tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 4, 2015 4:00pm-6:01pm EDT
sends -- and the sense of purpose it gets. with regards to mullah toward peace. that is the real drive that will continue. these are the sorts of things that these challenges, these curveballs, these are the things that come up, and the issue is whether you can stay focused. i think the primary players are focused on that. that is the key thing, in order to keep in mind with this, because it gets back to the problems i allude to, which is how president donning is trying to deal with pakistan. knowing this is not going to be something that you achieve in a few weeks, a few months, a few years.
i think it will take many, many years, and it will not only be dealing with the taliban, which of course is the headlines, but all of the other issues they have to address. that is much more important as a comprehensive matter -- i know the president is dedicated to, the chief executive is dedicated to. you get those indications from pakistan as well. while the trust may not be there to the extent that we would like, you can build momentum. so, you get get to the end goal. >> two more rounds of questions and i will ask that each person
only ask one question. i will start with the word row the two gentleman in the third row, one question each, please. >> thank you, michael. i'm representing the international stability organization, some companies that provide services to u.s. id -- usaid in afghanistan. as you draw troops down, will you be returning more to contractors to fill those gaps? maintenance, etc.? >> i am a journalist in washington. my question is with these so-called peacekeepers, as the taliban is concerned, they have been terrorists and they have killed hundreds of thousands of people and they have deep roots
in pakistan, of course. what role do you think india pakistan, and china will play because india has invested millions of dollars. on the -- general campbell: on the contractor question, what we have tried to do, we have built it up to a client where we were very very dependent on contractors -- build it up to a point where we were very very dependent on contractors. that number has continued to rise. the last couple of years, what we have tried to do in afghanistan, as we have retrograde it out of people -- as we have retrograded out of people, we continue to move toward balance. there are critical areas that
contractors provide. they support areas that we could not do our mission without them. we will continue with contractors on the battlefield. i think we have to balance that and as we look forward, to look inside afghanistan and have more afghanistan folks pick up those jobs out there so we build up that capacity. michael: either way. matt: with regard to the peace process, they all have a vested interest in afghanistan, be it economic, peace interests regional stability interests. china plays a greater role in the talks in early july. i think being able to do this provides greater impetus kind hiding the collective effort. india has invested a lot of money out west in afghanistan
and i suspect they do not want to have those investments, under security threat. it's finding those common interests in order to achieve desired ends. whether you take your eye off the ball and things like that, the question is whether there is the political resolve in afghanistan and with the taliban to achieve that. the fact that you have those talks taking place in early july, the first time you had afghanistan and the taliban sit down to addresses long-term problem is not something to be cast away. it's something significant. it will be a long process, but i think it is worth the effort all sides are contributing. michael: anything you want to add, general? general campbell: i think that is right. i think it will take time. i am happy that india china
russia are taking an interest. it will take all partners. a stable afghanistan is a good thing. if it takes pakistan, china working, i am all for that. i think the important piece is this has to be afghan led and resident ghani has taken -- president ghani has taken it on and will move forward. michael: everyone assumed that the taliban would take this year and next year is their opportunity because you downsize so much. is there any indication they are becoming discouraged, because they are not taking a lot of territory? maybe i am oversimplifying, but i wonder if there is any indication that the going is tougher than they expected? general campbell: when we talk numbers, and afghan numbers is probably three or four times higher than it was last year.
they have inflicted a lot of casualties. i think that we do see signs of fracturing from leadership. they are competing against isil in parts of afghanistan where they are paying more money to take away from the telegram. they have significant issues and they have found out the taliban fighters out and homeland, you find -- the taliban fighters out in helmand the spiritual leader of your movement, has been dead for a couple years. somebody has been playing you. i think they will take the opportunity. the taliban are tired of fighting. they are tired of the last 14 years. they want to get on with their lives and the only way they are going to do that because the afghan government is not going to fall to the taliban. they realize that now.
they are not taking territory. they are not meeting strategic level goals they set out. they will take a district center, but they will lose it. they will take another district center, but they will lose it. they are not going to gain any terrain. you talk about the cities. they are not going to gain any territory that means a great deal or has value to afghanistan. i think the president, from the very first day he took over office in his inauguration speech, he reached out to the taliban and said, you are brothers and sisters of afghanistan. you need to come to the peace process. i am opening this up to you. hopefully this will speed that up, but i think you will have folks out there -- potentially like haqqani -- that will be irreconcilable and will want to fight the fight. and we will have to deal with it a different way. michael: it sounds like you are saying if the taliban has made any net gains, it is one
presenter 2% or 3% of the country. i think people have the impression it could be a large chunk of the country at risk in a way it was not before. i hear you saying it is a very small percentage. michael: i could not put a number on it. they are not taking a district center. they are losing it within 24 or 48 hours. they have lost the support of the people. every survey we take shows the taliban approval rating is less than 5%. they don't have the approval of the afghan people. they are tired. the afghan people are tired of this. they want the same things we want. they want jobs. they want roofs over their heads. they don't want the taliban to come back. i don't see the taliban coming back. michael: we will take two more questions. i think we will go with the gentleman here and then three rows back -- i'm sorry, up in
the front. and then the woman in the red shirt. >> mark schneider, international crisis group. general, excuse me. let me push harder on that question. this last year since january you have had the highest rate of attacks might taliban since 2001. while it is clear they have not been able to take cities, they have been able to threaten a lot more cities outside their normal area of operations. they have managed to establish themselves over time. my question is, are they going to be able to continue to maintain their ability to provide security unless we maintain our level of support, both in terms of air support
not just through the end of next year, but beyond? is that the way to get the taliban to come to the peace table, when they see be a they will not achieve their aims militarily? michael: last question. >> i am a woman in afghanistan. general, thank you for being so active with the national unity government. icu almost weekly. -- i see you almost weekly. you made the remark -- they brought some help to the wounded soldiers. in my work, i have seen some impact, not the wounded warriors, adjusting returning to
their families. as you know, afghans married very young. most of these soldiers have wives and daughters and sisters and when they returned, a lot of the problems happen at home. is the wounded warrior project -- will it have an emotional counseling part? not for the wounded warrior, but the rest of the soldiers? thank you. general campbell: on the first 1 -- i think from the sustainment piece on the afghan side, the security versus are doing -- as mike said, 98% 99% of this on their own providing training at the core level, the minister level, and the special operations level. they have this. they have a set of time when it has been very, very tough and we continue to progress. i don't think -- i think the
taliban are starting to realize and i think they realized before this fighting season they needed to do something spectacular this fighting season to say hey, we are relevant, but they are not making the gains. are they having high profile attacks? yes. one arteaga people with suicide vest running into a place -- one or two people with suicide vest is running into a place with ngo's that is very hard to stop. the people need to continue to stand up and identify somebody in a village that does not belong there. as they do that and they partner -- you talked about cities. i talk more in terms of villages. the only place city wise -- even
the district center that was to the west with 10 kilometers, and the report was going out, which made it seem like it was going to fall in the next 24 hours. at as we looked through the different sensors that we have, we probably -- more importantly the way that they get their messaging out, it probably is of need of improvement and we have talked to them about that, we really need to get the message out. we need to have the propaganda change. just like isil does. they get the message out. they do not have to tell the truth. it balloons and picks up steam and all the sudden, the entire country thinks the national government is going to fall. if your house is under attack or you lost a loved one, of course, you will have a completely different outlook on life and a
feeling the government is not supporting it, but the strategic level i am looking from, the taliban are not winning need to get. of course, it's very, very tough. i do not think they will have issues against the taliban and. we are in the nascent stages of trying to build that program. you talked about bringing that emotional piece to the families. we have sent sergeant majors back to the united states to view how we do our programs. we are just starting to figure out how we do that, everywhere from providing martyr payments to families who lost a loved one, or to provide health care or orders to make sure they get
the right care. they are working very hard on their procedures. i talked about this earlier. driving around you get hit by an ied, you lose all of them. you lose your body armor, your headgear. learn how to do a turn a cat just like u.s. soldiers do. -- how to do a turn a kit --tourniquet, just like u.s. soldiers do. they have a lot of work to do, but i think just talking about talking about taking care of martyred families, wounded warrior families, the u.k. is stepping up, the u.s. is stepping up, and i expect other countries to step up as well. michael: please join me in thanking these two. [applause]
general campbell: i hope we never lose the opportunity to talk about the great men and women who continue to serve. many have returned 3, 4, five times. many have sacrificed a great deal and we can never forget our families. we could not do what we do without our great family supporting us being in the military. one half of 1% of your country does this. one half of 1% so the rest of you in the united states and the rest of the world can enjoy what you do every single day. we should not take that for granted. i don't take that for granted. i try to make sure every time i go to sleep night i have done everything i can, resource wise, decision wise to set our men and women up in the best possible
position force protection, on on. we could not do it without the support of 42 countries. if we start taking that for granted, if we do not take care of the families, the wounded warriors, do not remember the sacrifice paid by our men and women, shame on us. i do see afghanistan continuing to make progress. hourglass is half-full and i am start -- our glass is half-full and i am starting to fill that glass up everything will day. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015]
>> throughout the month, we will look back at the cities and towns we visited this year. tonight, austin, texas. you can watch tonight starting at 6:00 p.m. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a forum on the threat of isis, part of a security forum by the aspen institute. here is retired general john allen. general allen: isis is losing. when you listen closely to their tactical communications, they have problems with their morale right now. not long after they burned the captain, a number of high school foreign fighters -- isil foreign
fighters rebelled and they were some early -- summarily executed by the central government. during the early time of kobani, there was a moment in the campaign where everyone said we were going to lose that and it would be a great victory. but they were terrified. they were either going to be killed by defenders or coalition air. there are similar messages. there are many places within the daesh and for where the morale is not good. as we strangle the finances and it becomes more difficult to pay their fighters, that will create additional morale problems. >> general allen serves as a
special envoy on the operation to counter isis. you can watch the entire program with him at 8:00 p.m. this month, c-span radio takes you to the movies. here supreme court cases that played a part in popular movies. from this summer's winding gold -- >> extract the one little worm with a pair of tweezers -- >> to the free-speech case from the 19 any six movie "the people versus larry flynt -- the 1996 movie "the people versus larry flynt." >> imagine suits against people like gary trudeau and johnny carson? what do you say on the tonight show then?
>> the case from "all the president's men." >> these two were assigned to it. >> only now it turns out that they have their own counsel. >> they have their own counsel? >> is that unusual. >> do you know the name? >> some country club type. >> and the landmark civil rights case turning back the laws preventing interracial r marriage. >> what are the things that you can do between man and wife that you can only do in virginia? >> that is the right to wake up in the morning or to go to sleep at night knowing that these sheriff will not be knocking on their door or shining a light in their faces in the privacy of
their bedroom. >> for supreme court cases that played a part in popular movies, saturdays in august at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span radio. listen to c-span radio on 91 .4 fm. or download the c-span radio app. >> next, some of the recent forum on national security hosted by the aspen institute. top officials in u.s. national security, defense, homeland security, defense, and counterterrorism took part. homeland security secretary jeh johnson took part in this event. [applause] >> thanks very much. thanks, clark. thanks to the aspen institute for having me back. it is a pleasure to have the secretary jeh johnson. i will not go through his
biography. you will have it in your pamphlet. as i was preparing for this, the two things that struck me as most interesting -- it's difficult to know where to start in an interview with the secretary. he was involved in some of the thorniest issues the obama administration inherited from the george w. bush administration. he rescinded don't ask, don't tell. he was in charge of the fraught issue of figuring out how to shut down the risen at guantánamo. the risk -- the list goes on and on. with that background, it does
make you realize why you're the guy for dhs, another institution with a lot of problems when you inherited it. you basically went from the pentagon where you are in offense on the road on -- in the war on terror to purely paying -- playing defense. what are the lessons you learned at the pentagon? and what are the differences in those positions you had? going from the pentagon to sprawling dhs with hundreds of thousands of employees pieces of the government that do not belong together, have been smooshed together. tell us about that transition. secretary johnson: big question. 18, 19 months into the job -- i work with terrific people. i want to mention it's great to be back at aspen. this is my third year in a row.
at i appreciate all of the great work that goes into preparing this. clark and walt put on a trip at program. a lot of great friends here. my personal heroes. at and i hope everyone gets a chance to meet our terrific new dhs team. one is on one of the panels, the undersecretary frank taylor, our tsa administrator p devon juror -- pete who was confirmed a couple weeks ago and is on the job. i hope everyone has had an opportunity to meet these extraordinary people. so, you are correct. part of what i did as the senior legal counsel at the department of defense was to sign off on a lot of our counterterrorism operations legally.
and i took that very seriously. i looked at each one of them very carefully. that was on offense. we are taking the fight to the enemy overseas. homeland security, by its nature is defending our borders, defending hoh report, defending cyber security. there are in fact ways that we can be on offense. i am pushing our people very aggressively on a lot of different things. for example -- preclearance capability aviation security. i want to see more aviation security on the front in. i want to see us build a customs
capability on the front end of a last point of departure airport so we have more information when we screen people and we know what we know about them before they get on a flight bound for the u.s.. there are a lot of airports overseas that have indicated an interest in working with us on that. cyber security, which we will get into. we are on in an accelerated -- on an accelerated timetable. we are looking to protect against more intrusions and enhance our continuous diagnostics and mitigation processes. i want to get to 100% of the federal civilian world by the end of the year. we are on a mission to make our department understand.
we have a retired executive from johnson & johnson. we have a lot of initiatives out there. part of my job is being on offense tuesday one step ahead of a lot of the threats we know we face. >> you have talked about what you call the new normal. tell us what the new normal is and what is the new normal in the context of the threat from isis? secretary johnson: over the last 14 years, we have seen core al qaeda, as everyone knows the al qaeda affiliated elements of our shabbat, which while i was at -- al qaeda affiliated elements of al-shabaab, which while i was at defense, we were focused on. we have done a lot to degrade through our core efforts. we have done a lot to to grade
aqap. the main terrorist threat has evolved and it has evolved in a very significant way, from those groups to more groups. isil being the most prominent example. and it has evolved from terrorist attacks to terrorist-inspired attacks. i disagree a little bit with gym last night in that i think the distinction between terrorist directed and terrorist inspired is a significant one that the american people need to understand. the american people need to understand why we are where we are in our efforts. in this country and in europe, for example. they fit neatly into one of two
boxes. the terrorist directed attacks with an operative that has been recruited overseas and exported somewhere else to commit terrorist inspired attacks. it would involve a homegrown or even home foreign threats and the individual has never even come face-to-face. it is inspired through the very effective use of social media to commit an attack or attempt to commit a small-scale attack. it does involve an all of government approach. it does involve a lot of efforts in addition to the good work of the fbi and in addition to taking the fight to the enemy overseas.
we are doing a lot of things in dhs. we have enhanced our federal protective service presents. there is a presence right outside here that i do not think was here last year. that is in addition to the three that were at my door last night. [laughter] we have enhanced our aviation security overseas. we have enhanced information sharing with state and local law enforcement, which i think is crucial. garden city is a perfect example of the importance of sharing what we know with state and local law enforcement so they have the big picture. we have enhanced our cv engagement countering violent
extremism. i have personally met with large numbers of muslim leaders in this country and communities and i think that is critical to our effort. >> i want to appreciate your security detail, because i am in the suite next to yours. i am glad they are there. i want to talk about the difference in the threat from al qaeda and the threat from isis. in a sense, directed versus self-motivated. is it the lone wolf for the random inspired gunman -- isn't the lone wolf or the random inspired gunman a better problem than the al qaeda directed threats that plotted spectacular attacks, or do you see ice is moving the same direction and eventually that is what they want to do? secretary johnson: let me answer it this way. we are facing the prospect of smaller scale attacks, given how
this whole thing is evolving. but we faced the prospect of that day-to-day in a lot of places in this country. as i think jim has pointed out. abdulaziz was not on our radar. we are facing smaller scale attacks that are harder to detect day-to-day today. the alarming longer-term threat we have to be aware of, any terrorist organization with that level of resources, in excess of 30,000 fighters with foreign fighters pouring into syria, and that level establishing territory and attempting to establish a caliphate in iraq
and syria so that this very large, dangerous terrorist organization has a place, and base to train, send operatives, that is a huge homeland security concern joy number of nations or a that is the longer-term phenomena in we see and are very concerned about, which is why we are taking the fight to them in addition to the basic homeland security problems we see day today. >> let's talk about cve, countering violent extremism. one thing you hear from many republicans, being critical of the term itself. why does the obama administration discuss this as violent extremism and refuse to say it islamic extremism? what is the distinction you're trying to get out there? secretary johnson: i believe strongly -- and i hear this over and over again from muslim leaders in this country -- to
refer to isolate as islamic extremism -- to refer to i sil as islamic extremism dignify them too much. it identifies them as occupying some part of the islamic base, which is about peace. >> a part of what you are talking about, the cve engagement. secretary johnson: countering violent extremism -- this is something the fbi in other parts of the federal government have been doing for some time, but i have taken this on as a personal mission. we do these roundtables with groups of anywhere from 50 to 100 people. i have been to austin, brooklyn new york, maryland -- boston, brooklyn, new york, maryland, indianapolis, houston.
i want to get to every single major metropolitan area in this country that has a significant muslim population to talk to muslim community leaders to talk to us if they see someone going the wrong direction. as jim said last night, it's almost always the case that someone else knows. and we have seen success stories where someone in the community intervened and we need to see more of that. so, we go out, we do more of this and we have conversations where people in the community have issues they want to talk to me about. i am responsible for the enforcement of our immigration laws, for example. things that happen at airports. they want to talk to me about things, and i want to talk to them about helping us help them in our public safety, homeland security efforts and our messages it is your homeland too. i think people here that message. we made a lot of progress
building trust, building relationships, almost always have the local sheriff, local police with me, local fbi office. we are building trust. we are getting some pushback. there is actually a ccve effort out there. countering our countering violent extremism issue, and that is how you know you are having an impact. we are making progress. we are taking our efforts to the next level. we talk a lot about the counter message. it does exist, but it needs a larger microphone. it is not domestically for the government, but it does exist. it needs a larger platform. it needs a larger microphone. one of the things i want to do in this next phase is to engage the foundations, philanthropies to support this kind of effort in the united states.
we want to engage the high-tech sector and helping with messaging. but i believe cve is fundamental to our efforts. at these engagements, whether it is americans, syrian americans pakistani americans -- irrespective of the socioeconomics of these groups, and they are not a monolith -- isil is trying to hijack, so if you call it islamic anything, we are dignifying this terrorist organization by calling it a part of the islamic faith, which muslims in this country push very hard back on. >> but is the government not denying the fundamental religious component of this type
of extremism by not using the word islamic? your analysts in the government i assume, are trained to understand the religious dimensions of this kind of violence. to some people, it sounds like political correctness and that we are missing an important component to what is going on if we do not understand the religious component. secretary johnson: i could not disagree more. isil -- >> it is called the islamic state. secretary johnson: yes, and many people believe that they do not deserve to be called islamic or a state. isil i think, would like to be referred to as islamic extremism because then they can say that it legitimately occupies some form of islam, which is about peace. so, i think it is critical in order to build our relationship
and our level of cooperation with the islamic community we have to say to them, look, we understand what this deep gradient terrorist organization -- what this depraved terrorist organization is doing is no part of your religion. >> some people say what we are witnessing in the middle east is a civil war within islam? it sounds like that is not your view it all. secretary johnson: i think isil believes what it is doing is driven by their religion. the muslims i know and i have spent a lot of time within this country believe just the opposite. so, it's important to remember islam is one of the largest religions in the world. this band of terrorists and criminals does not represent
what the overwhelming majority of muslims in this country believe islam is all about. >> let me ask you about violent extremism in general and whether we overstate the threat from jihadist them -- jihadism in the united states. we had two tragic event's in the united states. since 9/11, there have been more attacks by violent extremists who were whites is premises -- white supremacists then islamic extremists, which i think challenges a lot of assumptions especially at a conference like this. how does dhs wrapper with homegrown extremism -- grapple with homegrown extremism that local law enforcement is more concerned about than anything coming from the middle east? secretary johnson: local law
enforcement should be concerned about mass shootings, rampages, multi-victim acts of violence. a lot of our grantmaking in dhs -- we have put out over $2 billion a year in grants to state and local law enforcement. that goes to readiness, first responder equipment, active shooter training. that can be useful in a variety of different mass casualty situations. a lot of first responder equipment used at the boston marathon, for example, was funded by our department. but a lot of that same equipment could be just as effective and is just as useful in any mass shooting event, irrespective of the motive. my mission, our mission at dhs is largely protecting our
borders. land, sea, and air. chief fisher is here. he is our chief of the u.s. border patrol. but given how the threat has evolved, we also have to pay attention to the effect of nest of terrorist groups' ability not just to send an operative into this country, but to send a message through social media through the internet. that is a mission that both dhs and law enforcement must undertake and be mindful. >> shouldn't the u.s. government be spending more resources on tracking, and then a five white supremacist groups? shouldn't we be more focused on that and we are now? if the number show more americans have been killed since 9/11 from that sort of threat then jihadism? secretary johnson: we do spend and invest considerable
resources in tracking violence -- white supremacist groups, violent domestic waste groups -- domestic-based groups and extremist's. we have to be mindful of that. the cornerstone of our department's mission -- we have to be mindful of oversee terrorist organizations inspired by a homegrown terrorist. that is part of our mission. and given how it is evolving, it is moving more closely to the purely domestic-based act of terrorism. there is a mission there for both dhs and law enforcement. >> you were talking about isis and controlling territory in the middle east. the 9/11 report, one of its core
missions never, ever let a group in the united states like al qaeda or isis -- which we did not know about the time -- never let it told a state. that gives them the capability to launch a more spectacular attack against us. you are at the pentagon when we threw down the troops against iraq. ray odierno said we could have "prevented" isis if we had not drawn those troops back. do you believe the obama admin station could have prevented isis? secretary johnson: i don't like to engage in second-guessing. i fully support the direction we have taken in our efforts overseas. i do believe that anytime a terrorist organization sets up caliphate or establishes territory, there needs to be a
national security, homeland security concern because that provides a basis for doing a lot of bad things. that is the best approach, to keep these guys on the run. and hit them where they live and hit them where they train. and we have done a lot of that in the last number of years and we need to continue to do that. >> is there a military component to defeating isis that you would pursue? secretary johnson: we continue through john allen's good efforts, continue to build and support an international coalition. we continued through dod's good efforts to work with the iraqi security forces, to train them so in that respect, that is the national security, military piece of this, that is necessary
to defeating isil. >> i will ask you a question we asked to be director about iran. under the current agreement, iran is about to receive a huge influx of cash from his frozen accounts in the sanctions. how -- this is the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world -- how, if it all, is dhs preparing for the changes that are about to take place in iran? a lot of people forget irani and hardliners not happy with this deal -- iranian hardliners not happy with this deal will make a show of aggression. how is dhs preparing for that, if at all? secretary johnson: well, i will give you a version -- [laughter] through our intelligence components in the intelligence
community, we keep a close eye on overseas threats that are emerging. one thing that has struck me to read we have come a long way in the level of sophistication of our intelligence community and its ability to track and detect the potential threats to our homeland from overseas. we are sorting out what is real versus the noise. we have developed good capabilities to detect plotting, to detect efforts, to do something bad in our homeland. we do have the problem that jim talked about last night, very definitely, and we have to find a balanced solution to that
problem. i think the good news is our intelligence capabilities since 9/11, our ability to connect dots is pretty sophisticated. >> all right, let's -- secretary johnson: which is why i think a number of us are so concerned about how this whole thing is evolving. because you have to be concerned about the homegrown threat, which is harder to detect in many respects. >> let's switch to a topic where the temperature is a little lower and easier to talk about. immigration. [laughter] ahem. there has been a lot of discussion in the public recently, as you may have noticed if you've turned on cnn about illegal immigrants coming to this country and committing crimes. what are the facts about that? what are the numbers, what are the trendlines about undocumented immigrants and crime in america right now? secretary johnson: interesting
fact is a few years ago pew took a poll of the american public and asked, do you believe more or less people are coming into our country illegally than 10 years ago? 55% said more when in fact, it is far less. because we have invested so much as a nation, as a government. we have more technology. chief fisher has more people. the border patrol is the most funded it has ever been in our nation's history. apprehension on the southern border, which are an indicator of total attempts to cross the border, have gone down to radically -- >> is that the best indicator? secretary johnson: that is the best indicator we have of total attempt to cross the border. the high was 1.6 million.
i am on a mission to put these facts out there. over the last several years, it has been down around 400,000. this year, considerably less than it was last year. if the current trend continues this year will be the lowest since the early 1970's. that is a good thing. >> that strange, because the economy is improving, so you would expect illegal immigration would be increased. secretary johnson: that is correct. normally apprehensions correlate with how our economy is doing. our economy is better. apprehensions go up. our economy is getting better. apprehensions are going down. there was a report released today by the migration policy institute, which is a nonpartisan entity that indicates that through our
realignment of priorities, we are focused more on criminals. we are focused more on threats to public safety. that is the direction the president and i want to take on enforcement resources. we want to get to the criminals that are undocumented and remove them, as opposed to someone who has been here for years and has committed no serious crimes. part of the effort is this new priority enforcement program which we have created, which replaces the old security program, which has become hugely controversial. a lot of communities did not want to work with us anymore. san francisco, the killing is a tragedy, but it is also, in my judgment, exhibit a for why we need the new priority enforcement program, so we can work effectively with state and
local law enforcement, for them to transfer to us convicted criminals who are undocumented. >> whose fault is it that her killer was released? secretary johnson: look, there is a very elaborate timeline to what happened here. the fact is, he was deported five times. he was prosecuted for unlawful reentry three times. he was serving his sentence in the federal bureau of prisons on his last unlawful reentry. our immigration enforcement personnel put a detainer on him. he was there. he was transferred to the san francisco sheriff. we put a detainer on him there. which was not honored. our new program, if it works effectively, and i believe it will, would have gotten a better result. the sheriff would have let us
know and he would have gone straight to us. he never would have hit the streets. that is what the program is designed to do. to promote public safety. we have it out there now and we are working with jurisdictions. this is before san francisco -- we're getting good reception from sheriffs and mayors and i believe we will be in a better place. >> all right, one mischievous question before we go to the audience. donald trump is going down to the border today. [laughter] he has asked to meet with i.c.e. officials today. what would be your message to him about what he does or does not understand about the immigration problem in this country? secretary johnson: i am not in the business of giving advice to candidates for president -- >> correct any misconceptions. secretary johnson: a lot of
people go to the border. a lot of members of congress go to the southern border. i want them to see the good work of our immigration personnel and border patrol. the facts are that apprehensions have gone way down. we have invested a lot in border security. we are much better at border security than we used to be. the undocumented population in this country has stopped growing. it used to be up over 12 million. the best estimate now is it is around 3 million. we have to recognize that population. they're not going away. no administration is going to deport them because they don't have the resources to do that. they are becoming integrated members of our society. as long as we do they do not commit serious crimes, we have to deal with them.
in california, and undocumented person has the right to practice law. we have to reckon with this population. we are focusing our enforcement resources. that is what we need to do. >> all right, let's take questions from the audience, which -- secretary johnson: which, by the way, i will have a harder time doing if congress does not repeal sequestration. so, when my friends in congress are here later this week, i hope someone will ask them, how do you expect homeland security to do all of the things you want them to do if you are decapitating their budget? so anyway. >> josh probably has a follow-up on donald trump. [laughter] >> thank you.
josh rogan, bloomberg via. thank you for your time and for your service. i want to ask about guantanamo. we all ready articles in the white house talked about yesterday. there is going to be a new plan, a new initiative. john mccain was going to try to close guantánamo. there have always been too big obstacles. one, can we safely release repatriate, resettle the detainees who will be let go? that is something you do with closely at dod. the other, can we safely prosecute and keep the ones we cannot let go? what has changed? what is different now? why can we now do these things? the defense department has been very, very wary on signing off on any of these releases. what is the likelihood this is going to get done question mark thanks. secretary johnson: the population at guantánamo when
this is mistreating him and drop this was to 42. it is now down to less than half of that -- the population at guantanamo when this administration came in was 242. it is now down to less than half of that. these are probably the toughest cases. in my view, in the view of a lot of other people, there is going to come a point soon where it really makes no sense from a fiscal standpoint to keep this very -- put aside the fact that it is a recruitment tool, what it represents to the u.s.'s prestige. >> is it still a recruitment tool? secretary johnson: it has been, and in my view, it continues to be a black mark on what this country should be about and we want to close it.
but in addition to that, the numbers are getting so low, it really does not make fiscal sense to keep this usually expensive facility opening keep this hugely expensive facility open in cuba. we ought to have a plan for transferring the remaining detainees to the united states with the appropriate protections consistent with law, and those that can be prosecuted being prosecuted. we should continue with that. eventually, those that can be transferred should betray them's appropriate assurances. it is -- should be transferred with appropriate assurances. it is an issue we have to grapple with. it is costing us aliens of dollars to house these people in cuba. -- it is costing us millions of dollars to house these people in cuba. i know this president is committed to closing guantanamo
bay, and does not want to leave that to his successor, whomever that may be. steve shapiro: thank you, mr. secretary. steve shapiro. many people here know that i work with an organization that deals with national security. sort of the boring chart aspects of domestic security that you live in. one of our major findings is that as you know, there are dozens of domestic entities that are to dissipate in domestic security and intelligence. -- that participate in domestic security and intelligence. many are in your agency. many are not. as you know, and maybe the audience knows, there is
something called "the intelligence community," that is a defined a legal term, that includes approximately 17 of these entities, many of which are on the domestic side including the fbi dea, coast guard, for example. but there are a number of entities performing intelligence that are not included, meaning that the director of national intelligence does not have the ability to coordinate and shape a unified mission plan. those include, in your agency alone, immigration and customs -- >> thank you very much. let's get to the question. steve shapiro: you know where i am headed. could you include five or six entities outside the intelligence community inside the intelligence community?
secretary johnson: i think there is a capability of border security that is unique to border security, such that it does not necessarily need to become part of the larger intelligence community. there are components within my department that have intelligence capabilities unique to our own set of missions. having said that we are, in my department, moving away from the stovepipes. we have a unity of effort and initiative that i announced a year ago to bring more centralized decision-making when it comes to budget acquisition. we have created a joint requirements council and acquisition reform initiative as part of our overall unity initiative. one of the other things we have done, which i think goes to your question, is a southern border campaign strategy, which is
modeled on the combat and command approach. we bring all aspects of dhs, in some part of the country to border security. we now have a joint task force east that is concerned about maritime approaches in the southeast. we have a joint task force west the cornice all the aspects of dhs in the southwest on -- that coordinates all the aspects of dhs in the southwest on border security. it's a more strategic centralized focus on how we do our job. the department has been around just 12 years. i want to see us bring together in a more strategic way our border security efforts, intelligence collection efforts, budget making, acquisitions. that is the direction we are moving in, and we have made a lot of progress.
our top priority is management reform of our department so that it runs and it works more effectively and efficiently for the american people. this is one of the things we are doing to bring that about. katherine harris: effort harris, foxnews. how many americans have -- katherine harris, foxnews. isis has a compelling message. what is the u.s. government's message, and why isn't it more effective? secretary johnson: the last number i saw of those who have left or attempted to leave is 180. the disclosed number is higher around 200.
i am not sure the exact number. the message that isis puts out combines violence -- it has a very western slick appeal to it. it says join us. it brands itself as a form of islam that i believe is illegitimate, and it has a lot of appeal to a young person who may be prone to violence who is looking for a cause. there is a counter message being developed. i think part of that counter message has to be more than just don't do this, this is bad. there has to be a positive aspect to the counter message to show people a different way in which they can channel their energy.
i believe that the message is being developed, but it needs a broader platform. that is fundamental to our overall homeland security efforts. >> the last thing? secretary johnson: the last thing i want to say to this very distinguished group is the overall assessment of where we are and the threat we face -- this is what i say continuously to audiences. we have to find the right balance between basic physical security, whether aviation security border security, even cyber security where absolute cyber security means you go on your system and there is no access to the outside world and you live in a prison. nobody wants that. in a free society, we have to strike the right balance.
the most important part of our homeland security is preserving the things that are great in this country. in every message to the public that i deliver about where we are, i say the public should continue to celebrate to this great country, whether it is july 4 or otherwise, because the nature of terrorism is that it gets nowhere if people refuse to be terrorized. things like the boston marathon -- it is no accident that we came back twice as strong with more runners the following year. there are examples like that all over. in the u.s. military, in oklahoma city. that is true of the greatness of this country. i hope you will continue to encourage the public to freely associate, freely travel, and celebrate this great country. thanks a lot. good night.
[applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> throughout the month we will look back at the cities and towns we have visited this year, with their history and cultural life. tonight, we visit austin, texas. you can watch starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a forum on the threat of isis, part of a national security forum hosted i the aspen -- by the aspen institute. here is retire to general --
here is retired general john allen. general allen: they have problems with their morale. not long after they burned the captain, a number of fighters rebelled against that kind of brutality and they were summarily executed. there was, during the time of kobani, a moment in the campaign when everyone said we are going to lose and it will be a great victory for dash. they were terrified of being sent to kobani because they knew there was only one outcome, being killed. events along the border in syria have rendered a similar
clear message. there are many places where morale is not good. as we strangle the defenses and finances, as it becomes more difficult to maintain operations and fighters, that will create a different outcome. >> general allen serves as a presidential envoy in the global coalition to counter isis. you can watch the full form tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. sunday night on "q&a," kevin or talks about detroit's financial issues and his job overseeing the largest municipal bankruptcy in u.s. history. >> if detroit had taken that $1.5 billion in 2006 and invested in an index fund, the dow jones index, the stock market is now trading almost three times what it was.
not only would they have tripled their money, they could have paid the pensions in full, and gotten what is called the 13th check. there used to be a practice of giving pensioners 13 checks at the end of the year. it could have fixed itself if it had some sober management, some strong leadership, some focused leadership. you can resolve these problems, but it takes a lot of effort. >> sunday night on c-span's "q&a." this month, c-span radio takes you to the movies. here four supreme court cases that played a popular part in movies. "woman in gold." >> we are opening a can and extracting one little worm with a pair of tweezers and then quickly shutting it again.
>> "the people versus larry flynt." >> we have a long tradition of satiric commentary. if jerry falwell can see you when there has been no -- ken sue -- can sue when there has been no libelous commentary imagine who else can. >> "all the president's men." >> who were the lawyers for the case, do you know? >> the burglars have their own counsel. >> the burglars have their own counsel? >> that's unusual. some country club types. >> and "the loving story," about the civil rights case validating
interracial marriage. >> it's a major civil rights case. >> that is the right of the lovings to wake up in the morning or go to sleep at night knowing that the sheriff will not be knocking on the door or shining a light in their face in the privacy of their bedroom. >> four supreme court cases that have played a part in popular movies, on c-span radio. listen to c-span radio at 90.1 fm in the washington, d.c. area, or download our c-span radio a pp. >> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," stephen dinan on the legislative futility index and the work of
the first six months of the 114th congress. and the president's plan to reduce greenhouse emissions. "washington journal" is every morning on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern, with today's headlines, your phone calls, tweets, and facebook comments. host: we are back with the president of freedom house to talk about human trafficking worldwide and in the united states state department, with their latest report out on it last week. worldwide. there is a latest report out last week. why do they do these reports? what is the intent and history? guest: congress decided in the early 2000's with senators down -- senator sam brownback on the left and a senator on the right that created a coalition for the
u.s. government to deal with the problem at home. host: what is the intent of tracking this? guest: it really is to try and deal of the problem. human trafficking is a jargon term. it is best understood as a form of slavery. a person's autonomy is completely removed. and it is interesting that they want to fight that slavery problem. host: how big a problem is it? guest: let's take not a u.s. source, but the u.n., a very conservative estimate, about 21 million people at any one time throughout the world are trafficking victims. anyone thousand people in the world, three of them are human trafficking victims. that is a lot. host: where does it have been
the most and what are the conditions under which it happens? guest: there are many different forms. it could be the sex trafficking of children, does, migrant workers in the gulf, people who never crossed the border, like the disadvantaged castes in india by the millions in an isolated area. when i am asked where the biggest problem areas are, there are three ways to answer. southeast asia and india because that is where many problems are. the gulf, where if you are a woman or a migrant you are not likely to have access to justice. but east asia, it has both sex trafficking and labor trafficking in large numbers. host: explain to our viewers what is going on. guest: it is controversy. some of the most controversial grade given in this report are
about countries in this region. there has been debate in congress about the transpacific partnership. at freedom house, we are a human rights organization and we think the transpacific partnership would be a good idea. but countries like malaysia vietnam, thailand, they are going to be given a soft pass. and there is a question of whether malaysia has been given a light touch in this report. host: right, malaysia was upgraded, if you will. explain the tier process and why malaysia was given an upgraded this report. guest: unique among human rights reports that congress makes that the state department puts out, this one gives group -- gives great two countries. it was developed by harvard scholar and it does change their behavior. the tier three countries are
the lowest, those not making an effort at all. the tier two watch list countries are those that are making some progress, but sliding will stop -- but sliding. tier two countries are making effort, but have a long way to go. and tier one meet most of the standards in the u.s. law and the treaties. host: malaysia was upgraded. guest: it was in the cellar tier three. by many standards, it is very problematic. the under secretary of state who oversees the trafficking office, a very serious foreign-policy specialist. she in a press conference she had last week on july 27 cited six things she was still deserved by in malaysia that -- in malaysia, that they have not implemented changes in their law that they have not implemented regulation, that there launched
-- their law enforcement is we convictions are remarkably low and victims are actually being detained by the government in malaysia, and passports are -- passports of migrant workers are regularly being confiscated, and they still got an upgrade. host: the cnn trafficking in persons report, this is the report we are talking about. the green and orange countries are those that received an upgrade. and the red and yellow countries are those that were downgraded. guest: the ones that disturbed me -- and it is interesting. freedom -- freedom house is an organization that looks at general political liberties. my students at georgetown say i seem to like giving grades two countries. but those that jumped out at me, the most worrisome are the drop of slovenia and europe, so let's
not leave europe out of the picture. it dropped from the top ranking to the lowest, just right the fact that slovenia is a very strong country in terms of press freedoms and civil liberties. and problematic drops, northern africa egypt, sub-saharan africa ghana, and costa rica dropping in central america. that whole area of all the violence that has led people to migrate to the united states. one of the examples of a more solid rule apply has been costa rica but apparently not on human trafficking. in the map, i would say there are what i would call for howlers -- four howlers in terms of the battle. we are talked about malaysia but three dollars -- three others are saudi arabia, which
is where migrants and women are treated less than human. the spec is stand, people are actually -- in uzbekistan, people are actually enslaved into picking cotton. and the other is cuba, being upgraded from a tier 32 is here to contact -- from a tier three to eight years to --to a teiier two. host: let's going into the first call. caller: yellow the talking about climate change and the most pressing issue to me is -- host: we will move on to kansas. do you have a question about human trafficking?
caller: i sure do. we have to lead by example and i'm can learn about what is going on in our -- i'm concerned about what is going on in our own country. the seattle school district is giving iud's to young girls as young as 11 without parental consent and i want to know how you can do find that at as anything other than sex trafficking. guest: i would not necessarily agree about the characterization of that policy, but i would want to know more about that. in the united states, we are setting a good example. but we should not sweep under the rug what is going on here. your colla -- the caller
emphasizes child sex trafficking. we know that children are most in danger in the first 96 hours that they are gone that they are being recruited into child sex trafficking. in the u.s., we often treat a child in prostitution as someone who should be arrested and jailed. under international norms, that is a human trafficking victim. we need to treat them as such. host: how do you define sex trafficking and labor trafficking? guest: labor trafficking is pretty straightforward. if there are conditions of coercion fraud or corrosion -- forced fraud or coercion, then that person is a human trafficking victim. they may be a migrant that crosses borders undocumented,
but if they did not have the intent or they were recruited or involved in fraud or subject to force, then they would be a human trafficking victim. as far as sex trafficking whether they crossed a border or not, everyone who is a minor does not have informed consent. they are a sex trafficking victim. we have focused on labor trafficking being the bigger problem in the world. it has become politically less attractive to focus on the adults involved in sex trafficking, even though host: they are out there. -- they are out there. host: why is that? guest: people's heartstrings are tugged by what happens to kids. my predecessor in the bush administration, john miller, as the human trafficking investor -- investigator, they were
singularly focused on sex trafficking. i think it is important to look at both. host: let's look at what the secretary of state had to say about this at the end of july when this came out. here he is at the state department. secretary kerry: we want to provide evidence and facts that will help people who are already trying to achieve reforms to alleviate suffering and hold people accountable. we want to provide ag incentive for government at every level for people to do all that they can to prosecute trafficking and to shield at risk populations. and in conveying these messages, let me acknowledge that even here in the u.s., we americans need to listen and improve. like every nation, we have a responsibility to do a better job of protecting those who live within our own borders. those whose passports are taken away for them, who are imprisoned for labor purposes or
for sex trafficking. host: what did you make of the secretary's comments? guest: it reflects a traditional americans focus on prosecution on the law. the human treaty that was formed at the same time in 2000 emphasizes profit -- prosecution. it is important to not just find the victims and thinking about giving them shelter and how they can reclaim their lives and giving them dignity. we need to help them become employed. he talks about the problem at home. it is important for the united states to tell the facts about what is going on here in the united they. -- united states. and even the report gives the united states the highest possible grade. tier one countries tend to be rich and have the means to
address the problem better. host: the violence against victims act of 2000 -- let's hear from aaron in ardmore, oklahoma. caller: hello. the supreme court was talking about some stuff with microsoft and with oklahoma health care. a lot of it has been displayed on the web. host: erin, i'm not sure where you are going with this, but we are talking about human trafficking worldwide in this country. cheryl in princeton, new jersey, democrat. caller: when individuals are rescued from those situations to getting them -- there are just
so many steps to getting an individual cognizant of the fact that they have rights. rescuing them is a great thing but how do you get them out? how many steps are involved? i think you know where i'm going with this. guest: i do, and i welcome this. freedom house works broadly around the world. those deaths every empowering someone who is a survivor of human trafficking -- those steps of re-empowering someone new is a survivor of human trafficking are many. they are told by the person that if you go forward, you will be found at fault.
and all too often, that is true that they will be blamed. and even once you have found them, they tend to get housing but they sometimes don't get the full medical care they need. they may get physical care, but they don't get their trauma dealt with. they often have basically the equivalent of posttraumatic stress disorder. the best way for someone to reclaim their dignity is to have a job. and if you drop the ball and do not give them the opportunity to work or get training to do so, then they slide back into the old life or never really prosper. host: are they deported, these victims of human trafficking? host: --guest: one of the elements of the humanitarian trafficking act is the visa. if you find someone and determined it was not their fault that they came to the united states undocumented, that they were a human trafficking victim subject to force, fraud,
coercion, violence they can be given a visa and stay here. and one of the reasons to allow them to do that is to allow them to testify against the bad guy, which is doubly for justice , according to that guy away and also been getting access to justice themselves. host: allow them to stay forever? and other resources to help them get a job -- are their resources to help them get a job? guest: they say for a while, and i think the one thing that deepens this is the ability to become citizens. host: virginia, republican. caller: my name is lowell. i have a friend who has brought all of this to my attention in the last six or seven months. there is a lot of it going on in virginia, which i was completely -- i did not know. guest: that is true.
caller: i'm in fredericksburg, virginia. are things like that happening in fredericksburg? guest: there are. i live in northern -- in nearby arlington in northern virginia. there is a church with a partnership with a local secular anti-human trafficking organization. there were sex victims found in my own town in arlington, virginia, found in a bust in a hotel. there are gangs connected to central america and transnational crime that pursue this. host: in virginia? guest: in northern virginia and throughout virginia. there are cases of sex trafficking, even people recruited out of their high school. sometimes people of color and minorities, sometimes even not. it is more prevalent in places
like florida with apple pickers -- or apple pickers in washington state. but there are some migrant workers where the conditions are so severe that it is human trafficking. host: what is going on in states like virginia that there is this sex trafficking trade happening? guest: the dirty little secret here is that men who buy women and girls for sex create a problem. i know there is a distinction between prostitution at the adult level and the most coarser forms of human -- coercive forms of human trafficking or child sex trafficking, but frankly, it's not cool. it is not ok that males by females -- buy females for sex and there needs to be
something done about that demand. the system slides the male buyers down to wanting to buy children. it is not only the hardened to goes, the pedophile -- the hardened sickos, the pedophile but others that are pulled into this market. host: martin, go ahead. caller: i'm calling to say we are pretty hypocritical as a country on this issue. i don't know much about it, about what is happening in asia. but i know that some of them are winding up here on because -- on visas that certain wealthy people, powerful people, they can pull these strings with the immigration system.
they can get these women from thailand or whatever over here in places like vermont. after a while, you can figure out what is really going on. somebody bought them, basically. guest: three takeaways from the observations. one, the united states in order to not be the critical needs to look at what is going on within its borders at the same time that it is pushing for the trafficking to be go with around the world. secondly it is very important to distinguish undocumented workers from the human trafficking victims. there is a problem of undocumented workers, but it is very important to realize there is a category of undocumented workers who are, in fact, human trafficking victims. we need to distinguish between the two and not sweep them all
into the category of illegal aliens. and the caller references people who are rich whoever you never here. sometimes people who are haitians or some from african cultures are so used to having domestic servants who cannot leave the home and they are subject to violence and coercion that they bring the problem to the united states in some cases. the last thing is truly revolting. diplomats who use diplomatic immunity to shield their heinous mistreatment of domestic servants. there have been dozens of cases of diplomats who have been found to be taking a person from a third country and abusing them. host: are there gangs or groups that exploit the visa system and use it for bringing large
amounts, or more than one person over to this country? guest: there are, and there are two different criminal problems that are related, but not the same. human smuggling, the actual moving of people across borders, and human trafficking, which is the coercion and violation and human right problem. the language is not very helpful. in spanish, it is very ambiguous. that is one reason why it is helpful to think of this as modern slavery. but there are games that will equal across -- gangs that move people across borders. when those people don't know they are breaking the law, or they may be aware that they are moving as an undocumented person but they are subject to violence and coercion, then they become a human trafficking victim under the law. host: joe on twitter wants to know what role the internet
plays in property, specifically the darknet, and how do you counter that? guest: a great question. the internet has really become a platform. early when the trafficking victims protection act was adopted in 2000, there was a focus on sex trafficking that exert -- that occurred on the street. on the internet it is increasingly hard to track down. but the good news is that the internet can be used as a method for helping people. there are apps, places people can contact. it is not only a hotline, but places -- in places that you can call or e-mail, but there are internet places you can text to get help. host: next call, go ahead. caller: thank you for coming on. my question deals with the fact that when we say sex
trafficking, we include as you mentioned earlier, sex workers as well as those who have been trafficked willingly and unwillingly. is there a problem when we conflate those two? guess many get into the sex field because they are in abject poverty. my question is, when we put those two things together, are we taking resources that should be diverted to the sex trafficking part of it and putting it to the sex workers who although they do need help are not as acute as the sex trafficked child? guest: that's a great question.
i have not fear -- figured out the clear line between the good selling of a female and the bad selling of a female for sex. but as in a dolt, it requires force, koran -- force, fraud, and coercion to be trafficking. but let's look at labor. if there was not demand for cheap products, there would not be forced labor. many people who get into that are recruited because of poverty , because of desperation. is it a meaningful choice for women and girls who are pulled into the sex trade and then end up being coerced into sexed trafficking? i will put my reputation on the line, and i am no more or less, that in fact, the existence of a sex trade, and the guys who buy
in cambodia from the united states are typically not punished for it. that is a problem. host: how hard is it to prosecute? guest: it is hard to prosecute traffickers because in large part we have tended to rely on the testimony of a traumatized victim, a victim who is scared of the trafficker, and in sometimes they have a stockholm syndrome attitude toward them. that is why i want to get away from that kind of evidence, like through the financial transactions of the buyer or other witnesses so you don't rely on this traumatized person who should be our first goal to help. host: does this conversation help put the spotlight on this? cnn is doing documentaries about it. guest: there have been some big
changes. since i was a staffer working on legislation we have moved a long way. i shake my head when people talk about awareness. i think we are getting there on awareness. we need the action and enforcement. the key things are these people around the world what they have laws on the books but they are not being implemented. we need to use the awareness. host: they put this together on their website, seven ways to spot someone being trafficked. do you recommend people alerting the authorities, seeing something happening in the airport? guest: well, it's very easy to jump to the conclusions that is not -- that something that is not human trafficking is human trafficking. but there is a campaign department of homeland security has been running in the last few years, the blue campaign, that
suggests the human trafficking victim may be blending into a background. you go into an electric -- and ethnic restaurant and you see people working in the back and you realize they may be sleeping there, they may be a human trafficking victim. it is worth doing her best. claris project runs a national hotline for the u.s. government and that trafficking and resource center has a record of saving people. people have called that have spotted a potential victim and they have been able to mobilize law enforcement in less than an hour to get to the victim. host: in new jersey, maria, independent. you are next. caller: i would like your guests to comment on something that i read recently. with the miners coming in, over three quarters of them --minors
coming in, over three quarters them are male. if a coyote is helping them they are not asked about any criminal record that they have had or gang affiliation. and if they are not adjudicated, they are just first across -- they are dispersed across the country maybe to join other drug gangs. what are her thoughts on strengthening our border and actually cracking down on accepting people's word without investigation? guest: i thank you for a good question. there are some important things to draw from that. there are male human trafficking victims and male kids. we tend to think of girls. we should be careful that we have a system in which we can identify people who really are human trafficking victims. lamar smith, the republican congressman, in the original legislation was skeptical.
he was worried people would be gaming the system when they were undocumented workers and illegal immigrants. we never came anywhere near the ceiling he insisted on being put in the original legislation in terms of the human trafficking victims, in terms of the gaming of the system. at freedom house, we are concerned about the lack of rule of law around the world. the problem is central america have enormous violence and corruption. and that leading to be collateral in the u.s. but fleeing the violence in central america. we need to deal with the root problem. host: rittenhouse, what is your route goal? guest: it is one of the oldest -- freedom house what is your r oot goal? guest: human rights organizations -- one of the
oldest human rights organizations in the world. it started as an advocacy organization. since the 1970's it has put out reports on press freedoms and internet freedoms. since the mid-1990's, the bulk of what we do is working programmatically around the world to assist civil society organizations, pushing their government to reform, or to deal with autocrats who are squeezing their voice. host: we go to harrisburg pennsylvania. sylvia, you are on the air. caller: yes, i was wondering -- can you hear me? guest: yes, we can. caller: the nsa under the patriot act, i was wondering if it was able to help you? guest: i don't think nsa observation can help. for freedom house and on the trafficking issue, i remain concerned that our counterterrorism policy has become an excuse for the
winnowing of civil liberties. that is another area where the united states needs to be an exemplar in her to be a promoter of human rights around the world -- in order to be a promoter of human rights around the world. and that should be of concern, who'd hold the -- who holds the data. host: can the violation of civil rights be a human rights abuse? guest: absolutely. human rights exists here and around the world and when they are ready, that is a human rights abuse. i started out with what portraits to put up in my office. we are focused on human rights around the world, but we have a photograph of martin luther king and current congressman john lewis as civil rights leaders convening and meeting on the human rights movement in the headquarters. i put that up to remind us of the long road from slavery to
the civil rights movement to the problems of relations today as we work internationally. host: carling, independent, good morning. caller: i want to ask your guest what his dance is -- his stance is on legal prostitution. it is never going to be eradicated. it is the oldest profession in the world. so it can be regulated and there can be right given to the sex industry workers. guest: we don't have an institutional perspective, but i have been long on the record since i became ambassador for human trafficking in may of 2007 that i am not for the legalization of prostitution. but let me be very clear. i am in favor of the system they used in the nordic states where
you don't punish the person who is in the sex industry. that is wrong. you should punish the trafficker or the regular pimp. but you need to punish the people who are buying the sex. if you do not deal with the demand, you will never deal with the problem. you should never punish the women and the girls who are in the sex industry, and sometimes the males who are in the sex industry. but i am not personally in favor of legalizing prostitution. host: a lot of questions about the sex trafficking part, but let's talk about the labor. how hard is that to prosecute? guest: it is very difficult to prosecute and if you look at the number of prosecutions around the world, there are many more prosecutions in the sex trafficking area. people are politically motivated
by the salacious problem of sex trafficking. they have not devoted the resources to it. it has been harder for american law enforcement to get their arms around those prosecutions. the human trafficking track sex trafficking versus labor trafficking statistics around the world. since we started tracking those in 2008, there have never been more than 20% of the prosecutions being in labor area around the world. there are many more victims of human trafficking for labor than for sex around the world. here is a fact for your viewers to take away. both sex trafficking and labor trafficking are very important. there are many more labor
trafficking victims, perhaps three quarters of the victims around the world by conservative estimates are labor trafficking victims. but more money is made on the backs of those who are in the sex trafficking industry. if this is about changing the ratio of profit to risk of being punished, you have to accept that. if you look at a place like cambodia or thailand you will see both problems. you will see more labor trafficking, more money made by the traffic or for sex trafficking. host: clearwater, florida audrey. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. i was given the telephone number because i could tell you why i am against voting for jeb bush. i am a republican. i come from a very patriotic background. and i would not choose to vote for jeb bush because because he
has decided to not only get his education, but to spend many of his business years living in mexico and in caracas, venezuela. host: what does that have to do with human trafficking, audrey? caller: i was not calling about that. host: and we are going to move on. we are talking with mark lagon president of freedom house, rest served as ambassador. we will move on to tennessee. caller: i think it is important to have jobs ready for people when they do turn up. we have good programs at chattanooga state where people can learn about technical skills and get their certificate and get on the road toward getting a career thereafter they are found.
but i think the biggest question i would have for the gentleman is, isn't this trafficking related to the actual drug pushing, you know, that goes everywhere? you know, the drugs that are being sold everywhere. guest: that is a good question. in different forms of transnational reform intermingles. what happens is the international criminals look for which thing is easier to do and has a higher profit and is less likely to get caught. we see evidence that has been documented by the office on drugs and crime that there has been nation from solely focusing on drug trafficking to human trafficking when it is more profitable. there is another dimension were thinking about in the sex trafficking, including right here in the u.s. the degree to which drugs are involved in keeping kids and
women. style -- keeping kids and women doci and they actuallyle. self medicate because of the trauma of kick >> tomorrow on "washington journal," stephen dinan on the work of the 114th congress, and a conversation on the president's plan to reduce greenhouse emissions from power plants. our guest are from the obama administration fish are from the climate institute. -- our guests are from the climate institute.
>> this month, c-span radio takes you to the movies. here four supreme court cases that have played a part in popular movies. from this summers "woman in gold ." >> i have problems with it he can of work -- can a form argument. >> to the free speech case from the movie "the people versus larry flynt." >> we have a long tradition of satirical commentary. imagine, if you will, suits against people like you gary trudeau and johnny carson for what he says on "the tonight show." >> the watergate case from "all the president's men." >> these two were assigned.
>> sorry? >> these two were appointed. >> the burglars have their own counsel? >> kind of unusual, wouldn't you say? >> the burglary was unusual. >> and "to the loving story," about the laws preventing interracial marriage. >> we pinch ourselves and say we are handing cash handling a major civil rights case. >> that is the rice -- right to wake up in the morning or to go to sleep at night knowing that the sheriff will not be knocking on their door or shining a light on their faces in the privacy of their bedroom. >> saturdays in august at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span radio. listen to c-span radio at 90.1
fm in the washington, d.c. area, online at c-span.org, or download our c-span radio atpp. throughout the month we will look back at the cities and towns we have visited throughout the year area tonight, we look at austin, texas. you can watch starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a forum on the threat of isis, part of a national security forum hosted by the aspen institute. here is retired general john allen. general allen: isis is losing. when you listen closely, they have problems with their morale. not long after they burned the captain, a number of fighters rebelled against that kind of brutality and they were summarily executed.
by the central government. the central element. there was, during the time of kobani, a moment in the campaign when everyone said we are going to lose and it will be a great victory for dash. they impaled themselves on the defenses of kobani. again, if you listen to telephone and tactical traffic they were terrified of being sent to kobani because they knew there was only one outcome being killed. events along the border in syria have rendered a similar, clear message. there are many places where morale is not good. as we strangle the defenses and finances, as it becomes more difficult to maintain operations and to pay their fighters, that will create additional morale problems. >> general allen serves as a
presidential envoy in the global coalition to counter isis. you can watch the entire program with him tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> this month, c-span radio takes you to the movies. court cases that have played a part in popular movies from "woman in gold." >> the can of worms argument. we are extracting one little worm with a pair of tweezers and quickly closing it shut again. >> to the free speech case from the movie "the people versus larry flynt." >> we have a long tradition of satiric commentary. if jerry falwell can sue on the grounds of public distress, so can other people. they will sue gary trudeau and johnny carson for what he says on "the tonight show."
>> the watergate case. >> who is the lawyer for the five men arrested in watergate? >> these two were appointed to the case. >> they have their own counsel. >> the burglars have their own counsel? >> that's right. isn't it. -- isn't it curious? >> what of the things that can only be done together as man and wife that they can't do their question mark >> we were pinching ourselves that we were handling a major civil rights case. >> it is the right of richard and those who load them to wake up in the morning or go to sleep at