tv First Ladies Influence Image CSPAN February 25, 2014 12:00am-2:01am EST
and if we could have more access to preventive and primary care, so people are getting the care and getting the coaching so they understand how to manage their own health, we all do better. >> thank you. i believe a healthy economy is key to people possible and personal health. if you want to help those that are poor and disadvantaged, the best thing we can do is give them a job and help them to have the opportunity to support themselves. i don't know what governor o'malley talks about with the top down failed system. we need to empower the wealth creators, those who find different ways to do things that government would never think about in the private sector. the bill gates, the steve jobs, the people out there creating wealth. as they create wealth they create job opportunities. as we expand the economy and make sure those innovators can start, and the rich, that is the american dream, that is what capitalism is about.
in utah we try to do that here it we have the lowest cost health care in america, the fifth rated best quality health care in our state. it starts with individual responsibility, l the lifestyles, people taking ownership and try to provide opportunities for health care in the private sector to find those niches and ways to deliver services to people in a free market system. trying to provide opportunities of their for health care in the are to find those niches and ways to deliver some bridges -- services. there are challenges out there, and there's not any silver bullet to find the solution to the problem. i have been critical, and still remain disappointed that when we created the affordable care act, that this body was never consulted.
they do not come to the states could they do not come to the governors. and yet we are the ones on the front lines having to build programs. it is a challenge. what would have been better is if they had said to the states, we have the health care issue,, you young population getting prenatal care, why don't every state develop their own system? as private programs out of the house up the federalism learn from each other? utah exchange, you may like it, you may not like it, but learn from our successes, learn from ur failures, and develop a system in all 50 states. would that not have been a better approach than the one-size-fits-all that came out of washington? the problem that we're having with the economy is because of uncertainty. the small and medium businesses are not investing capital in the
market place because of uncertainty. teve forbes estimates that nearly $2 trillion the -- of capital is not engaged because of uncertainty. quick you make a lot of good points. the point on the states, and the ability to be included in this discussion. what do you say that -- to the critic since that the economic and more favorable for the top, if it is not trickling down to the middle class? their wages have not moved. what do you say to the bush backs of that argument -- pushback on that argument? >> it is kind of like an accordion, it expands and contracts, it brings people up. >> you have seen evidence of that?
>> absolutely. in utah we have been rated, if you're in the low end of the spectrum and all of the other places, it your chances to align the latter is higher in utah. >> i go numbered remix and -- governor nixon -- >> three percent overhead cost, we are working to get those costs down as a country, but generally a program that was highly controversial when it came in, that was on excepted by the public in many ways, is now relied on by seniors and reliable. as the backbone of senior care, there are a lot of products you can buy, but that is number one. we have the unique opportunity in front of us and our time in history. our responsibility now is for the working poor, to give them the same opportunity for health
care that the senior citizens have had under medicare. that is our responsibility. we can talk about the politics of it, we can all do up raises on each side of whether rewrite the elephant or the donkey to work, but there is a unique opportunity with federal resources. we have an opportunity here as states, no requires us to use ur individual power to make it most applicable to our various states. that is why we need to have a tremendous amount of flexibility, and use those resources. we have been talking about technology, and health care needs way more technology. if a lease officer in missouri. r someone, by the time someone
-- by the time you get out of he car to talk to the speeder, he has their entire griddle record on the computer -- criminal record on the computer screen. if that person got hurt, and had to be taken to hospital, the hospital has no idea of their background. they do not know what medications they are allergic to, or what needs to be done. >> it is changing the game already, i could not agree more. >> i have to ask you, i prefer to ride a harley to work. not a donkey or an elephant. i would say that it is a little more safe than a donkey or an elephant. >> please wear a helmet. >> talk to us about this realization he made with medicare medicaid, and your solution. >> we did not take the medicaid
expansion, everyone is covered, because we had a unique transition. i want to go back to the original question. bill had a good point about your supermarket analogy. i use the one about taking on our cell phones and say how many of us in america can tell us what our cell phone plan is? if i did not have unlimited exting, my two teenagers would put me in the poor house. they can tell you that it is $10 to get prescription drugs, they can tell you it is the dean dollars to go to the doctor, but they do not know what it is all about. you talked about it in new hampshire with employees. one of the biggest areas of impact, just medicaid and state employee benefits. you think the concept of the cell phone plan, we have done that in a limited margin in the
past marketplace. one of the few places, corrective eye surgery, most all people had it too expensive. yet today, just about anybody could say about for corrective eye surgery for a couple hundred dollars. i still want quality, so you match it to out there. i need to make a logical decision based on the quality of the references that i get. yet, it can be affordable for someone who is not superrich. most decisions that we make when it comes to health care are elective. i'm not would you shop around if i have a heart attack as to what hospital. years ago, one of my friends have a flex account, and said the great thing for him and his
family was that they decided on a fairly routine procedure they could save $1500 by going to a clinic. we make those sorts of decisions on our phones, but we do not when it comes to health care. we need to move to a patient centered plan, something the states can play an active role in. if we give our consumers more data and information to make those choices, that will be what controls cost. quarks and they will be accountable for that. quarks what we have done a mississippi is look at health care from an economic driver. we are creating a thousand knew the -- a thousand new positions by 2025. we created health care zones where we incentivize the medical community, the same way we do with automobiles, aerospace, and other areas. we need to access the health care industry, rather than take the health-care industry and centralize it on the federal government. those other -- those that are for-profit, or not-for-profit, you do not have to pay taxes, we as the manufacturers come in, and doctors, nurses. we are treating it as a business and asking it to grow so that we
can have more access. i think there is a some play debated element that we have almost forgotten about in the competition but will lower the ost. >> you asked earlier some of the challenges, and i wanted to briefly mention a couple of challenges that sometimes wake the up early in the morning. the first challenge i think all of the governors are going to have, every mayor, chairman, county commissioner, is unfunded liabilities.
they're not under the -- on the books, but being swept under the rug. liabilities that are not funded for the next 10 or 20 years, regarding pensions, health care primarily. it is not being talked about enough in this nation, even among governors. it is going to catch up, and it is catching up in certain pockets of the united states at the time. ny board of directors in the private sector has to list the nfunded liabilities on their finance reports, that has not always been the case in government. we need to do some realistic accounting on unfunded
liabilities. the second issue that continues to be a problem for governors, and we had some consensus yesterday on several issues, the federals came passing new policies with no idea on how it will be executed. the governors, mayors, or others are the ones that have to execute a command there were not involved in that process. we have to find the talent executed, we have to find the systems to executed, we defined the -- have to find the forecasters for the execution. that does not happen overnight, and we are feeling about that -- it is the execution not being discussed which is the discussion. republicans and democrats
learned, they're doing it to our guards. not realizing the impact on the operation of our guard forces. the other is the execution of waivers. there is a consensus in this group, as of yesterday, where please give us a little more flexibility on waivers, and do not put us through bureaucratic time span and hunt to get waivers that may be working in other states. approve them for the states where they're working, without going through bureaucratic time sandwiches far too long to get approval.
we should not have to ask for waivers, we are the states. we are executives, give us the exact -- but civility -- that flexibility. the last thing we are seeing is predictability in some of these rules and procedures. what is happening out of the federal government is that they are changing the rules by the day, and by the minute. therefore, i do not know it is the case with other governors, we are trying to forecast our budget for the future. we do not know the medicaid impact that many more people are finding on medicaid. >> and food stamps? >> woodworking. how many people are coming out of the woodwork. major swags, on guessing what the impact of national policy will be on the states. that will be the great unknown on state budgets over the next
three or four months. the impact of medicaid rules. are people signing up for new insurance, or they just signing up on government insurance that currently exists? that is the state responsibility. those of the four major issues that we as governors, both republican and undercut have to -- and democrats have to find olutions to. >> you are having a meeting at the white house. is that the crux of the conversation, tomorrow? >> the good news among this group is that we are trying to find -- we agreed to disagree on some things. we're agreeing on the issue of waivers, we are agreeing on the guard issue.
i anticipate a very strong message to the president tonight and tomorrow would we have the up rigidity to meet with them to say this is where there is a united rot among all the governors. give us some flexibility. recognize the national guard cost in protecting our national security, it can end up saving you money, so do not deplete us. it is nice among us to find a consensus, and at least make progress toward those areas terry >> what confuses me is that we have been talking about some of these issues for a long time. the uncertainty of not knowing the rules, and not knowing where the federal money is going, if it is going eric >> -- going.
>> will business start dropping insurance? we would like to have businesses ay for insurance, subsidized the insurance of their mployees, but we do not know how they are going to go you know what, i will ask michael employee to go on the national healthcare act, and we will subsidize them to a certain amount, but now it is there is possibility. no one really knows what the impact of that will be, but from a financial standpoint, i'm eager going to see a lot of businesses do that, and it will change the whole framework of health care in the united states. recognizing people going to a 30 hour week? >> there are people growing up to only a certain amount of employees, and others reduce the hours. >> there was a story on the news in ogle the city about a man who was building a storm shelter. we had a terrible storm in may
of last year, so hit a storm shelter company, and he had grown into 70 employees. ith the new mandates under the affordable health care act, his health insurance costs were going to go up $250,000. he dropped his employees back to $50,000, and then all of a sudden it got delayed, and he had to let all of them go. that stopped his business from growing. it had the first affect, of what you're talking about a moment ago. we believe that governors should lead the way. governors have to find solutions to the problems. a lot of issues not being solved, we have to solve the problems coupled with a balanced budgets, work on education, and growing the economy and creating jobs and health go policy and infrastructure and energy, and creating business climate so that we can be competitive with
other foreign countries and the states in our nation. look to the governors, we have great solutions for health care issues, for education, for the work first -- force. address the issues that are important to americo when we feel like there is a lot of inaction in washington dc. >> ayako whatever the chair says. one thing within all of this, we are making progress. every day this country is getting a little bit better. not as fast as we would like, and we can see all of the mistakes we are making, but every day the world gets a little bit better. i see a level of integration between the states, we have a lot of different companies that are widespread when they put things together. sierra nevada spaces systems is working in 18 different states, if i remember correctly, different pieces.
they build and deliver space systems, they're taking over the space area, and they're working with vendors all over the country. we need to work together to get that project done with my fellow governors. we sometimes forget how well we work together. i'm going to guess there's not a state in the country that does not have a manufacturing presence. that ability of the country to work together, the ability of us to fix the infrastructure issues, whether it is education, transportation, we often have a lack of infrastructure, but the governors will sit down together and work it out. matter what it is, no matter
what the industry, we will try and change whatever the rules of regulations are, and celebrate the process. instead of doing it sequentially, what would take seven years, will take one year. we should recognize that we are being offered a chance to work with the white house on a direct basis and these agencies, and be more effective. > what are you expecting the financial impact of marriott -- legalizing their 10 will be on your state? >> more significant than most of us thought, but still early to see if the record -- if the restaurant business recognizes flow through. we're not sure with the repeat business is going to look
like. ne of the things that we are focused on is to not see this as a windfall, it is just something to look into. will we have a lot of kids that live off the track and we will need resources to put them in the right direction? looking at people with the attitude that marijuana consumption is harmless. we're trying to regulate it as vigorously as we do our call. - alcohol. we want to have the same sort of attention, not to take all of the windfall money and become dependent on it. >> we did a number of special reports about the business of
marijuana. it was the leading, the highest rating program safety had ever een. we're all looking at this and saying what is going on in the country? do you have an estimate in terms of the financial impact? >> for the first full 12 months we think that the tax revenue will be about $140 million, and the business itself only be about $1 billion. that is better than expected, but where to take it with a grain of salt. >> as we wrap up, i know you are eeting with a number of aboard people for the rest of the day, and you're going to the white house tomorrow. as you go around the horn, and come up with one important
solution or change the mower impact that you would like to come from the white house and congress this year, or the next two years, what would that be? we like to hear from all of you, hopefully you have an answer to hat. i will begin with you, sir. >> we have to raise the minimum wage. there is a principle the bible, if you work hard, and you're raising children, you should not have to be in poverty. pope francis talked about an economy of inclusion not exclusion. if we want consumer purchasing power, 77% of our economy, raise the minimum wage. >> it is a terrible mistake to follow the pentagon's
recommendation and cutting the ational guard. the guard has been really instrumental in fighting these wars in both iraq and afghanistan, and now that we are seeing dramatic cut backs in the military, the regular army has increased her medically. the size of the guard has stayed about the same. we need to keep the garden not cut guard -- the guard and not cut the guard. it is something that the governors are united on, and we do get is critically important, and we want the president to know that it would be a terrible mistake for him to cut the national guard in his budget. >> across the board would need the federal government to give us more flexibility to appreciate the way we want to run our programs in this country. there is a difference between nebraska and new york, between
carolina and new hampshire. more flexibility in every program. >> i'm an old appropriations chair, i still think the biggest deadweight on our economy is the ederal budget deficit. i think the economy is strong enough now that the president needs to get deadly serious about solving that problem, getting into the entitlements discussion, and provide the leadership we need there. it is absolutely going to continue to kill us unless we face up to it. >> overall, it is more about than just talking to the president. part of the uncertainty is the dysfunction that occurs in washington dc right now. we are almost always going to default on our debt. both out and the real world like
hat happens in states, because somehow we have one aside budgets to get things done. we need to do more of that washington dc, not just yelling at one another. >> can you point to one or two things that are the issues in terms of the barriers? is it just too much red tape? why can we not move forward with solutions, and unlimited this ncertainty -- eliminate this uncertainty? >> i had an undersecretary of the agriculture out last week seeing how could we actually moved some work off of federal
lands. it is a different world with an intensified rhetoric, and not wanting to work. we figured out a way to actually ut back, make record investments in college ducation, and leave $300 million in the bank. we found some of the common ground as we were looking forward. i do not think washington dc right now collectively is trying to find areas of common problem -- around to move forward. >> i think there is too much playing of who is king of the hill, and that gets in the way of finding solutions. we has governors go back to our own hell, and we have to solve problems -- hill, and we have to solve problems. we are partners with the government, and we have to be treated as such. we have something to say, we
have examples, we have opportunities. the concept of federalism as states being partners, kuwait: government, is not present in this congress. >> we need more flexibility, especially in the revelatory and permitting areas. that is something we would like to see. >> thank you for dinner. we ate a lot. maybe not elegant, maybe not 20, write a worse, that is what we do -- maybe not a donkey, maybe not a an elephant, but write it worse, that is what we do -- ride a horse, that is what we do. i do not see the reality of the lipservice and approach --in approach. we see undue regulations, and we see a dismissiveness toward what
states are trying to do. we live in our state, we cannot pass the buck in terms of budgets, we cannot kick the can down the road, we have to get things done. we see states taking great environmental steps that are being dismissed by the federal government at their peril. >> i will echo, i think the federal budget deficit, and the uncertainty surrounding the debt ceiling, and the death or wind if the budget will be -- if/when the budget will be passed is not good. >> i spend most of my days sorting out overregulation and these issues when we know our own backyard, because nevada is 78% federal land. >> on the energy policy, we know with the propane shortage it was a great wake-up call. we need to have a national
energy policy that embraces all of the above. it is a national security issue as well as an economic issue. with transportation, we are all wondering what is next. >> education is the best economic development tool we have. whether it's preschool, high school, quarter of all it is -- colleges, all of it. we need to support the families of the military, as we wind down in afghanistan. i think everybody here has done a good job in that area, we want to be supportive to get these folks back into their day jobs and communities, that we support them all the way home. >> write-down the things that we heard around the table, get more flexibility, and we are worried
about national debt. if things are going well in the state, it was a call and ask -- give us a call and ask how that s working out. see if it was something that they can assist us with as president. >> communicate. >> by this time he has been communicated with fairly thoroughly, after listing to all of our advice. -- listening to all of our advice. this is a big country, the issues are complex and difficult. the one thing you hear from all of us is that we can cut this out into 50 bite-size pieces come and as well as to assist with implementation. >> become part of the conversation. >> flex ability, transportation, let us unleash our energy resources. i think we need to get clarity
rom the white house on the issue of addiction and mental health, based on previous comments that have been made on drugs and other things, and alcohol. the addiction issue and the mental health issue for our state is another very serious hallenge for us. i'm worried about the next generation and the brain capacity. to me that is something we cannot ignore. >> it is interesting that that was a big piece on the
agenda. >> i would boil it down pretty quickly, give us the flexibility, and the predictability from the government. call us because -- before you, with a new policy that is going to affect us. allow us giving them but because i am completely different than missouri of our wisconsin --, or wisconsin, and this is not one size at all because our needs are different. >> all the initiatives that we want to embark on to our -- grow our economy, i would ask for the president to push for the
marketplace fairness act. we're losing sales tax revenue to internet sales. we get it through the house, have the president signed it, that is revenue that we can put toward higher education, to our kids, to our roads and bridges. to be competitive economically. >> to the president and to congress, we are a strong and resilient people. we have challenges in education, and infrastructure, health care. as robert frost said, the best way out is always through. we have to work together and we will get there. >> i would thank the president for showing more flexibility than either the past two administrations. i would ask them to lift more women out of poverty given making sure we rage the minimum wage. -- raise the minimum wage. it is one of the biggest factors for women living in poverty, so i would ask him to get the job done. >> i would repeat all of the things that i agree with that
have already been said, i think it's time to get a deal done with the interest rates. maybe that money, some of that tax money, can go into a loan fund for infrastructure that elps us to invest in our ridges, and roads. > we do appreciate the president and vice president meeting with all of the governors. there are a lot of great ideas, good solutions to problems, continued to ask for flexibility. we have innovative solutions to problems facing americans. where a blending those
solutions, give us the flexibility. as we see in federal rules and regulations, the best way to help people get out of poverty is to give them a good paying job, in the skill sets that they need. from an energy producing state, i would like to see something move. >> i want to say that i do not know that we came up with the solutions to fix all the problems, but getting everything on the table, making specific suggestions is the beginning. thank you for having me, good luck in your meeting tomorrow. hank you everyone. we will take a five minute break and move to the governors only session.
live coverage at 10:00 eastern. >> later the house and senate veterans affairs committees will hold a meeting on disabled military veterans. we'll have live coverage tarting at 2:00 eastern. >> c-span, we bring public affairs events from washington to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events and offering complete gavel to gavel coverage of the house. we're stan.
created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and funded by your cable provider. like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. >> representative john dingle, the longest serving member of congress announced he will retire at the end of this term. he was first selected in a special election in 1955 taking the seat his father held for more than two decades. we spoke with a reporter from the detroit news about his etirement. we have marisa schultz, the washington correspondent for "the detroit news." a growing list of members announcing they are not running again. why has dingell decided to call it quits? >> he has decided it is time for him to step down. he wants to spend more time with his family. but he has been suffering from mobility issues, a bad back, hip surgery.
he has been upset with the way congress operates. he looks back to the time when there was bipartisanship and people got along in congress, and he laments it. during the shutdown, he took to he house floor and he was so angry he said the american people could get better representation from monkey island at the zoo, and that ignited cheers from the house. there is a level of frustration from him. >> can you speak but his major accomplishments? >> he has authored major pieces of legislation. he helped medicare pass. he was part of the clean air act, the endangered species act. he was one of the original authors of the affordable care
act. his father, whom he replaced, was a huge advocate for universal health care, and john dingell made this his priority throughout his career. >> he has been called the dean of the house. why did he have that title, and did it come with any house leadership responsibilities? >> he is the leader, the longest serving member of the house, and he did have a leadership responsibility with the energy and commerce committee from 1981 until the 2000's. he was either the chairman or the ranking member of the energy and commerce committee, and he was worried powerful and was able to use that position to usher in some of this legislation. >> he was first elected to the house in 1955 and succeeded his dad.
what impact did his parents have on him in becoming a member of congress? >> he talks about his dad often. his dad was a new deal democrat, and he really believed in public service. when john dingell took over, he carried that with him. i mentioned earlier health care. his dad really wanted universal health care. john dingell made that his legacy as well. >> with his leaving, has he revealed what his plans might be after he leaves the house? >> i have a feeling he will still be involved. he has many supporters in his district, and his wife, deborah dingell, is interested in the seat, so i have a feeling he will be very much involved in politics and public service. >> he currently represents michigan's 12th district. ann arbor and dearborn. his wife is expected to run to
succeed him. why is that, and what is their political relationship like? >> they are a team, a really powerful political couple. debbie dingell is always at his side. she is with him at events and fundraising, meeting with local ommunity officials, and she is his confidante. it is expected that she is interested in the seat, i imagine that she would run for the seat, and john dingell would do everything in his power to help her win that seat. >> thanks for joining us. >> thank you very much. >> we'd like to get your trauths on the retirement of john dingle. yoin the conversation on facebook. -- join the conversation on facebook. >> house arms services committee talked about the u.s. mission in
>> on behalf of our members worldwide, i would like to welcome our speaker, and those of you attending today's event. our headed table -- our head table includes our guest speaker as well as our robinette journalistic members. after our guest speech oncludes, we'll have a twice genetic answer -- we will have a question and answer portion. fleas stand briefly as your name is pronounced. senior editor, air force
agazine. associate editor, inside the rmy. reporter, global security newswire. deputy communications director, house armed services committee, and guest of the speaker. reporter, bloomberg news, and a past president of the national press club. wife of chairman mckeon. the buffaloes news, chairman of the speaker committee. getting over the speaker, host of the speakers committee, who organized today's event. director of the house armed services committee, and guest of the speaker.
publisher of stars & stripes. united states navy, retired. editor of cq roll call, executive briefing defense, and chair of the national press club's read above the spread -- freedom of the press committee. congressman buck mckeon is our guest today to talk about the .s. effort in afghanistan. a recent gallup old says that for the first time in the nearly 15-year-old war, more americans think 2001 invasion was a mistake, and to get -- then think it was the right action.
but mckeon says the duties and afghanistan are far from complete. he says president obama has not isclosed is true plans for afghanistan, and has turned his focus elsewhere. he has also been critical of president obama possible as commander-in-chief, saying that a president must better communicate with the troops and the public that obama has. chairman mckeon has announced he will not seek a 12th term in congress. he cited gridlock on capitol hill. during his 21 years in congress, mckeon has been an advocate for increased spending for the pentagon. at a recent armed services committee meeting, the budget pressures have hamstrung the ilitary. forcing leaders to cut strength,
readiness, and capabilities when they can least afford it. please join me in welcoming to the national press club chairman buck mckeon. >> thank you very much. thank you for having me, thank you for being here this afternoon. i'm glad to have my wife here with me. she was introduced as my wife, she is also a mother of six, and a grandmother of 30 -- and a great-grandmother of one. hank you for giving me the opportunity to say a few things today that i think need to be said, that i think are very important. for nearly 13 years now the united states has been at war in afghanistan.
we are there because afghanistan was used as a launchpad for attacks that killed americans. we have a responsibility for the safety and security of our citizens. we have arisen possibility, and we will not abandon that esponsibility of a no matter how tough the fight is. the polls say that the support or afghanistan has dropped below 20%. if you listen to the news you will hear about a hopeless ampaign to win the unwinnable. hat is if you hear about it is all -- at all. the american people know two things. they know that the war is going badly, and they know that their neighbors oppose us being there. however, i am sure you have
heard it that, just because i know it of it doesn't make it so. neither polls, nor the press paint the full picture. they never tell the full story. that story is a hopeful one. not blindly so, but hopeful nonetheless. traditionally it is right and proper that these stories come from the commander-in-chief. he has talked about afghanistan only a handful of times during his presidency. each time, president obama has raised his run for the exits, or pitied our wounded, instead of lauding the compliments of our troops, and the importance of the mission they were given to fight. so the president of the united states will not give the speech, so i will. in 2001 after the u.s. -- worst attack since pearl harbor about we invaded afghanistan. the very act of toppling the taliban regime was both strategically and
technologically astounding. in three months time america and her allies not down a regime 7000 miles away in landlocked mountainous terrain. we dropped soldiers into a combat those with a brutal climate, with no support other than by air, and a tough determined enemy fighting on his wn turf. we asked them to supply lines that any logistics officer would call him possible. -- impossible. e not only succeeded, they kicked the taliban and down in three months. that is less than a semester to their college friends back home. nd we asked them to do
something even harder. make no mistake, an insurgency is the hardest type of war a democracy can fight. holding a new country study, with insurgents hiding among innocents can take years. it took the british 12 years to put down the continent tests -- communists. the agency and northern ireland took decades to resolve. they are finally nearing the finish line. these fights can be one, but they take time, patience, and treasure. and all of those things, in short supply with voters. i will not sugarcoat it. the american people are sick and tired of this war. it is there well, not the enemy cost -- enemy's that will determine afghanistan phosphate -- afghanistan's fate. not million dollars more out arms, or aircraft carriers.
here are the questions we have to ask ourselves. is afghanistan less of a threat to the united states than it was 13 years ago? is in a better place than it was 13 years ago? is america safer than it was on september 10, 2001.? take a good hard look at those questions, and the answer is a esounding yes. i cannot figure out why the president has not taken credit for these big worries. the games since 2000 and nine re threefold, strategic, diplomatic, and moral. let's talk about strategy for a moment. i think it was the height of foolishness to announce a surge,
and in the very same brass of the end for the search. the idea of military strategy being done by white house staffers then military planners is worthy of a head examination. think that when our generations sharpest counterinsurgency mind asked for more troops, give him more troops. even though the way that this white house has won this war has been outrageous, with white house staffers telling four-star generals their business, there has been unmistakable progress. that progress has come on the backs of our troops. specialist ty carter woke up one night to find it out was being overrun by 300 enemy ighters.
he not only stood his ground, he ran over 300 meters to save a wooded -- 100 meters to save a wounded soldier. he shouldered him and carried him back, over a football field, through 300 feet of grenades and bullets. here we think it is a big deal when somebody returns a pig staying -- a pigskin 100 yards for a touchdown when 11 men are trying to tackle him. sergeant dakota meyer was ambushed on patrol in southern afghanistan. he learned that the americans and soldiers were caught off. he joined with a fellow marine, and broken the ambush, just the two of them. he knocked down anyone who stood in their way. janice m a n afghanistan or better was walking down the road with an american intelligence officer, went to tell a band
partners -- went to taliban fighters snuck up on them. the taliban and not -- martin -- marked him for death, but he survived and was reunited with his american friend last october as one of america's newest residents. it is a national disgrace -- it is a national disgrace that a [applause] trader like edward snowden is a household name and icon are -- ty carter and dakota meyer are not. those men are the muscle and fiber of the strategy that is working. those men did what some would consider impossible. there stories should be told and
retold over and over again. not just those heroes, but our troops as well. in 2009, coalition forces have lost entire sections of the map to a resurgent taliban. he taliban were back, a deadly enemy that would burn their entire country to the ground if it meant keeping a woman out of school. the taliban and came back, but so did our coalition. when the annual summer offensive kicked off in 2012, we were ready for them. they threw everything they had at us, and we stopped them cold. the taliban and were dug into the cities like text. we booted them out. the enemy failed in every guard -- regard to achieve their military objective drink the last several offensive.
here is the tech talk me shift that has happened since 2009. the blossoming afghan national security forces, or the ansl. i had a long talk with the manager at of training the security forces. he told me a story. an american sergeant that was training of afghan counterparts as end up with four rounds into their weapon. the afghan soldiers did not know what four was. they worked down, they were illiterate, they had not had the opportunity that we had to get an education. education was just one of the infinite problems we've based standing up a new army and a new police force. some of our instructors expressed outright hopelessness
that the afghans would survive first contact with the enemy. what a difference a couple of years makes. that same year we educated 70,000 afghans up to the third grade level. they can carry their schoolbooks, they are happy with the opportunity to get education. and the ansl has doubled in size. 95% of conventional operations, and 98% of special operations are done by the a nsf -- a and s al. they are there to be back in enemy that is geographically constrained, and still smarting from the clobbering that our surge forces gave them. during the 2014 wide -- fighting season, they made gains, they built on those gains, and they secured those gains.
these guys were taking their eb steps not five years ago. they're holding onto a territory that took a 50 nation coalition to win. they are capable, they can take the fight to our shared enemy, and they are ready for that fight. the taliban can mount attacks, but that is about it. they are not trying to capture well defended target, because they cannot hold them. the afghan security forces have a numerical edge. the taliban and does not try to hold onto territories anymore, because the afghans make it hurt when they try. here is what it all means. the biggest uncertainties we face in afghanistan or no longer military. their diplomatic, and they are moral. it is hard to understate the successes of the past several
years. it may 2012 president obama and president karzai signed a strategic harder ship agreement. we declare them a major non-nato ally, and the afghan ratified the agreement with both houses of parliament. also, in may of 2012, the international community got behind the effort. they pledged to for support afghanistan through 2017. the wider international community declared its support afghanistan with a promise of $16 billion worth of assistance. one of the tougher nut to crack has been afghanistan. it is no secret that they have
some shared history. there is no need for rose-colored glasses here. relations between the u.s., pakistan, and afghanistan are finally starting to get some progress. they have both the knowledge that stabilities of both their entries in symbiotic. problems in one, means problems in the other. relations between the two countries are thawing. that started with president karzai's visit last september. official state is its are well and good, but what i really am watching is the military to military relations. pakistan and afghanistan have gone the role in -- the ball rolling their. their relationship has improved slowly but surely. i'm just as happy to see the same meetings held at lower levels.
we have a long ways to go, but these baby steps have made the way for giant leaps down the road. with that progress in mind we have a real problem heading our way with the bilateral security agreement. that agreement is the legal framework we need to continue the mission there, until the mission is finished. i told you that ansl had made some incredible gains. that is true, but i also told her that this is a force that is only five years old. without our support, and we support includes presence and money, the afghan security forces can execute. the remaining gaps are not unrealistic for a five-year-old force. filling the gaps does not mean that america's sons and daughters will be stuck on the
front lines forever. president karzai has refused to sign the agreement that allows us to provide that support. that is a problem. the afghan people have been amazing allies, resident karzai has not. let's not in our hopes on one man. especially one man who was packing his bags in a few months. the 2500 leaders from all around the country have overwhelmingly supported the bsa. polls show that 70% of afghans want us to stay. they have not forgotten how quickly we left after the soviet occupation, and how that ended. there is also an election coming up, and most of the presidential candidates support a long-term agreement with the united states. you do not need to look past
baghdad to see how quickly aims can unravel. we went into afghanistan to do a job. americans do not like starting things we do not intend to finish. no matter how hard it may be. locking down that tsa is the last day diplomatic step toward getting that job done permanently. it is vital to keep the coalition going, i am sure the lack of a bsa will be the subject of an intense discussion at the nato ministerial meeting this week. finally, we owe it to ourselves to have a frank discussion about the moral responsibility and afghanistan. the al -- taliban are cruel, barbaric, and their kind has no place in the 21st century. if we abandon them as we did
before, we paid the price. america, leads the world. leadership has responsibilities. there are times when the democratic -- democracies must take a look inward. there are times when we must come to terms with the burden of our values. afghanistan is one of those moments. do we step back and abandon afghanistan to the wolves? do we still have a moral responsibility to the people there? does our humanity still compel us to help us -- help people of know nothing but war for four decades? the market people are prudent people. they know we have problems here at home. they know we are buried under a mountain of debt. but they are also a
compassionate people. we have not just made strategic and diplomatic gains of about moral gains as well. it is worth asking, is there anything in afghanistan that gives us hope? you are darn right there is. [applause] the improvements in social development made over the past decade have finally even these good people a chance. afghanistan has made the largest percentage gain of any country in the world in basic health and development indicators. for example, in the year 2000, male life expectancy was 37 years old. today, it is 56. in 2000, fewer than five percent of afghans have cell phones, now over 60% do. including 48% of the women. in 2003, there were just 450
health facilities in all of afghanistan including hospitals. now there are more than 1800. only the privileged few had internet a decade ago, today over 65% of the population has access to an internet connection. nearly half -- .5 million of them have facebook accounts. when the taliban ruled, only to international airlines dared to fly in. now there are 12 that service most major cities. i visited afghanistan many years ago before the surge really kicked in. i could not go to the city in the south of it was a taliban stronghold. i went back after the surge, and the city was in radley hands. the marines had done their job. while we're there we help to open is cool. not a school like our kids get to go to here, but build out of
adobe and tents, with i've hundred excited children -- 500 excited children, about a third of them girls. that is a memory i will hold onto it for the rest of my life. nearly 8 million children are attending school. that is up from one million when we went in. today there are over 13,000 general education schools. the taliban and beliefs always dependent on low education, particularly in the rural areas. the old afghanistan, the one the taliban ruled is crumbling. in 2002, there were only 32 miles of paved road, now there is around 7500 miles. in 2001, the voice of sharia was the only news source. now there are 70 tv stations, with most of the population within rod castro range.
illiteracy, isolation, and poverty are the chains the taliban uses to bind the people in submission. but afghanistan is starting to break those chains. extraction of oil and precious metals account for 45% of their gdp within a decade. their rural population is gaining access to roads, electricity, and your geisha networks. let's -- what is changing slowly in afghanistan itself. afghans do not want what the taliban is selling. their ineptitude and governance, their heavy hand, their brutal treatment of the afghan people only quickens their slow arc to the grave. one progress that gives hope
this women's rights. they can attest to how things used to be. she was forced to marry at 14. she fled that marriage so the taliban and made an example of her. her nose and ears were cut off. she was left in the mountains to die, but was rescued by the army. today she is a grim reminder of what these men do when they run things. the taliban and through women out of schools and out of work, around one quarter of government employees work within in 1996. that was until the taliban decreed it was immoral for women to work. today they are constitutionally protected, and have seats in parliament. many presidential appointees are required to be female, and women have crept back up to 20% of the workforce.
there are now 40,000 young women attending public and private universities, technical institutes with more and rolling each year. we have had women from our congress, most of them from the armed services to midi that have gone to afghanistan and met with the same women, and seen the progress. they have seen the stories that these women are scared of the taliban coming up as they would be the first was killed. there are still huge cultural challenges here. afghanistan is not going to turn into sweden overnight. when i visited recently, the general made a point to stick with me. he said his visit -- it is absolutely essential to make the taliban carry the baggage of their history. you cannot bridge the gap between the taliban and the civil society.
that civil society is beginning to bear fruit, and the taliban are running out of time. the americans have the clock the mother he has the time -- that he has the time. and now the afghans have the time, and that is why you're seeing a desperate taliban flirting with political settlement. at some point, a decade of opportunity in afghanistan is going to catch up the taliban. it will catch them, it will blow right past them, and the taliban will be left in the dost. -- dust. there is a moral charge here, and the american people have answered it. we should be proud that we have answered it. i do not want to sound like i am feeding silver linings, especially when they are one warranted -- unwarranted. there's no question that afghanistan is still a monumental challenge. when i find astounding is that
the president will not acknowledge these big areas. i'm astounded he will not give this speech. why on earth will you not take credit for his own strategy, his own success tories -- success stories? you will get a timeline praising the end of the iraq war, they take credit for leaving iraq. you can ask iraqis how that has been going for them. in startling contrast, there is nothing special or prominent about what our troops have achieved in afghanistan. what president once referred to as the good war. go to whitehouse.gov/afghanistan. you will see a notice saying sorry, the page you're looking for is not found. does the white house really think they cannot have -- pretend a war is not happening.
less than 30% of americans thought it was a mistake. just last week, and for the first time ever, gallup found the majority of americans now believe the war was in error. counterinsurgency is have two fronts, the one out there, the one right here. the troops have held their line out there, the president has not held the line here. by letting the public support for the war in road, the president has caused himself political capital that could have been used to solve a number of points. there were even times when the president openly campaigned against his own strategy. he floated trial balloons about
abandoning afghanistan, and sent his political operatives out to so fatigue and hopelessness. our troops have sweat and blood to bring the fight to a finish. so has a multinational coalition, so have the afghan people. some have suffered, some have conquered, some have felt lost, some have felt victory, and some have the incredible odds. it is not much to ask that every once in a while we hear about these accomplishments from our commander in chief. we deserve to hear about the steps forward, we deserve to hear and understand why we fight. i spent 20 years in congress, i understand that politics can affect the judgment. but placing politics above duty is tragic. it is tragic, and it is
unforgivable. the american people and their armed forces deserve better. if the troops fight for the mission abroad, the president better fight for their mission here at home. anything less is a dereliction of duty. this country was built on the backs of great challenges. things we did not want to experience, things we did not want to do. afghanistan is one of those challenges, but let's look at the results. the president has sustained international support for this
new democracy. he went out and found billions in aid to help lift them out of despair. he kept the coalition of countries willing to send troops to fight with us, and as a direct result of this military strategy, afghanistan is freer, and america is safer. that should be a source of right, of these -- a piece of president obama's legacy. not some shameful burden never to be spoken of. mr. president, you may have stumbled there. but a safe and secure afghanistan is within our grasp, do not let it slip away. [applause] thank you. >> thank you chairman mckeon. what can congress do to ensure that afghanistan stays secure? what can you do legislatively to challenge the president's role-playing -- withdrawal plan? >> those are things that we're working on every year. we pass a nice little defense authorization act of and we will be addressing those issues i am sure in that bill this year.
we have the secretary of defense going to the nato meeting this week. he is going with a number of troops we would leave behind to continue on the mission of supporting the afghan troops. i think it would have been much better if the president had made the decision, and given that number. i visit with many of our nato allies, they ask me where do we go from here? they have already made commitments, they need to have that number established. i think congress can address that in our bill, and i think we can continue to apply pressure. we want the same and, we want the same goal, we want the safe, secure, free afghanistan. we are just whining over -- fighting over the strategies of
how that happens. >> your speech doesn't advocate or described a clear u.s. mission in afghanistan posed 2014. do you call for a continued counterinsurgency mission, a larger footprint, or a smaller force to do the narrow missions envisioned by president obama? >> the president is the commander in chief, and it is up to him to make the final determination. i have talked to the general, there is a very clear plan, and all he is asking for is
sufficient number of u.s. and nato troops to remain behind to support the areas that i mentioned in the speech. the intel, the logistics, and angst that the afghans are not yet able to do them for -- for themselves. for the next couple of years, to provide those things so that when we leave, we do not do what happened in a rock, and leave the country to falter and have all of the problems that we see coming from them on a daily basis. it is just a matter of a limited number of troops behind to support, and to sustain that effort. i think we have that all outlined, and the general has that, i know yes talk to the president about that. -- he has talked to the president about that. that is what i hope for going forward. >> you went and -- mentioned white house staffers telling the generals their business. can you cite some examples that concern you?
>> i said it has been reported, or stated, and i am reading a book that mentions that. [laughter] by secretary gates. >> i guess secretary gates is a good source. >> i wasn't in those briefings, but he was. read the book. [laughter] >> what do you feel the united states learned most about warfare, and about how to employ the might of the u.s. military
in the service of national objectives in well over a decade of fighting in afghanistan? >> i have been asked a few times, what have we gotten for our money? we have made tremendous advances in many different ways. we have learned how to fight a counter urgency fight -- counterinsurgency fight. we have made terrific gains in saving our wounded warrior's lives. in wars before this one, many people would have died that are now living. we made great gains in making their lives more full and complete. the country has really rallied around our wounded warriors and their families and loved ones. in many different ways we have shown tremendous growth in the medical field. also, in intelligence gathering, in the ability to use drones to keep our people out of harm's way, we have drones in the air, we have them on the ground, we're are able to discover and disable and dismantle ied's. there are a lot of things that have been very tough for us that we have made great gains in. ied's continue to be a problem around the world. it is a great source for terrorists, and what we have learned in this time has been
very beneficial in helping us around the world. >> you mentioned drones. american reliance on battlefield drones has become highly controversial. what would you say to those who say that the cost in civilian casualties has been so high that the overreliance on drones has harmed u.s. national security by turning civilian populations against us? >> there is no question there have been civilians killed, but there have been civilian skilled in every war that has ever been
fought on this planet. and i would say probably fewer in this war, all you have to do is look at what is happening in syria, egypt, india, and the ukraine, places were civilians are being killed. all of that focuses on one type of drug, there are many drones that are being used. there are small ones that troops can carry that will help them to see over the next hill and no one to expect. -- know what to expect. there are some that help them take the enemy on the next field. we would rather have our enemies die than our troops. anything that helps carry out that mission is something we should be happy that we have. i never want to send our troops into a fair fight, that doesn't make sense. >> as a backer of the iraq war,
do you think that conflict diverted attention away from afghanistan, and gave the taliban the chance to regroup? >> i think it probably did. it is very difficult to fight two wars at the same time. but i think another thing that secretary gates mentions in his book as we probably should not concentrate so much on the negative, but on establishing the fact that we are where we are, and what are we going to do going forward? i think barack was helped to be -- iraq was felt to be an important mission by the president. we carried out that mission, and i believe that we won the war, and on the -- have not done well with the peace. i am hopeful we do not make the same mistakes in ending iraqi involvement -- in afghanistan,
that we made in iraq. >> why is it worth even one more u.s. service member dying in afghanistan to stay there, when we are working with the government that at times seems to be our enemy, in fighting an insurgency that almost certainly will not be vanquished on the battlefield? >> i think i talked about that a little bit in the speech. i think that is the problem. our young people out there need to be told what their mission is, why they are fighting, why they are risking their lives over there. the cause is just.
to think that we are doing all of this with the afghan government, we're talking about one guy, president karzai. the loyal leaders that represent all of the people the nation strongly want us to be there. karzai has political problems, and vision, goals, whatever. we cannot hide the everything -- tie everything to one man. this is a nation of any people, and we need to concentrate on the good things that we have been able to accomplish there. i do not want to see one person -- i attended three funerals in one week, and i can tell you the stories about each of those young men. i will just say one thing, their families felt like what they were doing was worthwhile. if they heard some good things from our commander-in-chief, they would feel a little bit better about the loss of their loved ones then never hearing anything about why we are there, and what we are there for.
it is in our interest, in addition to the afghan people, remember that i said at the outset that was the launchpad where they attack us -- attacked us in new york on 9/11. >> as we speak, decide -- defense secretary hagel is unveiling a budget proposal to shrink the army to the smaller size 2002 -- to a smaller size, and to shrink our attack aircraft program. what do you think of this? >> we had a meeting this morning, and he went over those thanks. -- things. i'm surprised you're here, i thought you would be listening to his speech. [laughter] i have been talking about these
cuts for several years now. there is no secret that if you cut $1 trillion out of the fence you're going to be cutting manpower, programs, and these things that are important. in the last few years we have changed our strategy that has served us well since world war ii. that we should be equipped, ready to go, two major contingency that one time. we have cut that back to fight one and hold one. people have not heard the speech that the president gave where we cut our strategy back. in another beachy gave -- speech he gave we looked to the pacific. we are also cutting the navy back to the small it has been since world war i. they are much more powerful, but we have not learned how to have
a ship in two places at the one -- same time. when we go to one that is fast approaching 300 and 200, instead of 600, i a question that. what we're trying to do is solve our financial problems on the backs of our military. that cannot be done. if it could be done, it should not be done, but it cannot be done. if we cut the whole military budget, the whole discretionary budget, everything that we vote on annually as a congress, eliminate all of that, we was no be running -- we would still be running a deficit of $.5 trillion a year. the real problem -- the big animal in the room -- [laughter] that everyone is avoiding is the
mandatory spending. alas we address that -- unless we address that, weirds going to keep digging ourselves further and further in the hole. that is the real problem, and we are trying to solve it on the backs of our military. it cannot be done. >> what are your priorities for marking up the fiscal year 2015 defense spending bill? >> getting it done by october 1. [laughter] that is my main -- and that is all i am going to be talking about between now and october. i'm really concerned, and i brought that up in the meeting this morning with the big eight. it is incumbent upon us to get that done. last year we got the defense authorization bill done on the lasted a the senate was in
session. or we would have missed it. we have passed that will every year for 51 years, and some people think we have to do it for 52 years because we have done for -- done it for 51 years. we have to do it because there are certain authorities in there that help the authority -- the military and the defense contractors do their job. if we had not passed that bill when we did on january 1, the construction of our aircraft carrier that takes five years down in regina to build -- five years, down in virginia, would have come to a stop. it would've ended up costing us more money, and it is not a way to do business. it is very important that we get that bill done. we are on a timeline to get our build on in the house -- bill
done in the house, through committee, and to be floor by june. we could have immediately -- if they could have gone to the floor, we could've had our bill done in july. as it was, they never did get their bill pass on the floor. they got it done in the senate on the last day of the session. if that happens this year, think of the scenario. everyone who is wanting for reelection goes home october 1 two campaign, they come back after the election, and then what happens? what happens if the republicans win the senate? what is the incentive to finish anything? the republicans wanted to push it off to january, and i wanted to know why they couldn't do it
in june, july, october, november, december? january is when you have people coming back with a new congress. that is not the way to do business. the number one priority is to get the bill done. if we do not get it done by the time we leave in october, it will be very difficult to buy and there will be a lot of momentum to say we can do it next year. not everybody understands the consequent as of not getting it done. it is the only bill --congress doesn't do anything else anyway. that is the deal would get done every year. we will get that done october 1. >> it has been over a year since the repeal of don't ask, don't
tell. what is your thoughts on how well the transition the gone -- has gone for openly gay soldiers and sailors to be able to serve alongside the colleagues? >> i do not really know. i know that it is something, when i go to the troops, i do not ask questions about it, but maybe i should very maybe i will as we go around with more traveling this year. we have not done the lot of traveling the past few years. we used to do that to visit troops and leaders of nations, and that is something i should probably ask about. the leadership seems to think that it is moving ok. i think in our bill we put that there would be automatic reviews of this of and reports back to us.
i have not seen one of those yet, so i cannot give you a solid answer based on any criteria or facts. >> why do you represent -- support representative thornberry as your successor? >> did i write that one? [laughter] that is an easy question. thornberry and i came on with the armed services committee at the same time. i was elected in 1992, but i did not get onto the covidien my first term. we came onto the committee at the same time, we sat next to each other for many years now.
i've had the opportunity to watch them, visit his victor, see how he relates to the people in his district. i see how he relates to the other members of the committee. he is very articulate, very smart. he has good leadership skills, very serious. he has also a member -- been a member of the intel committee for a long time. i think he would make an outstanding chairman for the house armed services committee, and i strongly support him. i could give you many more reasons, but if you know that copy you -- the facts, you know he competed the last few times, and i only beat him by, well it was close. he is the one that is ready, he is been my vice-chairman now for five years. have i been chairman five years? [laughter] time flies when you're having fun. we do not train chairman, you
just compete for the job, and then you find out you get the job, and you start trying to find out -- you are a congressman coming all the things you're doing in other areas, but you do not know about the budget and how that works, and how you put people on different -- all the things you have to learn when you become chairman, i have tried to make sure mac knows those things. we have worked closely together on everything we do. he will be ready to transition if he is selected, and i'm confident he will be. i think it would be a seamless transition. not quite like what happened to me. i found out that i was going to be the new ranking member 15 minutes before we had a meeting to prepare for the next day mark
of of our bill. it is not going to be that way. thank you. >> we are almost out of time, but before asking the last question we have a couple of housekeeping matters to take care of. first, i would like to present our traditional mpc -- npc mug to our guest. we hope you find it useful. i would like to acknowledge his excellency, the afghan ambassador to the united states. your excellency. [applause] thank you for coming today. i would also like to thank the national press club staff, including the journalism institute and broadcast center for organizing today's event. [applause] well-deserved applause.
finally, there is a reminder that you can find more information about the national press club, including upcoming legends --luncheons on our website. if you'd like to get a copy of today's program, please check out the program website. we have time for a final question. you're leaving congress at the end of the year. what can be done to make future congresses less mired in gridlock, and more successful in tending to the nation's affairs? >> thank you. the ambassador is a good friend, grew up in california, he is a good guy. i wish i could wave a wand and make congress very responsive. i think our forbearers, when
they fled from kingdoms, and wanted to establish democracy did not want to see another kingdom, and any one person have too much power. they did an inspired, outstanding job of making it difficult for us to do anything. it has gotten worse the last few years. partisanship has gotten deeper, and more difficult to work together. i think that finance reform passed years ago that took -- basically neutered the parties and gave the opportunity for outside groups to raise unlimited funds, and to come in and play in the process has had a very drastic result. to the point where i was talking to a democrat where he lost the
election in the primary, and most members say that they cannot work anymore with the republicans unless they get taken out of the primary. the same has happened on the republican side. it pushes the republicans more to the right, and democrats to the left, and the opportunity for people to have meaningful discussions, and really come together on agreements to make things happen becomes very difficult. i think the fear that most members of congress have -- isn't the other party. it's being taken out in a primary. i watchedficult.
leadership struggle trying to get something done, and it's very difficult. i don't really know the answer -- one waye weight would be to fix kind -- campaign finance reform, but because of what is happening, i was being .acetious earlier we did get the budget passed. then we got the spending bill passed this year. maybe there is cause to be optimistic that it will be
better. i think they want to get back in the game. for have been irrelevant the last few years because everybody was just waiting for the end of the year, so i think if we can get closer to regular order we had many members of congress that don't even know what regular order is. and the government-funded by september 30 the way it was supposed to be. we need to get back to that. stuff wet some of the fight over the doesn't really matter much. inc. you. >> thank you, chairman mcewan. i don't know if it's going to be
retirement. inc. you for being here today. we are adjourned. -- thank you for being here today. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> i have a nephew training to be a chaplain. >> i know. >> thank you, thank you, thank you. thank you very much.
conversation on facebook and twitter. each morning at seven eastern on c-span. >> i think there are some myths out there. think like a maraschino cherry , him or act illicitly preserved a miraculously preserved product, and it's no different. call it awouldn't healthy product, but i would call it something that is a tasty treat. ies inre are cherry various stages. even though you put them in water they will still have ryan. go through extensive washing to get the sulfur out of the fruit. the process of making
is really taking that and soaking it in a .rogressively stronger sugar it's over the course of the schedule you will see the sugar content pickup. fruitn see here is some it is very early in the process. you can see how much darker it is. that is much further along. on a normal day you will see yellow, pink, deeper red. it's just that cycle of the infusion and where it is in the process. book tv andend, american history tv go behind them,story in sale oregon. >> the new c-span.org website
makes it easier than ever to keep tabs on washington, d.c. and share to facebook, twitter, and other social networks. easy search options let you access coverage of events. new tools bake it simple to create short video clips and share them with your friends -- make it simple to create short video clips and share them with your friends. viaou can share links e-mail. look for the green links throughout our site. on c-span.org,n and if you see something of interest, share it with your friends. defense secretary chuck hagel announced the pentagon will reduce the size of the army from 500 22,002 between 440000 and 450,000. martin dempsey spoke to
reporters at the pentagon for an hour. >> good afternoon. first let me acknowledge chairman dempsey and the secretaries who are here as well is our comptroller and are acting assistant to the deputy secretary of defense for the work they have done over the past few months in particular to get us to this point where we have a budget that we are going
to present to congress next week . i want to talk a little bit about that today. chairman dempsey will also add i am verys, but grateful. i know president obama is very grateful to these men and women who have spent an awful lot of time putting this together. i particularly want to note , this will bob hale be his last budget unless we call him to duty after he goes to find an island somewhere and amsn't return, but i particularly appreciative of his willingness to stay through this budget, which was not an easy for bob hale.
you know the type of service he has given to this department tor the years, and thank you your team. we are grateful. today i am announcing the key for the president for the budget and beyond. these recommendations will adapt and reshape our defense enterprise so we can continue in protecting this nation security in an era of unprecedented security and change. as we end our combat mission in afghanistan, this will be our first budget to fully reflect the transition we are making after 13 years of war. the longest conflict in the nation's history. we are repositioning to focus on strategic challenges and opportunities that will define our future. new technologies, new centers of power in a world growing more
volatile, more unpredictable, and in some instances, more threatening to the united states. the decisions will affect our defense for the years to come. chairman dempsey and i worked in . collaborative way i work closely with the chairman, vice chairman chairman, service secretaries and service chiefs in developing these recommendations in a process that began with last managementrategic review. i also want to recognize the senior enlisted leaders in each of the services for their contributions and their involvement and their leadership, which they continue to do everyday for the country, but in particular their input in crafting this budget. our recommendations were guided by a defense strategy that builds on the 2012 event strategic guidance described in
the annual defense review report, this is focused on defending the homeland against all strategic threats, building security globally by projecting u.s. influence and deterring aggression and remaining prepared to win decisively against any adversary. to fulfill the strategy, dod will continue to shift its focus to the asia-pacific. sustained commitment to key allies and partners in the middle east and europe, maintain engagement in other regions, continue to aggressively pursue global terrorist networks. priorities are very clear. first, the development and proliferation of more advanced though it carried technology by .ther nations at a time where
the seas and space can no longer be taken for granted. it is no longer expected to reach what was projected last year. given these realities, we must now adapt, innovate, and make difficult decisions to ensure our military remains capable, maintaining its edge over all potential adversaries. as a consequence of large budget cuts, our future force will assume additional risk in certain areas. we prioritize dod strategic in budget resources. this required a series of difficult choices. he chose further reductions in troop strength. and to protect critical capabilities like special operations forces and resources. delayse to terminate or
modernization programs to protect higher priorities or procurement, research, and development, and we chose to slow the military compensation costs in a way that will preserve the quality but also free up critical funds needed for before i get into the specific recommendations, let it get -- let me address the fiscal realities. one year ago, this week, abrupt spending cuts were placed on dod under sequestration. these cuts came on top and there was a ten-year spending reduction. sequestration was imposed in the fiscal year 2014 that would repeal these cuts in favor of balanced deficits reduction.
IN COLLECTIONSCSPAN Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on