tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN September 19, 2014 10:00am-3:01pm EDT
do, i hirehat i lawyers and spend more money. they say we can help and end up she is still there. i am disabled. host: have you talked to your congressman? caller: i have. my congressman said we cannot get involved. caller: yes, we can't get involved. host: what are you going to do next? caller: i don't know. host: all right. the brookingse to institution. this is an event with an author. darrell west is the author. "billionaireslled
: reflections on the upper crust." by markbe joined harbaugh of the "new york times ." issuel be discussing this in just a minute over at the brookings institution. this is a new book that is out and you will see it later on book tv as well. thank you for being with us this friday. enjoy your weekend.
the influence the wealthy americans have on public all as he. -- public policy. just getting underway. >> i would like to welcome you to this launch of my new book "billionaires: reflections on the upper crust for those of you who are interested, we will be selling books in the hallway outside got a torrent immediately following this event are a -- event. available on amazon and out leaving bookstores. if you want additional information, you can check our brookings.edu -billionaires. if you want to join in the
virtual conversation surrounding this topic, we will be using #billionaires for this event. so feel free to join in with any comments or questions you have. start would like to do is with a short video explaining why i wrote this book. inshows how my background rural ohio led to my interest in this subject. so we will start with the video. [video clip] >> i started out poor. i grew up on a dairy farm in southern ohio. i used to milk the cows before i would go to school every morning. when my fair -- when my parents
first moved to the house, it did not have running water or an indoor bathroom. the cows got running water before the house did because it was more important for the barn to have it. attendedducation, i public high schools and public universities. i spent 26 years teaching political science at brown university and met my first billionaire. eventually came to washington, d.c., and now i work as vice president at [indiscernible] have seen billionaires become much more active in trying to influence the election process. they are spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars pursuing their own partisan objective, often in secret from the american public. so it is really the culmination of wealth and secrecy that is
most problematic about the contemporary period. i wrote the book to provide a much better understanding of who these people are and how they are using their money in the political process. the big challenge of our current period in having all these winners with great fortunes is often times they are able to influence elections and government in secret. i was talking with a wealthy individual and he described what he called a strategy. if the kid get one senator to basically what they hold on an appointment you don't like or stop a bill that you don't want,
that can be a very powerful way to affect the political process. haveupreme court decisions put huge loopholes into our campaign finance laws. there used to be much more required disclosure. now wealthy people can influence the process. they can spend tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in secret and nobody else knows about it. wealthy people have the right to train -- to try and influence the process in the same way that every other american is very the we need to know how this big money is coming into the political process. i would like to thank george soros, christine jacobs, and the video team at brookings for producing the video. i wrote this book because i was
really curious about billionaires. i wanted to know who they are, how they got rich, and what are they doing with their immense wealth. whato wanted to know they're like as individuals. between teaching at brown university for 26 years and now being a brookings for about six years, i have encounters with a number of different winners. i think my experiences reveal some interesting tidbits about the mentality and viewpoints. i was visiting a billionaire friend of mine in palm beach. of course, he has a beautiful place right on the water overlooking the ocean. one morning, we were sitting on the patio overlooking the water when a helicopter flew very noisily write-down the coast, kind of completely disturbing the serenity of the morning. my friend rolled his eyes and said, oh, that's my neighbor. it turns out, instead of driving his car two miles down the road to go to the golf course, this guy flew his helicopter very
this is an example of alien ears annoying other billionaires. -- of billionaires annoying other billionaires. [laughter] in 2012, i had the experience of a billionaire annoying me. [laughter] i was asked that year about the possibility of donald trump speaking at the republican national convention. article thatn the republicans should send him on an all expenses trip around the world. if he actually spoke at the convention, he would bring the party too much trouble. i didn't think too much about those comments, but the morning it appeared in the paper, i got a call from trumps assistant requesting my e-mail address. he sent me an agreements are from the billionaire himself. trump had pasted my comment about him into the body of the e-mail and then he wrote in big
black, bold levels -- darrell, you are a fool. best wishes, donald j trump. [laughter] wishes.iated the best i have this note framed in my office. billy thing i don't understand is he put air quotes around fool. that made me think that i was being more stupid than a typical fool. prior to that interaction, i did not recognize the gradations of exit being a fool. that is the note that he sent. it is the first billionaire that i met at rowan university who propelled this book. that is actually ted turner. when two years ago, ted turner came to brown to give a lecture in it was noteworthy because he had actually been kicked out of brown for the support area code violations, mainly involving wine and women. i'm not sure that it was in that order.
but he came with his then-wife jane fonda. this was a big deal for the university, a glitzy occasion. he gave a funny speech. he said his favorite thing about having a ranch at west was being able to urinate off the front arch. crowd,or this ivy league that was a little racy for us but we laughed. but then he turned serious and he discussed wealth and he said the first million is the hardest. after that, money begets money and everything else is easier here in wealthy people have social, economic and political connections and those things make it much easier to make money. i thought a lot about that comment during the 2012 elections. we saw super wealthy individuals pour a lot of money into the campaign. s werest famous individual charles and david coke who donated billions of dollars
first to defeat president obama and now they are inactive -- they are active in this year's campaign. it turns out that they are not the only billionaires who are politically active. michael bloomberg this year has put $50 million in the fight on gun violence. he is active in promoting immigration reform. george soros supports a number of liberal grassroots organizations. don stiers only one of the less known of the politically active billionaires but this year he placed $100 million to raise public awareness about climate change. phenomenon,ng this i discover it is not just an american phenomenon but a global foot -- global development. bill enters a run for office in 12 different countries around the world. most of the time, they actually end up winning. the most famous is berlusconi in
italy. but more recently, we have the case of or senko among the new resident of ukraine. , the newoshenko president of ukraine. political influence, poor transparency of money in politics. we are seeing what i called the of politics at many different levels and many have written about the economic consequences of wealth. i wanted to look at the political impact of great wealth. billionaires and 492 of them live in the united states. it is important to understand the impact they are having on our political process. i wanted tohings look at his there are several aspects that i think are particularly important in terms of the context in which this
activism is taking place. one is the high level of income concentration we are seeing. thomas a chart from picardy and daniel tsai is which shows the dramatic rise of income concentration between 1913 and 2012. income concentration reached a number 1% inhe top terms of the percent of income they can -- that they earn. hyperactivewas a money 1%. oft meant the top 1% americans received 26% of the income. ii, it reached a low point of the rut percent in 1976. say that the wealthy will always be wealthy and everybody has this. but if you look at american history, it if -- it situates up and down. policy makes a difference.
what we have seen in recent years is that it is back to about 1%. the top 1% have very distinctive political views compared to the general public. decades,scientists larry bartel's and jason c wright did a very interesting study where they compared the political views of the top 1%ral 1% versus -- top versus the general united states. they ask a battery of questions to each of them and then essentially compared the results. aat you can see here is, on variety of issues, we talk about medicare, views about schools and views about health care. on all of these issues, the top 1% prefer a more limited role of government. 87% prefer cuts in medicare to comparedudget deficits to 27% of the general public. in regard to schools, 35% of the rich believe government should
is necessary to ensure that all children have a good public education. care, 41% ofealth the wealthy say they are willing to pay more in taxes to provide health care for all compared to 59% of the general public. so the rich are very politically active. they obviously have a lot of money. .hey have distinctive views perhaps one of the more troubling things about -- that i discovered in my research is what one wealthy individual described to me as a get-the-senator strategy. toggling about this. what this individual said is that there are some ultra-wealthy individuals who practice this particular strategy. we all seek congressional gridlock. we see the hyperpolarization, the extreme part assistant -- the extreme partisanship.
it turns out that money is in the middle of those problems. the wealthy have discovered that legislation is to get a sympathetic senator and take of sexistto tactics. secret hold so we generally do not know who was behind a hold or what their particular reason is. we can see these appointments language for months and months without a movement. you can filibuster to stop legislation. so there are a rewriting of different activities that fall within this category. "the new york times had an interesting story about this involving bill ackman, a wall street financier, and his campaign against over life and ackman has been against herbalife, complaints about the business model and has shorted the stock.
he was able to get massachusetts -- the massachusetts senator demanding investigation into this company. the day that that investigation became public, the stock price fell, which was a big help to mr. ackman. it is similar to a recent new youer cartoon which some of may have seen which shows this wealthy man in this really nice office with really big windows plane, town one yachts, four houses and five politicians. when you look historically, we often have had various organizations in american society that help us keep track of what is going on in the political process. of course, the news media is a big art of that. they have been the major oversight original station. -- oversight organization. reporters help keep track in
what is going on in the political process. but of course, what we have seen in recent years has been the news media have been devastated by the financial crisis and the growth of free information on the internet. this has been especially harmful at the level of state and government. conducted byrch the american journalism review which basically shows over time the number of journalists covering state government. they have done surveys. they found in 1998, there were 513 journalists who were basically working full-time to cover say government. 2003, the number had dropped to 468. by 2009, the last year in which they have done the survey, that number was down to 355. i think most of the people i talk to think, if you actually did this survey today, that number would be a lot less than
355. about thet, opportunities and the lack of oversight, some billionaires have shifted a lot of money into state referenda and state policy advocacy. knowing that there is a lot less oversight there than what we see here in our nations capital. so we have seen people get very marriage,n same-sex marijuana legalization, immigration, and should reform, obamacare, you name the issue. there often is a committee behind this. inthe problem that i see thinking about this whole topic of money in politics, especially when it comes to billionaires, is a lot of people suffer from ideological blinders. when i talk to liberals, they love it when lebron -- one liberal donors spring into action.
conservatives love it when they're rich people do exactly the same thing. need think what all they to do a step back and think about the system as a whole. we need to think about the impact of great wealth on government, on society, and on economic opportunity. the -- in the conclusion of my book, i argue that we need ologies that have greater transparency and offer broader economic opportunity. henry ford was someone who understood the value of reasonably paid employees. he was famous for paying his factory workers double the going rate. when people asked him about it he said, look, i need customers to buy my products. it is in my self-interest for me as a factory owner to pay my workers a good share, not only because it helps them live, but
they then can purchase my cars. so businesses need workers in order to thrive and to be successful. i suggest that we need more equitable tax policy, public investments in education and health care and i close the book with a personal story as saying that i am living proof of this argument. i tell the chapter, story being a young kid who woke up one day with swollen joints, a sore throat, and a high fever. looked at my symptoms and he merely sent me to the hospital. i had developed rheumatic fever, which is a bacterial disease that attacks the joints and the heart elves. -- heart valves. at age 11, i had rheumatic fever. today, nobody in america gets that disease. it is a developing world illness. there are so many kids in africa who get this and they do not have access to antibiotics.
many of the people who get this even today and that dying by age 20. but in 1966 when i had rheumatic fever, i was fortunate that there was a miracle cure that had just gone on the market a few decades earlier. a public we funded hospital, i was cured. i went on to a productive life. i went to a public university, got a graduate agree, taught in the ivy league for 26 years and then ended up teaching as what i view as the world's top think tank. so i won the lottery in terms of life's fortunes. dale is my friend also shown in this picture and was not what is fortunate as i was. after this picture was taken, he was in a farming accident and lost his big toe. he never got much of an education. he struggled economically his entire life and he died last year.
so we have two young boys who grew up in exactly the same area , two very different outcomes during there are obviously different things ago to life fortunes and explain why some people have an easier time than others, but we need public policies they keep the american dream alive for the next generation of young kids. thank you very much. [applause] i would like to invite our panelists and we will continue our conversation.
national public radio. i have to say i like that title a lot. [laughter] >> thank you. >> that keeps you very busy in this town? >> none of that has rubbed off on me. [laughter] heard peteryou have on the radio. he has been on npr since 1994. he has covered all the important money impolitic issues. now the recent rise of super pac's. andas won several awards, the radio and television correspondents association annual award for excellence. ruth marcus focuses on american politics and domestic oc area she has been with "the post" since 1984. she joined the national staff in
1986 and has covered a wide. he -- covered a wide variety of issues. she joined the editorial board in 2003 and began writing a regular column in 2006. john hall would is the chief washington correspondent for cnbc and is a political writer for "the new york times." he writes a weekly column for the paper. in addition to cnbc, john offers political analysis on nbc's meet the press and "washington week in review" along other programs. randy willens is a reporter for "the wall street journal was quote in washington, d.c. he covers business, lobbying, campaign finance and he started at "the national journal congress daily." won the mckinley dirksen award for distinguished reporting on congress. awardo won the josh holt
for best clinical reporter under the age of 33. [laughter] still a great way to start your career. i will start with peter. you have great expertise in money and politics. what do you see as the political impact of billionaires and has therefore is changed over time? billionaires influence change just because, when you start looking at the history of money in politics, you have the inflation factor. been big has always money in politics. that is a given in america. is eugener example mccarthy's campaign in 1968 was recently financed by love and eyes. you have that history.
what you have now is, after a disclosure, more openness, more campaign contribution limits, you have a contributions and a rise in non-disclosed money being prominent in the political system. 4's mainly. numberk about the finite of billionaires in this country. we don't know how many of them are active in politics. we know a few of them. we know the koch brothers, and don stier, george soros. but most of the people on the list, we don't know if they've -- if they are politically active or if they are active through the 501(c)4's and we
can't know unless it leaks. -- is anan undefined unanswerable question. if so you have to answer by definition. >> i give you history instead. [laughter] >> that is helpful to have that background. ways, you go to the history and say and leaving aside the inflation point him a one million there was a big deal -- inflation point, when million there was a big deal. to capacity of the money influence politics has always been there. go back to robber barons. the lion era and look at the leave the rear era -- at
buckley v. barrera. has a parallel to buckley. it has been there since 1974 and one question we can ask is not why is this happening now and no one hears about it but why wasn't it happening previously when limits on individual spending and expenditures had never been in place. it is fascinating to think about that question because there has been a change in the culture where there seems to be more willingness on both sides of the political spectrum or throughout the political spectrum to spend millions and be proud of it.
i couldn't agree more with the they have raised about secrecy because it is the toxic nexus between big money and secrecy whereas you have the biggest problem. the scariest unknown figure in your his intention is the number of reporters that states have because, when you take it money and you take secrecy and you take away coverage, you have a huge problem. that the, i think willingness of these billionaires to the unabashed about their desire to influence the political process is to some showt -- we know a lot of anderson's pending because he was proud to tell us about it. kichs who used to -- th
operatewho used to in secrecy now makes it more known. theome ways, in addition to more troubling development, that is an interesting one. what's brody, you focus on business law and campaign finance. my own comment is -- my billionaire rupert murdoch was a really good guy. [laughter] he is just try to help the country. [laughter] billionaire. [laughter] >> jeff bezos. >> good point. the waythink part of the system has been developed
law of unintended consequences that came from the 2002 campaign finance reform legislation where, at the time, businesses and unions and billionaires who give unlimited sums of money to the political parties and at the time everybody thought that was a bad thing. so we have had legislation to ban these unlimited contributions to clinical parties. later, that money started going to outside groups. it took a few years for them to get to the system we are now. but the system we used to have where people could give million-dollar new nations -- nine dollars donations to the republican party or the democratic party and it was disclosed and it went to two forces that were bringing politics together. time southern
democrats. we have republicans in new england during we had people all across the spectrum in both clinical parties and they came to washington because -- to washington and they compromise because they agreed. now the money cannot go to political parties. they nabbed her to outside groups which are very extreme. so you don't have canada's coming to washington who are supported by these groups. you have candidates who come to washington who are in general more extreme. you have no republicans in new england during you have in a democrats for the most part in the south. allfornia is almost republicans. so you come to washington and you cannot compromise and that is an unintended consequence of the 2002 reform. >> don, what is your view? >> first of all, i think we all
have an interesting controlled experiment. if sales of this but make you a billionaire, we will see how much you change your [laughter] >> and if that happens, i will be happy to disclose that publicly. [laughter] >> i must say, topics like the effect of billionaire is a little bit like i think of the topic of media bias which conservatives complain about. it is true. it is a factor but i think it is not as large a factor independently as the critics fear it is. you talked about that in your book. to mybama's election reelection, is that proof that money doesn't determine an election outcome? i think it doesn't. it influences them. but it is one of a number of factors. brody was describing structural
changes in american politics that to me are the greatest term in and of election outcomes and those have been going on for some time, like decades since the 1950's. i also think that, if you look at it more broadly, you can make an argument that the real -- the problem with money in politics is much vigor than the 1%. maybe it is the 15% because the of we have had a divergence life fortunes and economic success in our country, you could say -- you can look at our system and say that public policy is made for the interest of about -- of upper-middle-class people, not just billionaires only. rise of income inequality and the certification of society and the way that
perpetuates itself through our education system and many other issues. i think it matters. -- tends to tens balance out, whether it is bill and her-two-billionaire money or billionaire two-online money. i believe in the third quarter of 2003, they raise more money in that quarter than bill clinton had raised in any quarter running for president of the united states. the technology and information structure that we have makes it possible to innovate and figure out new ways of balancing the effects of april like the koch brothers or george soros. john was talking about the impact of 2012. i want to talk about 2014.
harry reid is really attacking the koch brothers. i think that is risky. "californialed a billionaire who stands to profit from the blocking of the keystone pipeline. how is all of this doing billionaire activity going to affect the 2014 elections if at all? >> i would argue very not -- not very much at all. his senator reid was having daily attack on the coke others, , not tooch brothers sound too cynical, it is they had nothing else to talk about. >> you are so cynical.
[laughter] i really think that it is a little bit on both sides of a base revving up mechanism to go guys attack the other billionaires. but it is not the kind of things that resonate with most voters. ok, that's fine, but what are you all about? a gets me to something that i want to challenge john with. a challenge in the nicest awesome the way. you were saying that you thought things would work themselves out, billionaire versus billionaire. i really take your point about the powerful impact of internet advertising and somewhat leveling the playing field. but in terms of billionaire versus billionaire, how do you
take that assertion against what i think is troubling differentials in darrell's chart were attitudes of -- these diners but the top 1%. there are clearly ideal .ifferentials >> are you talking about a disparity in partisanship or the disparity in the -- or the political views of billionaires versus everybody else? >> i think that once again the same question. if you are a billionaire and you think there should be less government spending on health care or education, you will totally gravitate toward one political party rather than another during >> yes. than another. >> yes you that is also in the service of the point that i was
making more broadly about people with money. not millionaires, but people with money, upper-class people. they care more about deficit reduction than ordinary people do. that is not a, function of billionaires. it is a function of income inequality and different ways of looking at the world. have as the gene mccarthy story indicated millionaires who -- individuals who are willing to spend money in the service of values that are out of step with their class. the democrats improvement politically speaking with people with money is an important factor in leveling what we are talking about. democrats are doing a lot better with people with postgraduate
successful baby-boom liberals who have gone into business. i think that gives them the thecity to respond to -libertarian -smaller government point of view. how do you see the outcomes in the 2014 elections? i'm sorry, the money or the billionaires? >> either. >> i think that we see hints that the billionaire issue resonates with voters. i just did a story last week about the senate race in --higan where they had just
conservation voters had an ad tying the republican candidate to the cove others -- the koch brothers and suffolk university pollsters were calling. they get to the open-ended firston, what is the thing you think of when i say the name of the candidate. i think it was 4% of the respondents said the first thing they thought of when her name was mentioned was koch brothers big business. basically that phrase. does this stick till the election? i don't know. the fact that it is registering at all that way, i think, it goes back basically to harry reid setting the stage for the democrats to do this kind of advertising.
both groups -- koch groups attack don stier. >> do you think these attacks and counter attacks will make any difference? >> it is hard to say. stepping back a little bit, we are still in a period of elections where most of the money is still being spent by candidates and local parties in the old system. the money by the outside groups and donated by billionaires is still not a majority of the amount of money being spent very they are a few names bring many out there, but elections have been filed the way we want them to be battle, which is by candidate. this election may be the tipping point where outside groups and billionaires and millionaires spend more money on the election than the candidates themselves. if we keep going in this direction and we get to 2016 and
beyond where all of a sudden the candidates are not able to get their own messages out because the other groups are battling above them about their own campaign. that is a point where i think it is dangerous for democracy were candidates who are running for office are not even allowed to control their message. we are not there yet, but we are heading there. and there is no legislation to change anything. for thea scary prospect selection anyone after. >> i think we ought to remember less and matter messages matter less than before. so much of politics and structural. it is well known to the vast majority of voters what team they are on. and their cultural identification, people who care about the environment and income theuality and don't like prevalence of guns in our
society know what team they are on and know which ways to vote to advance that team. the same is true people on the other side. you've got increasing stratification of our politics by race. white voters overwhelmingly in very large numbers boat for republican candidates and blacks and increasingly us panics are locked down for democrats. so the influence of the attack ads and other campaign material is on a pretty narrow band of brothers. ahead to 2016, it strikes me that democrats have not quite decided how they feel or what they want to do about billionaires. on the one hand, you have harry reid who is fighting them publicly on the or the senate. then you have this ready-four-hillary super pac which is not quite her super pac -- >> ready to be. [laughter] >> yes and signing up
billionaires. democrats can't decide whether to fight them or join them. when we looked at 2016, how do we see this whole thing on theng, both republican side as well as the democratic side. >> one thing we are seeing already is, with the koch brothers and to a lesser extent don stier, the billionaires are building their own ground organizations. ,ou keep going this direction tv ads, groundwork organizations owne koch network has its book or database -- booker database just like a political -- i am not saying that the koch network is a political party, but they are doing a lot of things that a political party does. >> you mentioned super pac's.
it is really important to continue to distinguish between the kind of billionaire setting we are talking about. discuss thet or life of the super pac as the force in american politics, but at least we know through super pac's would billionaires were millionaires or the rest of us are contributing and spending. that my bigger worry is not billionaires banding together in billionaire super pac's, by billionaires spending money i don't even know about. to that extent, i would say that the fault is in our billionaires in a world that we have allowed to be rewritten that they are allowed to operate without any sunshine on them. the fact that we have a tax code
that allows tax-exempt organizations to engage in what anybody out there, from first grade on, understands as clinical activity is really a criminal public policy. and it needs to be changed during the irs understands it needs to be changed. the irs needs to get itself out of the business of politics and everybody else would be better off good the ftc needs to get itself into the business head but we need either regulatory changes or legislation to make that happen. i think we all understand the entrenched interests that work against that, which leads to a 2016 set up that doesn't just see the explosion of super pac's but the continuing rise of 501(c)6'sand
exploding. >> sometimes we don't know who is spending money. ago, we all got in this room and tried to come up with the worst possible system of monetary campaign and we would probably come up with what we have now. donate what they want to and do not disclose who they are. that is where we are now. it is a parable -- it is a very terrible system. racks to pick up on your point about ready for hillary, i don't think democrats are ambivalent about how they feel about billionaires. i think every single one would be welcome if they showed themselves to be on the democratic team and brought their check up. -- checkbook. billionaire is not a disqualification for the democratic already as long as you are on their side. and they've got some and they will use them as best they can do on the influence of these
super wealthy spenders, i think back to sheldon adelson. he bet his money on newt gingrich. how effective was that? where did that go? you had another one, i forget the name of the guy, who invested very heavily in rick santorum. i'm sure any democrat would be delighted if he's as a billion dollars on rick santorum in a primary election. -- you cans only make a difference, but there's only so much of a difference you can make your it -- you can make. >> lets up the floor to the audience. there is a gentleman in the very back who has his hand up. we have a microphone that will come back to you very if you can give us your name and your organization. those of you who are watching the webcast, if you want to submit questions, you can do so
through #cleaners area >> thank you. i am lauren hirschi. about 30 years ago, i was a guest scholar here at things ver. -- a guesthank scholar here at brookings. i want to thank the panelists. i am in virginia and. there was a federal trial in richmond recently, $177,000 box of papers. would you please comment on that? could you be more specific? years, therehree will be a supreme court decision on mcdonald versus u.s. the question is how does that buyout on the psyche or the consciousness of the american voter today? i could give you a sort of other
side of the coin. there are two new populism is going on than the united states. one is the tea party and the other is the left wing of the democratic already. senator from ohio and senator from massachusetts represent them. i invite your comments. what else is there out there that is happening that is or that you would interpret or comment on from these two phenomenon, the new , and thes, left, right decision a fewnd weeks ago. voter,outside cynical the corruption that was disclosed and that the jury decided was criminal behavior really just ratifies what many voters at least think is
business as usual. by thealways been struck degree to which voters actually think the system is so much more is,upt than it actually that there are lobbyists coming with bags of money and popping them on the desks of lawmakers for their own personal use here --what is really interesting personal use. what is really interesting about the mcdonald cases, he was dealing with a campaign donor and getting campaign contributions that were disclosed and he was simultaneously doing relatively minor official acts for this donor, would there be a criminal case there at all? probably not. the benefits are going to him personally and that really transformed it.
but from the point of view of voters, it is probably all of a piece of this vague disgusting match that they think of, a, washington and, b, politics. >> i think the public doesn't run on this idea that public -- that campaign contributions are bribes. our system, our economy is not delivering rise in incomes in a way [indiscernible] engenders -- people get different notions of why that is true and some of it could flow from the corruption system. some of it can flow from
immigration, and some can flow from the increasing wealth of 1% 1%, the ways in which the of the playing field. but all of those things, the underlying fact is that people are anxious and scared about their economic futures. >> christine has a question from our webcast audience. little bit on it a with your remarks earlier, but for the larger panel, can you get into your perspective on the psychology of ellen airs, what of billionaires, what drives them, what makes them tick? >> one thing that -- i don't think i have any friends who are billionaires, but i have a friend who might be close to that.
i am struck in talking to him, at the way in which he oddly, in my opinion, feels he siege by the political system. like this whole notion of, you know, pitchforks and people coming after people with money that engenders a sort of attitude of trying to push back really hard. i remember having a conversation guy at a college reunion before the 2012 election. obama asked me, why does hate us so much? i did not know how to answer because it seemed like such a crazy question. but there is a sense that -- i don't know if there is a psychology that is part guilt or ,f it is simply self protection
but there is a sense of everyone else who is not doing so well being after them. a little bit comical to my way of thinking. but that is the only exposure i've had. >> i don't know any billionaires, or didn't until i met darrell. [laughter] >> i like the optimism. >> this might be counterintuitive, or counter conventional wisdom, but i don't think billionaires spent all this money on elections for of yo desk for your business point of view. -- for a pure business point of view. these guys make billions of dollars a year and they're spending $100 million and they think it will affect their business?
wouldn't they spend more money if they thought it went directly to the bottom lines? sheldon adelson is an spending money directly -- is not spending money directly on casino regulations. >> he is spending some money on casino regulations. >> if they thought it was only important to the bottom line, they would spend more money. i think it is more just ideological. to be aon seems to want person of power within the republican conservative movement. yeah, he threw away his money on gingrich, with the result of are was all the candidates coming to him and saying, "hey, how about me?" 14 he likes to be in a position likes to -- for him he be in a position of power, and
is spending in the 2012 cycle helped establish him that way. >> i think one thing we haven't touched on is the really interesting -- it kind of goes to what are they motivated by, basically trying to protect their wealth or are they trying to promote their worldview, and i think it is probably more the latter. one of the things that i think is a really interesting distinction is the difference between billionaires spending their money on candidates and billionaires spending the money on causes. it strikes me in part because of the countervailing influence of individual donations through the internet that billionaires spending money on causes -- you darrell -- this, could be more powerful, depending on what your position is and where the billionaires put themselves out, more pernicious in terms of the impact on stay for a friend that -- state referenda.
billionaire jeff bezos -- i don't know if he thinks of himself that way -- >> you will not get far if you call him steve. [laughter] >> there you go, i am done. i retire. could you undo the tape? not enough caffeine this morning. jeff bezos, my billionaire, spent on marriage equality, which passed. i would venture to guess that his $2.5 million there was a lot better return on investment than $2.5 million on newt gingrich or whoever his individual candidate of choice would have been. that is a really interesting distinction to raise on the incentive to be involved in this, psychology of
involvement. >> i think>> that is an important point, the state level, especially around referenda, policy ideas, and so on. if you think about $2 million, or $3 million, $5 million going into a medium-sized state, you could have an impact. in some of these campaigns you end up with one-sided campaigns. if you have a weak media role that could be a bad combination. if there's a lot of competition, a fear campaign, spending on both sides, that is not something i would worry about. >> just wait to see what happens if a try to outlaw telepathic golf courses. >> these guys will be in trouble. peter. can we get a microphone over here? coming up behind you. >> retire from brookings.
i am struck at the moderation of the panel on this edition. money has always influenced u.s. politics, it's not new, there's democrats, there's republicans, so it is on both sides. i think this is a much more in a thanus issue, development, the panel seems to believe. let me throw 2 thoughts out and get your feedback, 2 negative thoughts. one is the rising public opinion polls that show the american public thinks the system can be bought. higher and higher percentage, i think in the mid-80's or something. when the public has such a negative view of the influence of money, that is terrible for the whole system. the second negative impact is in the past, would be candidate needed to develop a broad base of financial support, get lots
of contributors to run. now all you need is one billionaire. you don't need to develop any message that affects bronislaw aths of the people. you get ade behind youl and that iss allo you need. major negative impact ofn cleaners -- of billionaires on money. win theich didn't republican nomination and obama was reelected. as a service-level response, i think that, first of all, i don't think it is the case that in look back and candidates the past didn't have wealthy patrons who were making it happen. that is everybody from ronald of --, who had a group richard nixon, gene mccarthy.
i don't think it is that radically different, and i don't think that it is a guarantee of success. i do think it is corrosive that people believe the system is corrupt, but i think a lot of that flows from their feelings about their own economic prospects, and what they are getting out of it. >> brody, you want to jump in on that? >> 20 has always been in politics. -- money has always been in politics. the problem is how the money is spent. it is being run by unaccountable, outside groups who don't need to disclose who their spending the money for. that is the problem. you end up having candidates in washington who are beholden to the extremes of either party and not candidates who have a sense of more balance.
it is how the money is flowing, not that there is money. >> if i could add an international component to this, i mentioned earlier, billionaires have run for office in 12 different countries and often are very successful. when you start looking at what people --hat these once these people are actually in office -- the point that peter raises about public thesesm, in all of countries there are charges of cronyism, conflicts of interest, insider dealings. , georgia, where there has been a lot of evidence of this. in the developing world they don't have the rule of law that we have, they don't have the economic opportunities. in many of those countries they have a small number of billionaires. the thing that makes me optimistic in terms of the future is the fact that we have 500 billionaires and on most
issues there's some papers in viewpoints among them, but you go into other countries there might be three or five or seven billionaires. they always have very close election ships with the government and that needs to massive public cynicism. even lesshaps effective regulation and disclosures than we have. cannot absolutely absolutely. >> steve. >> i am a guest scholar at brookings working on international entrepreneurship as a foreign-policy tool could i think the point made about the corrosive effect of all of this is an important one because one of the reasons is so much excitement about your book, we all know this is happening and here is a book that talks about it. one of the things that i thought was especially interesting were the under the radar revelations that you made. herbalife, for example. we all know about the few household name billionaires and
the candidates they have supported. but we don't know is what we don't know. you match that with the chart you showed about the decline in investigative journalism, which is why i especially wanted to ask this question of this panel of journalists, you have a very nervous-making situation. my question is, it seems to me that there are 2 answers, and i would like to hear your ideas about which of these is the most realistic to happen. >> give the question, don't give us the answers. is howthe first question to increase the transparency. section -- or second option is campaign finance reform and the likelihood of that. >> i actually can say something optimistic for a change, which is i would suggest that among major news organizations, there is actually more resources
dedicated toward covering money in politics now that there was when i first started writing about it in 1995, 1996. as you are doing then, peter. it was not a boom area of journalism. the 1996d after fund-raising scandal that it was really worth paying a lot of resources and attention to. i think there is no major news organization without a reporter dedicated, i would venture to guess, toward money in politics. he doesn't counterbalance the failure of many news organizations to have local and state-level reporters or even half reporters dedicated towards covering their congressional delegations. think about the cunningham corruption, which was fair for the looking at. you look at the financial disclosure forms, you look at the properties he had, and it
and it took reporting to bring back to life on the broader question of the prospects of campaign-finance reform, you know what they are. >> i will sound a more pessimistic note than ruth. >> he just wants to fight with me. [laughter] >> about state-level journalism. when i was on a tallahassee bureau of "the st. petersburg times," we were engaged in a process and we split the cost with "the miami herald." it was staff intensive and we had several people working on it. -- we had every single action or vote that was taken in the legislature, we associated the money with the legislators and how they voted,
and that was a theme of our coverage. my newspaper yesterday announced 5% pay cut for every single person who worked there and warned of impending layoffs. the paper has shrunk dramatically from the size that herald" hashe shrunk even more. that is just an emblem of the darrell'syou saw in visitation of the shrinking number of people covering state legislators on this topic and every other topic. >> someone has a question ther e? this gentleman right there? name is michael beckel and i am a reporter at the center for public integrity, money in politics beat. and twock to '96 thousand, 2002, the last round
of campaign-finance reform came out of scandals. i am curious if the panelists thought that attitudes towards wealth and big money had changed much since then, if people were wrong to be outraged about those things, if we were allowed to give more money to the parties directly, if it was sort of a situation where, you know, bush or obama had guests coming back to the lincoln bedroom, maybe there will be raffles and small dollar donors were good to go as well as the dollar -- the dollar. what does it take to have a scandal that would affect things these days? >> the whole business of medical money and fundraising and all that -- political money and fundraising and all that is much more out in the open than it used to be. the baseline level of cynicism is a lot higher. this beat, youon
know, campaigns did not want to talk about their fundraising, lobbyists didn't like to talk about their lobbying, and all that. , you know, the campaigns are bragging about how much money they raised, and the parties are bragging about it. the only people who aren't bragging about it are (c)4's. >> and some of them are bragging, if not disclosing. know, it is a lot more out in the open, therefore i think that the potential for a scandal is greater because it is more generally understood what are.ing on, what the norms and when you go past those
norms, i think it is easier to tell a story if the billionaires involved that if some corporate lobbyist is involved. we are on the train headed down the tracks towards -- and to get even more cynical, if i might inject even more cynicism -- >> oh, my god. >> the laws are made by people who went, and the people who went to the ones who do well under the system -- who win are the ones who do well under the system. that is why in campaign-finance -- it happenedrm ,ith a vermo -- with abramoff action 74 watergate. -- 1974 watergate. that is how we got campaign-finance reform in the first place. and say that-cynic
the capacity for scandal may be greater but the capacity to respond to scandal is less. during the 2000 campaign, during the primaries, there was a group that popped up -- i don't remember its name, that was a 527 organization, political organization but back then it did not have to disclose its donors. it was spending an unbelievable sum, which my recollection was $2 million to $3 million -- this was during a republican primary campaign. it was, i think, in support of -- i don't remember if it was in support of john mccain or george w. bush. someone else here who has a less creaky memory -- >> they were attacking mccain. >> i'm not sure whether they were attacking mccain or supporting him in favor of bush.
all of a sudden this thing popped up on the horizon. i was an editor at the time and my reporter went out and basically just by dint of banging on people, these brothers came forward. they had no responsibility to disclose this 527. within a few months, congress had actually passed, mccain pushed, because back in the days when mccain cared about campaign-finance reform, mccain bush and congress passed -- mccain bush and congress passed legislation that is on the books that requires 527 groups who are operating outside of regular committees to disclose their campaign spending and donations. that happened within the election cycle, as i recall. our capacity to respond in that same election cycle or even in anticipation of the next election cycle seems to me in response to a similar scandal to be vastly reduced. >> probably should at this point
in the spirit of full disclosure explained my cameo in the 1996 clinton fund-raising scandals. in 1997, republicans were investigating, and fred thompson had a committee, and i got a call wednesday day from an investigative reporter at "the boston globe" who also happened to be a friend of mine who said "i want to know why you attended one of the clinton fund-raising coffees and why you didn't disclose that to your readers journal.'"all street "what are you talking about? of course i didn't attend the clinton fund-raising coffee." "i have a document that says you did." the databases got screwed up because there was a john harwood for "the wall street journal" and there was a john harwood who was speaker of the house in rhode island who later went to jail for corruption. >> i know that john harwood.
>[laughter] andhese things got merged he wrote in the paper the next day that i denied having attended. >> he actually did not go to jail for corruption. there were a bunch of people who did. >> can the panel talk about any differences, if there are any, between the established billionaires, the sheldon andsons of the world whatnot, with the emerging money coming from silicon valley, the mark zuckerbergs of the world? elite ismerging i going to be more selective of the younger generation in terms of being socially liberal. i think generally speaking it is going to be a more democratic group, or at least more democratic on a certain set of than thehat he -- older money group. >> some libertarians among them. >> more libertarian, more socially liberal.
more marriage equality, more probably reproductive rights, more focused on environmental, climate change issues. thate other aspect of that is interesting is what happens when the current billionaires start passing away. like, what happens to the money? people are these conservative interviews and they often have children and grandchildren who do not share their viewpoint. an interesting example of this -- the late harold simmons, who passed away last year, some of his fortune has gone to his 2 daughters, who have supported hillary clinton, they supported barack obama, they support reproductive rights. harold simmons himself said that barack obama is the most dangerous man in america. i'm not sure how he feels about what his daughters are going to be doing with his money. you have a question?
we have a microphone coming up to you. about the sort of parties versus the outside groups. i think it really mischaracterizes how our politics has evolved. if you look carefully, the parties, and how involved they are strategically and every ,ther way in elections especially swing elections, they have never been as influential been.as they have even most of the very big and influential super pacs are informally attached to the parties. we really have 2 big team operations, and all the emphasis on what is the chamber doing within the republican party to support the establishment is a pittance of what is really going on.
parties are ideologically polarized, they are finding their allies among billionaires and others. that is where the game is. having the money come directly to them would probably not make much of a difference in charlie -- not make much of a difference electorally but it might make the donors a little more influential than they are right now. picking up on the last thing, darrell, we have a movement among some billionaires, the -- to give get back back, and i'm curious if outside the immediate political arena, what can you say about what is happening in the billionaire community? -- interestendums in big issues but other things that might come closer to public goods. >> a number of the billionaires i have looked that are actually
very forward-looking in their policy agenda. they are thinking -- looking down the road in terms of robotics and what type of social impact is going to have offshore -- offer communities -- peter thiel is a libertarian who has been big on that. emphasis on stem cell research. these are billionaires who have been visionaries, that is how they made their money. in their philanthropy they are thinking long-term in exactly the same sort of way. as you point out, bill gates and warren buffett have proposed the in whichedge billionaires give away at least half of their money during their lifetime. slightly less than 10% around the world have signed up for that. many of them are in the united states. there has not been that much interest outside the united states. they went to china to try to sign up chinese billionaires for
the giving pledge and had a big dinner and at the end of the dinner, nobody signed up. but we do have a very alibaba justase -- went public this week. leader behind a firm, is starting to do philanthropy inside china. he is worried about air pollution and he is focused very much on the environment. he is cognizant about billionaire activism can get you in trouble with your home government so he keeps telling government officials "i want to work with you. i am not working against you on this issue." there are interesting things going on in that area. we are out of time but i want to thank our panelists. brody,ruth, john, and your comments at it a lot and i appreciated hearing your insights and for those of you who want books, we have been in the hallway. thank you for coming. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]
more live coverage coming up on c-span could hillary clinton speaks at the democratic national committee women's leadership forum. at 1:00, the president of cvs health talks about corporate america's role in delivering better health outcomes for consumers to 2:00, secretary of state john kerry was united nations security council meeting on iraq and developing international support for the new government in combating isis. tonight, more campaign 2014 covered, starting with the arkansas governors debate between mike ross and asa
hutchinson, followed by the governors today from texas. greg abbott.aces that is at 10:00 eastern. both chambers of congress yesterday wrapped up work for the whole and members headed back to their districts to prep for the november elections. before leaving town, house speaker john boehner appeared at the american enterprise institute and talked about immigration, taxes, his proposal for addressing the national debt . >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. i'm delighted to welcome you all here today for this important address from the speaker of the house, john boehner. it's a distinct honor to introduce my friend john boehner back to aei as both of you -- most of you know he's the 61st
speaker of the house. when he was elected in 1990, he had little idea what his trajectory is going to lead to i dare say. he served as the house minority leader, the house majority leader the chairman of the house committee on education and workforce, chairman of the house republican conference and on and on, one leadership mission after the other up to the highest leadership position in the house. he is known not just as someone who holds leadership positions but who is authentically a good and courageous and fair leader. today he is here to discuss a five-point plan for the congress to reset america's economy. please join me in welcoming speaker john boehner. [applause] >> good afternoon, everyone and let me just say how happy i am to be back at aei. i last spoke here shortly before i became speaker and it's a job i love but looking back a job i never thought i would have.
when i got first elected to congress i thought i will probably do this for 10 years and go back and run my business or do something else but i'm still here and still on the journey for the same reason that many of you are. each of us was fortunate that we had a chance to succeed, chance to realize our potential and our work isn't finished until we have passed the same chance on to our kids and theirs. and i have got some ideas about how to do that, and today i would like to share those with you. let me start by picking up where i left off when i was here nearly four years ago. that day i talked about how we would run the house differently, differently than the republicans had run it in the past and how democrats were running it then. today i can report that the people's house is more open and more transparent than ever. for the first time legislative data is posted online in xml and
in bulk. the house proceedings and committee hearings are all streamed online. you can even bring your ipad to the house floor, which was prohibited in the past. earmarks used to crash our coffers at the rate of 10,000 at a time and they have been eliminated. we have considered bills under an open process. consider that my predecessor had no bills on the floor under that open process. so we are on the right track. much of the credit goes to the people in the institutions that would do all the heavy lifting. all this without delivery and what my friend newt gingrich called the 21st century citizen directed government. one that is smaller, less costly and more accountable to the people we serve. that is why despite being a
minority party here in washington, republicans have gotten some really important things done. we have cut total federal spending two years in a row, which hasn't happened since the korean war. we have completed a major trade agreement with columbia and panama and south korea, made it easier to pay for college by tying student loan rates to the markets instead of some political whim, improved our job training system so that more people can gain high-quality skills that advance our economy. we are protected 99% of the american people from an increase in their taxes. now there's a lot more that we can do, and our focus continues to be on what we call better solutions. solutions to get people back to work, lower costs at home, and restore opportunity for all americans. to that end we have passed now over 380 bills that are pending in the united states senate.
380 -- almost all of them done on a bipartisan basis. dozens of those would improve our economy and improve the prospects for jobs in our country, and as we speak the house is considering a big energy bill and with good reason. there's an energy boom going on in america. it's soaring from colorado to north dakota to texas louisiana, to eastern ohio, pennsylvania, west virginia, too, and the boom is driving real economic growth. unemployment today is half of what it was just four years ago. it's a big deal. americans aren't hearing a whole lot about it because it's happening entirely on state and private lands. and the federal government really is not involved in this at all. we take this approach to the national level by doing things like approving the keystone
pipeline, opening more of our federal lands for oil and gas exploration, and if we really want to get our economy humming that would do it. but let's not stop there. i think beyond just boosting the numbers a little bit. in my view america's energy boom presents a once in a generation opportunity to reset our economic foundation from from the bottom up, and here's what i mean. america is on track to be energy independent in the next few years. that's going to mean more growth but it's also going to mean lower prices, energy prices in north america. we are already paying anywhere from 30 to 50% less than our big competitors around the world, industrial competitors especially the europeans. this disparity is going to grow and as it grows more manufacturers are going to work at moving their facilities here. it's actually already underway, and if you are an energy dependent industry you are going to have no choice but to move your operations here because you
can't produce anything without energy, and you can't produce anything without electricity. and so they are going to be doing this, and our job is to make sure we continue to look at moving their facilities here. the problem is washington's approach is always top down and the bureaucracy is so lumbering that the government is keeping us from where i think we need to be. now just look at the state of things and where we are today. flat wages, higher prices, a six year slog to regain the jobs lost during the recession and millions continue to ask the question -- where are the jobs? so we can do this the washington way and move dirt around and see what happens or we can lay a solid foundation for economic growth.
not picking one over the others but to do all what we can to reap the benefits of this bill. bring these good-paying jobs home, get our workers off the sidelines, build a culture of hard-working responsibility around them, and make america the place to work, save, and invest. it can be done, and there are five things that i think that need to happen in order to bring this about. you know the first is to fix our tax code. we have heard a lot lately about corporate inversions and inversions are just symptoms, visible symptoms of a much deeper problem. our tax code is terrible. nobody understands it, not even the irs. it will pay accountants hundreds of dollars so they can try to lower their tax bills and they have had to because over the years thousands of changes have been made to the tax code.
and mostly for the benefit of those who are well connected. all this talk about inversions is making the problem smaller. it's like fussing over a divot when a road is filled with potholes. corporate side and personal side. make it pro-growth, make it pro family, and bring down the rates for every american and clear out the loopholes allowing people to do taxes on two sheets of paper. 95% of the american people do their taxes on two pieces of paper. i could feel the blood pressure going down in the room already. so we do this. we get one of the biggest reasons that jobs are moving overseas, and we make it easier for families to do anything from building a house to save for college for their kids. secondly, solve our spending problems.
for 53 of the last 60 years we have spent more than we brought in. this is where people get on me about comparing apples-to-oranges, but hear me out. now would you do this in your own home? of course you wouldn't. you would never get by with it. can anybody run a business this way? absolutely not. well guess what? we can't do it as a country either because it's bad for our economy, to stealing from our kids and their grandkids, robbing them of the benefits they will never see him leaving them with burdens that are nearly impossible to repay. the question isn't what's driving this debt, it's who. baby boomers like me are retiring at the rate of 10,000 a day. 70,000 this week, 3.5 million this year, and this is going to go on for another 20 years. our entitlement programs were not designed for almost all of this retiring at the same time and they certainly weren't designed for the fact that most of us are going to live well
beyond 80. those programs are important to tens of millions of americans say you can't throw them out, and you don't want to throw them out, but they need to be fixed and put on a sustainable path and we can in fact do that. thirdly, we have to reform our legal system. they let anybody in america sued anybody any day for any reason they want. this is crazy, and we all pay for it in everything that we buy. the costs are staggering. we spend more per person on litigation, like 2.5 times more than the average industrial country around the world. they don't just show up in higher premiums but literally everything we buy. it's inefficient, it makes america less competitive. there has got to be a better way. i'm all for taking care of people who have been injured and making sure they have access to
the system, but there ought to be reasonable standards and reasonable limits on compensation. fourthly, our regulatory system. the way the federal government hands down regulations is coercive, combative, and frankly it's very expensive. you take the dodd-frank laws as an example with a 849 pages and $21.8 billion for compliance costs. the interesting thing about this is the dodd-frank was passed to get rid of too big to fail. not only has it failed to do that, the compliance costs are indiscriminately giving small community banks and credit unions and for the banks and credit unions, their bread and butter are small business loans and family loans.
but now you have more uncertainty in more money going into compliance and what happens with the cost of borrowing goes up and access to credit goes down. it's the last thing that main street needs. other countries have a more collaborative process for deciding what is the problem, a more collaborative process for how to address that problem, and the result is you have fewer regulations, but the ones that you do have are a more meaningful and don't necessarily drive up the cost of doing business in that country. even if we did these four things i don't think we are going to maximize our potential out of this energy bill. the fifth issue is simple. we have got to find a way to educate more of america's kids. aside from arthur brooks, you are not going to meet more of a glass half full guy than me, but some of these figures are really rather depressing. last year one out of every five high school students didn't graduate with their peers. one out of five. among those who did graduate one in five need remedial education before they can start college.
according to the nation's report card, only 38% of 12th-graders performed at or above proficiency in reading. only 26% performed at or above proficiency in math. we are simply not educating enough of america's kids. no child left behind did was require every child to adopt standards and make assessments. frankly, it's there so we can track whether kids are learning. that's the good news. the bad news is too many children still are learning. many are not learning because they struggle in school. that is why one of the things we have done is create the first federally funded choice d.c. scholarship program. i will tell you what -- it's exceeding beyond anyone's highest expectations.
97% of these kids graduate from high school. 92% approval rating from the parents, so why wouldn't we go ahead and start expanding the program to the rest of the country? let's give more poor kids and parents a better chance to find schools. we all know we are going to have a growing economy, we are going to need workers. we can't have workers that don't get the basics of a decent education in america. here is the whole point. if we were doing these five things in a meaningful way and with this coming energy boom in front of us we could reset the economic foundation -- provide a reliable stream of good-paying jobs, more stability and security all the way through retirement, and more
opportunities for americans to get ahead, not just to get by. there are many reasons do that than not one more important than the rest. many cities and universities built their memorial stadiums in honor of the following. one of the classics is the navy marine corps memorial stadium in annapolis. if you have never been there surrounding the football field the great battles are listed, guadalcanal, midway, sicily, and iwo jima and the story goes a few decades ago william and mary player looked at the names and said "man, these guys have a tough schedule." [laughter] let me tell you, america has a tough schedule in front of it and we can't avoid it nor should we try. we are not just obligated to lead. we are called to lead.
and we are driven to serve in the same spirit which our parents, grandparents built those living memorials with humility and desire to do something that outlasts us. for what lies ahead we need a strong america that leads a strong economy, one in which our people can strive to fulfill their god-given potential and show us there is no greater enterprise and free enterprise and we will never settle for a safe route. we will lead for freedom in every sense of that word. today i have tried to lay out a path that speaks to both parts and frankly to all americans because i trust them, i know they can do anything, and i know their labors will justify our faith. thank you for being here. [applause] >> thank you, mr. speaker. we can take a few questions from
the audience. looking forward to hearing yours. >> mr. speaker, i really appreciate the foresight you were showing in taking this energy boom and how we can maximize the rare and valuable thing. unfortunately -- and i'm afraid i will get into trouble with my boss -- i am a glass half-empty guy and not a glass half-full guy. i am worrying about the forces in the city that are going to prevent us from realizing the gains you are talking about, which are so valuable. can you talk a little bit how to overcome the obstacles and sustain the progress so not just for five years but 15, 20, 25? >> frankly, the state regulates fracking and while the epa
continues to try to stick their nose into this they really can't find a reason to do so. when you look at where the congress is, i don't think the congress is going to get in the middle of this. this will create good-paying jobs. we look at eastern ohio where we have got this big oil and gas line they have been developing over the last three or four years. it's a big deal. you have to understand this was the heart of the so-called rust belt. this is where it started, and what is happening there, the development and all the good jobs, it's like manna falling from heaven. i don't think the congress on either side of the aisle wants us to go away. what i didn't spend much time talking about was how much oil and gas we have in the mountain west on federal lands in the continental shelf. we have an abundance of oil and
gas reserves that can help fuel our economy for hundreds of years. this is a lot different than what was being preached 20 or 30 years ago. let's make sure we use it in a way to maximize the potential for our entire country for a long time. >> let's go next to joe lawler from the "washington examiner." >> thank you, mr. speaker. i want to ask you about two things you didn't mention. one is immigration reform and how the obama administration says immigration reform is a key part of our growth over the next few years. do you agree with that? and also with the housing market faltering resolving the status of fannie mae and freddie mac a priority for republicans? >> i gave a version of this speech a year ago and somebody said you have to have a point.
i gave it some thought over the months and i thought legal reform needs to be part of this. there can be a lot of other pieces to this. yeah, i think immigration reform would help our economy but you need to secure the borders first. we have a mess and i think everyone knows we have a mess. our legal system is broken and our borders are secure and then we have the problem of those that are here without documents. we are a nation of immigrants. the sooner we do it the better off the country will be. when it comes to the housing market, i don't know what's going to happen to fannie and freddie, but i don't think it's going to have any sizable impact on what happens in the housing market. >> we actually think you should >> as you stand, give us your name and affiliation.
i am a k-12 public education advocate. i happened to be from the great state of michigan. the chairman of the house ways and means committee hails from michigan, dave camp. he put together a tax reform plan. unfortunately, it was max baucus who had a premature exit. did you have a chance to go over that? there are a few things in there i have my questions about budget has been out there since march and i'm shocked how little i have heard about it. there are some quarters of criticism about this issue or that issue, but for a plan to completely overhaul the tax system, i would've thought i would've heard more complaints. i think it is a good starting point. the next chair man may start someplace else, but you are not going to get this done i just keep talking about it.
at some point you have got to lay out your ideas in writing and have people engaged in this. we are republicans. we actually think you should read the bill before you vote on it. [laughter] >> going to come over to this site here. >> i am a nurse. obamacare is a large part of the economy and two comments -- one is to a large degree obamacare and one is there people on both sides of the aisle focused on the burden of health care. are you still committed to protecting the elderly? do you have a strategy the politicians and american people support? >> when it comes to medicare
let's all be honest -- this program is not sustainable in its current form. our kids and grandkids do not have enough money for all the of medicare they will consume over the next 30 years, so what do we do about it? there are small steps we could take and you could change the program. a lot of things could be done but sticking your head in the sand doing nothing is a prescription for disaster. >> ringing the mic back here right into the middle. >> i am with the jewish council for public affairs. i heard a compelling speech by your colleagues representative ryan talking about poverty.
i am interested to get your perspective extending the earned income tax credit. and the criminal justice reform. >> paul is doing some very good work on the issue of poverty. we have record number of americans not working but stuck if you will. it is our obligation to help provide the tools for them to use to bring into mainstream america society. this idea that has been board may be out of the economy the last few years that we don't have to work, this is a very sick idea for our country.
growing up with 11 brothers and sisters with my dad at the bar and if you wanted something you worked for it. i had some kind of a job whether throwing newspapers or cutting grass. trust me -- i did it all. i do think his idea on the earned-income tax credit has an awful lot of merit. the other issue -- i thought about this criminal-justice reform. i was in the statehouse when every state was in the mandatory sentences and we decided we would not trust the judges anymore.
>> time for one more and i will give it to steve. >> i work and study here in with 500 of your closest friends for a discussion giving a survey 's remarks? henko plu there are a lot of students in the audience so could you give your view of ukraine, syria, etc.? thanks a lot. oh, bonus question -- 2 or 3ants me to give were speeches. putin making a case for managerial or is he meeting on roger goodell? -- beating out roger goodell? gave that speech about
vladimir putin on 2011. it is probably somewhere in the archives, but he will find everything i said is exactly what he has done. the message from president poroshenko was straightforward. america, we need your help. we can't do this by ourselves. and they can't. the president worked with the europeans but the sanctions will not bring freedom and security. they need weapons, they need advisors. i think he made the case today if not now, then when? nd if not there, then where? when i talk to allies in the region, they'll ask me, where are you going to draw the line, and how much is enough?
the line has to be drawn. the sooner the better. when it comes to the issue over the middle east, the overarching strategy to deal the threat of terrorism. and when isil came across the iraqi border in january, i got over the president on where is the plan? the mission is to destroy isil -- if that really is the mission, i don't see that overarching strategy. there is no reason not to do the minimum. training free syrian army types to fight isil in syria. but i am still waiting to see the bigger picture of how we
win this war. how we destroy isil and i have not seen that yet. thank you for the opportunity. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute] the 2015 c-span student cam video competition is underway, open to all middle and high school students to create a five- to seven-minute documentary on the theme, the three branches and you.there is
200 cash prizes for students and teachers totaling $100,000. for a list of rules and how to get started, go to studentc am.org. we will continue live coverage shortly as we hear from former secretary of state and possible 2016 presidential candidate hillary clinton. she will be speaking at the democratic national committee women's leadership forum. that is live at 12:05 eastern and we will have that for you shortly. healthsident of cvs will talk about corporate america's role in delivering better health outcomes for consumers. also this afternoon, secretary thetate john kerry posting united nations security council meeting on iraq and delving into the developing international support for the new government in iraq in combating isis. that coming up at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.
and coming up shortly, we will go to live coverage of the u.s. house as they gavel in for a brief pro forma session. n no legislative business will be conducted. 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 rooms, washington, d.c., september 19, 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: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. eternal god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. as our world finds itself in armed conflict in so many volatile regions, give those who work for peace a cessation of violence and the care of refugees and the victims of these tragedies the strength and fortitude they need to meet such great needs. grant success to the work of their hands. the members of this assembly have returned home to engage in campaigns for election. bless them with peace, honesty and fairness.
bless of people of this great nation with wisdom, knowledge and understanding, that they might responsibly participate in our american democracy. please keep all who work for the people's house in good health, that they might faithfully fulfill the great responsibility given them in their service to the work of the capitol. bless us this day and every day . may all that is done be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the chair will lead the house in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under indivisible, with liberty
and justice for all. lay before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir. pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on september 19, 2014, at 10:13 a.m. that the senate agreed to senate concurrent resolution 44, that the senate passed senate 1611, senate 1691, senate 2040, senate 2061, senate 2583, senate 2673, enate 2778, senate 2793, senate 1360, senate 2912. that the senate passed, with an amendment, h.r. 83.
that the senate passed, without mendment, h.r. 594, h.r. 2600, r. 3043, h.r. 3716, h.r. 4994, h.r. 5026, h.r. 5404, h.r. 4980. signed, sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 4 of rule 1, the following joint resolution was signed by the speaker on hursday, september 18, 2014. the clerk: house joint resolution 124, joint resolution making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2015 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house an enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 4323, an act to re-authorize programs authorized under the debbie
smith act of 2004 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a privileged concurrent esolution. the clerk: senate concurrent resolution 44, resolved that when the senate recesses or adjourns on n'diaye from thursday, september 18, 2014, through tuesday, october 14, 2014, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its majority leader or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until 12:00 noon on wednesday, october 15, 2014, or such other time on that day as may be specified by its majority leader or his designee and the motion to recess or adjourn. and that when the senate recesses or adjourns on wednesday, october 15, 2014, it stand adjourned until 12:00 noon on wednesday, november 12, 2014, or such other time on that day as may be specified by its majority leader or his he
is dig -- designee or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution. which ever occurs first. and that when the house adjourns on any legislative day from thursday, september 18, 2014, through friday, november 7, 2014, on a mission offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its majority leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on wednesday, november 12, 2014, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 3 of this concurrent resolution, which ever occurs first. section 2-a, the majority leader of the senate or his designee, after concurrence with the minority leader of the senate, shall notify the members of in the senate to reassemble at such place and time as he may designate if, in his opinion, the public interest shall warrant it. b, after reassembling pursuant to subsection a when the senate ajurns on a motion offered pursuant to this subsection by its majority leader or his
designee, the senate shall again stand adjourned pursuant to the first section of this concurrent resolution. section 3, a, the speaker or his designee after consultation with the minority leader of the house shall notify the members of the house to reassemble at such place and time as he may designate if in his opinion the public interest shall warrant it. b, after reassembling pursuant to subsection a, when the house adjourns on the motion offered pursuant to this subsection by its majority leader or his designee, the house shall again stand adjourned pursuant to the first section of this concurrent resolution. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and a motion to reconsider s laid on the table. without objection, pursuant to senate concurrent resolution 44 , the 113th congress, the house stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on wednesday, novemb
>> remarks know from former secretary of state and possible presidential candidate hillary clinton. she is at the democratic national committee's women's leadership forum which is just underway. everyoneeone to thank with the women's leadership forum who makes this conference possible -- >> i want to thank everyone with the women's leadership forum who makes this conference possible, especially my longtime friend, lonnie shackleford, the new chair of the dnc women's caucus. i was thinking when debbie was introducing me, it has been more than 20 years since tipper gore democratic gathering women together and formed this
organization. a lot has changed since then. we have elected dozens of women senators and congresswomen. we have seen our first woman speaker of the house in nancy pelosi. [applause] and most importantly, we brought , and hopes, and dreams of women from the margin to the mainstream of american public life. you've done that. you have moved those political mountains, and i thank each and every one you. haves much as things changed, here is what has stayed as true as ever. the democratic party is at its best. just like america is at its best when we rally behind a simple but powerful idea, family. family is the building block of any society. it is the building block of our
party and our country. when democrats bought for labor rights so that more families could -- fought for labor rights so that more families could make it into the middle class, when democrats for social security so that our parents wouldn't live in poverty, when democrats fought for health care, education and civil rights so that all of our children could grow with opportunity and equality, we have fought for families, for moms, dads, kids, and the values that hold us all together. so don't let anyone dismiss what you are doing here today as women's work. don't let anyone send you back to the sidelines. we are here, proud, democratic women and proud, democratic men, to stand am not just for ourselves, not just for women, but for all of our people, for our families, our communities, and our country. [applause]
, i know you have already heard from our fabulous first lady yesterday and from our apt lewdly committed eyes resident absolutely committed -- viceresident president yesterday, and you will hear from our president later today. signed,the first law he the lilly ledbetter fair pay act, this president has done a tireless advocate or women and families. a tireless advocate for women and families. yesterday, i was with nancy pelosi and congresswomen and others at the center for american progress. leader pelosi put it well. when women vote, america wins, and that is why we're all here today. there is a because
movement stirring in america. you can see it in the parents in california who demanded paid sick leave so they did not have to choose between their jobs and their kids. you can see it in the moms demanding equal pay for equal work. and the dad's demanding access to quality, affordable childcare. you can see it in the fast food and domestic workers all across our country who ask for nothing more than a living wage and a fair shot. is a movement that is not waiting for washington with its gridlock and grandstanding. this movement won't wait, and neither can we. and that is why we are here today. we are also here because the mid-terms really matter. they may not be as glamorous as presidential
elections, but these upcoming midterm elections are crucial for our countries future, for our jobs, our schools, our health care, our families. they deserve our undivided attention. in just 46 days, american voters have a choice and the chance. it is a chance to put american whenies first at a time corporations have all the rights of people but none of the asponsibilities, we have choice to make. it is a chance to elect leaders who know that women should be able to make our own health care is a chance toit elect democrats who will fight oury day to make sure economy and our democracy work for every american. at a time when the deck does seem stacked against middle-class families in so many , we have a choice to make.
in sunday, i was in iowa with a candidate for congress name stacy appel. she is a great mom who worked her way up from minimum wage to , and with enough support, she could be the first woman ever elected from iowa to the u.s. house of representatives. stacy is one of more than 100 democratic women running for the house this year, and i can't think of a better way to make congress start working for american families again than electing every last one of our women candidates come november. in 10 democratic women are running for the senate. are runningic women for governor. if i could vote for all of them, i would. and i know that mary burke from
wisconsin spoke your yesterday. she is offering a choice between more angry gridlock and routers that will actually make a angryence for was cut -- ideas that will actually make a difference for wisconsin families. i come from the school that says results matter, evidence matters, and the evidence is in. smart, progressive policies in minnesota led to more job creation and more economic growth. wisconsin deserves better and with mary burke it will get better for the people and families of wisconsin. now, here's what we know. women participate in politics, the effects ripple out far and wide.
weren't you proud when a coalition of women senators wrote the logjam during last ?ear's government shutdown and then when senator patty murray stepped up to get a budget passed -- i saw her yesterday and we were talking about it and she said it just comes down to building relationships, listening to each other, spending time, understanding and nobody gets everything you want in congress or, may i add, in life, but you work together and you get the best outcome you can. now that we are hearing republicans talking about another potential shutdown if they gain control of the senate, it is yet one more reason to elect more democratic women who will prioritize people over politics, and here is why it matters. yesterday i met a single mom
from chicago named rihanna who talked about being caught between the needs of her family and the demands of her job. every mother's worst nightmare. there was a day this past winter , she said itold was way below zero, that the city schools had to shut down. she scrambled to find childcare for her son, who has autism, but she could not find any at such short notice, so she called in sick at the supermarket where she worked and the next day she was fired. i sat there listening to her story and i remembered how i felt as a young mother so many years ago. i had many more than judges, much more support, and yet i, too, felt that squeeze. there was one morning when i was due in court at 9:30 a.m. for a trial. it was already 7:30 a.m., and chelsea, just two years old, was running a fever and throwing up.
my has and was out-of-town, the normal babysitter -- husband was out-of-town, the normal babysitter called in sick with the same systems -- same symptoms. i had no other relatives in town. i called a trusted friend to come to my rescue, but i felt terrible that i had to leave my six child at all. i went to court and i called -- at everyeak break. when i came home and saw my reading to chelsea, the eight finally went away. but for so many people, that ache is with them every day. women hold the majority of
minimum wage jobs in this country. women hold the majority of jobs as waiters were they are paid minimum wage and many of them are at risk for exploitation like wage theft and harassment. think about a mom trying to succeed at work and give her kids the support they need with a job like that without flexibility or predict ability. without access to quality, affordable childcare. without paid leave. is one the united states of only a few countries without it. so manyr there were more women than men in poverty last year. no wonder so many american families are hurting today. for too many women or too many families, they don't just say ceilings on their dreams. it feels to them as though the floor has collapsed any third
feet. that is not how it's supposed to be in america. this is the country where if you work hard you can make it, and each generation is supposed to have a little bit better than the one before. challenges aree most acute for women fighting to lift themselves or their families out of poverty, women ladderdown the income face barriers to advances. we see it in women who take home less money than their male coworkers. we see it in the two small percentage of women in the corporate or dreams. and we see it in the mother penalty, with many women forced to take a pay cut when they have children, while men who become fathers often get a pay bump. let's be clear. these are not just women's
issues. they are family issues. they are america's issues. and they hold back our entire economy. but the good news is it doesn't have to be this way. we know we can do better. we have done better. and i have seen it all over the world. strong women and strong families can grow economies. we create change. we drive progress. we make peace. if we close the gap in workforce participation in the united states between men and women, our national economy, our gross domestic product, would grow by nearly 10% by 2030. think about it. can we afford to leave that kind of growth on the table? just go issue by issue. take equal pay. we have been fighting for thaneck fairness for more
15 years. if women have worked hard all day, they deserve equal pay. this week, the senate republicans blocked the bill again. is why midterms matter. look at health care. the affordable care act was a step forward for women and families covering important prevention procedures like mammograms, family planning, prenatal services, preventing insurance companies from charging women more solely because of their gender, which actually happened in more than 90% of individual insurance plans before the new law went into effect. fair to say that just as the affordable care act , theoing into effect supreme court's hobby lobby decision pulled the rug out from beneath america's women. it's a slippery slope when we a woman'sing over right to make her own health
care decisions to her employer, and my question is -- [applause] do anything about it? that is why midterms matter. violence against women. 20 years ago this week, my husband signed the violence against women act. it was a great victory thanks to years of hard work from leaders like vice president biden. but celebration of this anniversary was tempered by troubling news on many fronts, from the outrages of the nfl to assaults against women in uniform and a college. at columbia university in new york, a survivor of sexual assault, began carrying her mattress around campus. she was tired of being overlooked. tired of waiting for change. and that was the best way she could think of to draw attention to the dangers facing female students. that image should haunt all of
us, and i am very pleased that president obama is supporting a new effort to address sexual assault on campuses across the country. just think about it. we ask so much from our young women. we ask them to delve into fields like science, technology, engineering and mathematics were they have not been well represented areas he asked them to go to college and technicals cool -- represented. go to collegeto and technical school. we asked them to study hard, work hard, lead and take responsibility for caring for children and aging relatives. any of these, let alone one or all of them, they face so many obstacles still. so, voters have a choice in november. whooice between those
blocked paycheck fairness, who applauded hobby lobby, who tried to stop the renewal of the violence against women act, or leaders who will fight for women and girls to have the same opportunities and rights that they deserve, leaders who will fight for families and for all of us. have so many reasons to be hopeful. mary burke gives me hope. wendy davis gives me hope. allison grimes, kay hagan, mary landrieu, jeanne shaheen, natalie denning, they all give me help. -- give me hope. [applause] but you know, we are in the home stretch, and it all comes down to who makes the effort to show up and vote.
have been thinking a lot about family because as you know i am on grandbaby watch. and i think a lot about this new member of our family and what he , ande can look forward to i am well aware that we will certainly do everything possible to prepare this child, to protect this child, but i want that for everybody's child and everybody's grandchild. i want everyone of our children to feel they are inheriting the best of america. to believe they have the chance to do what was possible for me and what my husband believe was possible for him and what we our daughter, that this country is on your side, this country will give you the
fighting chance and the fair shot you deserve to have. this entry will maintain a level whether you're the grandchild of a president or the janitor, whether you are born in a city or in a , no matterl village who you are, you have a right to inherit the american dream. on everything i have done over my long career of fighting for women and children in fairness and equality and , i believe with all my heart that this midterm election is a crucial one. there is so much at stake. so as you gather here today to dnc, i hopeand the when you return home each and
every one of you will get on the phone, get on the internet, get to encourage your friends, your family, your neighbors, people you have never even met to turn out and vote. tell them america is fighting for their families. tell them when we fight for equal pay for equal work, we fight for them. tell them when we fight for the freedom for women to make our own health care decisions, we are fighting for them. when we fight for better jobs and better wages, for an economy that works for everyone, no , we are fighting , because when women succeed, families succeed, and when families succeed, our country succeeds. this is the great unfinished
business of the 21st-century. let's do everything we can to path to aca on the better future that some of you have worked so long to support leaders like president obama, bill clinton and others who have kept pushing those boulders up the hill, taking on special-interest, taking on those who claim they climbed the ladder and there is no reason to leave it behind for anybody else. and get out the vote for these midterm elections. thank you all very, very much. [applause]
merlot will be talking about corporate america's role in delivering better health outcomes for consumers. also at 2:00, secretary of state hosting a united nations security council meeting on iraq. we will have that for you at 2:00 p.m. eastern. chambers of congress wrapped up until the fall as members head back to their states to put -- to prepare for the midterm elections. we are asking your thoughts on this congressional session. you can share your thoughts on
facebook.com/c-span. once again, we will hear from larry merlot this afternoon at 1 p.m. eastern. while we wait, a congressional roundtable on the 113th congress from today's washington journal. host: joining us on "washington journal," two long-time members of congress. gene green is a democrat from
texas, phil gingrey is a republican from georgia. dr. gingrey, this is your last term. guest: peter, it is. 12th year, six terms. i have about three months left, i will come up for the lame duck. i am enjoying these last few months and i've enjoyed the past 12 years. it has been an honor and privilege to represent the 11 congressional district of northwest georgia. host: so you are leaving congress, congress is adjourning. what do you think about congress leaving in the middle of september? guest: well, in the years i've been up here -- gene has been here longer than i have -- i'm sure that has been the modus operandi for a long time in an election year, either a presidential election year or midterm election. members try to get the most essential things done like we did yesterday, in funding the government, not having a government shutdown, so members can get back to their districts and do the campaign they need to do to try to get reelected and then come back and go back to work and roll up our sleeves in the second week of november. host: gene green, you have been here for a while, representing the houston area. what do you think about concentrating and you running for reelection? guest: normally during september everybody is out of town and go home. we are on the ballot every 2 years. granted we have an extra couple weeks now that we normally don't
have, but that is a decision made by majority. it may be longer, but i end up voting no on most of the things that come in the house so if i'm not here i don't have to vote no. host: how did you vote on syrian aid and the continuing resolution? guest: i supported it for a number of reasons. we don't want to go through what we went through last october, 17 days of the government shutdown. also on the syrian issue, i'm
convinced it only goes until december so we have a short time to give the president the authorization to arm more moderate levels in syria, and also do what we need to do. if it hadn't have been specifically in that language, no u.s. troops on the ground except for the ones that are going to protect our personnel, i don't think it would've passed congress. most of us have war fatigue. we have spent a lot of lives and money and injuries in iraq and the government could have been much better until the donations -- and dealt with their own issues. host: same question. guest: i actually voted no on the amendment that the president outlined the american people in regard to what to do about isil. i voted, like gene, yes for the continuing resolution because like him i don't want to see a government shutdown and we need to get the work done. as far as the plan, i give the president credit for trying to do something, but i just don't think it is going to work. you try to connect those dots and you worry about the free syrian army and who they are and which direction they will point guns. isil one day, assad the next day, and it would eventually lead to boots on the ground and the american public is wary of that. in a 10-year period i lost 40 in either iraq or afghanistan. i take that very seriously and i know all members do. host: we have invited you here to talk about specific legislation. we hear about the rancor in congress but this is something you all worked on for years. guest: congressman gingrey have
worked for a couple congresses, if not more, on trying to frontload our new generation of antibiotics because the current antibiotics are not working. bones mutate, evolution, they become immune to it. the ebola issue comes up -- antibiotic resistance, tuberculosis, you name it. this would front end load some of the research.
we have a hearing today in the subcommittee and we are going to hold the hearing october 30. congressman pete olson and i on the committee will talk about what we can do for health care in the 21st century. developing antibiotics that will cure some of the illnesses -- host: how can congress aid in the development of antibiotics? we're talking money, the fda -- what we talking about?
guest: getting approval, getting the fda the tools. we need more medical research funding. again, very bipartisan in congress. we have a problem with our debt but we also need to make sure we are doing research to protect our own people. that is a bipartisan goal. we have worked together, our wives are friends, and i will have to find another partner on health care. host: phil gingrey -- dr. gingrey, i should say, ob/gyn, do we over-antibiotic ourselves in the united states? guest: peter, no question about that. patients go in, they have a common cold, they think they have pneumonia. they think that if they don't have a prescription or two or three for antibiotics, they have not been adequately treated, and that is not the case. in many of these cases it is inappropriate to prescribe
antibiotics, particularly the second and third and fourth generation of antibiotics, which should be reserved for a limited population and specific infectious disease. the abusive utilization of antibiotics -- the president came out with an executive order with regard to this entire issue. stepping right into the wheelhouse that gene and i have been working on for several years. i would say, too, the problem with lack of antibiotics, new generation antibiotics, we're talking about a long time ago, 1940 for penicillin, probably the 60's for tetracycline. the pharmaceutical companies can make much greater profit on other medications that can be used more broadly, not as expensive to develop, and so for the last 20 years you have not seen any new or many new
antibiotics coming to market, and as congressman green indicated, the books mutate and they develop resistance. you have intensive care units that have horrendous infections and they are resistant to everything. the gain act, which we passed in july 2012, would incentivize pharmaceutical companies and say look, you develop these antibiotics, we will give you five additional years of that exclusivity so you can recoup your costs, tax incentives. it is really working, and american society for infectious diseases and infectious disease physicians have been really proud of the efforts on behalf of our committee, and it is not just gene and i treated as
conducting a bipartisan way. we have people like henry waxman, john dingell, fred upton. we do things in a bipartisan way for the good of all people, republicans and democrats. host: we will put the numbers on the screen. we have a lot of issues -- antibiotic issues, as well as the broader issues we have -- that have been talked about over the past year with this congress. you can see the numbers. we will be taking your calls in just a minute. congressman green, phil gingrey is leaving, the congress is adjourning until after the elections.
what is going to happen to this legislation? guest: we are having a hearing today, a legislative hearing, the commissioner there today and we will have a panel and our goal is to have his legislative hearing, and this is very bipartisan. we have a majority of our committee, republicans and democrats cosponsors. maybe in a lame-duck if we can pass something like this -- we are teeing it up for next congress. these illnesses are not going away. this congress -- i wish we had the world, around the antibiotic resistant diseases. we want to make sure we do the
best we can. host: in a lot of countries, you can buy antibiotics over-the-counter, which means you can self prescribed. guest: i have had sinus troubles since my 20's. gete times a year, they infections. my dr. grumbles at me for going down. i say this is what the doctor in houston prescribes to me. infection, a sinus antibiotics are good. a nurse,mom, who was yells at me for doing the same thing.
are you going to grumble at me for doing that? >> im. we all need to be well informed and be disciplined in regards to this and understand what gene is talking about. the abuse of antibiotics is part of the problem. act, weveloped the gain also have to look at the other side, and that is the regulatory aspect, the fda. very closely with dr.director hamburg and woodcock who will be one of the witnesses at our hearing this morning in regard to may be alternate pathways
and clinical trials so it is not so difficult when you have an emergency situation to bring these drugs to market. fine balanceys a to make sure safety is there and efficacy at the same time. when we developed these bills and they become law, we wanted to make sure that the people, the public is safe and yet they get the drugs they need so does relate. host: we are going to start taking your calls. we are going to begin with carl on the democrats line. go ahead. caller: gentlemen, you have just wrestled with the arming of syrian rebels in congress and .ou made your vote let me respectfully suggest what you did not consider, what you
and your associates did not , and that was international law. as you gentlemen both now, back when we signed the charter for the united nations and the senate ratified it, it became the law of the land. therefore, how in the world can you and your associates totally, in my opinion, totally ignore international law, that spells out that no one has the right to in the equip rebels sovereign nations such as syria. guest: that is a very, very good point, and quite honestly part of the reason why i voted no on that amendment. you pointed out serious, and i am glad you did.
in regard to their law, the new government stood up. malik is gone, and this new us toment wants us, needs come in either with airstrikes, training, command and control, or special forces necessary but without boots on the ground, but serious is a different situation. you allude to the fact it is much as we seem to despise -- >> we will leave this discussion from this morning's washington journal to go live to the white house to hear from susan rice. she began about five minutes ago talking about the u.s. taking on isis. mark one yearwill since the president launched the civil society initiative last
year at the general assembly. this was a groundbreaking effort to support, defend, and sustain the work of civil society amidst a rising tide of restrictions on its work. the president will make his andess to the u.n. assembly with a landmark meeting the security council. this is another element of our comprehensive response to the proposed -- post -- challenge posed by isil. the resolution will expand on current obligations within international law and counter violent extremism, which is a key part of the effort to suppress the foreign terror fighter threat. the seconde only
time an american president has chaired the united nations security council. some of you will recall that president obama did it in 2000 -- 2009. later, the president will speak at a high-level event based on an initiative launched in 2011. this is a very important that was launched by the president with seven other founding members three years it has grown to
some 64 countries and we have generated commitments from tontries around the world mobilize governments and energize civic engagement. the last day will be the 25th and the president will address a high-level meeting chaired by ban ki-moon on the ebola epidemic. build on the momentum of the president's announcement this week where he stepped up commitment. we expect this to be an occasion where other countries will announce additional commitments to the fight against ebola and it will be a chance for the u.n. addressl its efforts to unmet needs. we expect commitments in the form of financial assistance, equipment, personnel, and treatment.
finally, it will be an opportunity to hold bilateral meetings and to participate in functions such as the reception he hosts every year for visiting heads of state, the secretary-general's annual luncheon, etc.. we will have more details about the engagement and the schedule in the coming days. >> i wanted to ask you about i sold. -- isil. >> i wonder, as you build a coalition, if you were run -- if you run the risk of a bifurcated coalition that is willing to fight in iraq but not syria and i wonder if you have as many commitments to take the fight to syria as you do for saudi arabia
. we have a think bifurcated coalition. this is a unified coalition under one command and we welcome partners to make contributions based on their capacities and varying political circumstances. underl be cohesive and one single command authority. i am quite inc. her aged that we will have a number of countries participate in various different .ays australia has indicated an active involvement. the british have been involved along with the french, the australians, the canadians. and we do anticipate that to the that is necessary in syria, there will be other countries involved. >> the president told us last authorizede had
airstrikes in syria. the president has been clear that his strategy entails not only broadening the and going ont isil the offensive, but in all likelihood involving action in syria. and he is prepared to take that action. i don't think it would you wise telegraph from the podium what that action is and what steps may need to be taken. >> is it to build a broader coalition? i am not going to give you any precision our prediction on when that might occur. obviously, we are working everyday to build the coalition that we are making good progress
in that regard. there are other elements of the comprehensive approach that we are pulling together that are important aspects of the overall strategy. u.n.' he security council resolution, do you have commitments from other members and what does the resolution seek? >> i do expect we will have a successful resolution, which means an agreement among the majority of states. maybe a resolution we are able to reach unanimity on. resolutions are rarely concluded this far in advance. negotiations are going on but they are going comparatively well. resolution would build on existing legal architecture. you may recall resolution 1373
was passed not long after 9-11. it dealt in part with the flow of foreign terrorists into combat zones. this will build on that. obligationsease the of states to try to determine the flow of foreign fighters. it will also place new emphasis on the challenge of countering violent extremism. ball down thehe field in terms of the legal obligation on states to try to combat this challenge. >> he spoke about a timeline on training the syrian opposition. now that the authorization is planning start immediately? gratitudereiterate
congresswift action by that was the predicate for us to proceed. now that we have that, we will move out as rapidly as can be done. trainees need to be vetted and brought into train. this will be a process that .akes months as i indicated, this is not going to happen overnight. something one should expect will yield rapid and immediate fruit. this is a serious training program and one we are serious about equipping. i cannot give you a precise deadline. we are moving as fast as we can, but this is something that will
take more than a month. >> the most immediate threat this poses to the united states is foreign fighters. why are we not seeing other countries jump onto this immediately. we are seeing up until today the united states only conducting airstrikes. can you give some confidence to the american people on what kind of handle you have on american foreign fighters, on how many there are and how well we are keeping track of where they actually are. something our national security agencies and counterterrorism team are taking very seriously. something we track closely. we can tong all that both gather the necessary information and take the appropriate precautions to the greatest extent that we possibly
can. obviously, that also entails consultation and collaboration .ith other countries in many instances, they transit to and through those countries. much focused on this. you may recall that we had a withng earlier in the week the president that was focused solely on the foreign fighter as it relates to the larger counterterrorism challenge. that was an opportunity for members of the national security team to provide the president with an update on their very deliberate and concerted efforts to deal with the problem. >> regarding airstrikes in syria, it sounded like that is a call the president himself will make. is that right? >> the decision as to when to strike? the president will make the decision and the commanders will carry it out and it organs with
the guidance provided by the president. >> the pentagon is waiting for that authorization? that's not what i said. >>. that's not what i said >> can you expand the distention? you asked if the president would make the decision and i answered the way i answered. >> the president has given the authorization and then he will give the go-ahead? >> what i said earlier was that we have been clear that we are prepared to go ahead and take action in syria as art of this larger campaign. i am not going to preview from the podium when that will happen. it will be at a time and place of our own choosing. we are not asking you to tell when the bombings will start. as the president already made the decision to do this and now it's a matter of when the
pentagon pulls the trigger or is there another decision the president has to make? >> i'm not announcing any decisions by the president today. i'm here to tell you we are prepared and the president has been clear the united states is prepared to act in syria. when and how we choose to do that will be an operational decision. al, thank to see you you. >> national security advisor ambassador susan rice at the white house addressing a number of issues, the president's travel schedule and the u.s. response to isis and plans to combat the ebola virus. we missed part of her remarks at the top and we will have it for you in its entirety later. housest saw white spokesman josh earnest come to the podium and he's about to start the daily briefing. we will be recording that and haven't for you later on the c-span network. secretary of state john kerry will have more to say about the isis issue this afternoon he will be leading a roundtable
with the un security council today. we are planning live coverage deception and starting at 2 p.m. eastern. also, president obama will be addressing the dnc women's leadership forum that starts at 3:35 p.m. eastern and we will have it online at www.c-span.org . live at the national press club, the president of cvs, larry merlo and the corporate role in delivering better health outcomes. he is about to be introduced. live coverage here on c-span -- >> skipping over our speaker for a moment, john welch, account supervisor and the speakers committee member who helped organize today's lunch, thank you, john. tom moriarty, guest of our chief healthvs strategy officer and general counsel. virgil dickson, reporter at modern health care. mark heller, reporter at
bloomberg dna. and terrence shea, former editor at hr magazine. around of applause for our head table guests. [applause] things you can count on -- there is no smoking at the national press club. [laughter] and now, [applause] now you cannot buy smokes c atvs. [applause] the second largest retail chain voluntary gave up about $2 billion in annual sales when it announced this year it would stop selling tobacco products. the company viewed cigarette sales as contradicting its plans
to expand its health care business. for instance, cbs plans to expand in-store minute clinics from 900-1500 by 2017. to recently changed his name cvs health to reflect this shift in direction. the stock market seems to have reacted favorably to the changes. the price of cvs shares fell slightly the day the company announced it was going tobacco free. i saw shares were down a little bit yesterday but this week, shares were trading at their highest level this year. all these charge of changes is our speaker today, the company's ceo, larry merlo. the first person in his family to attend college, he graduated from the pharmacy school at the 1978rsity of pittsburgh in
and he took a job as an assistant manager and pharmacist at a people's drugstore. by 1990, he was a regional manager for the chain and that's when it was acquired by cvs. much of his career has focused on driving sales, profits, acquisitions, and job growth. but he has long held that cvs would be an important part of the solution to repairing a bogged down health care system. mr.merlo joins us today to discuss the role of corporate --rica and improving have health outcomes for consumers. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in giving a warm press club welcome to larry merlo. [applause] >> thank you for that warm
welcome and good afternoon everyone. i will preface my remarks on the transformative changes taking place in our health care system and the impact that is having on consumers, employers, health care providers, certainly our government. i will also describe some of the solutions that we are bringing forward to address what many have referred to as this cost quality access conundrum that health care is facing today. then i will share more about how evolvingdesk health is as a health-care company and how that led to our decision to stop the sale of tobacco products. i think everyone is familiar with the cvs brand but let me share our history. last year, we actually celebrated a significant milestone, it was our 50th anniversary. we have come along long way since that very first store opened up in lowell, massachusetts back in 1963. all along the way, we have worked hard to stay true to our focus on the customer, working to create value and constantly
innovated -- innovating to meet customers needs. i am sure you know what vast from our cvs pharmacy stores print we have more than 7700 locations across the country. we actually serve about 5 million customers each and every day. however, we are much more than a retail pharmacy business. we provide prescription benefit coverage to nearly 65 million people across the country, ranging from large and small employers, health plans, and government-sponsored care what you think about medicare and medicaid. we also operate more than 900 retail medical clinics. they are branded as a minute clinic and our nurse practitioners have now treated more than 21 million patients. isally, specialty pharmacy one of the fastest-growing areas in health care. we operate quorom which is a leading national provider of
services and we treat more than 20,000 patients per month. we treat them at home or at one of our ambulatory infusion sites. for those specialty patients who are managing often times multiple and complex disease, we offer coordinated case management services. we have 17 specialized programs that focus on whole patient care. about thehink businesses, it is a unique combination of assets working together as a single integrated model that allows us to create real value for our patients, our customers, and our clients all across the country. i'm sure many of you in this companiesworked for where they have their mission and they have their vision. ourvs health we call it purpose and a purpose is simply that we work hard to help people on their path to better health. all across the organization, it serves as our guidepost as we think about business decisions
and focus on health care innovation. i will come back to that in a bit. with that as a backdrop, i want to spend just a few minutes looking at some of the dramatic changes in the health care environment and what that really means for employers, community leaders, and health care consumers. let's start with the current health care environment. it is clear that the system today is pretty stressed. according to the independent ,ffice of the actuary at cms the health share of gross domestic product will increase from 17.2% in 2012 to more than 19% by 2023. while this is slower than the growth experienced over the last two decades, health spending is still growing faster than average economic growth. the real world translation to those numbers is the fact that
it becomes more challenging for people to quickly access quality care through the traditional care channels. ask at we got there, if you look back over the past 15 years, it shows is that health care coverage has been dominated by employer funded insurance. while employers and insurers and health care companies have worked hard to bring innovation to the market in terms of improving the quality of care, we also know that millions of americans remain uninsured and often without needed medications. at the same time, there is tremendous growth in medicare which has been driven by what we like to call this silver tsunam i. there are 10,000 baby boomers who become eligible for medicare every day. this means over 16 million new people becoming medicare eligible by 2019. facing aeans we are
long-term increase in the demand for services and the use of medications. challenge is the increasing prevalence of chronic disease. does it surprise you to know that half of all americans today suffer from one or more chronic diseases? this is expected to continue to rise for the next 20 years. chronic disease today accounts for nearly three out of every four dollars being spent on health care. at the same time, the number of people who don't take prescription medications as prescribed, we call it an epidemic. there are many studies out there that talk about the fact that medication nonadherence is costing our health care system about $300 billion per year in avoidable and unnecessary costs. i think you can see that there are a lot of factors that are contributing to health care spending and there is no question that we must and can do more to slow the growth of health care costs.
can all agree the health-care care system is also we've all been. first there is the of horrible care act. when the law is fully in -- first there is the affordable care act. there will be coverage prided by employers and new insurance marketplaces and by medicaid or other programs. health plans and the government will play a growing and important role. the thrust time with of the affordable care act focused on access, payers and providers are also beginning to innovate for this quality and cost dilemma. health plans are piloting new outcomes based payment models. physicians have traditionally operated in a fee-for-service environment where they are compensated for volume, not outcomes. this is beginning to change as they now take on more risk through participation and accountable care organizations and patient centered medical homes. ina result, they are now
scented to focus on quality improvement and cost efficiency. at the same time, pharmacy is an important part of that equation. cvs health is playing an important health care role as a health care partner to physicians and physician practices. another important trend, we call of healthailization care. consumers are more informed and they are beginning to lay increasingly active role in health care decisions. you look at the growth of private exchanges, the emergence of public exchanges -- they are putting the decision for planned choice directly into the hands of the consumer. at the same time, there is growth in consumer directed health plans that is driving consumers to be more involved and take more fiscal responsibility for their health care choices and costs. finally, there is this transition to a digital society where we all experience
transforming how we live and how businesses behave and how consumers act within their day-to-day lives. although this transition has been slower in health care, significant and lasting changes underway and i think the reality is that this kind of innovation is not optional. in fact, there are many that believe the health care industry will change more in the next 10 years than it has in the past 50. were beat purchased and delivered -- health care will be purchased and delivered and managed differently going forward. i am convinced that one very important avenue to improve quality, cost, and access is rooted in pharmacy care. it is reflected in many of the things we are doing at cvs helps to drive solutions. back in history, traditionally people have thought about pharmacies as pill dispenser is. we know that pharmacy is much more than that.
pharmacy is expanding the front lines of health care to deliver that are outcomes, more affordably, to the people we serve. cvs health is driving many innovative approaches to reinventing pharmacy. the ultimate goal is to once again help more people on their path to better health. this, ways we will do they were very different from how we have serve customers in the past. one of the greatest assets we have to drive innovation lies in our people. pharmacists are in a unique position to help. they are highly trusted resources for patients. for many years now, the annual gallup poll has consistently ranked pharmacists among the top three most trusted professionals. with aists today help broad range of counseling and interventions and one of the biggest opportunities we can address is the issue i mentioned earlier -- patients not taking
their medications as prescribed. statementback to the earlier that about half of all americans suffer from chronic disease and most chronic diseases are treated with some type of drug therapy, this is where the statistics start getting alarming. one out of three patients who start a maintenance prescription will decide to discontinue treatment before their first refill is even do. less than one half of patients take their doses as prescribed by their physician's. three out of four people will stop taking medication within the first year of beginning therapy for newly diagnosed disease. these quantifying medication nonadherence is as much as $300 billion per year in avoidable costs so solving this medication adherence epidemic presents a huge opportunity to
both improve health and lower costs. we have a solution. we call it pharmacy advisor. it's a portfolio programs to help people manage chronic disease. it connects patients with pharmacists who help them stay on their prescribed medications, prevent complications, and these touch points can range from phone counseling and e-mail reminders to in-store counseling and home consultation for some of the more complex cases. research is showing that it's working. we looked at interventions for people with diabetes and the fact that they were very effective at not just increasing adherence but providing a return on investment. for every dollar spent, there was an roi of three dollars. today, a pharmacy advisor is available for 10 diseases ranging from diabetes and cardiac care to asthma and osteoporosis.
program wed another call specialty connect which offers patients choice and flexibility in how they access their specialty medications. if you are wondering what that is, these are prescription therapies for very complex conditions like hepatitis c or ms or rheumatoid arthritis for cancer. in addition to being very costly, oftentimes, the drug requires special handling and storage requirements. specialty connect offers the patient the option of getting prescriptions by mail or through a new option to drop off and pick up their specialty prescription at any cvs pharmacy. this increased flexibility and access makes it easier for people to get on and stay on their therapy. helps address access to care issues that is being created by influx of newly
insured and at the same time, a growing shortage of primary care physicians. minute when it continues to expand its footprint. we plan to have 1500 clinics by 2017. minute clinic provides affordable and high-quality care for both acute needs as well as chronic and wellness needs whether it's vaccinations, screenings, weight loss programs, chronic disease monitoring. minute clinic is staffed by highly -- highly trusted nurse practitioners and we are fully accredited the joint commission. we accept nearly every insurance plan including government programs. we are open seven days a week including evenings and holidays and we see patients on a walk-in basis, no appointment required. you might find it interesting to note that about 50% of all of our visits actually occur during the evening hours and on weekends. minutes clinic is
both replacing the use of higher cost sites such as emergency room's as well as addressing unmet needs for access to primary care. in both of those activities, that will help hold down the overall cost of care. at the same time, i want to be clear on one very important point -- we do not advocate for or believe that the family physician is going away or should go away. we see our minutes clinic offering as both complementary and collaborative with primary care medical homes and helpful to our health care system overall. finally, there is a focus on digital innovation. we are using connected health with customers with retail and mail in prescriptions can have an integrated view of their medications and the ability to easily refill or even transfer them between the retail and mail channels. we have added feature to our mobile app like you can scan your refill, you can check drug
interactions, getting customers on the go access to easy prescription information. in the next few months, we will be adding additional tools like a virtual pillbox and daily reminders to help patients and caregivers actually track medication adherence. i think you can see how our unique business model is allowing us to deliver programs and services to improve health and at the same time, lower costs. these are just some of the ways in which we are helping people on their path to better health. that brings us to the topic of something that hurts health and that is tobacco. the numbers here once again are pretty staggering. more than 42 million adults smoke. year00 people die each from tobacco related illness. smoking today causes 87% of lung cancer deaths. 79% of all cases of chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease. the economic cost attributed to smoking and exposure to smoke is approaching $300 billion per year on an annual basis. as a company, we have wrestled with the inconsistency of tobacco sales in a place where health care is delivered for some time now. time, there is this $2 billion in annual tobacco sales to be considered. to what our colleagues and customers and communities in which we live and serve are saying about tobacco as well as leading health advocacy groups. we stepped back and used that purpose of helping people on their path to better health is our decision filtered. we brought multiple viewpoints to the table including those of our chief medical officer, colleagues from finance, merchandising, human resources, operations and the list goes on. we weighed both the short-term and the long-term opportunities. as you might expect, there was
very thoughtful debate and discussion. as a unified management team along with our board of directors, we made the decision to quit tobacco for good. we announce that decision back in february, february 5, six months later, we are officially tobacco free, one month ahead of schedule and we are proud to say we are the first national pharmacy chain in the country to take this action to support the well-being of our patients and customers. [applause] we engaged leading health organizations including campaign for tobacco free kids, the american lung association, cancer society, the ama, the robert wood johnson foundation and american pharmacists association and these and many others have rallied behind our decision with public statements
adding to the chorus of why retailers with pharmacy should the tobacco free. social media has amplified the conversation with countless statements of support from consumers, celebrities, health, business, and political leaders and there is no question that a national conversation about tobacco has been reignited. we believe that reducing access to tobacco products will help reduce tobacco use. our chief medical officer, dr. troy brennan recently show the result of a new study that showed the effect of an acting policy to eliminate the sale of tobacco products. in boston and san francisco where retailers with pharmacies are not permitted to sell tobacco, there was up to eight 13.3% decrease in the purchasers of tobacco products. at the same time, we also launched a comprehensive and uniquely personalized smoking
cessation campaign to help the seven in 10 smokers that want to quit. we consulted with many experts and took third guidance about what works to build a comprehensive smoking cessation campaign. it taps our entire chain of stores, our 900 minute clinics and the factng pbm that we have 2600 pharmacists a nurse practitioners across the country and includes for critical components. an assessment to determine the smokers registered quick, education to provide smokers the information and tools they need to quit, medication support to help curb the desire to use tobacco, and finally, coaching to help individuals stay motivated and prevent relapses. the combination of medication and coaching can be very powerful. it can nearly double quit rates from seven percent to 15%. you might be surprised to know that it takes on average seven times before someone is
successful in quitting. we want those people to never quit quitting until they are successful. historic 3 was also an day for our company for one more reason -- it's the day we announced our new name, cvs health. our new brand signals a fundamental shift about who we are and what we do. it certainly has inspired that her purse of helping people on their path to better health. i think all of us at cvs health of the truly humbled by the outpouring and encouragement and support we have received since announcing her decision to quit tobacco and it has come from all corners. as we move forward, it is vital the private sector continue to take a visible leadership role on tobacco, working with nonprofits and the public sector to address and prevent tobacco related disease. just the right thing to do like air decision to quit selling tobacco products.
tobacco has no place in a health-care setting.including pharmacies to sum it up, we don't see exiting the sale of tobacco as an important decision for just us. we see it as an important decision for public health. in closing, let me come back to where i started -- as dramatic change takes place in health care, i believe pharmacy can bring solutions that will make a big difference in the health and well-being and the financial outlook of our country. as a pharmacist myself, i know the value that our profession can play in the lives of others. there is moreat that pharmacy can and will do to improve both care and affordability. our 200,000 cvs health colleagues join me in committing to you that we will do our part to continue to provide better and more affordable care to people young and old across the country and help them on their path to better health. turn itu and i will
back over to you, john, and we will open it up to questions. [applause] thank you. not surprisingly, we have a lot of questions on the tobacco decision. initially, when you announced the decision back in february, october 1 was going to be the date. then you moved it up. as of this month, you are no longer selling tobacco. why did you move it forward a month? 7700en you think about stores coast-to-coast, there is a lot of work to do to transition that space that previously had tobacco. we thought it would take us until october 1 to get that work done. i have to say i am proud of the cvs team that mobilized and got everything together and it was werey a situation that we
able to execute it a little quicker than what we thought. >> i referred earlier to your stock price. to what extent do you think there has been a cause and effect between your decision on tobacco and the companies bottom line and stock market performance? had support the white house and elsewhere and has that translated into helping her bottom line? >> that's a great question. when we made their announcement, back in february, we were pretty transparent in terms of the financial impact and the fact that it was $2 billion in revenue. firmly and time, we wholeheartedly believe that is the right thing to do for the long-term growth of our company. i talked about some of the ways that cvs health is lighting today a bigger role in our health care delivery system. whether it's a new partnership with the health system or a physician practice or a large
health plan clients, as we engaged in those discussions, we saw that the sale of tobacco is an obstacle to forming new partnerships. i think the financial community certainly understands the value proposition associated with cvs health and the growth trajectory of the -- of the country. it's hard to sit here today and say that there is any singular event or announcement that makes a difference. i think collectively, we have been humbled by the outpouring of support and i think collectively, it has -- it is resonating in terms of whether they are investors or consumers or potential clients, the value proposition that cvs health offers the marketplace. electronic cigarettes seem to be becoming more popular. do you foresee selling them at any point at cvs or will they be
treated the same as tobacco products? >> that's another great question. that's something we are asked a lot. we have never sold e-cigarettes and do not plan to. one of the things we are troubled i is if you go in as door later today that sells these cigarettes, you see the as hellore branded kitty or the liquid to put into those devices that are bubblegum flavor or tootsie roll. i think it raises the question in terms of what is the role or play inrettes this country and who was a target consumer? we don't sell them today and have no plans to sell them going forward. [applause] how do you assess the risk of your decision going forward? this questioner notes that they
saw a 7-eleven down the road from a cvs promoting that sells cigarettes with an outdoor sign. perhaps trying to capitalize on your decision. is there still a risk out there, do you think, this $2 billion in revenue, giving that up? >> i think it goes back to the statement i made earlier. we think of ourselves as a pharmacy and patient and health care company. you think about many of the factors that i mentioned earlier. think about the 10,000 baby boomers that turned 65 everyday. folks over the age of 60 take three times the number of medications as the younger population. we certainly see a much bigger opportunity to grow the health segment of our business, certainly the pharmacy and the fact that there are many elements of our cvs pharmacy stores where we have an opportunity to extend the
pharmacy experience into what i will call the front of store orther it is otc products the beauty products we sell in our store, recognizing there are many more products today when you think about healthy skin products and the list goes on. that's where our focus will be. competitors have followed you for going tobacco sales. why do you think they are not doing what you did? [laughter] >> you really want me to answer that question. listen, i certainly cannot speak for our competitors. they've got to go through the same process we went through. we have to ask the hard questions and we have to look in the mirror and use our purpose in terms of how we saw ourselves as a company. that weto the decision
came to an somebody had to be first and we are proud to say that it was cvs. as you mentioned, you have rebranded the store cvs health but you still sell things that are not necessarily good for a person. the store a couple of blocks from my house, i have been known to go down and buy a bag of snackfood that are not particularly good for me. where will you go in looking at other products and do you think other products might follow tobacco and you will decide not to sell them? the way, i love the cupcakes at the table. so thank you whoever came up with that idea. [laughter] [applause] i think that is a question we get asked a lot. discussionsad many with leading health experts, whether you are talking about a candy bar or a bag of chips or a soda or in some places, we sell wine or a glass of red wine --
those products taken in moderation or the occasional use, if you're talking to your physician or dietitian or nutritionist, they would tell you that they have not been proven to cause medical harm. the emphasis is on occasional moderate use. you cannot say the same thing about tobacco. there is no amount of tobacco use that can be considered safe. at the same time, we think we have an opportunity to educate consumers in a more holistic way about healthier choices. as we go forward, you will see the introduction of healthier products. we just launched a new product line within the last couple of months that is a snack line called abounds. it's a healthier alternative to some of the products. you will see those things as we go forward.
there will be more information at the point of decision, when the consumer is picking those products off the shelves. that is where our focus will be. we do not have plans to carry our tobacco decision and eliminate other categories within the store. d.c. where the national press club is located is a city that has approved the use of marijuana for medical use, medical marijuana. issue ofoks at the marijuana being used for medical purposes, how do you come at that? how do you assess that? >> we have no plans -- [laughter] get into that line. you may find it interesting. i have been asked this question many times. that inpeople believe some of the states where the law has passed, because you operate a pharmacy, if you choose to
sell marijuana, you can do that. the licenses that we have within pharmacy to not permit us to sell marijuana. we would have to go out and be providerd as another and we have no plans to get into that line of business. [applause] this questioner asked if obamacare played any role in your decision on tobacco products and, in general, has obamacare been a net positive or is it a net negative and why? let me take the second question first. -- this isd at 2014 information we have disclosed in the financial community -- we thought, does -- from a business point of view that the portable wee act would be a modest -- thought that the affordable care
act would be a modest benefit to our business this year. as we fast forward, we are almost nine full months into the year, that is pretty much how it has played out. we are seeing more of a benefit from the affordable care act as a result of medicaid expansion than we are from the and roman in the exchanges. there are many studies out there. when folks are trying to answer the question -- the 6 million plus that have enrolled in exchanges, how many of those and release -- enrollees are new to health care coverage? up to asas low as 25% much as 80% so i'm not sure we know the numbers in terms of what percentage are related to insurance. that is not the same and medicaid. we are seeing more of a benefit to our business from medicaid expansion. as we think about the tobacco
decision, the affordable care act did not really play a role in that decision. it goes back to one of the comments that i made in my prepared remarks. the affordable care act does deal with access. the 30 million uninsured, the fact that they should have the same opportunity care just like all of us in this room have but at the same time, we've got to begin to focus on cost and quality. our current health care trajectory, when you think about what percentage of health care makes up gdp, it is not sustainable. this questioner asked about the role of prescription drugs in overall health care in coming years. they say that consumers are facing pressure through rising costs on premiums and co-pays with prescriptions. do you expect that to continue and even expect consumers to become more cost conscious and
rein in their prescription spending? >> i think some of this goes back to the role that prescriptions play in chronic disease. thick about whether it's someone who has high cholesterol -- by the way-when you think of the role of generic prescriptions-i don't know if you'll be surprised that when we look at all prescriptions we dispense, today between 83 and 84% of all prescriptions are generic. they are at a much lower cost than branded products. as you look across those chronic diseases that i mentioned earlier, i think in almost every one of those disease conditions there is a generic drug that is available to treat that particular disease whether we are talking about high cholesterol or hypertension or diabetes and the list goes on.
and thewe all believe studies substantiate the fact that prescription medication is very effective for my cost-benefit point of view. anding someone on a state stati9n - the average cost of a heart attack is $30,000. for every one dollar invested in keeping a diabetic adherent to their prescription regimen, there is a three dollar return in terms of reducing overall health care costs. we were excited a little less than two years ago, the congressional budget office actually came out and scored the fact that keeping people at here into their medications will reduce overall health care costs. we will work diligently at work
tirelessly to make sure that our patients and clients and every one of the stakeholders across the health care delivery system understands the role that prescription therapy and prescription adherence plays not just in keeping people healthier but at the same time, reducing overall health care costs. says that heioner or she believes that every part of the health care sector is sacrificing and changing to hold down costs under obamacare but he or she does not see the pharmaceutical companies acting that way and sees them as being and beenfrom change -- very protected from change. you agree that is the case and is there anything that can be done to change that? years, it's been commonly
known that the prices of prescription medications in the u.s., the same products in another country cost significantly less. the fact that the u.s. subsidizes the cost of research and development and what it takes to bring a particular drug to market. the pharmaceutical manufacturers are rewarded with 17 your patents on those products. i don't want to mislead anyone. by the time they get at the market, they have burned up many of those years through clinical trials etc. i think there is more competition entering the pharmaceutical space weather is asing from generic drugs drugs lose their patent protection. at the same time, there are more new products entering the market that are clinically effective but think of them as me too
products within a clinical disease state. much like all of us here, we are consumers. we choose competition in the marketplace which drives where we choose to shop. i think we will see increased competition because of more me too product introduction -- product introductions that will hopefully work to reduce the overall cost of pharmaceuticals. earlier about cvs wrapping up the minute clinics. this questioner asked to what degree might the minute when his contribute to a tiered health care system where in those who have the time and resources will go to see their primary doctors previously who received little or no care will depend on minute clinics instead
of seeing physicians? will this result in a kind of ti ered health care system for the haves and have-nots? >> that's a great question. i will give you an example because we have 200,000 of my colleagues at cvs hal. it's a great opportunity for us to use our unemployed population is our learning lab. our years ago, we looked at employees that had access and utilize one of our minute clinics. we went out and did a study. we looked at their overall health care costs against a control group adjusted for age and health status. those ofound is that our employees that utilized minute clinic at eight percent lower overall health care costs. that, ask what is driving earlier, i mentioned about 50% of all minute when it visits occur at nights and weekends. one of the key drivers is
getting that visit out of the emergency room and into the -- theat a factor of average cost of an emergency room visit -- it could be as much as $800. the average visit as a minute clinic is about $80. i think in the health care system, someone made a comment to me that quality -- how do you define quality and cost? someone said it's really health care value and health care value is defined as the intersection of quality and cost. you think about the fact that we are delivering high-quality, low-cost care at minute clinic but across our health care delivery system, we've got to begin to think about health care value as being where that care should be administered at the lowest possible cost. i think that is my answer.
as i mentioned earlier, we did not want to replace the primary care physician. there are things we can perform more effectively, maybe not more effectively, but more costly and more accessible and more convenient for the patient. think about the role the pharmacist play in vaccinations today. five years ago, it was the exception that a firm assist administered a flu vaccine or a shingles vaccine. it is becoming much more common place across the country. i think some of this gets back to, once again, the fact that pharmacy is extending the front lines of health care. there is a role for promises to play and the role certainly for nurse practitioners to play. will package the two together because they are similar -- do you think down the road perhaps that cvs could get into the role of primary care
physician? another questioner says access to dental care could be much better in some urban neighborhoods and rural communities. with cvs ever consider addressing that need by opening retail dental clinics. >> that's another great question. [laughter] we are having a short-term plans. as you think about the role we may play in dental -- one of the services our nurse practitioners provide or folks who come in a may have a dental abscess and once again, it becomes one of those emergency visits until they can get to their dentist or orthodontist. our health-care care system is evolving, we continue to evaluate at broadening our services. i think we are doing more today than what we were doing three or four years ago. i think there are some things
that we will begin to pilots next year that will broaden our services but once again, we do services ase those being complementary to primary care. we do not see replacing the role of the primary care physician. this questioner asked about prescription painkiller abuse as a growing rubble nationwide. cvs helpedhow handles that issue and what you can do at your stores to make sure this problem can be held in check? >> that is a great question and one that i think has all of us in the pharmacy profession were in. -- worried. there is a number of things we are doing today as an industry. we are working together across the country in terms of ng's like shared databases so that we can separate out the liars from
the outliers, if you will. we are participating in drug take back for crimes and that is something i would encourage all of you -- you go home and looking her medicine cabinet and how many painkillers are sitting there. maybe you have a dental procedure or a simple procedure and the physician wrote a prescription and you took a few and started feeling ettore and you say you don't need this anymore but they're sitting there. it's not good to flush them down the sink or in the toilet. we are sponsoring drug take back programs across the country and working with police departments to make sure we get those out of the home and at the same time, we get them destroyed in an environmentally friendly way. one of the other things that, as a pharmacist, i never thought i would see the day but we have built some technology in our shop that looks the fact that there are some license prescribers that are not running
ethical practices. but they arensed writing those narcotic prescriptions for all the wrong reasons. stopped filling prescriptions for over 100 physicians. as they have not been able to of theirthe legitimacy practice. we will continue to work to support our firm assists so that they are doing the right ng in terms of making sure that the right people are getting the medication that they need. working with all the stakeholders whether it is the dea or law enforcement and others were involved, to make thisthat we get rid of other segment of pharmacy that is really driving the problem occur the country. -- problem across the country. >> congress acted in the last few days on a continuing resolution to keep the federal government funded temporarily.
when you talked earlier about the importance of research to these products, how much do you worry about the federal funding pipeline being diminished or cut off for these products as congress struggles to find revenue. >> i think that is a concern. roomnk the folks in this know that there are many universities across the country that are research oriented -- with grants from different entities and that has led to terrific innovations in the market. that is certainly something that has no universities concerned. other research stakeholders as well. that is something that must continue to receive ongoing attention and management.
we've got to make sure that we don't cut to the bone and that we compromise future research. you think about -- we have not found a cure for alzheimer's is an example. i think we want to see the research supporting cheers for that and a less. they're just debilitating diseases. more to come on that. >> what do you see as the role of tele-medicine and technology particularly in rural areas where people might be a distance from your store and maybe not have transportation to get there? do you look at integrating more of the services? >> there is no question that technology plays an important role in solving the challenges i mentioned earlier. our focus ont digital. we are experimenting with tele
medicine and at 28 sites in southern california and texas and they are staffed by licensed in anda patient comes they are actually, through technology, seeing a nurse practitioner or a positions assistant. the consumer feedback and patient feedback is off the chart positive. thateality behind that is in the site they're being seen, there is a tv monitor. that patient is able to look at the same thing that nurse practitioner is looking at. someone --st time, all these years we have gone to the doctor and open their mouth and the interior. they are seeing what that position is looking at an there's an education that is taking place in terms of why send faction why may not be. the feedback is terrific there.
i think we are in the top of the second inning in terms of where that's headed. i think we are off to a terrific start and i do believe that tele medicine will play an important role especially when you talk about the rural areas of the country that do not have access to a primary care physician. we are almost out of time before i asked the last question, i have a couple of housekeeping matters to take care of. first of all, i want to remind everyone about upcoming speakers. on september 23, we will host former virginia senator jim webb and on october 15, debra rutter president of the john f. kennedy center for the performing arts will be our guest at a luncheon. secretary 20, labor thomas perez will be here .
-- ier piece of business would like to present you with the coveted national press club mug. [laughter] [applause] you cannot yet one of those at cvs. [laughter] but you can have healthy drinks in that mug that are good for you. -- this is theon voice of a customer coming through. once in a while, these customers find a way to get their voice heard in their questions in. this customer says," how can you possibly run minute clinics when you can never fill any of my first prescriptions in less than 20 minutes? [laughter] >> that's a fair question. i think there are a number of tongs that we are doing
create efficiency and effectiveness. i think we have done an awful lot with technology. i can remember the early days as a pharmacist where when people came in, you filled the prescriptions in the order that they came in. we are doing a better job, albeit probably not perfect, in terms of being able to separate people that just left the doctor and might have a sick child and they want to get home and darted on the antibiotics to someone who is phoning in a refill and will pick it up tonight or tomorrow and we are doing a number of things with automated refill programs. i have talked to some of you earlier and you appreciate orting those text messages phone calls reminding you that your prescription can be as ready and picked up. we are working hard to make sure that prescriptions can be ready when promised by using technology and additional features like that. [applause]
>> i was going to say how about a round of applause that you took care of that. thank you, larry. [applause] todaynk you for coming and thanks to our audience at the national press club for those wonderful questions. i would also like to thank the national press club staff including its journalism institute and broadcast center for organizing today's event. remember, for a copy of today's program and to learn more about the national press club, you can go to our website, press.org and find that information. thank you for being here and we are adjourned. [no audio] [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]
and the developing international support for the new government there that is combating isis and that meeting will take place in a couple of moments we will have live when it gets started on c-span. wait, congress recessed yesterday as they headed to their home states to campaign for their elections. congress has wrapped up until after the election. does this congress get will be remembered for? it might be remembered for the government shutdown. there was not a whole lot of significant legislation passed. there was not a lot of significant legislation passed. -- on the vote to our men allow president obama to arm and train
syrian the rebel perhaps one of the most theyficant votessession in jant might take a vote on a broad war authorization or military force authorization, but we will have to wait until after that. host: what is the prediction for the next funding mechanism? caller: the intervening elections will have a lot to say about whether that is possible. say beforewmakers the election, it is going to be a lot different than what they
might say depending on the results. if republicans win the senate, they will have a lot more january and they will likely want a short-term continuing resolution, kick the decisions into the new congress, when they can pressure the president and the pressure democrats to cut spending further for the rest of the year. indemocrats keep the senate november, there might be a little bit of a better chance to get in on the bus that will fund the government for the rest of the year. host: you mean through 2015. host: what does that due to the influence of the work of the appropriations? they are in favor of doing their individual bills, but they will take the bills, package
them into an on the bus. the appropriators hey continuing resolutions because it takes power out of their hand. that is not how the government was designed to run, on autopilot where these resolutions fund the government in the same way it has been funded before and do not allow for long-term planning on the part of agencies and departments. host: what is the wire? guest: we cover everything from politics to entertainment. host: is it available and free to the public? guest: it is. >> live pictures from the u.n. as secretary of state john kerry is about to tear the un security council meeting on iraq and talk about the coalition that is
the developing support for the new government in iraq as they fight isis. we want to let you know some of our other programming coming up on the c-span networks. president obama will be addressing the women's leadership forum this afternoon that starts at 3:35 p.m. eastern. coming up tonight, more c-span 2014 campaign coverage. that against with arkansas governor's debate. that will be live at 8:00 p.m. eastern that wil. by thell be followed debate between wendy davis and greg abbot. -- >> avenu
security council is called to order. the provisional agenda for this meeting is the situation concerning iraq. adopted, and it is my pleasure to warmly welcome this extraordinary turnout of ministers, and their distinguished representatives present in the security council chamber. the numbers of people have traveled from afar, some of whom have to go right back and then , the extent of dedication of so many to be able the press ofiven business for everybody in this chamber is a statement in and of its self of the importance of the matter that is under discussion. grateful, outages
-- notof our invitation, just on behalf of our invitation, but told the country to understand the series of this moment, and we express our great gratitude to everyone. in accordance with rule 37 of the councils provisional rules of procedure, client by the representatives of all vanier, bahrain, belgium, canada, denmark, egypt, finland, germany, george r, iraq, the islamic republic of iran, italy, japan, lebanon, the netherlands, counter,man, poland, saudi arabia, spain, turkey, and the united arab emirates to participate in this meeting. it is so decided. in accordance with rule 39 of the councils provisional rules of procedure, i invite mr. nicolae, the special
representative of the secretary-general and head of the united nations assistance mission to participate in this meeting. it is so decided. council will now begin its consideration of item two of the agenda. mr.w give the floor to nicolae. >> thank you. thank you mr. president of the council, thank you honorable representatives present for this meeting. it is an honor indeed to be in front of the security comes up i have the secretary-general. mr. president, this is the fourth time i have addressed the council on the devastation growth to the people of his rock. let me thank the security council for its continued interest and its unity and expressing support for the people and the government of
iraq, as wells make it possible for the mission to fulfill its mandate figure consistent calls for inclusion 11 gold engagement, timely elections, and a government process have not gone unheeded. your condemnation of the violence and human rights abuses has been welcomed by iraqis. and finally, your consistent pronouncements, most recently through the adoption of resolution 21 continue to encourage the people of iraq that they are not alone. mr. president, our position has been painful and guard by much violence. the people have shown ability to persevere despite the difficulties. most recently, amidst a rapidly deteriorating security department, they came out to vote in a competitive election that was followed finally by an peaceful transition of power. as we work to rescore securityty -- restore to large part of the country, we
work to develop inclusive policies that contribute to social cohesiveness. we also look to the national community for support. life-threatening danger from the advancement of isolate, and we look toward the countries, the memories of the security council, neighbors, allies, and friends. we look to the international community and the united nations for collective measures to remove the threat from iraq and for peace in the nation. i still ended affiliated groups have captured large parts of northern and western iraq. they have a gained massive amounts of weapons, financial resources. there in a battle to dismantle the iraqi state. provinces had become the for telegraph for this terrorist organization. throughout this, the united nations mission in iraq observed
and underscore the organizations involving strategy of terror. the strategy that continues to systematically undermine legitimate authorities through kidnappings, assassinations, and violence. discontent use the among sun communities and turn that into bitterness and violence. controlthe consolidated over extended territory in both iraq and syria, combined with an ideology of hatred, and fear to resent a clear danger for the very existence of a unified iraqi state. it is a threat to to the region and to the region international security. mr. president, for the last time forces have allowed some areas to be brought back under the control of legitimate authorities. there have been instrumental in saving thousands of lives from eminent death. they have protected the cities, and safeguarded key
infrastructure, and they have arrested the advance of isolate or the capital of baghdad. despite these advances, the have been able to take control of key talents in the provinces been am encouraged report that in the faitce of this growing threat, the coordination between the federal government and the regional engorgement halves increased -- government has increased. we are facing emergency with up to 1.8 million people displaced since january. they have sought refuge in the grandstand region, and an additional 10,000 families in just the passport and have been displaced. the human during crisis is not just in the north of the country, but tens of thousands of people have fled to the south while many of them are hosted by families and religious institutions. the pressure local communities across the country is growing, as a continuing influx has created a massive crisis.
with winter fast approaching, immediate and critical measures need to be enhanced. as more than 2000 schools are currently providing shelter to refugees, the staff of the school -- start of the school year has already been delayed a month. in response you and has mounted a massive humanitarian effort to provide food, shelter, water, sanitation, and health systems. we continue to face immense challenges in reaching an estimated eccentric 50,000 arele -- 650,000 people who in the areas of active conflict. i use this opportunity to call the government of iraq to put forward a national strategy to address the situation of the displaced people. as well as the immediate restoration of essential services throughout the country. their efforts must be encourage, and their financial commitment to help this unitarian must the recognize. ready to provide additional assistance in the coronation of services.
let me thank those members states who have so far responded to our call for assistance, and have followed through with generous support to the u.n. manager and effort. i also want to recognize the kingdom of saudi arabia which has contributed 500 million u.s. dollars for the effort in iraq. over 50% of this donation has already been spent on food and other items for the refugees. i have to note with growing concern that available funding with you manager and operations will be exhausted before the winter, and additional support will be needed. this crisis has had a devastating effect on detection iraq.an rights in there have been some 25,000 civilian casualties, including at least 8500 killed and more than 16,000 would. -- wounded. deepest my
condolences to all civilian counsel to families -- casualty families. religious minorities have been particularly targeted a i still who seek systematic cleansing of territories under their control. we continue to investigate reports of violence and abuses of human rights law. we have conducted over 500 andrviews with the tim's of witnesses of these violations. as a result of this, the u.n. has verified systematic and widespread human rights violations committed both by i soul and associated groups but armed groups supportive of the government as well as some committed by the iraqi security forces. a public report was published in july, while a second one is
under preparation. on account of the gravity of the crimes committed by silica by welcomed the decision by the toan human rights council dispatch a mission to iraq to investigate alleged violence and abuses of human rights law and humanitarian law. mr. president, the fall of osul show them that it was not just the country that was a stay, but they're very community. losethey stand to if they fail to stand against terrorism and extremism. there's a growing understanding for any security plan to succeed and needs to be broadly excepted by all. there is an agreement among key decision-makers, that security cannot be provided without the full respect of the constitution, rule of law, international manager a lot, and human rights anders. the conditions that breed discontent of violence need to be addressed as a matter of
priority so that the disaffected communities, particularly those currently located in conflict areas can be brought back into the democratic process. is theqi constitution guiding framework for resolving all grievances. policies that contribute to social peace and development, devolution of authority, fair revenue-sharing between provinces, and public service and measures against corruption. and perhaps most important of m all a strengthening of security. all this will allow the country to move forward. all of this is impossible without addressing the human rights violations of the past and the present. left unresolved past grievances tol undermine any attempt solve the policy issues. i'm pleased to report that since this appointment, the government has made important steps, and has a strong beginning for its
collective work but i very much welcome the prime ministers recent orders to suspense of the air force strikes in those areas in commitment to protection of civilians. the primeer-in-chief, minister has taken the initiative to restructure the leadership of the iraqi armed forces. girdingcisions aren't steps toward meeting the demands for reform. i further welcomed the council of ministers decision to establish a reconstruction fund to rebuild the areas damaged by military operations. the u.s. stands ready to assist in this respect and i also very pleased to report the we have drafted a law the creation of a national guard that will allow for the devolution of authority and will strengthen local engagement in the provision and management of security. and his most recent address to parliament, the prime minister has committed to resolving outstanding budgetary disputes
between the federal government and the goethe stand region. i encourage the iraqi government to swiftly move forward on restoring subsidies, starting in september, to the provinces. and theral government kurdistan regional government should move quickly to reach an agreement on the outstanding payments. and time it is -- it is time for the revenue-sharing to be in line with the constitution. as always the united nations and iraq is ready to continue facilitating this process. all members of the international community should continue to work closely both with the government and the kurdistan region to extend the humanitarian assistance it needs. the states are very high for both the people of iraq and the region. iraq and all of its regional neighbors have an unprecedented opportunity to restart positive bilateral relations based on mutual interest and progress. cooperation should be open, and
inclusive of all neighbors that the challenge of confronting i so. -- isil. thearab league resolution, paris conference of peace and security, all support iraq in its time of need. the u.n. stands ready to support iraq and the region by gordon meeting the political and social humanitarian efforts needed to address the current crisis. be veryng, let me clear. isil is a scourge that has shown may have regard for humanity. their perverse ideas of justice their example of
disregard for humanity. common work on the basis of the framework of the charter of the united nations and the relevant security council resolutions. thank you. >> thank you. i think more importantly from all of us, we thank the secretary general and u.s. special representative, but also heading up the u.n. assistance and all the work you're doing. we are very grateful to you. the council has before it the text of the statement on behalf of the council. i am very thankful for all the contributions to the statement. the members it that of the security council agreed to the statement which will be issued as a document of the security council under the 20.d/2014/1
so decided. i have now the blood privileged -- i now have the privilege of giving the floor to the representative of iraq,. . >> peace be upon you all. it is my pleasure to be before you today. of manythe presence foreign ministers from friendly countries whose presence today proves the gravity of the threat we face. we would also like to thank the united states for holding this mobilizewith a view to international support against
isis and the affiliated organizations. greet theso like to special representative of the secretary-general. iraq reaffirms his position. is ace up to terrorism international urge that should be eliminated. it is an extremely important for ordination and cooperation amongst all parties to take place. the influx of terrorist fighters from all over the world to isablish this state of isis a great danger not only to iraq in syria but to the entire region. finding those terrorist in iraq, and sparing the iraqi people is in the interest of the entire world. this is a war that is being lost against the people of iraq, --
launched against the people of iraq, they have violated our land and the dignity of man. all of the people, muslims, christians, they are all against this evil. restore peaceto and stability so that we can restore public services to the people, especially in the affected areas. the actions of isis has led us to the displacement of more than 1.4 million iraqis to goethe stand in other areas of the south. but despite the political and security challenges, and the wely elected government, have cooperated with united two restores no organiza
control of these areas and were turn them to their homes. we organize national elections, followed by the formation of a that listens to the concerns of the entirety of iraq and all of its factions. we need to implement the main principles in the document of iraqo by all parties to enhance national unity and social cohesion and to make necessary measures to face to terrorism. on the nationally agreed formation of a national government that includes all aspects of society. mobilizing all efforts, internationally and regionally, to face up to terrorism that is an effective way to deal with other challenges that face the region.
mainlieve the responsibility is ours, and the responsibility of the iraqi armed forces and national guard. however, areas support requires assistant i friendly nation. taken all measures to enhance national unity and take unified action. we have previously warned that the situation in syria would eventually affect iraq, and this major threat should we remove not only from iraq but from any other country. uponwas previously called your security council on the requestinge, 2014, assistance by the international community. therefore i would like to state the following.
military, economic, and financial assistance should continue to support the counteroffensive against isis. terrorismhe threat of removes all fighters including in neighboring countries. and any military actions against isis should be done in coordination with the iraqi armed forces. humanitarian assistance should be provided to alleviate the suffering of more than 1.8 million people, including women and children. we call upon member states of the united nations to remain committed to the implementation of human rights resolutions and security council resolutions in tos regard, with a view cutting off military support to isis and prevent them from
getting national resources in the area that they take control. nations strategy against terrorism has stress these points and we would like to stress that this threat will not be removed unless we fight the extremists and their ideas that support it. such extremistf from should be prevented public speech, and should be countered at all levels. of people and government iraq appreciate the roles played by the united nations, european nations, and other nations including our arab brothers who have assisted in providing for the needs of the just placed and in the affected areas where fighting has been severe. we are all facing a grave danger
that has no respect for human rights or humanitarian aspects. we should all work for the ,pposite culture of love prosperity, and cooperation. finally we would like to express our appreciation of the andstance to the displaced, reaffirm our appreciation and thanks and a steam for the dedication to iraq in this crisis. thank you. forhank you your excellency a very important statement. we appreciate very much your leadership and the new government's efforts. a is my privilege to make statement in my capacity as secretary of state of the united states. by thanking again every single one of you for participating in the session.
weeke seen the last traveling around how extra ordinarily busy everyone is and how committed to this effort is through their actions as well as through their incredibly is he schedules. that the fact that so many countries are represented here from some of you were parts of the world really underscores the clear need for all of us to come together to welcome and to support the new, inclusive government in iraq. and of course to put an and to isil's unfettered barbarity. i want to thank the secretary-general and welcome our new iraqi counterpart, the prime minister. i do not need to remind anyone here that the last two times iraq, was focused on
was when its government was in confrontation with the international community with great consequence. but today we come together in support with the new iraqi government. it is already made great strides in a short amount of time. and we must not miss this moment. second tripmade my to baghdad in just over two months to meet with the new iraqi government. i was very encouraged to hear them reaffirm their commitment to govern in the interest of all iraqis, and to finally begin to address the deep divisions that we are all aware of, including those over energy resources, regional autonomy, and the composition of the security forces. all of these have plagued iraq throughout its modern history. y are also committed
to mobilizing communities to ity in theirur own areas. they have a unity they have not experienced in decades if ever. last month and iraqi era pilot qi-arab pilot flew a helicopter with a kurdish crew with the goal of rescuing mountain.rom the tragically, it crashed. the general was the only one killed. but the mission to rescue them was the most important thing he had done in his life, and career as an iraqi pilot. level oforic
cooperation between iraqi and kurdish forces has resonated deeply in both communities. as the president explained earlier this month, my president, isil is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. than the vision other slaughter of all who stand in its way. -- hasgion that is known notes about bloodshed, these terrorists are actually unique in their brutality. prisoners,e captured kneeling them down, tying their back, pull it through their headgear they kill children, they enslave, rape, and force women into marriage. the threaten a religious minority with genocide. and they took the lives of two american journalists, and a british aid worker.
isil simply poses a threat to the people of iraq and syria, and they brought him released -- and the broader middle east. if left unchecked, these terrorists would certainly pose a growing threat beyond the region because they have already promised to. ultimately history will judge how the world response to this moment, to this challenge. in the face of this sort of evil, we have only one option, to confronted with a holistic global campaign that is committed and capable of degrading and destroying this terrorist threat. with a holistic global campaign that is committed and capable enough to ensure whether in iraq, syria, or elsewhere, isil cannot find safe haven. obama has clearly explained, and as i think everyone in this room is well aware of, the coalition required is not only,isil
or even primarily military in nature. andust he comprehensive, include close collaboration across multiple lines of effort. it is about taking out an entire network, decimating and discrediting a militant cult , masquerading as a religious movement. the fact is there is a role for a nearly every country in the 'srld to play, including iran, foreign minister is here with us today. threat to all of us, and we are committed to partnershiplose with the no iraqi government and countries around the world to defeated. that is why spent the past week consulting with my iraqi county arts -- counterparts and troubling in the middle east and europe, building partnerships, and that is why you were so focused on hosting the section here today. and i think the foreign minister
for saudi arabia's leadership in hosting their conference. i think the president of france for holding the leadership conference in paris. each of these has brought greater and greater commitment to do what we need to do. i have to tell you that in many of the meetings that i have had so far, leaders are not talking about if they should support their campaign against isil, they are asking how. across the lines of effort that we are focused on, we have seen more than 50 countries come forward with critical commitments. first, on military support, countries in the region and around the world are already providing assistance, both in terms of kinetic action, but also in terms of training, advising, equipping, providing logistical support, and so on.
in the region, countries like have committed to significantly and has the coordination between its forces and iraqi and kurdish forces. but even further away from iraq, countries like australia are committed to deploying fighter jets and support aircraft and personnel. germany, and recognition of the grave threat posed, reversed its long-standing policy against offering legal aid. its worstnducted airstrikes against isolate targets -- its first airstrikes targets.sil these components are essential our combat strategy. but there are only one part. were also seeing overwhelming support when it comes to
humanitarian assistance. dozens of countries from throughout the international have committed $1 billion to the humanitarian response and -- interact. iraq. we are seeing encouraging progress in the effort to dry up their illicit funding as well, and bahrain has offered to host an international conference in the near future to further develop a global action plan to counterterrorist financing. as we will discuss next week at the session the president obama will chair, we must also stop the low of foreign fighters to isil, men and women who carry passports from countries around including nearly every country represented in this room. this is another area were countries have already begun to
take important steps, including legislation, utilizing the recruitment, preparation, and participation of their citizens in combat activities of terrorist of rod -- terrorism abroad. and finally there is an urgent need to counter the toys this propaganda, and gross distortion of islam that isil is spreading far and wide. it is time to put an and to a group so extreme and its --that they been math social studies for children. saudi arabia's top clerics this week came out publicly and declared to terrorism a heinous crime, under sharia law and
called isil the order of saint. tan. we know preventing an individual from joining or getting to the battlefield in the first place is the most effective measure you can take. but for this campaign to have any chance of success, rock itself much -- iraq itself must be leading the way. that is why it is imperative we all go the extra mile to help iraq fully reintegrate into the region and into the global community of nations. let us starting to happen. last week the iraqis long estranged from their neighbors and isolated from the world were not just invited, but were warmly welcomed at international before the security council and before the entire world.
and what is different about today's meeting, and this is one reason why we're so grateful to so many ministers for traveling meetings,hat the last the world did not share the double or operation of the discussion as it would talk. toay the world can listen each of the ministers, and they will understand the breadth of the scope of the support of this effort. so we are well on our way, but does not mean we are where we need to be. progressday that the we have described will continue and over the course of this week we will have more partners that will come forward and more commitments to these efforts that will be announced. make no mistake, our work to build and enhance this coalition will continue well after this week is over. i commit that to you, and president obama commits suc -- to you. one of our experts, general john
allen, who served in afghanistan iraq,o years, and also in has agreed to come to the state department with the presidential theintment, and oversee u.s. effort to match up each country's capabilities with the coalition's total need. so the line of effort is coordinated. i look forward to hearing from all of you in the course of this afternoon. i close by thanking everybody for joining this discussion, and i am absolutely confident that asough global campaign, wefidence of and committed, can support the promise of the new government in iraq and we can defeat the actual threat wherever it exists. i give the floor to her excellency, the minister of
foreign affairs for wan rwanda. secretary of state john kerry, dear colleagues, distinguished leaders in your i thinkve capacities, the united states for organizing this important debate on the situation in iraq, at this very challenging time for that country, the region, and indeed the world. and thedership today, presence of a number of ministers in this debate is an indication of the will of the international community to honor its obligation to support and againstthe iraqi people the threat of the islamic state in iraq. that everytunate time the security council
defaults on its inherent responsibility, that of maintenance of international peace and security, the human cost is just unbearable. we all know that the conflict in syria was reading ground for -- breeding ground for isil. committed has coul mass atrocities. ofir ongoing for suspicion minorities forcibly who there on persecution of minorities for simply being who they are is amounts to genocide. support our resolve to protect the many innocent civilians caught in the cruelty they have nothing to do with. we take this opportunity to express our condolences to all the bereaved families.
mr. president, baghdad is far thanus in more aspects jogger for. but the plight of many iraqi people today is no different from that of many of the ns 20nch in -- rwanda years ago. faced with unprecedented cruelty they look to the world for help. i am the foreign minister of and as such i carry the experience of abandonment in 1994. we believe that the international community must act collectively, to deny this terrorist group t hold to any territory, access to any financing, at any channel of recruitment wish allows them to kill children and adults, behead journalists and humanitarian workers, enslave women and
girls, and persecute religious minorities. the opportunities we can build our support on for the people of iraq and all of us to eradicate threat. these the ability demonstrated by the iraqis to come together and form an inclusive government. among the rocks community -- iraq's community was critical to ensure success against isil, as the effort should be nationally led and nationally owned with the support of all of us. second, there are building blocks that we should take advantage of. acknowledge the active role that the united states plays in building a coalition to fight
this terrorist group. nationoming united security council meeting which president obama will chair next week will be another opportunity to garner global support for this effort. we are also encouraged by the conference held on september 11 which brought together members states of the corporation counsel as well as egypt, iraq, turkey, jordan, and and we commend their resolve for a coordinated military campaign against isil. in the same spirit we welcome the outcome of the international conference on decent security in iraq -- peace and security in iraq held in paris. ical needa crit to ensure the council resolution
andhe 15th of august 2014, other resolutions concerning the fight against terrorism. there is a lot the international community can do, particularly this naughty, to stop the influx , starting with targeted sanctions. countries of the region and beyond should also play an important role in preventing hatred and extremism and take necessary measures to prevent religious radicalization. mr. president, before concluding, i shall note the the has ledvance of isil to massive displacement of more than 2 million people, which requires increased humanitarian assistance. we therefore call on the international community to provide enhanced support to the
affected populations in countries. yourly, we commend delegation for introducing the presidential statement which was just adopted, and we thank mr. nicolai, the special representative of the secretary-general in iraq as well as the entire team of united nations mission in iraq for their dedication to the people of iraq as well in such a difficult time and environment. i thank you for listening to me. >> thank you very much. thank you for the important reminder the impact of in action from 1994. i now give the floor to her excellency, the minister of foreign affairs of australia. >> i thank you mr. president for initiating this meeting today. ofmust send a clear signal
the international community's strong support for iraq, australia endorses the terms of the presidential statement. it is an affirmation of a rocky and international efforts to combat the terrorist threats provided by iso-and to provide humanitarian relief to prevent further suffering. atrocities against women, girls, and against vulnerable minorities and security force opponents, as well as the barbaric use and then bi beheading of captured generalists and aid workers and others to advance the depraved agenda are absolutely despicable. grotesquerget the image shown around the world of an australian child standing
with his father, and holding up the severed head of a soldier? the showed beyond ambiguity hideous acts they are capable of. their barbarism and their ideology. the international community cannot with any conscience turn away. we cannot leave the people and government of iraq to face this cruelty alone. doubt theons leave no severity of the threat of the region and the wider world. threat to australia, our spreads in southeast asia, and beyond. before,seen this extremists, foreign fighters returning home, responsible for terrorist attacks in our region.
law enforcement agencies have taken steps in recent days against a group in our country, inspired by isil, door seeking to emulate the brutality. a threat to the fundamental values of the international community and the front -- and an affront to our shared unity. . weooperation with a rock, are deploying a military force to the region for possible involvement in the united states led effort to support a rock against isil. a special forces task group to advise and assist iraqi forces. this is a prudent and proportionate response to the threat posed by this murderous terrorist organization. efforts to effectively end
the ravages and ambitions will necessarily involve measures to ,ut off support networks including the flow of fighters, arms, and funding. there is more we can all do. australia is introducing legislative reforms to address threats from home-grown terrorism and is intensifying our counterterrorism engagement with others. we encourage others to do the same. political measures are also needed. formation of a new iraqi government is a positive step. australia supports the prime minister at the works to rebuild a government that will bring a stable iraq. remainsrity case grave. humanitarian needs of innocent are multiplying.
nearly 2 million people are believed to be internally displaced. these people are vulnerable. their protection needs are urgent. isil has explicitly targeted minorities and women and children. there must be consequences for australia will help to provide further $2 million to help the united nations population fund to scale up delivery of reproductive health care. there will also be $5 million in emergency funding to iraq, and we have undertaken air drops to besieged communities. we have provided humanitarian aid for those in dire need in syria and assisted lebanon and jordan with