tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN May 28, 2014 12:00pm-2:01pm EDT
consideration of the commerce, justice, and science spending bill for 2015. fiscal year 2015, the third spending bill they have considered so far. that will be later on today. first though for general speeches. live to the house floor now on c-span. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., may 28, 2014.
i hereby appoint the honorable frank r. wolf to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 7, 2014, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour ebate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip but in to five minutes, no event shall debate continue beyond 1:50 p.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, for five minutes. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to pay tribute to an extraordinary
life, to an extraordinary individual, to a dear and good friend of mine for many, many years. the el raymond lewis was librarian emeritus, the last and longest serving librarian of the u.s. house of representatives, a prolific author, archivist, educator, humorist, historian, illustrator, psychologist and recognized expert on military and naval history. he died on may 14. he was the husband of my former chief of staff, eleanor lewis, an extra individual in her own right who had been geraldine
ferraro's chief of staff as well. ray lewis was a man of great intellect, ever great warmth and of great contributions to this institution, to his ountry, to his family and to the intellectual education of so many. ray lewis was a man of the house and so much more. he lived a life of vast experience. he was, as eleanor observed, a genuine renaissance man. he loved his work and his scholarship and service to the house, to this country, which he enriched so extraordinarily well. during his tenure as an officer in the house, dr. lewis
combined discipline intellect with a deep interest in the house's history and patience to guide house members and staff seeking historical understanding of this institution. during the house judiciary committee impeachment hearings on president nixon, he had historical referenceses to guide the committee in its work and he honored the tradition of the office he headed, authoring history of the house library and promising ties -- and promoting ties with the senate library and the library of congress' congressional research service. as i said, mr. speaker, i knew ray lewis for much of the time i served in the house of representatives. i got to know him, his sense of humor, his sense of this institution, his sense of
decency, his sense of excitement of what was going on here and around the world. and with eleanor, he traveled in much of the world, and in each place he learned something new and brought it home for all of us. created extraordinary research on for thifications, astal for thifications, -- fortificatois, was an expert on that particular historical focus. eleanor lewis, as i said, was my former chief of staff. she's still a very dear and close friend. were dray -- she and ray
partners in life for over four decades. they were partners, as well, in intellectual pursuit and in love of this country and of this institution, the house of representatives. they enriched all. ray lewis was born to sigh beerian immigrants in oakland, california, on november 30,1928. he attended the university of california at berkley and the university of oregon. while enrolled at the university of oregon, he studied with a grant from the national institutes of mental health. he became a tenured psychology professionor in the oregon university system for half a -- professor in the oregon university system for half a dozen years. he was one of the first sychology professors to become part of the oregon professor board of examiners and the
first to be on television, a renaissance man, a man before his time. he had a life-long love of public spaces and actively pursued parkland. at the age of 8, he joined his parents and brother, albert, now deceased, in walking across the golden gate bridge on opening day. to nated specimens on earth national and state parks including mount stevens, at the mouth of the columbia river, in oregon. ray lewis, to the very end of , life, digested life welcomed life. i am part of what i have met, yet all experience is an arch where untraveled world where margin fades forever and
forever as i move. that was ray lewis' psyche. he saw life as an ever expanding opportunity. to enrich himself and to enrich others with his intellect and his excitement for what could be done and how well he participated in doing for this house, for this country, for his family. mr. speaker, my remarks are longer than this, and i will not repeat all of them. much of them have been contributed by his wife's observations and her writing skills, and i would ask they be included in the record. i have read some of them, but the remarks i give about him are personal because he was my
friend. was an american to be admired by us all. he was a good citizen, a great . erican, a man of the house sympathy to eleanor for her loss but to all of us as well for our loss of a good and decent man who made such a contribution to this country and to all of us, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, for five minutes. mr. poe: i ask unanimous consent to address the house and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: mr. speaker, on memorial day, i was at houston national cemetery with texas veterans and their families. but they were irate about the
allegations against the v.a. they want to know what we plan to do about it. in a july, 2012, speech president obama said, i promised to strengthen the v.a. and that promise has been kept. thanks to whistleblowers we now know that statement is not accurate. the more we hear about the v.a.'s treatment of veterans the worse it gets, and over the past few weeks we have learned that 26 facilities nationwide are being investigated for cooking the books, ensuring that long wait times sick veterans has to endure is hidden from the public. secret waiting lists, hidden agendas, all by those at the highest level at the v.a. why greed, why cook the books? because if wait times are reported low, v.a. officials receive bonuses. v.a. workers have allegedly used different tactics and strategies to give the impression they were meeting the department standard of seeing patients between 14 and
30 days. to promote this lie, the phoenix v.a. hospital allegedly had a secret waiting list to conceal delays and wait times. meanwhile, dozens of patients' conditions worsened and many died waiting in line. it has been reported that between 1,400 and 1,600 sick veterans had to wait months to see a doctor. the phoenix v.a. was not the only place where fraud took place. in my home state of texas, it's been reported that the v.a. officials in san antonio and austin purposely manipulated appointment data to hide the long wait times. according to a whistleblower and his reports, top level v.a. staff directed workers to ensure wait times were as close to zero as possible. in other words, juggle the books. he went on, it's playing and simple common sense. if you have a patient who has a delay and diagnosis of any cancer, that cancer did not stop growing. while they were waiting for the doctor to see them.
mr. speaker, treating our veterans like cattle in line at the stockyards is unacceptable. our warriors are dying in line. according to the daily beast, a whistleblower in the texas v.a. described this as an organized crime syndicate. people up on the top are suddenly afraid they may actually be prosecuted, and they're pressuring the little guys down below to cover it up. according to the whistleblower, the problem comes from higher up. if v.a. directors report long delays, they won't stay a director very long and they certainly won't get promoted. no one's getting rewarded for honesty. they pretty much have to lie. if they don't they don't go anywhere, end of quote. if one person comes up with a the o cheat an a report to government that's a fraud to the government. he continues, if hundreds of people are defrauding the government, it's a conspiracy, and that's what you got now and it runs coast to coast, bottom to top. mr. speaker, it's time for the administration to stop claiming
ignorance and blaming lower level operatives for a scandal that has been driven from higher up. secretary shinseki has overseen this department and it's now been called a criminal syndicate. he should just be fired. those money hungry executives at the v.a. who engaged in secret illegal activity that has resulted in veterans dying should be treated for what they are, criminals. and those veterans who are still waiting in line should be given waivers to see the private doctor of their choice. mr. speaker, cancer does not wait for government bureaucracy, incompetence and delay. american warriors have died in lands far, far away but now other american warriors are dying in the united states in line waiting for v.a. health care. put those that committed crimes in line for the stock aid and fix the problem. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from american samoa, mr.
faleomavaega, for five minutes. mr. faleomavaega: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. faleomavaega: mr. speaker, last year nine members of this house and i sent a letter to the national football league's commissioner roger goodell and to the washington, d.c., franchise dan signifiedered and to the owners of the other 31 national football league franchises urging an end to the use of the term redskins as an nfl franchise name because it is derogatory, it is demeaning and offensive to american indians. while mr. snyder did not respond, mr. goodell did so in a dismissive manner, calling this racial slur a unifying force that stands for strength, courage, pride and respect. mr. speaker, give me a break. last week 50 senators joined our efforts and also sent a letter to the nfl.
mr. goodell did not respond but bruce allen of the washington franchise did respond in a dismissive manner stating that redskins is not a derogatory word and claiming it actually honors native americans. mr. speaker, shame on mr. allen, shame on mr. goodell, shame on mr. snyder for suggesting that redskins is a name of honor when according to native americans it is the worst thing in the english language you can be called if you are a native person. . they have escaped a public lashing that don sterling received just weeks ago for his racist remarks on african-americans who play basketball. i believe if the american public knew the history of this der roguetory term, they would call on dan snyder to change the name or get out of the league. mr. speaker, i would like to share with my colleagues the painful and violent past associated with this despicable term. for many of our native americans, the word "redskins"
is reminiscent of a time when the colonial government engaged in the practice of trading indian scalps, or skins, as body parts for bounties. n 1749, the british colony was giving money for every indian taken or kill. in 1755, lieutenant governor of the massachusetts bay providence, issued a proclamation calling for the extermination of the penobscot indian nation. a male indian above the age of 15 was 50 pounds, his scalp was worth 40 pounds. the bounty for a female indian of any age and for males under the age of 12 was 25 pounds, while their scalps were worth 20 pounds. in 1863, the reward in minnesota was $200 for every redskins sent to perfectingtory.
-- purgatory. mr. speaker, the chief of the indian nation declared the word redskins is not just a racial slur or derogatory term but a painful reminder of one of the most gruesome acts of ethnic cleansing ever committed against his people. the hunting and killing of native american indians as stated by chief francis was a most despicable and disgraceful act of genocide. this photo depicts what genocide looks like, mr. speaker. i want to share this photo with my colleagues. while scalping is a matter of historical debate, mr. snyder's response to this disgraceful act is indicative of the racist history behind the washington franchise's name. as pounder george preston marshal is identified as the driving force behind the color barrier that existed for 12 years in the national football league, a sad commentary or chapter from 1934 to 1945 when
african-americans were banned from the national football league by a so-called gentleman's agreement. for years mr. marshall marketsed the washington, d.c., franchise to appeal to the segregated south. the band played "dixie" the confederate flag flew, and after the nfl's color line was crossed in 1946, the washington, d.c., franchise was the last team to field a african-american player not until 1962. i might add, mr. speaker, that the washington team did not welcome african-american players with open arms. oh, no. then secretary of the interior, stuart udall, and the attorney general, robert kennedy, presented the franchise with an ultimatum. whls marshall signed a african-american player, the government would revoke his franchise 30-year lease on the use of the d.c. stadium. mr. speaker, we cannot simply continue to -- this hateful traditions that mock, delittle,
disparage, or disgrace those of a different race because of the color of their skin. the national basketball association recently reacted swiftly to mr. don sterling's racist remarks. why is the national football league so hesitant? why is mr. snyder so slow to do the right thing when some six million of his own people's skins were used for change by the nazi germans in world war ii. shame on mr. snyder for perpetuating this racism and bigotry. we should know bet earn do better. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess
in fact, you shouldn't think about that issue at all when you sit down to write. what you should do when you sit down to write is to write what you find interesting and to follow your own curiosity. so when i was writing "tipping point," for instance, i can honestly say i never fore a moment tried to imagine how well that book -- for a moment tried to imagine how well that book would sell. i wanted to write something
cool. i was interested in this. i wanted to write something my friends would read, that my mother would like. >> read more with our conversation of malcolm gladwell from our "book notes" and "q&a" programs from public affairs books, now available for a father's day gift available at book sellers. >> president obama today delivered the commencement address at the u.s. military academy at west point. his 45-minute speech laid out his administration's foreign policy plans, addressing issues from afghanistan to terrorism and climate change. obtuse the president announced his plan to leave 9,800 troops in afghanistan after the final withdrawal of u.s. combat forces this december. the president saying he'll reduce the numbers gradually by the end of 2016. here's today's speech.
>> thank you. hank you, so much. thank you, general caslen, for that introduction. to general clark, the faculty and staff at west point, you have been outstanding stewards of this proud institution and outstanding mentors for the newest officers in the united states army. i'd like to acknowledge the army's leadership, general mchugh, secretary mchugh, general odierno as well as senator jack reed who is here and a proud graduate of west point himself. to the class of 2014, i congratulate you on taking your place on the long gray line. among you is the first all-female command team,
erin. you have a rhodes scholar. and josh proves that west point accuracy extends beyond the hree-point line. to the entire class, let me reassure you in these final hours at west point, as commander in chief, i hereby absolve all cadets who are on restriction for minor conduct offenses. [applause] let me just add that nobody ever did that for me when i was in school. [laughter] i know you join me in extending a word of thanks to your amilies.
joe, whose son, james, is graduating, spoke for a whole lot of parents when he wrote me letter about the sacrifices you've made. deep inside, he wrote, we want to explode with pride at what they are committing to do in he service of our country. like several graduates, james is a combat veteran, and i would ask all of us here today to stand and pay tribute not only to the veterans among us but to the more than 2.5 million americans who have served in iraq and afghanistan as well as their families. [applause]
this particular useful time for america to reflect on those who sacrificed so much for our freedom, a few days after memorial day. you are the first class to graduate since 9/11 who may not be sent into combat in iraq or afghanistan. cheers and applause] when i first spoke at west point in 2009, we still had more than 100,000 troops in iraq. we were preparing to surge in
afghanistan. our counterterrorism efforts were focused on al qaeda's core leadership. those who are carried out the 9/11 attacks. and our nation was just beginning a long climb out of the worst economic crisis since he great depression. 4 1/2 years later as you graduate, the landscape has changed. we have removed our troops from iraq, we are winding down our war in afghanistan. al qaeda's leadership on the border region between pakistan and afghanistan has been decimated, and osama bin laden is no more. [applause] and through it all we've refocused our investments in
what has always been a key source of american strength, a growing economy that can provide opportunity for everybody who's willing to work hard and take responsibility ere at home. in fact, by most measures, america has rarely been tronger relative to the rest of the world. those who argue otherwise, who suggest that america is in decline or as seen its global leadership slip away are either misreading history or are engaging in partisan politics. think about it. our military has no fear. he eyes of a direct threat against us by any nation are low and doesn't come close to the dangers we faced during the cold war. meanwhile, our economy remains the most dynamic on earth. our businesses the most nnovative.
each year we grow more energy independent. from europe to asia, we are the hub of alliances unrivaled in he history of nations. america continues to atrack striving immigrants. the values of our founding inspire leaders in parliaments and new movements in public squares around the globe. and when a typhoon hits the philippines or school girls are men pped in nigeria or occupy a building in ukraine, it is america that the world looks to for help. [applause] so the united states remains
the one indispensible nation that has been true for the century past and it will be true for the century to come. but the world is changing with accelerating speed. this presents opportunity but also new dangers. we know all too well after 9/11 just how technology and globalization has put power once reserved for states in the hands of individuals. raising the capacity of terrorists to do harm. russia's aggression towards former soviet states unnerves capitals in europe while china's economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. from brazil to india, rising middle classes compete with us and governments seek a greater
say in global forums. and even as developing nations embrace democracy and market economies, 24-hour news and social media makes it impossible to ignore the continuation of sectarian conflicts and failing states and popular uprisings that might have received only passing notice a generation ago. it will be your generation's task to respond to this new world. the question we face, the question each of you will face s not whether america will lead but how we will lead. not just to secure our peace and prosperity but also extend peace and prosperity around the globe. now, this question isn't
new. at least since george washington served as commander in chief, there have been those who warned against foreign entanglements that don't touch directly on our security or economic well-being. today, according to self-described realists, conflicts in syria or ukraine or the central african republic are not ours to solve and not surprisingly after costly wars and continuing challenges here at home, that view is shared by any americans. a different view from interventionists from the left and right say that we ignore these conflicts at our own peril, that america's willingness to apply force around the world is the ultimate safeguard against chaos and america's failure to act in the face of syrian brutality or russia provocations, not only violates
our conscience but invites escalating aggression in the uture. and each side can point to history to support its laims. but i believe neither view fully speaks to the demands of this moment. it is absolutely true that in the 21st century american isolationism is not an ption. we don't have a choice to ignore what happens beyond our borders. if nuclear materiels are not secure, that poses a danger to american citizens. as the syrian civil war spills across borders, the capacity of battle-hardened extremist groups to come after us only increases. regional aggression that goes unchecked, whether in southern
ukraine or the south china sea or anywhere else in the world will ultimately impact our allies and could draw in our military. we can't ignore what happens beyond our boundaries. and beyond these narrow rationales, i believe we have a real stake, a biding self-interest in making sure our children and grandchildren grow up in a world where school girls are not kidnapped when -- not kidnapped and when individuals are not slaughtered because of tribe or faith or political belief. i believe that a world of greater freedom intolerance is not only a moral imperative, it lso helps to keep us safe. but to say that we have an interest in pursuing peace and freedom beyond our borders is not to say that every problem has a military solution.
since world war ii, some of our ost costly mistakes came not from our restraint but from our willingness to rush into military adventures without thinking through the consequences, without building international support and legitimacy for our actions, without leveling with the american people about the sacrifices required. tough talk often draws headlines but war rarely conforms to slogans. as general eisenhower, someone with hard-earned knowledge on this subject, said at this ceremony in 1947, war is mankind's most tragic and stupid folly. to seek or advise its deliberate provocation is a black crime against all men.
like eisenhower, this generation of men and women in uniform know all too well the wages of war, and that includes those of you here at west point. four of the service members who stood in the audience when i announced the surge of our forces in afghanistan gave heir lives in that effort. a lot more were wounded. i believe that america's ecurity demanded those deployments, but i am haunted by those deaths. i am haunted by those wounds. and i would betray my duty to you and to the country we love if i ever sent you into harm's way simply because i saw a problem somewhere in the world that needed to be fixed. or because i was worried about
critics who think military intervention is the only way for america to avoid looking eak. here's my bottom line. america must always lead on the world stage. if we don't, no one else will. the military that you have joined is and always will be the backbone of that eadership. but u.s. military action cannot be the only or even primary component of our leadership in very instance. just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail. because the costs associated with military action are so high, you should expect every civilian leader and especially your commander in chief to be
clear about how that awesome ower should be used. so let me spend the rest of my time describing my vision for how the united states of america and our military should lead in the years to come. for you will be part of that eadership. first, let me repeat a principle effort i said at the outset of my presidency, the united states will use military force unilaterally when necessary when our core interests demand it. when our people are threatened, when our livelihoods are at stake. when the security of our allies s in danger. in these circumstances, we need to ask tough questions whether our actions are proportional and just.
-- and effective and just. international opinion matters. america should never ask ermission to protect our people, our homeland or our way of life. [applause] on the other hand, when global concerns do not pose a direct threat to the united states, when such issues re at stake, when crises arrive that push the world in a more dangerous direction but do not directly threaten us, then the threshold for military action must be higher. in such circumstances, we hould not go it alone. instead, we must mobilize allies and partners to take collective action. we have to broaden our tools to include diplomacy and
development, sanctions and isolation. ppeal to international law and if just, necessary and effective, multilateral military action. in such circumstances, we have to work with others because collective action in these circumstances is more likely to succeed. more likely to be sustained. less likely to lead to costly istakes. this leads to my second point. for the foreseeable future, the most direct threat to america at home and abroad remains terrorism. but a strategy that involves invading every country that harbors terrorist networks is naive and unsustainable. i believe we must shift our counterterrorism strategy,
drawing on the successes and shortcomings of our experience in iraq and afghanistan. to more effectively partner with countries where terrorist networks seek a foothold. and the need for a new strategy reflects the fact that today's principled threat no longer comes from a centralized al qaeda leadership. instead, it comes from decentralized al qaeda affiliates and extremists, many with the focus in countries where they operate. and this lessens the possibility of large-scale 9/11-style attacks against the homeland, but it heightens the danger of u.s. personnel overseas being attacked, like we saw in benghazi. it heightens less defensible targets as we saw in a shopping mall in nairobi. so we have to develop a
strategy that matches this distuesday threat, one that expands our reach without sending forces that stretch our military too thin or stir up local resentments. we need partners to fight terrorists alongside us. and this is a large part of what we have done and what we are currently doing in afghanistan. together with our allies, america struck huge blows against the al qaeda core and ushed back against the insurgencey that threatened to overrun the country. but this is for the afghans to do the job and that's why we trained hundreds of thousands of afghan soldiers and police. earlier this spring, those forces, those afghan forces secured an election in which afghans voted for the first democratic transfer of power in their history.
and at the end of this year, a new afghan president will be in office, and america's combat mission will be over. now -- [applause] that was an enormous achievement made because of america's armed forces. but as we move to a train and advise mission in afghanistan, our reduced presence there allows us to more effectively address emerging threats in the middle east and north africa. so earlier this year, i asked my national security team to develop a plan for a network of partnerships from south sia. today as part of this effort i'm calling on congress to support a new counterterrorism partnership fund of up to $5 billion which would allow us to train, build capacity and facilitate partner countries on the front lines.
and these resources will give us flexibility to fulfill different missions, including training security forces in yemen who've gone on the offensive against al qaeda, supporting a multinational force to keep the peace in somalia, working with european allies to train a functioning security force and border patrol in libya and facilitating french operations in mali. a critical focus of this effort will be the ongoing crisis in syria. as frustrating as it is, there are no easy answers there, no military solution that can eliminate the terrible suffering anytime soon. as president, i made a decision that we should not put american troops into the middle of this increasingly sectarian war, and
i believe that is the right decision, but that does not mean we shouldn't help the syrian people stand up against a dictator who bombs and starves his own people. and in helping those who fight for the right of all syrians to choose their own future, we are also pushing back against the growing number of extremists who find safe haven in the chaos. so with the additional resources i'm announcing today, we will step up our efforts to support syria's neighbors. jordan and lebanon, turkey and iraq as they contend with refugees and as they confront terrorists working across syria's borders. i will work with congress to ramp up support for those in the syrian opposition who offer the best alternative to terrorists and brutal dictators. and we will continue to coordinate with our friends and
allies in europe and the arab world to push for a political resolution of this crisis and to make sure that those countries, and not just the united states, are contributing their fair share to support the syrian people. let me make a final point about our efforts against terrorism. the partnerships i described do not eliminate the need to take direct action, when necessary, to protect ourselves. when we have actionable intelligence, that's what we o. through capture operations like the one that brought the terrorists involved in the plot to bomb our embassies in 1998 to face justice or drone strikes like those we've carried out in yemen and somalia. there are times when those actions are necessary and we cannot hesitate to protect our
eople. but as i said last year, in taking direct action, we must uphold standards that reflect our values. that means taking strikes only when we face a continuing imminent threat and only where there is no certainty that there is near certainty of no civilian casualties. for our actions should meet a simple test. we must not create more enemies than we take off the battlefield. i also believe we must be more transparent about both the basis of our counterterrorism actions and the manner in which they are carried out. we have to be able to explain them publicly, whether it is drone strikes or training partners. i will increasingly turn to our military to take the lead and provide information to the public about our efforts. our intelligence community has
done outstanding work, and we have to continue to protect sources and methods, but when we cannot explain our efforts clearly and publicly, we face terrorist propaganda and international suspicion. our ode legitimacy with partners and we reduce accountability within our own government. this issue of transparency is directly relevant to a third aspect of american leadership and that is our effort to strengthen and enforce international order. after world war ii, america had the wisdom to shape institutions to keep the peace and support human progress. from nato and the united nations, to the world bank and i.m.f. these institutions are not perfect, but they have been a force multiplier. they reduce the need for
unilateral american action and increase restraint among other nations. now, just as the world has changed, this architecture must change as well. at the height of the cold war, president kennedy spoke about the need for a peace based upon a gradual evolution in human institutions and involving these international institutions to meet the demands of today must be a critical part of american eadership. there are a lot of folks, a lot of skeptics who often downplay the effectiveness of multilateral action. for them working through international institutions like the u.n. or respecting international law is a sign of weakness. i think they're wrong. let me offer just two examples why.
in ukraine, russia's actions were called to the day when soviet tanks rolled into eastern europe. but this isn't the cold war. our ability to shape world opinion helped isolate russia right away. because of american leadership, the world immediately condemned russian actions. europe and the g-7 joined us to impose sanctions. nato reinforced our commitment to europe allies. the i.m.f. is helping to stable ukraine's economy. and they brought the eyes to the unstable parts of ukraine and this mobilization of world opinion and international institutions served as a counterweight to russian propaganda and russian troops on the border and armed militias in ski masks. this weekend, ukrainians voted by the millions. yesterday i spoke to their next
president. we don't know how the situation will play out and there will remain grave challenges ahead, but standing with our allies on behalf of international order, working with international institutions has given a chance for the ukrainian people to choose their future. ithout us firing a shot. similarly, despite frequent warnings from the united states and israel and others, the iranian nuclear program steadily advanced four years. but the beginning of my presidency, we built a coalition that imposed sanctions on the iranian economy while extending the hand of diplomacy to the iranian government, and now we have an opportunity to resolve our ifferences peacefully. the odds of success are still
long and we reserve all options to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, but for the first time in a decade we have a very real chance of achieving a breakthrough agreement, one that is more effective and durable than what we could have achieved through the use of force. and throughout these negotiations it's been our willingness to work through multilateral channels that kept the world on our side. the point is this is american leadership. this is american strength. in each case we built coalitions to respond to a specific challenge, and now we need to do more to strengthen the institutiones that can anticipate and prevent problems rom spreading. for example, nato is the strongest alliance the world has ever known but we're not working with nato allies to
meet new missions, both within europe where our eastern allies must be reassured but also beyond europe's borders where our nato allies have to pull their weight to counterterrorism and respond to failed states and train a network of partners. likewise, the u.n. provides a platform to keep the peace in states torn apart by conflict. now we need to make sure that those nations who provide peacekeepers have the training and equipment to keep the peace, so we can prevent the type of killing we've seen in congo and sudan. we are going to deepen our investments in countries that support these peacekeeping missions because having other countries maintain order in their own neighborhoods lessens the need for us to put our own troops in harm's way. it's a smart investment. it's the right way to lead. [applause]
keep in mind not all international norms related to armed conflict, we have a serious problem with cyberattacks which is why we're working to shape and enforce rules to secure our networks and our citizens. in the asia pacific, we're supporting southeast asia nations as they negotiate a code of conduct with china on maritime disputes in the south china sea, and we're working to resolve these disputes through international law. that spirit of cooperation needs to energize the global effort to combat climate change, a creeping national security crisis that will help shape your time in uniform as we are called on to respond to refugee flows and natural disasters and conflicts over water and food. which is why next year i intend to make sure that america is out front in putting together a global framework to preserve our planet.
you see, american influence is always stronger when we lead by example. we can't exempt ourselves from the rules that apply to everybody else. we can't call on others to make commitments to combat climate change if a whole lot of our political leaders deny that it's taking place. we can't try to resolve problems in the south china sea when we have refused to make sure that the law of the sea convention is ratified by the united states senate, despite the fact that our top military leaders say the treaty advances our national security. that's not leadership.
that's retreat. that's not strength. that's weakness. it would be utterly foreign to leaders like roosevelt and truman, eisenhower and kennedy. i believe in american xceptionalism with every fiber of my being, but what makes us exceptional is not our ability to flout international norms and the rule of law, it is to affirm them through our actions. [applause] that's why i will continue to push to close gitmo because american values and legal traditions do not permit the indefinite detention of people beyond our borders. [applause] that's why we're putting in place new restrictions on how america collects and uses
intelligence. because we will have fewer partners and be less effective if a perception takes hold that we're conducting surveillance against ordinary citizens. [applause] america does not simply stand for stability or the absence of conflict no matter what the costs, we stand for the more lasting peace that can only come through opportunity and freedom for people everywhere. which brings me to the fourth and final element of american leadership. our willingness to act on behalf of human dignity. america's support for democracy and human rights goes beyond idealism. it's a matter of national sduret. -- security. draukses are our closest friends and are far less likely to go to war.
economies based on free and open markets perform better and become markets for our goods. respect for human rights is an antidote to instability, and the grievances that fuel violence and terror. a new century has brought no end to tyranny, and capitals around the globe, including unfortunately some of america's partners, there's become a crackdown on civil society. the cancer of corruption has enriched too many governments and their cronies, enraged citizens from remote villages to iconic squares, and watching these trends or the violent upheavals in parts of the arab world, it's easy to be cynical. but remember that because of america's efforts, because of american diplomacy and foreign assistance as well as the sacrifices of our military,
more people live under elected governments today than in any time in human history. technologies empowering civil society in ways that no iron fist can control. new breakthroughs are lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. and even the upheaval of the arab reflects the rejection of the authoritarian order of anything that was stable and now has the long-term prospect of more responsive and effective governance. in countries like egypt, we acknowledge that our relationship is anchored in peace treaties to israel to shared efforts against violent extremism. so we have not cut off operation with the new government but we can and will persistently press for reforms that the egyptian people have emanded.
and meanwhile, look at a country like burma which only a few years ago was an intractable dictatorship and hostile to the united states. 40 million people. thanks to the enormous courage of the people in that country and because we took the diplomatic initiative, american leadership, we have seen political reforms opening a once closed society. a movement by burmese leadership away from partnership with north korea in favor of engagement with american and our allies. we're now supporting reform in in badly needed reconciliation hrough investment, through coaxing and at times public criticism and progress there could be reversed but about burma succeeds, we will have gained a new friend without having fired a shot. american leadership. in each of these cases, we should not expect change to
happen overnight. that's why we form aalliances not just with governments but with ordinary people. america is not afraid of individual empowerment. we are strengthened by it. we're strengthened by civil society. we're strengthened by educational exchange and opportunity for all people and women and girls. that's who we are. that's what we represent. american assistance has made possible the prospect of an aids-free generation while helping africans take care of themselves for their sick. we're helping farmers get their
products to market, to feed pulations once endangered by famine. we aimed the double access to electricity in sub-saharan africa so people are promised by the global economy and all of this creates new partners and shrinks the space for terrorism and conflict. that's why we have to focus on not rescuing those girls but to focus on educating the youth. it should be one of the hard when our military became the strongest advocate for diplomacy and development, they understood that foreign assistance is not
an after thought. something nice to do apart from our national defense, apart from our national security. it is part of what makes us trong. ultimately global leadership requires us to see the world as it is with all its danger and uncertainty. we have to be prepared for the worst. repared for every contingency. but american leadership also requires us to see the world as it should be. a place where the aspirations of individual human beings really matters. where hopes and not just fears govern. where the truths written into our founding documents can steer the currents of history in a direction of justice.
we cannot do that without you. the class of 2014, you have takin this time to prepare on the quiet banks of the hudson. you leave this place to carry forward a legacy that no other military in human history can claim. you do so as part after team that extends beyond your units or even our armed forces for in the course of your service you will work as a team and with diplomats and development experts. you'll get to know allies and train partners. and you will embody what it means for america to lead the world. next week will i go to normandy to honor the men who stormed the beaches there. and while it's hard for many
americans to comprehend the courage and sense of duty that guided those who boarded small ships, it's familiar to you. at west point you decide what it eans to be a patriot. three years ago gavin white graduated from this academy. he then served in fghanistan. like the soldiers who came before him, gavin was in a foreign land helping people he never met. putting himself in harm's way for the sake of his community and his family and the folks back home. gavin lost one of his legs in an attack.
>> we have been through a long season of war. we have faced trials that were not foreseen and we have seen divisions about how to move orward, but there is something in gavin's character, there is something in the american haracter that we'll always try. leaving here you carry with you the respect of your fellow citizens. you will represent a nation with history and hope on our side. your charge now not only to protect our country, but to do what s right and just.
as your commander in chief, i know you will. may god bless you. may god bless our men and women in uniform. and may god bless the united tates of america. [applause] the speaker pro tempore: the president earlier today at west point. some reaction from capitol hill. the chairman and ranking member of the foreign affairs committee in the house issuing statements. ed royce the chairman saying n. part, since president obama took office, a series of foreign policy plans envisioned have been put forward. assurances have been made but too often strong words have been followed by weak actions or no actions. part of the comments from ed royce. also eliot engel from the house foreign affairs committee issuing a statement today as well. thoughts from viewers c-span
chat is the #, getting a number of tweets from different people, including from a kevin dyer, general $5 billion fund for supporting nations where terrorists operate should be on congress on a case by case basis. the founder of code ping tweeted, obama talked about hardest lesson of iraq and afghanistan. i've got one. don't invade other countries. and one from trevor thomas, when the president talks about what is making the rest of the world unstable, sounds like his own domestic policy. your thoughts at c-span chat on twitter. the president spoke yesterday about part of his plan, an additional 10,000 troops remaining in afghanistan through 2016. we get more from this morning's "washington journal." we -- we want to bringave the bureau chief from "the washington post."
we want to get your thoughts on this announcement was received in afghanistan, specifically by government officials. caller: for a long time there has been a sense that -- host: are you still with us? we will work on getting him back .o talk to him dave, good morning. i want to agree with a large majority of the comments made by the caller. after 9/11, both sides of the aisle were pretty much in lockstep agreement with what had to be done. only monday morning
quarterbacking that after the fact they have all broken their ankles jumping off the ship. that these to say people that say we should not have fought these wars? quite often in my daily life. i talk to them and i say -- ok, i will take your argument at face value and say that we should not have. well, what we should -- what should we have done? they get a blank stare and cannot answer the question. they say -- i know what we should not have done. would youmment is -- rather do what ronald reagan did? spend the money to build a force you don't have to use and no one wants to trifle with? or would you rather spend that same money, which we have done, sending people, equipment, and resources, and bringing those boys and girls home in bags? i say -- spend the money, build it so that we don't have to use it.
then we don't have to go to arlington and visit more bodies and other places around the world. so, let's be smart about this. kevin,et's go back to the washing -- the "washington post" bureau chief. kevin, good morning. caller: in yet? host: you were talking about how this announcement was received by afghani officials and the government there. the general perception was that if the u.s. -- caller: the general perception was that if the u.s. was going to stay , it would be for many more than two years. it comes as somewhat to -- somewhat of a shock to people outside the government. the people who took it the hardest are the people doing the fighting. the people on the front lines in a dangerous war.
they have got to years of some although 5000 troops at the end of 2015 is not that much. they see that as something approximating abandonment. they think they are very much in need of what the u.s. military can do in afghanistan. the idea of going alone and not in a year or two is right frightening to the guys who are still -- fighting the insurgency. >> is there any difference with how those troops you're talking about feel that the u.s. troop presence there and afghan civilians, in your experience? afghans are often very critical of what the american military continues to do in afghanistan. there are still many gripes within the government and outside about civilian casualties. but there is also the realization that without the u.s. military here it would be a much harder war for the afghan
military and police to fight alone. i think that those sentiments articulate it simultaneously. i think that overall there is a sense that even though the u.s. military has what the afghan calls problem's here, it is still an institution that is very much needed and you hear that sentiment across the board. we have you, can you talk about the role of hamid karzai in the role of what is going on right now and the roles he continues to play as we talk about potential u.s. troop presence down the road? host: i think that you could probably pick out any american official and listen to a long list of complaints about the role of hamid karzai in the last several years. if he had signed the bilateral peace agreement, it would have solved this question of enduring troop presence many months ago. that was a huge setback, not only for the americans in
charge, but also for the afghans who were eager to figure out what was going to come next for them. in part what he didn't, creating this level of uncertainty, has no doubts made it much more difficult for afghans, again, from the afghan soldier in the fight to the afghan civilian trying to operate a small business, that has made it difficult for all of them to succeed in their everyday endeavors. one last question for you, seeing reports this morning on an attack in western afghanistan , this is from late last night our time. anything you have learned on that? to be honest, i have been at a u.s. military base all day meetings. i heard those reports, but i can't confirm them. i will say that it is no surprise to me that there is an attack on miller -- american
military or diplomatic personnel the day after obama's announcement. the taliban recently just a few statementreleased a saying that the american intention of keeping troops here beyond what you 14 just underscores the ongoing need for .ihad i think that the statement referred to the fact that even if it is only one american troop in afghanistan, it is one too many. worth thinkingis about for those interested in thoughry is that even there is this contradiction -- on one hand the american troops are needed here to sort of bolster security, but on the other hand they do infuriate the very people we are hoping to reconcile with. in some ways these two missions, the effort to reconcile with the insurgency and the effort to secure afghanistan are at odds
with each other. that is something that the u.s. has been trying to deal with for a long time. obviously, as we see today and will see over the next few days, an announcement like this will continue to infuriate the people who still have the resources to wage a serious fight against the u.s. and its allies. host: >> the u.s. house gavels back in in about 45 minutes or so and they are briefly back for legislative work at 4:00 p.m. 10 bills today, including a number dealing with very veterans administration, veterans' affairs, and human rights issues overseas, and they'll take up the third of the 2015 spending bills, this one on commerce, justice, and science. we'll have live house coverage when they are back at 2:00 p.m. eastern. then again at 4:00 here on c-span. until then back to this morning's "washington journal" and a discussion on the obama administration's blan for stem education in schools. washington journal continues.
host: the white house announced several new efforts to promote science technology education and math. executive director of the stem education coalition, mr. brown. why does the white house believe a new push is needed and how do u.s. kids stack up when it comes to stem education in other countries? thank you for letting me be on the show. a great pleasure. the president talks passionately about stem education. we have been working on getting them to college. math and science at first, that leaves of the engineers and scientists. that is where the people feel the economy is going as far as skill sets. often times, they are talking about stem skills.
president talks about this issue a great deal in his public speaking about the future of the economy. the reason the white house is talking about is the same reason we are. here's a picture from the white house science fair yesterday. what was announced yesterday at the white house? click several different things. the president made announcements like this in the past and they are all different times during the year. it is sometimes about graduation and sometimes back to school. the biggest part of the president posses announcement was a new grant initiative under the existing program where they would make available $35 million to support teacher training programs at the university level to train new teachers in the field.
how does that stack up to the rest of the budget for 2013? it looks like a drop in the in the bucket. 100 and $2.9 billion in the overall budget, 150 million dollars for effective teaching 110 million for innovation networks. was this just a drop in the bucket? $35 million is not nothing. the 2.9 million dollars is spread out over 200 programs. most of it is quite small. especially given this is the only program at the department of education that is specifically focused on expanding capabilities for teacher preparation within the higher education. it is meaningful. there are about 40 grant programs already.
on stem focused education outcomes. it is an example of the administration trying to use existing programs and existing money appropriated by congress for the purpose of advancing stem. some of the things you talk that have not yet been advised. iraq --e effort announced yesterday at the white house, the president does not have to go to congress to get approval for this. is right.t they propose using $35 million to train stem teachers. we are talking to james brown. we are talking about stem education funding for issues surrounding stem education. segment ofes in this the washington journal, parents can call --
host: engineering employers, and then all others, 202-585-3883. while folks are calling in explain what the stem education coalition is. guest: we are an alliance of education groups and what that means is employers large and small, large companies like time-warner cable and microsoft that employ hundreds of thousands of workers, employers of all different levels. small businesses. and in the education community its groups like the national science teachers association, the chair of our board. the math teachers, different groups and university spectrum. if you took the s.a.t., educational testing service, that is one of our members. we had a wide variety of different science, engineering, and different scientific professional organization. the chemist, physicist, different disciplines in engineering. what holds us together as a broad coalition is the notion of
promoting stem education as a national priority. host: who started this coalition? guest: stem is a relatively new term. it's only been in use about 10 years which is relatively new in terms of washington thinking about education. before that we talked about math and science. when we talked about math and science, most of the time we were thinking about the sort of research pipeline. the idea of a student who was exceptional in math or science getting an undergraduate degree, graduate school, and ph.d. and serving in academia. today almost every worker in economy is some form of a stem worker. our coalition has broadened because that's where the interest is in, what new jobs are being created that require stem fields that schools are not traditionally prepared to do. clm education. the united states ranks 25th in
mathematics and 17th in science according to their numbers from doe. 16% of u.s. high school seniors are proficient in math and interested in a stem career. we are taking your comments and questions as we talk to james brown. -- let's go to our line for educators. waiting in pennsylvania. good morning. as a retired english professor, i am wondering what kind of value you see in the importance of language education? guest: a great question.
one of the things about stem essay topic is that somehow stem is displacing the need for other fields. is clearly an important element of a well-rounded education, but that does not mean we do not need students who are literate, good communicators, good at teamwork, and good at a lot of other fields. employers are calling for students and future workers who have well-rounded gills, but they also want to make sure they have stem skills. term i have heard the steam as well as stem. will: a lot of employers talk about design, creativity, the ability to integrate a lot of different perspectives and you need only look at the most popular products, technology. your iphones, your smart computers, wearable technology, design.he interface of
we have a broad definition of stem education. one that integrates some of the soft skills like arts and design. education has a lot of resonance when you talk about the workers you need. to theills are pacific education system. a is for arts. our line for parents in michigan. go to grace calling in from pennsylvania. calling. nk you for why would any parent encourage their child to go into stem fields? know why. h-1b has something to play in that. toond of all, i would like
know why they continually push stem fields when you cannot get a job in it because of h-1b program. guest: thank you for the question. there was something like 30 million new jobs created in the before 2000, but since then, there were only 4 million new jobs created in the united states. we have a challenge in terms of creating jobs generally. the good news in that story is if you're in the stem fields, you doing better than the rest of the economy in the aggregate. if you look at unemployment, you find lower unemployment rates and higher salaries than the rest of the economy. i appreciate people are out there looking for jobs in every area. in some of the stem fields, unemployment has gone up by a factor of two.
if your field went from two percent to four percent unemployment, i will not tell you that does not feel like it is harder to get a job here in if you have a good set of stem skills, you will do better in the economy. host: on twitter -- guest: there is certainly a debate and we should have the debate about what role foreign workers play in the education field. we had some of that debate last year and a senate. not playoalition does a role directly in immigration policy but we appreciate the implications for the stem field of the workforce. if you look at the foreign workforce, predominately, there are large numbers of stem workers. we have to ask ourselves a fundamental question. we all agree we want the smartest people in science and
technology working in the united states. that is how we improve our lives. we can debate how to best handle our foreign workers. host: jean, good morning. educators line. caller: i would like to jump in for a minute here and second the discussion. when i worked for the great blue oval in virginia, i went looking for an engineer and was flat out told by my hr people i had to hire an engineer because they are worth between nine and $4000 cheaper. the other thing i would like to mention is now that i am in academia, i essentially counsel my young engineers that your future is not in technology, that, while getting an engineer degree and being a trained problem solver will serve you for the rest of your life, i
when i was. david doing my graduate work and he described engineers as the migrant workers of the mind because your life really is going from project to project, one layoff to the next layoff, because the people who actually run our companies are actually business and finance people who have no understanding of the technology. you look at the auto industry, how it got run by finance people and we ended up with the problems. look at gm. host: let me give james brown a chance to jump in. speaking to what is the future of the economy. there are industries in decline and industries on the rise. technology is important in all of those. one of the things that gets lost is that it is not
necessarily a bad thing for people to get a degree in engineering and work in another area. i have a degree in engineering. i think the skills i learned as an engineer are important to the other things i have done for the same reasons the caller raised. problem solving skills are valuable everywhere in the economy. 100ou want to talk numbers, students who starred in college, 19 choose to major in a stem field. a fraction of those graduate and only six out of those 10 go into stem fields to work in the economy. the rest of the workforce that started or graduated in stem or work in another field, they had stem skills but are working in a bureau of labour statistics does not categorize as a stem job. it does not mean when we are talking about the stem education pipeline, we are not just training them to be engineers, we are training them to be good citizens.
caller: when you have -- one of the problems with getting kids to go into engineering is that here you are, your son and daughter of an engineer who spent your life watching mom or dad go from layoff to layoff, and here are your choices. do i go to the university and take very hard science courses and get called a geek and spend my life being laid off, or do i go get a business degree, take courses that are probably less difficult, and i will be the ones to lay these geeks off. like the term geek. it is a badge of honor in this economy. the president talked about this yesterday. .hey have a program they do but i would say the economy is changing in every part of the
economy. you look at nationwide unemployment at 6.5% right now. as i said, i think everybody is struggling in the economy as we sort out the future of america you will do. better. that is not to say you will feel comfortable. everybody is looking at the changing nature of their fields. we have special lines set up in this segment for parents and teachers. we want to hear from you. calling in from maine this morning. thank you for calling. >> good morning. to basically call in before the previous caller and amplify what you said. i first heard about the problem of getting students to go into the stem field in 2004.
from a panel discussion senator schumer was having. donahue was the chamber of commerce. any economist worked at the time for the cato institute. not exactly a liberal outfit but he has told them he is going around giving talks to high school kids and kids were coming home from college looking for careers and stem was not on the felt theyse the kids researched it and after 10 or 15 years, there were going to have to be promoted out of engineering into a management job, or leave the field. that was their take on it. verywere going to take expensive courses in college for a 10 year career. what business are you in? caller: right now, i am an
engineer who got laid off four over 15 years and i'm picking up my network of friends who were laid off and we are just doing one short job in engineering. i coordinate that and we design and do stuff. that is only part time. one thing you can do about the low unemployment rate, it is a low unemployment rate, but one reason is they are very intelligent. a lot of engineers both chainsses in hamburger and hair salons. that is what they're doing now. if you went and did a study, a statistical distribution on how many engineers in the field who are 50 years old are doing engineering work, you will not find many.
they will do other things and i do not consider being a manager of five engineering departments doing engineering work anymore. it is interesting to have this debate and whether or not we should be steering kids into the fields. isther thing that gets lost it is not just a debate about whether we want more or less students to go into stem fields. what we want for kids looking at career choices, whether it is going into college or the military or a career in technicians areas, something we called blue-collar workforce when i was growing up, we want them to make informed choices. we look at the amount of money parents will spend on college. we look at the time it may take to get a degree. a lot of options were not there before in terms of careers in the technology area. a lot of jobs in that economy do degree anymore.
that is changing. i love to see people talk about bill gates or steve jobs or other entrepreneurs who are famous who did not finish college. they will say, for my children, i want to make sure they go to college but i like the idea of trading things and not going that route. the you are thinking about economy, the notion that somebody will go to college and get a degree not to kill her field and spend their entire career working in that same field in the same organization is an idea that does not often apply in our economy. tois not like you can go other countries and have that experience. what is underlying this is making sure kids and parents are making informed decisions about the future of their career path. field,e in the stem there is no guarantee you will stay in that field. so many people who start out in engineering and up in other areas. if you look at the economy workforce, 1980, the
how you count that, it was about six percent of the entire workforce. i do not think people are arguing there is a massive aches tension of what they need when we talk about stem workforce. the growth in the area is in the fact stem skills are present -- pervasive in so many other areas of the economy than they were before. if you work in a manufacturing facility, you are a software engineer. if you work in the facility that repairs those automobiles, you have to plug the car into a computer system to do the maintenance for that vehicle. areasare a lot of skill where we have not traditionally thought of them as stem jobs, but now they are. people in training academies for automotive technicians are now learning math and science at levels they have not learned before. those are just a couple of fields where the growth is going on. it is growing incredibly fast in the cyber field.
i want to talk about the gender disparity. here is a bit of president obama yesterday at the white house science fair talking about efforts to get more girls involved in science and technology in school. than one in five bachelor degrees in engineering and computer science are earned by women. fewer than three in 10 workers in science and engineering are women. we have got half the field -- half our team, we are not even putting on the field. change those numbers. these are the fields of the future. these are where the good jobs will be and i want america to be a home for those jobs. three years ago, i called for a national effort to train 100,000 over the stem teachers next decade. we are making progress on that front. announcing a new $35 million competition to train our
teachers,and science even when school district cannot afford a lot of fancy equipment. stem americorps to provide opportunities for 18,000 low income students this summer. [applause] and, companies, nonprofits, cities, they are doing their part. dozens of them are stepping up with new commitments to inspire and help more students learn. host: james brown on the gender disparity the president brought up at the beginning of those remarks? guest: the diversity is definitely an area we need to focus on. we find women and also minorities are underrepresented in stem field. african-americans are 11 or 12% of the stem population. only three percent of the stem workforce. stem education is
the latter of upward mobility in the economy and an opportunity for people to do better than the rest of the workforce, then there is clearly a need to make sure we're making those opportunities to study in stem fields, to be the next scientist or next inventor available to more students in the economy. in thelly good schools united states stack up great compared to the rest of the world. look at the top 10 are sent if you look at the schools and the inner cities, you find lower rates of student being able to take courses in calculus. if there are some states where nobody has taken the ap exam in computer science. if you make of those opportunities are available all across the country. ly of are particular interest. essential that we make sure we do but we can't make of those opportunities are available to everybody and break down those barriers.
on your work with thewit stem education coalition, michael on twitter asks, "how was the stem education coalition have 500guest: we members across the country. they are representative of a larger membership. the businesses and professional groups in the education groups and their supporters through dues that they pay a cheer. host: let's go to chris in newport news, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. i had a question for you in a comment. i used to be a teacher in virginia. i worked in the classroom. the technology in the math classroom. one of the problems i dealt with
was my administrators could not with the technology i was using. whether i was using calculators, computers or ipass. i ended up leaving the classroom and got a job as a math consultant. withld hold the training the teachers to teach them technology in the classroom. my biggest challenge was to get traditional teachers to embrace the technology. you arewonder how giving money to teachers -- how are you going to get a traditional teacher to embrace technology? guest: my first job was in newport news. it's a great community. it death only one that understands the value of building things.
one thattely understands the value of building things. when i was growing up, freedom for me meant getting a car at 16. now, kids or 11 and 12 are making powerpoint presentations to their parents. when everybody has a cell phone in high school, we can use those devices in the classroom to help augment learning. that is one of many examples of the difficulties of bringing technology into the modern classroom. --most schools, the ecology the technology buying decisions about which software to use or what to use in the classrooms to concede the same computer screen come a those are enormously complicated technology buying decisions for schools and they are poorly equipped to deal with those types of decisions. that's an example of a challenge in terms of aligning how schools work with the availability of technology and capabilities of
the modern age. aur experience is fairly common one. one of the things the president was trying to get with this announcement of the resources dedicated to teacher training was, when we look at what keeps -- but prepares a teacher to teach in this environment is the notion that their preparation begins with integrating technology. it begins with an in-depth understanding of what the teaching environment is what the challenges are in preparation to ensure that the teachers are prepared to meet the challenges. that is the biggest challenge we have. making sure the teachers are stemred to teach in the subjects. you use technology in a science classroom in the ways you don't use it any other way in the school system. the school system is now everywhere. if i'm a student or i'm a parent
of a kid who is trying to learn science, i'm not just looking at the classroom environment as the only opportunity to get the skills. i'm looking at afterschool programs, videos on youtube that i can access that will help me compare my child to study in those fields and be successful and the teachers are dealing with the same challenge. they go home at night and they do their professional work online or look at resources they can bring into the classroom. being able to do that is an absolute necessity. sent an e-mail question. doesn't this end up being a lot apparent there -- a lot of hot air? it sounds good, but it is so general that i don't know -- i don't see how it gives a direction. guest: stem is certainly a buzzword that people in the education establishment are hearing about.
every school is a stem school right now. we are all dealing with the challenge of preparing kids with the skills they need in the new economy. at the stem subjects are very concrete things you can learn. stem skills are required to graduate in every school. to take a mistreatment physics and biology. people are debating whether you have to take peter science. chemistry, physics and biology. one of the interesting points was this notion of, i did not feel like i was getting support from administrators. when 25 states county science -- science.tates count that is driven by the fact that science is no longer included in the schools accountability forms. host: that's good to edward in maryland. good morning. -- let's go to edward in maryland. caller: good morning.
job.ave done a very good i have called in once before. physicist who studied in germany. the german industry requires that when students take a break haveg summertime, they academic standards and they require that the university. the students -- that the university pay the students a starting salary. opportunities.ss we will have that same -- we don't do that in the united states. we don't support the students enough. we have thee --
-- we have a congress that turns their back on science. nasa and you had the right wing people -- if we don't do something about that, we will lose ground. the hard-core scientists -- we have to do something about that. i would like you to talk about that in-depth. that.d to work on guest: the point you make about the rest of the world in germany prioritizing these fields is -- that is very true and there is lots we can learn from what other countries are going. has a national focus on it the education
system. they focus on training technicians. i love the analogy in the united states when you see something walking -- sunday walking down the street in scrubs, it's a badge of pride to be involved in that field. we don't look at technicians the same way. yet, the person who works in the auto mechanic repression might more than the person who works in the hospital. technology is a part of every profession in the united states. as much as we limit our education system, we talked about how we need to improve our rankings in science and technology, if you look at our university system, it's universally acknowledged as still being the best in the world. the best and brightest want to study in the united states and get degrees from u.s. universities. i wonder how long we can sustain that leadership when the rest of our education system is struggling to keep up with the rest of the world. if you look at the international
rankings -- i'm not sure they are the only and best estimate of where we are doing in the world. we are down and all of these rankings. we are not headed back up. if we don't do something about more peoplethat study in the stem fields and that we make access to these important subjects available to more corners of our economy, we will continue to fall behind. say tohat would you the concern about congress? guest: they are not leading on a lot of issues with regard to education policy. the administration -- to get at this larger point, the obama administration has made a clear point about when what can with administrative authority to make changes that they think are the right changes. area, mosteducation of those rules are set by congress and administration does not have a lot of leeway in
terms of changing education policy. frankly, i don't think that you do it on their own. congress needs to reauthorize the no child left behind law. 12 years in the making now. five years overdue for reauthorization. the higher education act is overdue for reauthorization. 13 other education policy bills that are overdue for reauthorization. only a handful of santos -- there are only a handful of scientists in congress. you can hear lots of members of congress talking about agricultural economics or other ifas in excruciating detail it's relevant to their states. questionk them a about science ecology, they say they defer to others. it would be welcome in our system. many we will try to get as of your calls and as we can. chris is in rockville, maryland.
caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i'm 50 years old. i have two kids that are six. i'm concerned about a couple of things. how does core curriculum intersect with stem? for someone like myself in the energy management field, which , how can im related or someone in my position or 40 years of age access stem curriculum to retrain? i'm of the mindset that there is no better teacher than experience. but there are a lot of people who are 48 or older that are unemployed, but there is not any retraining or certifications out
there that are stem related that is where the jobs are. can tapn my age group into that. guest: thanks for the question. let me take the last part first. one of the notions that we have to all embrace is the fact that now we have to be lifelong learners. this notion that we go through the education system once and we start a career and that is where the learning stops is a very 20th century notion. workerson valley, embrace the notion that they will have 12-15 jobs over the course of their life read for young people, labor participation rates are at the same level they were in 1970. we are all struggling in terms the economy.ing in it is not unique to the stem fields. your point about the need for training, one of the weakest
areas in the federal portfolio when it comes to shove for policy -- when it comes to social policy is job-training. education laws are not nimble. there are aspects of technology that are not allowed to be used in training environments. it online education is not treated with the same set of rules as the school as. have veterans use their g.i. bill benefits don't line up very well to opportunities in modern educational settings today. there are ways in which we can improve federal policy and state policies to deal with the fact that our workforce is getting very modern. on the common standards. there are two sets of standards that apply in the stem fields. common core and academics and next generational science standards. what they are doing, they are collective activities of all the different states that have gotten together and agreed to what the learning targets are in different grade levels for students in math and science.
the states set their own curriculum and develop their own tools to teach in the classroom. the idea behind that is that we will raise the bar across the board so that a student who gets an education in the eighth grade in washington state is learning the same things that somebody maryland in case they move between maryland and washington state. technology that they use in the classroom is indexed to the same grade levels . there are lots of advantages of allowing states to borrow what they think works in other states in the stem field. host: diana from livingston, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm also a technology student. i went through school for health information technology. at education is not always the answer because
the barriers to getting a job is that these employers want you to have 3-5 years of experience or specific vendor experience but are not providing the tools. you see that china protects their nation by ordering a study of ibm servers. here, our american technologies outsource our jobs. they are currently negotiating tbttpd agreement -- agreement. here we are getting into debt. i have three children in college. they are getting into debt. -- all thee jobs education in the world are not going to do any good unless these american companies step up and start hiring. are using college students as unpaid interns.
they have these offshore subsidiaries and they use inversion and transfer pricing. it's not the governments fault. everybody is blaming the government. it's all the business owners. the leaders. they get together with the government to provide exactly what they need and step up and -- microsoft some build the schools in india so they can train those citizens. what about our citizens? you touched on an area that i don't think is often times thought of as a stem field, the health and life sciences area. we argue about these distinctions of what a stem field and what's not. i embrace the idea of the life sciences. in the, if you're health-care sector, that is an area that is growing. we need or the people going in to -- we need more people going
into health. you touched on something that is -- that we should say out loud. it's taking people a lot longer to find a job after college than they have in the past. the georgetown center for education did a study last year that showed that it takes four years longer to get to median earnings in the united states. a long time for somebody who is 22 and says it'll take you eight years to get to the same point that somebody might do in four years one generation ago. you touched on something that people are talking about and thinking about. better ways to deal with. -- retiringntegrate scientists and engineers are the biggest source of new opportunities in those fields. they are retiring it very fast rates. faster than the number of graduates being produced by american universities. they are leaving jobs open that were for highly skilled workers. employers are working at, how do
i replace the experience and the skill set? they're looking at employer directed mentorship opportunities. what is the best way to ask and -- to expand internship opportunities? there were three parts of the president's announcement. -- more, mentorship kids from the inner city can get exposure to science and the 30'sy careers -- was companies that have stepped up and heeded the call, the need for an all hands on deck strategy. it companies need to be doing more. when they talk about not being able to hire workers, we ask, what is your internship program? companies are starting to make limits because they are feeling this in their own bottom line.
it's one thing to say. it's another thing to feel it. brown is the executive director director of the stem education coalition. you can follow them on twitter >> the u.s. house gaveling in momentarily. briefly too, for short speeches, back at 4:00 p.m. for a number bills dealing with a number of different issues. later on commerce, justice, and science spending bill for 2015. live now to the u.s. house here on c-span. -- conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. we give you thanks, o god, for giving us another day. in these days, after memorial day, we thank you again for the ultimate sacrifices of so many of our citizen ancestors. bless their families with you