stashed offshon and boeing is pursuing these deals with the japanese banks and the company is less worried about this bill and that financing than my friend from washington is. so, this is simply about saying that are iran does notville direct access to the u.s. financial system. . i don't know why my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are so freaked out by. that this is simply making sure that our banking system is not going to finance this deal indirectly or directly. and the use of the export-import bank would be prohibited. this amendment says it's a sunset to this bill, upon presidential certification that iran has ceased support of international terrorism. a goal we all have.

so if the president can support that and certify that, then this falls away. so, we do not say that this deal is not allowed. we simply say that u.s. institutions, financial institutions, cannot be used for this. and we cannot and will not use the export-import bank at u.s. tax --, a u.s. taxpayer funded entity, to do this. at the end of the day in april of this year, secretary jack lue told us that. that there would be no access. in eith -- and either he misled the united states citizens and this body at that time, or they changed their mind. they haven't told us which. but neither one is acceptable. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended and on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan, mr. huizenga. the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from michigan, mr. huizenga. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to prohibit the secretary of the treasury from authorizing certain transactions by a u.s. financial institution in connection with the export or re-export of a commercial passenger aircraft to the islamic republic of iran. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i have to -- mr. swalwell: mr. speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? mr. swalwell: i am opposed in its current form. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman qualifies. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. swalwell of california moves to recommit the bill, h.r. 5711, to the committee on financial services, with instructions to report the same back to the house for thewith with the

following amendment. page 2, after line 2, insert the following new section. section 103, protecting u.s. elections. the secretary of the treasury may not authorize a transaction described under section 101 by a u.s. financial institution if such institution is engaged in business with a foreign entity that has been found by the secretary in consultation with the director of national intelligence to have engaged in or authorized cyberattacks targeting any election held in the united states. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california is recognized for five minutes in support of his motion. mr. swalwell: thank you. this is the final amendment to the bill which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. if adopted the bill will immediately proceed to final passage as amended. mr. speaker, this final amendment says plainly, no u.s. business may do business with a country who has used cyberattacks to undermine a u.s. election. so if my colleagues are genuine in believing that iran is a

hopeless adversary, surely they will join me in believing that russia in its efforts to undermine our recent november selection should also be treated as such. this motion is really about the future of two u.s. adversaries. iran and russia. iran, surely a bad actor over the last few decades, has finally in the last couple years come to the international table, struck an agreement with the united states, and many of our allies, to make sure that we take it from being a country that is three months away from having a nuclear weapon to one year away. they continue to sponsor terrorism across the world, but today, better than ever before, we have eyes, ears, checks and balances on them that we've never had. and by the way we can address all of their bad behavior with them being much farther away from having a nuclear weapon than they were before the iran nuclear agreement. russia, however, continues to wreak chaos in the middle east.

supporting syria and its brutal dictator, assad. russia brought down a commercial airliner over ukraine and has further encourage -- incurred into ukraine, taking over crimea. russia continues to attack and escalate hostilities with the u.s. personnel at our embassy in moscow. now, the standard bearer for the republican party, president-elect trump, has chosen to embrace russia and take the united states on a new tact. so, the question today is, if you believe iran is hopeless, then do you believe that we should also make sure no u.s. business does business with a country that's trying to undermine our elections? i want to go through some of that evidence. on october 7 of this year, the director of national intelligence, clapper, said that the intelligence community is confident, confident that the russian government directed cyberattacks aimed at

disrupting our november elections. why would russia do this? russia clearly had a favored candidate in this race and president -- in president-elect trump. russia has been successful. this amendment says that you cannot do business with any country that is trying to influence our elections. this amendment says that if you think iran is a bad actor, then you have to treat iran the same way you treat russia. this amendment says that if you think the u.s. should allow businesses to do business with a country trying to undermine our elections, to undermine the will of our constituents, then you should vote against this amendment. if you are with russia, you should be against this motion. however, if you believe that we are closer to preventing iran from having a nuclear weapon than we were a year ago, and if you believe that it's better for a u.s. manufacturer to airliners to cial

iran and create u.s. jobs and have eyes and ears on what's going on over there, then you should be for this motion. but if you want our elections to be free and fair from outside influence, vote for this motion. if you want to stand with russia, you should vote against this motion. so i ask my colleagues on the other side, are you going to embrace the new u.s. foreign policy that your standard bearer has proposed? that we are going to undermine and unravel the agreement that we have struck with iran and march millions of young men and women back into the middle east, an area where we have not had major combat operations, finally, for the first time in 15 years. or do you think that we should treat iran the same way that we're treating russia?

so, i submit that to my colleagues and i invite them to maybe engage on that question. because that's what this motion is about. do you stand with russia or do you stand with preventing u.s. businesses from doing business with a country that our intelligence community has said has tried to undermine our elections? with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i rise in to claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. huizenga: well, america, you just heard a ridiculous strawman choice laid out in front of you. this is not about anything other than selling and financing aircraft sales to iran. that's what this bill is about. this is what this bill should be about. i will point out to my colleague that there are some pretty major kinetic activities there, i believe, -- they're, i believe, called at this point. but at the end of the day, mr.

speaker, i want to encourage my colleagues to vote no on this motion to recommit. i look forward to working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to address concerns that we may have with other foreign governments in the future. and i would request that they vote for the underlying bill, h.r. 5711. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. weck, the previous question is ordered on -- without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. the motion is not agreed to. mr. swalwell: i ask for a vote on the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to the order of the house of today, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir. this letter is to inform you that i have sent a letter to california governor jerry brown informing him that i am resigning my position as the united states representative for the 44th congressional district of california effective sunday, december 4, 2016. in november i was elected by the people of los angeles county to serve as county supervisor for district four. it has been a privilege to serve the residents of california in the house of representatives for the last 5 1/2 years. i have worked to build a better future for our state and country. i also want to thank you, mr. speaker, and my colleagues in the house. i have enjoyed work with you and my colleagues during my time in congress. i look forward to continuing our work together in order to build a better country. signed, sincerely, janice juan, member of congress. -- janice hahn, member of ongress.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. kaptur: thank you. mr. speaker, we in the industrial midwest, in great lakes heartland, know firsthand why the presidential election was so hard-fought and close in ohio, pennsylvania, michigan and wisconsin. our region has endured a grim reality, with a decades-long economic struggle to produce good jobs, with good wages and benefits. but what we have experienced is a continuous outsourcing of millions of jobs to penny-wage sweat shops in mexico, china, bangladesh and beyond. to the people of america's heartland, it feels like jobs are being moved just about everywhere but into the midwest and great lakes. daily we witness train loads of imports floweding into our

nation, as closed and protected markets abroad block mutual exchange of exports. america hasn't had balanced trade accounts for three decades and workers in those nations struggle to survive on measly wages without spare cash and cannot buy much of what they produce anyway. meanwhile, pink slip u.s. workers have endured a painful toll, annual wages now $7,000, yes, -- less per year on average in northern ohio. while the cost of education expenses, health care and of everyday life rise and further squeeze pocketbooks. please don't tell us robots took the jobs. this daily reality was a major back drop to this recent election and deserves closer attention in the coming days. america's trade policy must result in trade balances, new jobs here and preferably trade surpluses for our country, not job loss. and that policy must be fashioned on the fundamental values of free and fair trade among free people. i yield back my remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: are there any further requests for one-minute speeches?

under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, the gentleman from florida, mr. grayson, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. grayson: mr. chairman, we have gone through a terrible and traumatic experience in the last year called a u.s. presidential election. i don't know how many countless people were utterly mortified by this, whether or not their chosen candidate won. now, as it happened, the candidate whom i voted for

lost. but i would be foolish if i ignored the fact that people all across america had a miserable, terrible experience with this presidential election , whether or not their candidate won or lost. and you ask yourself, how could that be? why don't we cherish the opportunity to choose our national leader? how is it that we've been sucked into this negative vortex of hate -- of hatred and villfication called choosing a president of the united states? it seems utterly impondrable. i was watching "saturday night live" just a couple of days before the election. and the not hillary actor and the not donald actor could agree on only one thing. this is what they said. this whole election has been mean. don't you guys feel gross all

the time about this? and they were speaking to us. not to each other. but they were speaking to us. the american people. and they're right. it is gross. but the question for us is very simple. does it really have to be that way? or could we somehow transform this into what it's supposed to be, an exhilarating jubilee revolving around choosing a leader who will make america a better place? but you have to understand, we're in a deep, deep hole here. both major presidential candidates entered this campaign with deeply negative favorability ratings, so negative they were in double digits. in the last six months it's within been a common place that both candidates were the most unpopular candidates in the history of presidential polling. about as popular as getting a

root canal on your birthday. now it's been 13 long years since the gal up poll indicated that most people in this country thought that the country was headed in the right direction. 13 years. some republican leadership, some democratic leadership, it all ends up the same way. most people think the country is headed in the wrong direction. it's been 13 year, not coincidently, since the majority of americans thought that congress was doing a good job and approved of it. in fact, we reached a nadir during the government shutdown, only 16% of the country thought we were heading in the right direction, only 9% of the country thought that congress was doing a good job. i pointed out at the time, standing exactly where i'm standing right now, that according to recent polling congress was literally less pop already than dog poo. in one election after another,

the voters feel completely ignored. literal -- little effort is made to explain to them how their lives may be improved by any candidates running for office. it's all an add hominem, personality driven crap store. people feel they're left with a choice of choosing between two evils. take it from me, the choice between two evils is evil. the one sort of commonsense observation when you're left with two major candidates, beth of whom are overwhelmingly unpopular, is that part of the problem we face is that almost 80% of the people who were in america, eligible to vote, had no part in choosing the candidate. so maybe it should come as no surprise that we end up in a situation like this. i did an interesting poll just three days before the election,

a national poll, let me show you what i found regarding how these candidate the nominees of their parties, stacked up against other alternative opponents. let me show you. let's play fantasy politics for a few minutes. if the matchup had been president obama versus donald trump, president obama would have won by 2% of the vote. the matchup had been bill clinton versus donald trump, bill clinton would have won with 4% of the vote. if the matchup had been joe biden, the vice president, versus donald trump, biden would have won by 8% of the vote. and if the matchup had been bernie sanders versus donald trump, as reported in the huffington post recently, bernie

sanders would have won bhi 12% of the vote. -- won by 12% of the vote. note one thing. every single alternative candidate performed better than the actual candidate who was the nominee of my party in these matchups. also note that you can't possibly contribute -- attribute that only to the negativity of the campaign because frankly, there have been a few hard knocks over the years against barack obama and against bill clinton and against joe biden and against bernie sanders. let's play some more fantasy pl ticks. -- fantasy politics. let's look at alternative opponents against hillary clinton. bear in mind that according to the current result, although hillary clinton lost the presidential election, she nevertheless won the popular vote by around 1% of the vote as i speak to you tonight. let's take a look at what would

have happened if she'd been pitted against alternative republican candidates. hillary clinton would have lost to ted cruz in the popular vote by 4%. hillary clinton would have lost to george w. bush by 8%. she would have lost to marco rubio by 10%, mitt romney by 12%, and she would have lost to the speaker of this house, paul ryan, by 14%. again, note one thing that draws all these matchups together. the fact that the candidate who actually was the nominee of his party would have done worse against any alternative opponent. and the candidate who would have been the nominee of her party would have done worse against any alternative opponent that was tested here. let's continue. ust for those who are curious.

if neither of the candidates had been nominated by their parties we would have had some interesting matchups. i'll give you three examples here. i told you already that sanders would have defeated -- senator sanders would have defeated donald trump by 12 points he would have defeated ted cruz by 10 points hsm ewould have defeated marco rubio by four points. interesting matchups, all. but here's the thing. the fact is that the great majority of americans had no choice at all in selecting the candidates who we ended up voting for. we might consider it somehow a good thing that 58 million americans actually voted in the presidential primaries, until we consider that 191 million americans did not.

our grievances as a country and our divisions are massive, deep, intractable, and widely shared. and that makes me wonder whether we can declare our independence from a system that constantly and perpetually generates unappealing and frankly sometimes appalling alternatives. we can't go on like this. you know what i'm talking about. as leonard cohen said, we all feel like our dog just died. we have to change the way that we do politics in america. i'm not suggesting that we choose our leaders like the athenians did they chose by lottery. i'm not suggesting that we adopt john on this swift's suggestions, but i agree -- john on this swift's suggestions but

i -- jonathan swift's suggestions but i agree with him that people are the treasure of the nation. and i don't think we should sit it out. i've heard people say, don't vote, it only encourages them. we need a bhetter system that manifests itself in a positive way and leads to a choice between candidates who, imagine, we respect. e admire, we look up to. they engage in a battle of ideas and principles, not a battle of personalities and personal attacks. i'm also not going to suggest that my answer would be a third party. if there's one thing that's clear, the two parties that we have aren't functioning that well. i'm not sure a third party is likely to make much difference. and i don't think that we're likely to see a messiah running for the third party as a presidential candidate when one we had this year couldn't even

tell us what alepp poe was. -- aleppo was. i think what's missing after giving this great thought for the past week is something very simple. we americans desperately need and deserve the right to reject all of the candidates on the ball will the. now, i realize that that's an unusual notion but i want you to think about it. because i'm introducing a bill called a none of the above act whereby if the last line of the ballot, none of the above, gets more votes than any candidate does, then none of the above actually wins. i'm not talking about the nevada version we already have where the none of the above vote gets ignored. i'm talking about none of the above winning and forcing a mulligan. a do-over.

we make them do it over until they get it right. and give us candidates who we want to vote for. someone who we feel will actually do a good job in leadership and make the country a better place. now, i want you to know that this is not unprecedented. i want you to know that in communist poland, none of the above actually crossing the candidates' names off the billion lot, which is a verks of none of the above, defeated the prime minister in 1989. candidates for the soviet congress of people's deputies were defeated the same way. so at the end of commune -- so if the end of communism isn't enough to motivate you for favoring this reform, here are more benefits. first and most importantly, we eliminate the need the terrible need to try to choose between

the lesser of two evils. i will remember the louisiana governor's race 25 years ago, when we were forced to choose in louisiana between corrupt edward andrews and racist david duke. there were bumper stickers that said vote for the crook, it's important. now according to a poll at that time, 2/3 of louisiana voters wished they could have voted for neither. for none of the above. and they were right. they were right. if primary voters haven't identified the best candidates for the job, not just decent candidates but the best candidaters in job, the general election voters should be able to wave their fingers and say, uh-uh, no way. i'm not going for that. until you convince we the people that you're the best candidate for the job, we're going to insist on other choices until we find somebody who is.

now this will have a wonderful effect, a very important effect on what we saw drenching us, the tsunami of negative advertising, negative campaigning, that we saw on our tv screens and now on our computer screens and even our phones. this incessant drum beat of negative campaigning. why? because both sides will understand that if you indulge yourself that way, all you're doing is driving down votes below none of the above and elevating none of the above your candidate. let's replace this terrible, malignant notion, vote against him, vote against her work something called for me and here's why. here's what i will do to improve your life. what am i going to do for you, not what am i going to do to you. in addition to that, i see a big boost in turnout.

last time i checked, which is a few days ago, the total number of votes in the 2016 presidential election was her than the total number of votes in the 2012 presidential election. and the 2008 presidential election. and the 2004 presidential election. as of a few days ago, you have to go back to 2000 to find any national presidential election where fewer people voted. and here's the really strange thing. back in 2000, we had 40 million fewer americans. i think there's a lot of people who show up for the specific purpose of voting for none of the above. i think we'll see a massive increase in turnout. if we simply convey to people the right to reject all the candidates which is exactly how they feel. in addition to that, we'll be keeping elected officials on their toes. 90% of the elected officials in

this body, the house of representatives, face uncompetitive races time after time after time. 2/3 of all the races down the hall in the senate are uncompetitive. when members of congress represent deep red or deep blue districts, they often run unopposed. and they win with 100% of the so-called vote which isn't really a vote at all. so knowing that no matter what kind of district they are, red, blue, purple, no matter whom they represent they will be facing none of the above on that ballot, we'll put the fear of god in them. and we need to do that. we need to make sure that the comfortable here in this room and down the hall aren't too comfortable. and that even hampered incumbents in gerrymandered districts would have to work diligently to defeat the specter of none of the above.

also, we clearly need to defeat the dictatorship of the primary voters. as i indicated before, 54 -- 58 million american adults voted in the primary elections. and 191 million did not. what was the what was the result of that? people who are deeply dissatisfied with the choices they had. let me show you what i mean. two days before the presidential election, i asked in a national poll, how do you feel about those presidential primary elections? how do you feel about them? almost 52% said they were disappointed. only 48% said that they were pleased. interestingly enough, that sentiment of disappointment was widely shared.

among democrats, 38% said that they were disappointed. among republicans, 53% said they were disappointed. among independents, who in many states didn't even have the legal right to vote, to choose a presidential candidate in either party, 69% said that they were disappointed. and that explains in part why e end up with a terrible choice on the ballot. above all, though, to be able to choose none of the above on each federal ballot would show respect for the voters. in my state, the state of florida, the constitution of the state begins with these words, all political power is inherent with the people. if you really believe that in your heart, if you believe that the sovereign in this country, the royalty in this country are the people of the united states, the voters, then how

can you possibly explain to them why we wouldn't allow them to reject all the candidates? this is a practical proposal. i don't know how many people have noticed this. but we have more than two months between the election and when the president is sworn in, under the 20th amendment. we have lnl two -- almost two months between the election and when the house of representatives and the senate are sworn in here in this building. it's not that difficult to put on a new election within two months. i know a lot of people who would favor having elections that take place in less than two months instead of approaching two years. in fact, it would be a blessed relief. now, i understand that most people who are elected officials would want to fight against this. for their own selfish purposes. in fact, one of the liberating elements is the fact that i'll be leaving this body in a couple of months.

i'll be leaving because i was defeated. i'll be leaving this body and that gives me the freedom to be able to do and say what is right and not what is for my own personal benefit. but i will point out that many, many, many people across the country believe the term limits are a good thing, and that somehow or another term limits ave been the through the florida legislature and the legislature of many other states, and of course term limits limit the terms of elected officials. so in the same sense, if term limits can ever be enabilitied anywhere -- enact -- enacted anywhere, it shows it is possible to put a choice on the ballot, like none of the above, that doesn't favor any elected official anywhere ever, but favors instead the voters. and gives them a right that they should have, but they don't have. now, in case you're curious, you may wonder, what would have

happened a week ago last tuesday if we'd had that choice on the ballot? i know, and i'd like to show you. of ding to my poll, 40% the american people would have voted a week ago last tuesday for none of the above. 60% would have chose an candidate, if you delve further into it, would you see that of those 60%, 28% would have voted for hillary clinton. 27% would have voted for donald trump. 4% would have voted for the third party candidate put up by the libertarians, and 1% would have voted for the third party candidate put up by the green party. in short,, think about what

this really means, none of the above would have won. none of the above would have won. and we would have the choice, the human dignity suggests we should have, a choice involving new candidates to decide who rules over this nation of 300 million-plus people. and becomes the leader of the free world. a new set of choices, a better set of candidates, and a brighter future. if we simply can't stand the candidates we've got, we need new ones. isn't that obvious? hink of it as voting with your middle finger. we deserve this choice. as human beings, as americans, as people who deserve to have

full control over our own sovereign fate, we deserve the choice of none of the above. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. gallego, for 30 minutes. mr. gallego: mr. speaker, our country's facing a perilous moment. in my district, parents are reassuring frightened children that everything will be all right. that's what parents do. our jobs as members of congress is to do the best we can to make sure those reassurances come true. mr. speaker, i was born and raised in chicago.

in 2000 i waited -- voted for the first time in my life. i voted for barack obama to serve in this chamber. while he did not win that election, i was inspired by his message of reform, change and hope. throughout his life and career, barack obama has always tried to bring people together. even in the highly polarized and tumultuous time, he's always tried to rise above and bridge those divisions and to be a unifying force for good. this is who barack obama is. this is who he was at harvard law school. this is who he was as a er in ity organize chicago. this is who he was as a state senator. as a commissioner candidate i voted for, as a united states senator, and as our president. right now president obama is discharging his constitutional obligation to orchestrate an orderly transition of power to a new president. i understand and i respect why under those circumstances he has chosen to manufacture size -- emphasize a message of national unity. and i respect why hillary clinton, who, despite the fact

that she received more votes than her o.p.m. opponent, is doing the same. i have an obligation at this moment, as do many colleagues in this house, i have a duty to tell the truth about donald trump. we cannot treat him like any other politician. or even like any other republican. because he is not. trump represents something much more dangerous. while none of us want to be in this case, we have a duty to treat him like the threat that he is. a threat to our values, a threat to our people, and a threat to our national identity. donald trump is 70 years old. and is unrealistic to expect him to change at this moment in time. donald trump is a sexual predator who brags about grabbing women without their consent. to date he's been accused of sexual assault by nearly a dozen women. donald trump is a demagogue. his political mentor was roy cohen, senator mccarthy's right-hand man. no surprise that donald trump burst onto the national conservancy by peddling a racist conspiracy, questioning whether president barack obama

was even an american. the speaker pro tempore: those will refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president-elect. mr. gallego: duly noted. donald trump is a bigot. even paul ryan called donald trump's words attacking a federal judge of mexican dissent -- descent racism. donald trump is a liar. senator ted cruz called him a pathlogical lie who are is amoral to boot. most of all, donald trump is a con artist. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is again reminded about the decorum of the house and reminds members to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president-elect. mr. gallego: duly noted. next month donald trump is going on trial for fraud related to fake university that bore his name. a series of exposes in the "the washington post" have revealed systemic misuse of his funds at the fake charity he established. in atlantic city, he enriched himself at the expense of creditors, investors, workers

and suppliers. who are running multiple casinos into bankruptcy. every one of us in congress, every single one of us in congress, knows who donald trump is. it does not matter what he says today. or what he does tomorrow. his whole life and his whole campaign speak to who he is and what kind of president he will be for our country. we should be horrified because it is horrifying. the man that boasted, i will alone fix this, will fix nothing. he has broken us apart. millions of americans are living in fear because he has threatened them. muslims, latinos, african-americans, women, the disabled, the lgbt community and more. donald trump will be our next president. we here in congress must oppose his agenda. we must oppose his efforts to increase his power. anything that makes donald trump more powerful makes him more dangerous.

look at who donald trump is. look at the life he has led. look at the campaign he ran. no one should be under any delusions. no more in my lifetime have we needed stronger, aggressive, innovative, strategic leadership from the democratic party and the progressive movement that he fuels. donald trump will not be an ordinary president, rather than helping him protect the country, we must protect the country from the new president. mr. speaker, this is uncharted territory. in the days since his election, trump has attacked the right to protest, he's attacked "the new york times" for its critical coverage, he announced that steve bannon, a white nationalist racist, will serve as his senior advicer in his white house, he's committed to deporting two million to three million immigrants immediately. his team has threatened legal action against a senator who criticized him, and on the campaign trail, he threatened to use regulatory powers of the federal government to retaliate against his critics. despite his promise to drain

the swamp of corruption in washington, he's stacking his transition team with corporate lobbyists. trump is preparing to install foxes to watch the people's hen house. last, bibi no means least, he's refused to engage in any meaningful financial disclosure or to take any steps to effectively mitigate the conflict of interest inherent in the president of the united states and also being the head of an opec network -- opaque network of privately held companies. we don't know who he owes money to. and we don't know who is paying him. he's installed his children and heirs to manage his company, even while they serve as top advisors to his transition. given everything we know about donald trump and everything we don't know, i was alarmed by the words of senior leaders from the progressive and centrist wings of the democratic party regarding their openness to working with donald trump on infrastructure. under ordinary circumstances, we would welcome a plan to invest in america's infrastructure. that plan came from the other

side of the aisle. especially if it came from the other side of the aisle. but donald trump is not an ordinary politician. he's a con artist. he's refused to give the american people reason to believe that he's not in this to enrich himself. in fact, he's buck traddigs by maintaining his family interests in a private corporation and unfortunately his infrastructure plan is -- the speaker pro tempore: the chair again reminds the gentleman about the decorum of the house and members are to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president-elect. mr. gallego: thank you, mr. speaker, duly noted. he's not reaching out. he is reaching his hand into america's pockets. and we must not let him do it. when president obama took office, even americans who didn't support him celebrated his election and what he said about our country. and united in wishing him well. here in congress republicans announce they had would not lift a finger to help him lead our country. as donald trump takes office, even americans who did reluctantly cass kraft their

votes for him worry about what this election says about our country. and if we are united, it is our fervent hope that he dus not govern the way he has campaigned. here in congress, however, we cannot afford to give him that benefit of the doubt. we must not lift a finger to help him scam our country. we must instead put every effort into stopping him. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. mr. speaker, i move that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: madam speaker. thank you. the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. "washington journal"

continues. host: congressman mark meadows is at our desper desk. should this be read as a signal that you, your fellow conservatives, those in the -- is this a sign that you guys are fully behind this new leadership group? guest: the vast majority of americans want something to get done here in this city. they are tired of gridlock, they are tired of fighting.

for me, it's all about trying to make sure that we return washington to its rightful owner , the american people. at what iss looking important to the american people, whether it is jobs, national security, fighting isis, immigration -- we are focused wholeheartedly on trying to make sure that we not only advanced that agenda but we are ready. we have a few weeks before we take a break. we have to hit the ground running. host: you are a member of the freedom caucus. do the priorities of the freedom caucus align with the priorities of the house republicans leadership? >> the priorities for the house freedom caucus have not changed. it's about giving a voice to millions of americans who feel like their elected official has forgotten them. that has not changed. in terms of policy differences,

certainly there are policy differences, just like there are differences in constituency. my district in western north carolina may be very different than a district in michigan. have two different that it should not stop us from being able to find common ground. i serve in a committee with brenda and we've been able to look at those issues that are important to her people that she represents, some that are important to mine. those don't always align. ,ust like in a gop conference the priorities for my district may not align with leadership, but it is incumbent upon me to not only find a common ground, to influence the leadership know what is significant so we can work on those pieces of legislation. host: does the freedom caucus holds formal elections? guest: we do.

those elections will be happening after thanksgiving. new boardminated members, we have four new board members that will be elected. . from there, a chairman will come out of that. -- wee created those coat have created two new positions. we will know the votes of our members and where they are on particular items. becoming a little more focused and official. host: you've expressed interest about running the freedom caucus should the current chairman step down. guest: he is one of my best friends in congress. we met last night to discuss some things. if he decides to stay on, he will have 110% of my support and backing. the decisions have not been made. it's not even something we've taken to our freedom caucus members at this point.

there's lots of speculation on, will he stay on, will i step up? it's about who can best serve as a voice for the rest of the caucus and bring us all together. our strategy may be has shifted a little bit to more of a policy driven focus. what we are going to before for, how we advance that and make sure that we work hand in glove with the new administration. lines are open if you want to talk with congressman mark meadows. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. you talk about the new to the goals of the freedom caucus align with those you are hearing from the incoming trump administration? guest: some of them do.

job security, border security, all of thoserity, things are important, helping our veterans and making sure that we have a robust veterans administration that actually fulfills the promises we made to our military men and women. all of those align very closely. there's been a lot that has been talked about -- really, when we start to get a robust economy, some of those decisions become much easier to address. istainly deficit spending not something murmurs of the freedom caucus would support. that members of the freedom caucus would support. it's like a mortgage you have on your home. if we know we have a plan to get that debt paid off, we are willing to make up decisions in the short run to make sure that on the back end of that, we are

fiscally sound and we do what is right on behalf of our children and grandchildren. host: tough decisions like raising the debt ceiling? guest: there has not been in opposition to raising the debt ceiling -- if there is a plan. we continue to raise a debt like having a 30 year mortgage and saying now i have a 40 year mortgage, now i have a 50 your mortgage. you are never making the payments to pay it down. if we have a plan to pay it down, we understand the deficit -- the debt ceiling will increase in the short run to bring in better fiscal policy. host: and in florida. in florida. a republican. good morning. caller: there is so much, so many things going on lately. c-span is wonderful.

i just can't get over how wonderful you guys are. first of all, i would like to say something in my opening year or thislast year before the election when the caucus that i'm forgetting which caucus shut down the house and had the private telephone with nancy pelosi -- was at the black caucus that the that? -- that did that? host: are you talking about this in an over gun issues? caller: yes. we watched it on c-span. can you address something like that ever happening again? that whole scenario seems very bizarre. since you are on the transportation, the situation regarding building the wall and all that -- i watched on c-span about the weeklong program they

did on immigration issues. can't wait tax that huge incoming infrastructure down there a little bit more to pay for the wall? it is huge, the trucks daily that come through that area. are segmented we did in laredo to talk about the trade. -- our segment we did in laredo. guest: there is an unbelievable amount of trade that comes across our southern border. i've been addressing that from a visa and national security standpoint and i was surprised to see 82 million different transfers back and forth across the southern border on an annual basis. it is a significant amount. as we look at that come apart of what president-elect trump has talked about in his nap the renegotiation is looking at --

as we look at that, part of what president-elect trump has talked about in his nafta renegotiation is looking at that. to pretend to speak on behalf of the new administration coming in as they look at that. but i do know that he is committed to renegotiating nafta. it is not just with regards to the border security wall. as we look at those components, how do we paper that -- pay for lookingnumber of us are at appropriating money right away to start the construction. the american people want to see something happen. the second part of that was about the city and -- the sit in as it related to the democrats protesting the lack of initiatives on gun control in

light of what happened in orlando. that was a violation of house --es as we start to see that there were fundraising off of that. see some real penalties and consequences that come as a result of those who were fundraising off of that. you could actually have a reprimand from the house ethics committee. there would also be other areas that could potentially be a violation -- we have rules that say we cannot use official duties to be able to raise money. even making a phone call come i cannot do that in my office if it is campaign related because and thetes the ethics federal election laws as we start to look at that. some of that will be addressed. we have additional rules that we

will be passing here very shortly. i know that speaker ryan has worked with his colleagues on the other side of the aisle to strengthen those to make sure the decorum of the house is followed the way that it should be. host: we are getting further thatfrom the sit in happen. when you expect the penalties to come down? that happen. when you expect the penalties to come down?it -- some of the people will be leaving. anything that would have to be addressed would need to be addressed in this congress. any rules that go fourth would be for future congresses. and he consequences would have to be addressed in the coming days. north carolina, gutierrez is an independent. caller: i'm calling to let you this pasthat presidential election was stolen

in places like michigan, arizona, north carolina, ohio. these were republican held states. due to suppression and the purging of the vote, the republicans were successful in winning the general election. we need to get rid of the electoral college. the last two elections have been stolen through corruption that's going on within these elections. like my vote -- my boat has been stolen twice out of the lasix seniors. that isn't right. has been stolen twice out of the last 16 years. that isn't right. people are out here protesting because they feel like their vote has been stolen. this election was stolen by the

republicans. host: what do you say to that concern? guest: making sure that we have proper voting to be able to do that is key. of our voting system is key. having lost anse election with fraud. i was in selma, north carolina with president-elect tromp in your area seven or -- president each wrote in your ar seven or eight hours away from where i live. place ire cars and cannot imagine there were that many people that will show up. as we looked at that, all of us needed to standup whether we are democrat, unaffiliated or republican against voter fraud.

what i found as many people do not exercise the privilege. for example,lina, 60% of people registered to vote voted. you have a good 32% of people who could have shown up at made a difference. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. >> c-span's washington journal d live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. this week we're focusing on members of congress and their reaction to donald trump's presidential win. coming up thursday morning, kentucky republican congressman thomas massie, member of the government oversight and government reform committee, will join to us talk about donald trump as the next president and what it means for the republican party. he'll also touch on key issues ahead in the lame duck session. and appropriations committee member, ohio democratic congresswoman marcy kaptur, will be on to talk about the role of ohio in campaign 2016. and reaction to the election.

she'll also discuss the upcoming democratic leadership election. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal d live at 7:00 a.m. eastern thursday morning. join the discussion. >> president obama is overseas after his final stop in office. he talks about democracy in each increase in how the system of government has benefited other parts of the world. this is 50 minutes. [applause] president obama: thank you so much. [applause] thank you. pres. obama: thank you very much. please, please have a seat. thank you.

[applause] audience member: chicago! president obama: chicago. [laughter] pres. obama: hello, greece! [applause] pres. obama: yia sas! kalispera! to the government and the people of greece, including prime minister tsipras, who i thank for his partnership and -- this is my final trip overseas as the president of the united states and i was determined on my last trip to come to greece. partly because i have heard about the legendary hospitality of the greek people.

your philoxenia. [applause] pres. obama: partly because i i had to see the acropolis and the parthenon. but also because i came here thatgratitude for all greece -- "this small, great world" -- has given to humanity -- our minds of been opened by of herodotus and thucydides. our understanding of the world and our place in it has been expanded by socrates and aristotle. in the united states, we're especially grateful for the friendship of so many proud

greek americans. in my hometown of chicago you can find them in greektown, with their foustanellas. and together, we've celebrated greek independence day at the white house. we've had some spanakopita and some ouzo. greek americans have worn the uniform to keep our country free. greek americans have marched with dr. martin luther king jr. to make us more just. greek or american, we're all cheering for giannis antetokounmpo who seems to be getting better each year. and if anyone seeks an example of our shared spirit, our resilience, they need look no further than new york city, near

ground zero, where the greek orthodox church of st. nicholas, once in ruins, is now rising again. most of all, we're indebted to greece for the most precious of gifts -- the truth, the understanding that as individuals of free will, we have the right and the capacity to govern ourselves. [applause] pres. obama: for it was here, 25 centuries ago, in the rocky hills of this city, that a new idea emerged. demokratia. [applause] pres. obama: kratos -- the power, the right to rule --

comes from demos -- the people. the notion that we are citizens -- not servants, but stewards of our society. the concept of citizenship -- that we have both rights and responsibilities. the belief in equality before the law -- not just for a few, but for the many; not just for the majority, but also the minority. these are all concepts that grew out of this rocky soil. of course, the earliest forms of democracy here in athens were far from perfect -- just as the early forms of democracy in the united states were far from perfect. the rights of ancient athens were not extended to women or to slaves. but pericles explained, "our constitution favors the many

instead of the fewthis is why it is called a democracy." athenians also knew that, however noble, ideas alone were not enough. to have meaning, principles must be enshrined in laws and protected by institutions, and advanced through civic participation. and so they gathered in a great assembly to debate and decide affairs of state, each citizen with the right to speak, casting their vote with a show of hands, or choosing a pebble -- white for yes, black for no. laws were etched in stone for all to see and abide by. courts, with citizen jurors, upheld that rule of law. politicians weren't always happy because sometimes the stones could be used to ostracize, banish those who did not behave themselves.

but across the millennia that followed, different views of power and governance have often prevailed. throughout human history, there have been those who argue that people cannot handle democracy, that they cannot handle self-determination, they need to be told what to do. a ruler has to maintain order through violence or coercion or an iron fist. there's been a different concept of government that says might makes right, or that unchecked power can be passed through bloodlines. there's been the belief that some are superior by virtue of race or faith or ethnicity, and those beliefs so often have been used to justify conquest and exploitation and war.

but through all this history, the flame first lit here in athens never died. it was ultimately nurtured by a great enlightenment. it was fanned by america's founders, who declared that "we, the people" shall rule, that all men are created equal and endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights. now, at times, even today, those ideals are challenged. we've been told that these are western ideals. we've been told that some cultures are not equipped for democratic governance and actually prefer authoritarian rule.

and i will say that after eight years of being president of the united states, having traveled around the globe, it is absolutely true that every country travels its own path, every country has its own traditions. but what i also believe, after eight years, is that the basic longing to live with dignity, the fundamental desire to have control of our lives and our future, and to want to be a part of determining the course of our communities and our nations -- these yearnings are universal. they burn in every human heart.

it's why a greek bishop atop a mountain raised the flag of independence. it's why peoples from the americas to africa to asia threw off the yoke of colonialism. it's why people behind an iron curtain marched in solidarity, and tore down that wall, and joined you in a great union of democracies. it's why, today, we support the right of ukrainians to choose their own destiny; why we partner with tunisians and the people of myanmar as they make historic transitions to democracy. this has been my foreign policy during my presidency. by necessity, we work with all countries, and many of them are not democracies. some of them are democracies in the sense they have elections, but not democracies in the sense

of actually permitting participation and dissent. but our trajectory as a country has been to support the efforts of those who believe in self-governance, who believe in those ideas that began here so many years ago. and it is not simply a matter of us being true to our values. it's not just a matter of idealism. i believe it is practical for the united states to support democracies. [applause] pres. obama: because history shows us that countries with democratic governance tend to be more just, and more stable, and more successful.

open, democratic societies can deliver more prosperity -- because when people are free to think for themselves and share ideas and discover and create -- the young people who are here, what they're able to do through the internet and technology, that's when innovation is unleashed, when economies truly flourish. that's when new products, and new services, and new ideas wash through an economy. in contrast to regimes that rule by coercion, democracies are rooted in consent of the governed -- citizens know that there's a path for peaceful change, including the moral force of nonviolence. and that brings a stability that so often can facilitate economic growth. the history of the past two

centuries indicates that democracies are less likely to fight wars among themselves. so more democracy is good for the people of the world, but it's also good for our national security. which is why america's closest friends are democracies -- like greece. it's why we stand together in nato -- an alliance of democracies. in recent years, we've made historic investments in nato, increased america's presence in europe, and today's nato -- the world's greatest alliance -- is as strong and as ready as it's ever been. and i am confident that just as america's commitment to the transatlantic alliance has endured for seven decades -- whether it's been under a democratic or republican administration -- that commitment will continue, including our pledge and our treaty obligation to defend every ally.

our democracies show that we're stronger than terrorists, and fundamentalists, and absolutists who can't tolerate difference, can't tolerate ideas that vary from their own, who try to change people's way of life through violence and would make us betray or shrink from our values. democracy is stronger than organizations like isil. because our democracies are inclusive, we're able to welcome people and refugees in need to our countries. and nowhere have we seen that compassion more evident than here in greece. [applause]

pres. obama: the greek people's generosity towards refugees arriving on your shores has inspired the world. that doesn't mean that you should be left on your own [applause] pres. obama: and only a truly collective response by europe and the world can ensure that these desperate people receive the support that they need. greece cannot be expected to bear the bulk of the burden alone -- but the fact that your democracy opens your heart to people in need in a way that might not otherwise be the case. just as democracies are premised on the peaceful resolution of disagreements within our societies, we also believe that cooperation and dialogue is the best way to address challenges between nations. and so it is my belief that democracies are more likely to try to resolve conflicts between nations in a way that does not result in war.

that's how, with diplomacy, we were able to shut down iran's nuclear weapons program without firing a shot. with diplomacy, the united states opened relations with cuba. [applause] pres. obama: with diplomacy, we joined greece and nearly 200 nations in the most ambitious agreement ever to save our planet from climate change. [applause] pres. obama: and speaking of climate change, i would point out that there is a connection between democracy and science. the premise of science is that we observe and we test our hypotheses, our ideas. we base decisions on facts, not

superstition; not what our ideology tells us, but rather what we can observe. and at a time when the globe is shrinking and more and more we're going to have to take collective action to deal with problems like climate change, the presence of a democratic debate allows the science to flourish and to shape our collective responses. now, democracy, like all human institutions, is imperfect. it can be slow, it can be frustrating, it can be hard, it can be messy. politicians tend to be unpopular in democracies, regardless of party, because, by definition, democracies require that you

don't get a hundred percent of what you want. it requires compromise. winston churchill famously said that democracy is the worst form of government -- except for all the others. and in a multiethnic, multiracial, multicultural society, like the united states, democracy can be especially complicated. believe me, i know. [laughter] pres. obama: but it is better than the alternatives because it allows us to peacefully work through our differences and move closer to our ideals. it allows us to test new ideas and it allows us to correct for mistakes. any action by a president, or any result of an election, or

any legislation that has proven flawed can be corrected through the process of democracy. and throughout our history, it's how we have come to see that all people are created equal -- even though, when we were founded, that was not the case. we could work to expand the rights that were established in our founding to african americans, and to women, to americans with disabilities, to native americans; why all americans now have the freedom to marry the person they love. [applause] pres. obama: it's why we welcome people of all races and all

religions and all backgrounds, and immigrants who strive to give their children a better life and who make our country stronger. and so here, where democracy was born, we affirm once more the rights and the ideals and the institutions upon which our way of life endures. freedom of speech and assembly -- because true legitimacy can only come from the people, who must never be silenced. a free press to expose injustice and corruption and hold leaders accountable. freedom of religion -- because we're all equal in the eyes of god. independent judiciaries to uphold rule of law and human rights. separation of powers to limit the reach of any one branch of government. , becausefair elections

citizens must be able to choose their own leaders, even if your candidate doesn't always win. [laughter] pres. obama: we compete hard in campaigns in america and here in greece. but after the election, democracy depends on a peaceful transition of power, especially when you don't get the result you want. [applause] pres. obama: and as you may have noticed, the next american president and i could not be more different. [applause] pres. obama: we have very different points of view, but american democracy is bigger than any one person. [applause] pres. obama: that's why we have a tradition of the outgoing president welcoming the new one in -- as i did last week. and why, in the coming weeks, my administration will do everything we can to support the

smoothest transition possible because that's how democracy has to work. [applause] pres. obama: and that's why, as hard as it can be sometimes, it's important for young people, in particular, who are just now becoming involved in the lives of their countries, to understand that progress follows a winding path -- sometimes forward, sometimes back -- but as long as we retain our faith in democracy, as long as we retain our faith in the people, as long as we don't waver from those central principles that ensure a lively, open debate, then our future will be okay,

because it remains the most effective form of government ever devised by man. it is true, of course, over the last several years that we've seen democracies faced with serious challenges. and i want to mention two that have an impact here in greece, haven an impact in the united states, and are having an impact around the world. the first involves the paradox of a modern, global economy. the same forces of globalization and technology and integration that have delivered so much progress, have created so much wealth, have also revealed deep fault lines. around the world, integration and closer cooperation, and greater trade and commerce, and the internet -- all have improved the lives of billions

of people -- lifted families from extreme poverty, cured diseases, helped people live longer, gave them more access to education and opportunity than at any time in human history. i've often said to young people in the united states, if you had to choose a moment in history to be born, and you did not know ahead of time who you would be -- you didn't know whether you were going to be born into a wealthy family or a poor family, what country you'd be born, whether you were going to be a man or a woman -- if you had to choose blindly what moment you'd want to be born you'd choose now. because the world has never, collectively, been wealthier, better educated, healthier, less violent than it is today. that's hard to imagine, given what we see in the news, but it is true. and a lot of that has to do with the developments of a

integrated, global economy. but trends under way for decades have meant that in many countries and in many communities there have been enormous disruptions. technology and automation mean that goods can be produced with fewer workers. it means jobs and manufacturing can move across borders where wages are lower or rights are less protected. and that means that workers and unions oftentimes have less leverage to bargain for better wages, better benefits, have more difficulty competing in the global marketplace. hardworking families worry their kids may not be better off than they were because of this global

competition. what we've also seen is that this global integration is increasing the tendencies towards inequality, both between nations and within nations, at an accelerated pace. and when we see people -- global elites, wealthy corporations -- seemingly living by a different set of rules, avoiding taxes, manipulating loopholes -- when the rich and the powerful appear to game the system and accumulate vast wealth while middle and working-class families struggle to make ends meet, this feeds a profound sense of injustice and a feeling that our economies are increasingly unfair. this inequality now constitutes

one of the greatest challenges to our economies and to our democracies. an inequality that was once tolerated because people didn't know how unequal things were, now won't be tolerated because everybody has a cell phone and can see how unequal things are. the awareness that people have in the smallest african village, they can see how people in london or new york are living. the poorest child in any of our countries now has a sense of what other people have that they don't. so not only is there increasing inequality, but also there is greater awareness of inequality. and that's a volatile mix for our democracies. and this is why addressing inequality has been one of the key areas of focus for my economic policy.

in our countries, in america and in most advanced market economies, we want people to be rewarded for their achievement. we think that people should be rewarded if they come up with a new product or a new service that is popular and helps a lot of people. but when a c.e.o. of a company now makes more money in a single day than a typical worker does in an entire year, when it's harder for workers to climb their way up the economic ladder, when they see a factory close that used to support an entire city or town, fuels the feeling that globalization only benefits those at the top. and the reaction can drag down a country's growth and make recessions more likely. it can also lead to politics

that create an unhealthy competition between countries. rather than a win-win situation, people perceive that if you're winning, i'm losing, and barriers come up and walls come up. and in advanced economies, there are at times movements from both the left and the right to put a stop to integration, and to push back against technology, and to try to bring back jobs and industries that have been disappearing for decades. so this impulse to pull back from a globalized world is understandable. if people feel that they're losing control of their future, they will push back. we have seen it here in greece. we've seen it across europe. we've seen it in the united states. we saw it in the vote in britain to leave the e.u.

but given the nature of technology, it is my assertion that it's not possible to cut ourselves off from one another. we now are living in a global supply chain. our growth comes through innovation and ideas that are crossing borders all the time. the jobs of tomorrow will inevitably be different from the jobs of the past. so we can't look backwards for answers, we have to look forward. we cannot sever the connections that have enabled so much progress and so much wealth. for when competition for resources is perceived as zero-sum, we put ourselves on a path to conflict both within countries and between countries. so i firmly believe that the best hope for human progress remains open markets combined with democracy and human rights. but i have argued that the current path of globalization demands a course correction. in the years and decades ahead,

our countries have to make sure that the benefits of an integrated global economy are more broadly shared by more people, and that the negative impacts are squarely addressed. [applause] pres. obama: and we actually know the path to building more inclusive economies. it's just we too often don't have the political will or desire to get it done. we know we need bold policies that spur growth and support jobs. we know that we need to give workers more leverage and better wages, and that, in fact, if you give workers better wages businesses do better, too, because their customers now have money to spend. we know that we have to invest more in our people -- the education of our young people, the skills and training to compete in the global economy. we have to make sure that it is

easy for young people who are eager to learn and eager to work to get the education that they need, the training that they need, without taking on huge amounts of debt. we know that we have to encourage entrepreneurship so that it's easier to start a business and do business. [applause] we know that we have to strengthen the social compact so that the safety net that is available for people, including quality health care and retirement benefits, are there even if people aren't working in the same job for 30 years, or 40 years, or 50 years. we have to modernize our infrastructure, which will put people back to work. we have to commit to the science and research and development that sparks new industries. in our trading relationships, we have to make sure that trade works for us, and not against

us. insisting on high standards in all countries to support jobs, strong protections for workers, strong protections for the environment, so that even as we freely trade, people and workers in all countries see the benefits of trade in their own lives, not just benefits for for the environment, so that the bottom line of large, multinational corporations. these are the kinds of policies, this is the work that i've pursued throughout my time as president. keep in mind i took office in the midst of the worst crisis since the great depression. and we pursued a recovery that has been shared now by the vast majority of americans. we put people back to work building bridges and roads. [applause] pres. obama: we passed tax cuts for the middle class. we asked the wealthiest americans to pay a little more taxes -- their fair share.

we intervened to save our auto industry, but insisted that the auto industry become more energy efficient, produce better cars that reduce pollution. we put in place policies to help students with loans and protect consumers from fraud. we passed the strongest wall street reforms in history so that the excesses and abuses that triggered the global financial crisis never happen again -- or at least don't start on wall street. and today, our businesses have created more than 15 million new jobs. incomes last year in america rose faster than any time since 1968. poverty fell at the fastest rate since 1968. inequality is being narrowed. and we've also begun to close the pay gap between men and women. we declared that health care in america is a privilege not for the few, but a right for

everybody. today, our uninsured rate is at the lowest levels on record. and we've done all this while doubling our production of clean energy, lowering our carbon pollution faster than any advanced nation. so we've proven that you can grow the economy and reduce the carbon emissions that cause climate change at the same time. [applause] pres. obama: now, i say all this not because we've solved every problem. our work is far from complete. there are still too many people in america who are worried about their futures. still too many people who are working at wages that don't get them above the poverty line. still too many young people who don't see opportunity. but the policies i describe point the direction for where we need to go in building inclusive economies.

and that's how democracies can deliver the prosperity and hope that our people need. and when people have opportunity and they feel confidence the -- in the future, they are less likely to turn on each other and they're less likely to appeal to some of the darker forces that exist in all our societies -- those that can tear us apart. here in greece, you're undergoing similar transformations. the first step has been to build a foundation that allows you to return to robust economic growth. we do not need to recount all the causes of the economic crisis here in greece. if we're honest, we can acknowledge that it was a mix of both internal and external forces. the great economy and the level of debt had become unsustainable. in this global economy, investment and jobs flow to countries where governments are

efficient, not bloated, where the rules are clear. to stay competitive, to attract investment that creates jobs, greece had to start a reform process. of course, the world, i don't think, fully appreciates the extraordinary pain these reforms have involved, or the tremendous sacrifices that you, the greek people, have made. i've been aware of it, and i've been proud of all that my administration has done to try to support greece in these efforts. [applause] pres. obama: and part of the purpose of my visit is to highlight for the world the important steps that have been taken here in greece. today, the budget is back in surplus. parliament passed reforms to make the economy more competitive. yes, there is still much more work to do. i want to commend prime minister

tsipras for the very difficult reforms his government is pursuing to put the economy on a firmer footing. now, as greece works to attract more investment, and to prevent old imbalances from re-emerging, and to put your economy on a stronger foundation, you'll continue to have the full support of the united states. at the same time, i will continue to urge creditors to take the steps needed to put greece on a path towards sustained economic recovery. [applause] pres. obama: as greece continues to implement reforms, the i.m.f. has said that debt relief will be crucial to get greece back to growth. they are right. it is important because if reforms here are going to be sustained, people need to see hope, and they need to see progress. and the young people who are in

attendance here today and all across the country need to know there is a future -- there is an education and jobs that are worthy of your incredible potential. you don't have to travel overseas, you can put roots right here in your home, in greece, and succeed. [applause] pres. obama: and i'm confident that if you stay the course, as hard as it has been, greece will see brighter days. because, in this magnificent hall and center -- this symbol of the greek culture and resilience -- we're reminded that just as your strength and resolve have allowed you to overcome great odds throughout your history, nothing can break the spirit of the greek people. you will overcome this period of challenge just as you have other challenges in the past. so economics is something that will be central to preserving

our democracies. when our economies don't work, our democracies become distorted and, in some cases, break down. but this brings me to another pressing challenge that our democracies face -- how do we ensure that our diverse, multicultural, multiracial, multireligious world and our diverse nations uphold both the rights of individuals and a fundamental civic adherence to a common creed that binds us together. democracy is simplest where everybody thinks alike, looks alike, eats the same food, worships the same god. democracy becomes more difficult when there are people coming from a variety of backgrounds and trying to live together. in our globalized world, with the migration of people and the rapid movement of ideas and

cultures and traditions, we see increasingly this blend of forces mixing together in ways that often enrich our societies but also cause tensions. in the information age, the unprecedented exchange of information can always accentuate differences, or seem to threaten cherished ways of life. it used to be that you might not know how people in another part of your country, or in the cities versus the countryside, were living. now everybody knows how everybody is living, and everybody can feel threatened sometimes if people don't do things exactly the way they do things. and they start asking themselves questions about their own identity. and it can create a volatile

politics. faced with this new reality where cultures clash, it's inevitable that some will seek a comfort in nationalism or tribe or ethnicity or sect. in countries that are held together by borders that were drawn by colonial powers, including many countries in the middle east and in africa, it can be tempting to fall back on perceived safety of enclaves and tribal divisions. in a world of widening inequality, there's a growing suspicion -- or even disdain -- for elites and institutions that seem remote from the daily lives of ordinary people. what an irony it is, at a time when we can reach out to people in the most remote corners of the planet, so many citizens feel disconnected from their own governments.

so, just as we have to have an inclusive economic strategy, we have to have an inclusive political and cultural strategy. in all of our capitals, we have to keep making government more efficient, more effective in responding to the daily needs to citizens. governing institutions, whether in athens, brussels, london, washington, have to be responsive to the concerns of citizens. people have to know that they're being heard. here in europe, even with today's challenges, i believe that by virtue of the progress it has delivered over the decades -- the stability it has provided, the security it's reinforced -- that european integration and the european union remains one of the great political and economic achievements of human history. [applause] pres. obama: and today more than

ever, the world needs a europe that is strong and prosperous and democratic. but i think all institutions in europe have to ask themselves -- how can we make sure that people within individual countries feel as if their voices are still being heard, that their identities are being affirmed, that the decisions that are being made that will have a critical impact on their lives are not so remote that they have no ability to impact them? we have to make clear that governments exist to serve the interest of citizens, and not the other way around. and so this is why, as president of the united states, i've pursued initiatives like the open government partnership that promotes transparency and accountability so that ordinary people know more about the

decisions that affect their lives. that's why both at home and around the world, we have taken steps to fight corruption that can rot a society from within. as authoritarian governments work to close space that citizens depend upon to organize and have their voices heard, we've begun the work of empowering civil society to defend democratic values and promote solutions to the problems within our communities. and as so many people around the world sometimes are tempted by cynicism and not being involved because they think that politicians and government don't care about them, we've created networks for young leaders and invested in young entrepreneurs, because we believe that the hope and renewal of our societies begins with the voices of youth.

[applause] pres. obama: in closing, our globalized world is passing through a time of profound change. yes, there is uncertainty and there is unease, and none of us can know the future. history does not move in a straight line. civil rights in america did not move in a straight line. democracy in greece did not move in a straight line. the evolution of a unified europe certainly has not moved in a straight line. and progress is never a guarantee. progress has to be earned by every generation. but i believe history gives us hope. 25 centuries after athens first

pointed the way, 250 years after the beginning of the great american journey, my faith and my confidence, my certainty in our democratic ideals and universal values remain undiminished. i believe more strongly than ever that dr. king was right when he said that, "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice." [applause] but it bends towards justice not because it is inevitable, but because we bend it towards justice, not because there are not going to be barriers to achieving justice, but because there will be people, generation

after generation, who have the vision and the courage and the will to bend the arc of our lives in the direction of a better future. in the united states, and in every place i have visited these last eight years, i have met citizens, especially young people, who have chosen hope over fear, who believe that they can shape their own destiny, who refuse to accept the world as it is and are determined to remake it as it should be. they have inspired me. in every corner of the world, i have met people who, in their daily lives, demonstrate that despite differences of race or religion or creed or color, we have the capacity to see each other in ourselves. like the woman here in greece who said of the refugees arriving on these shores, "we

live under the same sun. we fall in love under the same moon. we are all human -- we have to help these people." women like that give me hope. [applause] pres. obama: in all of our communities, in all of our countries, i still believe there's more of what greeks call philotimo [applause] pres. obama: love and respect and kindness for family and community and country, and a sense that we're all in this together, with obligations to each other. philotimo -- i see it every day -- and that gives me hope. [applause] pres. obama: because in the end, it is up to us. it's not somebody else's job, it's not somebody else's

responsibility, but it's the citizens of our countries and citizens of the world to bend that arc of history towards justice. and that's what democracy allows us to do. that's why the most important office in any country is not president or prime minister. the most important title is citizen. [applause] and in all of our nations, it will always be our citizens who decide the kind of countries we will be, the ideals that we will reach for, and the values that will define us. in this great, imperfect, but necessary system of self-government, power and progress will always come from

the demos -- from "we, the people." and i'm confident that as long as we are true to that system of self-government, that our futures will be bright. thank you very much. [applause] pres. obama: zito i ellas. [applause] ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

>> president obama traveled to germany next four meetings with chancellor angela merkel and other world leaders. it is his sixth and final visit to the country as president. friday the president had to peru economic summit before heading back to the u.s. >> of this weekend, c-span city tour along with comcast cable partners explore the literary life and history of pittsburgh, pennsylvania. on book tv of c-span2, here about industrialist andrew carnegie on how is innovative spirit transformed pittsburgh into the steel capital of the world. >> carnegie talked about the burning sign of chemical knowledge. he understood things from a scientific point of view, an engineering point of view. whereas, other people were still going on the seat-of-the-pants

operation. >> i think by looking at some of the materials we selected here, that carnegie really had a love for learning. and through this wonderful institution, thought this would toa way for the public escape into another world. then, the lives and contributions of pittsburgh african-americans since world war ii. ofluding the significance migration, civil rights, and black power movement. >> the long haul of that story is, black people in pittsburgh, the ohio river valley, became part of a new industrial environment that really took off in the period after the civil war. american history tv, we

tour the andy warhol museum to see the personal artifacts that once belonged to the famous 20th-century pop artist. the museum curator talks about his early life in pittsburgh and shows his collection of wigs and corsets. >> it is a great insight into how self-conscious andy warhol actually was. a lot of people have a vision of him as really cool and aloof, and he definitely was cool and aloof, but it came with a lot of work. c-span cities tour pittsburgh, pennsylvania on c-span2's book tv. tv, workinghistory with cable affiliates and visiting cities across the country. >> the new congress meets in january. several leadership roles are being decided before hand. today, republicans reelected

senator mitch mcconnell as the majority leader, while democrats chose senator charles schumer to replace retiring senator harry reid as minority leader. for more about the leadership elections we spoke to the congressional order -- reporter. jordan of the hill newspaper follows the senate leadership races today on capitol hill. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me on. a changing of the guard today with a chuck schumer easily winning the leadership post. what other surprises were there? >> going into today's election, there is a question on whether there would be a fight between senators for the number two spot. there is still a question on who will head up the democrat senate campaign. that was the one position they did not announce today.

everyone was watching this heading into this year. >> over the goals of senator schumer? what was he trying to accomplish in setting up his new team? >> we heard talk before the meeting that he would expand the leadership team and bring all the factions of the caucus into leadership. especially coming out of an election where you have a lot of questions about the future of the democratic party and which way it goes. how they appeal to voters. him try to pull, the more moderate side, bernie sanders came up in the leadership, he tried to pull everyone together. new title for-- a elizabeth warren of massachusetts. >> he elevated them, but they are were already in leadership. he moved them up to up sanders,n, moved

,ammy baldwin, into leadership to broaden the team. >> and a new position for senator bernie sanders, who remains an independent. he caucuses with the democrats. what was he looking for? >> you heard chatter going into this meeting with bernie sanders , was he challenging them, or looking at the number three spot? he was very quiet on what exactly he wanted for leadership. have been an uphill climb, he said he would not challenge. it did not give us any insight into his thinking. the thought was that he would be working on outreach. they really thought that was a natural suit for him, given his presidential days and his ability to reach and tap into the younger voters from a liberal wing of the party and excite the base. >> let me ask you about changes

key committees. senator dianne feinstein will be the ranking democrat on the committee and patrick leahy will move over from the senate appropriations committee. but with regards to senator feinstein, there will be at least one supreme court appointee front and center next year. where does this put her? >> applets are the very forefront of the upcoming supreme court. they have to find someone for scalia's desk. essentially, two or three more justices, depending on what happens. they are at the center of that fight, with her being the ranking member on the judiciary, acting as a check for a lot of amocrats talking about justice that maybe the democratic caucus would not support.

>> senate republicans also a leadership vote today. mitch mcconnell returning as the senate republican leader, nominated by senator marco rubio, who will begin a second term in january. -- why isr romeo senator rubio making the recommendation? >> they mentioned he was really involved. he led the charge to getting rubio to change his mind and come back to the senate. remember, iteople added moments earlier this year to getting republicans on the track where they could keep the senate majority. senator rubio is very much a part of that. also, another seconded that. it was a nice, symbolic gesture guys he helped keep in the senate.

>> no significant changes in the republican leadership team except for senator cory gardner of colorado. what his senates in charge of the campaign tragedy for republicans heading into 2018. there facing what looks like a favorable map. they are defending roughly eight but have dozens of democrats up for election in red states that could favor republicans in a midterm, and some more purple states that donald trump one in this last white house election. be their point person to figure out how they can move all that to their vantage going towards 2018 at a favorable senate map. >> democrats holding off and filling that position on the democrats said of the aisle until early next year, correct? >> they are some difficulties finding someone to fill that position. they were talking to senator durbin earlier, and he said it