tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN October 24, 2013 3:00pm-5:01pm EDT
where you can get your questions answered about. -- basis of your question is goes to the heart of the matter -- should the website have been functioning more effectively on october 1? the answer is yes. the president the website is improving every day to read the consumer experience is improving every day. it's incremental and what those teams are focused on making those improvements so that the goal can be achieved, which is the availability of affordable health insurance to millions of americans. >> does the president think the launch date should have been pushed back knowing what he knows now? >> again, the website should have been better functioning on october 1. what you are asking me and let these questions them from the people who either want to
eliminate obamacare or delay it so they can eliminate it later gets to the other part of the matter which is how much longer do you ask americans with pre- existing conditions to go without health insurance? how much longer do you ask a in honor of breast cancer awareness month to go without -- how long do you ask her to go without health insurance, to go without coverage? from octoberle now 1. americans have been able to sharp -- have been able to shop for and enroll in affordable health insurance plans. portal through which they can do that has been inadequate and has functioned poorly. we are fixing that every day. >> a look at the cms center website.
getting your thoughts on healthcare.gov, how it is working or not working. john says it has been a bad experience. hi, john. i'll lays try to get on, four or five times over the last two weeks and have never gotten past. host: what slows you down? face.: the happy put on all the information they ask for and what worries me is the information they ask for down the road, the social security number, birth dates, the safety guarantee on the website. these are people who steal your identity.
nancy from anchorage, alaska, you have not yet tried going online? caller: i have not. they want all your information that can be stolen. on your full name, social have no number, they idea who these people are, nor do they have any idea how much they're being paid to do this as a firm. i also have another concern that i haven't heard anybody ask about, and that is the mixing of funds with cmf to pay for obamacare. cmf is the social security provider for people who are retired. i'm one of those people who is retired and i realize i don't have to sign up for obamacare because i have social security. using cms as part of
their system, they could be taking more than the billion dollars they have already taken who arese are people worried about re-existing conditions and i have heard pre- existing conditions are excluded under most of the health care policies. then they are excluded in the fine print. i think people need to look at what they are getting before they give all of this information out. thanks for that call and reaction on facebook. debra says accountability will not happen because our own president is not accountable for his estate. buck says from the white house's own website -- title i, affordable health care for all americans. nothing in the proposal forces anyone to change the insurance they have.
john is in middle island and has had a good experience on the website. thank: good afternoon. you for inviting me. to. ofngs -- one, you go to get what they do their and what they are doing is verifying, if you notice, there is a secure site. i've been in the business but i'm now disabled and retired grade is a safe website and they need to be able to confirm who you want. it's necessary to do that. disabledning on, i'm a retired american veteran. i'm recovered but my wife is not -- my i am retired but my wife is not. it took four minutes for them to
verify my identity and send me to the new york state exchange which is up and running. very intuitive. minutes to get her all set up. you put on the information and it comes back and gives you what are the next steps. this campaign is very happy with what's going on and i'm happy to say as an american patriot, it's about time. thank you c-span for everything you do. >> marty, not having a good experience dealing with the site for 10 and aed half hours to get on the website and cap kicking me off. this is at health care.gov -- this is at>>
healthcare.gov? caller: yes. i got to the end of it after about three hours and it wish me to start over again. host: that must be frustrating. caller: it is. you wait for the screen to pop up and you go through all these stunts and stuff and after listing to the show and everything, i'm kind of wondering if i even want to put my information on there now because it is all your information. whoe are people out there hack the servers all the time to get information. from what i hear, people who do areally yet on, they getting dropped from their previous insurer and their rates
are going up by one third to double. right now, you have not completed -- caller: thank you for sharing your experience. cheryl says having basic health care coverage is like having car insurance. it protects society as a whole. another caller says the idiot from texas is talking about the people in charge of the website who is responsible for 700,000 people didn't have a clue needs to retire. two old to be in office. susan says proud of republicans for politely staying on topic. democrats wailed and moaned with little of investigative value. and onrings, missouri, has not got online. what are you anticipating?
i am a concerned as a user of the medicare system, seeing the premium rates are going to be increased and they are not going to tell me that great i know higher rates are being talked about for commercial and exchange renames, even doubling up the deductibles, and i'm afraid it's posted costs $94 million and is now over $600 million. obama can take $500 billion out of the care and put it into the affordable care act, why couldn't he raise the premium on us seniors to pay for his mistakes? let's hear from bob in michigan who had a good experience. caller: i had a good experience. i was with insurance at my my -- and my wife was without.
she had been without for two years. i didn't go on the website but we went to the insurance company in michigan, blue cross blue shield. and my premiums are not astronomical. they are very reasonable. host: so you have just recently done this? yes.r: it took just a matter of 20 minutes to complete. callstank's for all your this afternoon. more ahead. we will show you the house energy and commerce midi eating in its entirety this evening beginning at 8:00. one of the members of the committee said after today's representative mckinley takes the mega bus back to the first the strict, saving taxpayer money. he is the first district of west virginia. president obama talked about another legislative issue --
this is about legislative reform and he called for congress to take it up as one of its next ironies. this is from earlier today in the east room. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president and vice president of the united states. [applause] you.ank thank you so much. have a seat. thank you very much. please, have a seat everybody. good morning. welcome to the white house.
i'm here with leaders from business and labor come in to faith communities who are united around one goal, finishing the job of fixing a broken immigration system. whoses not just an idea time has come, this is an idea whose time has been around for years now. leaders like all of you have worked together in this town in good faith for years to try to get this done, and this is the moment when we should finally begin to get the job done. it's no secret that the american people haven't seen much out of washington that they like these days. the shutdown and the threat of the first default in more than 200 years inflicted real pain on andbusinesses and families
it was a completely unnecessary self-inflicted wound with real costs to real people and it can never happen again. even with the shutdown over and the threat of default eliminated, democrats and republicans have vague disagreements. some fundamental views about how we should move forward on certain issues. on the other hand, as i said the day after the shut down ended, that's no reason we shouldn't be able to work together on the things we do agree on. we should be able to work together on a responsible budget that invests in things we need to do while maintaining fiscal discipline. we should be able to pass a "farmville" that protects vulnerable americans in hard times. and we should pass immigration reform. [applause]
we should pass immigration -- it's good for our economy, good for our national people,, good for our and we should do it this year. everyone should know our current system is broken. across our political spectrum, we've known it for years. it's not smart to invite some of the brightest minds from around the world to study here. we send them back to their home countries to start businesses and create jobs and invent new products someplace else. and not fair to businesses middle-class families who play by the rules when we allow companies trying to undercut the
rules working to hire folks at lower wages for no benefits, no overtime so somehow they get a competitive edge for breaking the rules. it doesn't make sense. it doesn't make sense to have 11 million people who are in this without anygally incentive for anyway for them to come out of the shadows, get right with the law, meet their responsibilities and permit their families to move ahead. smart, it's not fair, it doesn't make sense. we have kicked this particular can down the road for too long grade the good news is this year, the senate has already passed and immigration reform bill by a wide bipartisan
majority that addressed all of these issues. it's a bill that continues to strengthen our borders a lot with level the playing field by ifding employers accountable they knowingly hire undocumented workers. it would modernize our legal immigration system so that even as we train for jobs of the future, we are to attract the skills from workers beyond our borders to create jobs in the united states. it makes sure everyone plays by the same rules to provide a pathway for earned citizenship, one that includes passing a background check how the learning english, paying taxes, paying a penalty, getting in line behind everyone trying to come here the right way. it had all the component parts. it did not have everything i wanted. he did not have everything everybody wanted, but it address
the core challenges of how we create an immigration system that is fair, just, that is true to our traditions as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. that has passed the senate by a bipartisan majority. [applause] here is what we also know -- that the bill would grow the economy and shrink our deficits. independent economists have shown if the senate bill became decades,the next two our economy would grow by $1.4 trillion more than it would if we don't pass the law. it would reduce our deficits by nearly a trillion dollars. this is just the right thing to do, it's the smart thing to do. securing our borders, modernizing our illegal immigration system, providing a
pathway to earn belie citizenship, growing our economy, strengthening our middle class, that's what common sense immigration reform will do. obviously, just because something is smart and fair and good for the economy and fiscally responsible and supported by labor, the embellished -- dna -- the evangelical goal community, that doesn't mean it will actually get done. [laughter] this is washington, after all. everything tends to be viewed through a political prism. everybody has been looking at the politics of this. folks who think obama is for it, i'm against it. everybody myemind republican predecessor was also for it when he proposed reforms like this almost a decade ago.
i joined it with 23 senate republicans back then to some court that reform. reform remind you this one more than a dozen republican votes in the senate in june. i'm not running for office again. i just believe it's right into do. [applause] i just believe it's the right thing to do. i also believe good policy is good politics in the sentence -- in this instance grade if they are concerned, shall a should take a look at the polls because american people support this. it's not something they reject, they supported. everybody wins here if we work together to get
this done. if there's a good reason not to pass this commonsense reform, i haven't heard it great anyone still standing in the way of this bipartisan reform should have to explain why. majority support it. how do we move toward? democratic leaders have introduced a bill in the house that was part of the senate will. now it's up to republicans in the house to decide whether the reform becomes a reality or not. i do know and this is good news, many of them agree we need to fix the broken immigration system across the area -- and what i have said to them that i will repeat today as house republicans have new, additional ideas for how we should move forward, we want to hear them. i'll be listening.
i know democrats and republicans in the senate, those who voted for immigration reform already are eager to hear those additional ideas. is sweep thet do problem under the rug one more and leave it for someone else to solve in the future. rather than create problems, let's prove to the american people that washington can actually solve some problems. tos reform comes as close anything we got to a law that now andefit everyone into the future. let's see if we can get this done and get it done this year. [applause] we have got the time to do it. republicans in the house,
including the speaker has said we should act. so let's not wait. it doesn't get easier. let's do it now. let's not delay. let's do it in a bipartisan fashion. of you who are here today, i just want to say one last thing -- thank you for your persistence thomas thank you for your activism, thank you for your passion and heart when it comes to this issue. you've got to keep it up. keep putting the pressure on all of us to get this done. there will be moments, and there are always moments like this in big efforts at reform where you the presstance and will declare something that. it's not going to happen.
overcome.e and i have to say these don't look like people who are easily deterred. they don't look like folks who are going to give up. [applause] thelook fired up to make next push. whether you are a republican or democrat or independent, i want you to keep working and i'm going to be right next to you to make sure we get immigration reform done. it is time. let no get it done. thank you very much, everybody. let's go get it done. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]
>> thanks, everybody. [applause] >> i think women are getting a very complex message. we are in the middle of a social logical revolution. young women are told they had to have a great career, be great mothers, they have to be thin, they have to be good-looking but well, manage the house and there is a sense of entitlement. i can do everything a young man does. that includes having a glass of wine or two afterward. to medicate anxiety and loneliness. i think there is a lot of anxiety in this generation in terms of how do i manage it all.
what we look at who is drinking the most, we see professional women, the educated woman, and i don't think this is what gloria steinem had in mind. >> on the closing gender gap in the world of risky drinking, sunday night on "afterwards" as part of book tv. right now online, join other like john lewis. hear what others are saying and find out more on book tv. the c-span student cam video competition asks what's the most important issue congress should continue -- should consider in 2014. be sure to include c-span video. the competition is open to all the land high school students with a grand prize of $5,000. this year, we double the number
of winners. entries are due by january 20 come a 4014. span -- we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting them in the rim at congressional hearings, briefings and conferences and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house as a public service of private industry. the tvc-span, created by industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. now, you can watch us in hd. government shutdown ended a week ago. up next, a conversation on its impact and the future ahead for the conservative agenda. we want to welcome back and culture who is out with a new book -- never trust a liberal over three, especially a republican.
first, i want to get your reaction to the headlines this morning over the affordable care act. obamacare's first users start to get booted. more losers than winners at the end of this month. >> it everything conservatives expected. it is a universal law of nature. will get more expensive and worse over time and everything is subjected to the private sector will get better and cheaper. that's why we would like health insurance sold in the same market they gave us cell phones and flatscreen tvs. not airportbut security. health insurance will be airport security. >> what should be the strategy going forward after the government shut down. do? should republicans
continue on the road with the funding the affordable care act? >> yes thomas in a sense. they only have one half of one branch of government. i would add to that, try to get more of the government treat we have elections coming up next year and that's a big point of chapter one of my book great to tell republicans to start fighting like democrats. thoseants do not lose elections. charlie cook this is political about more than a dozen toss up seats -- i believe republicans have lost 10 of them. it's in a party that seems dedicated to winning. and so i do not think this is the time for the establishment sites be denouncing the conservatives as wacko birds. nor is it time -- let's take the incumbents and set them aside.
i allow one exception and that is lindsey graham in south carolina. host: a government shutdown -- should happen again? guest: the republicans cap funding the government. they will fund the entire government but they want to defund obamacare. it was unpopular law that was passed and didn't have both houses voting on the same bill, according to john roberts. it was turned into a bill that congress never could have passed on a strict party-line vote. they could not have gotten every democrat to vote for it. john roberts said do not worry, congress. we will turn this into a tax.
it has to originate in the house. this was passed by a large democratic majority in both houses of congress and a democratic president. republicans usually except the games and move on. we will just cut taxes. raking cannot get rid of the department of education. republicans are coming back to this. 80% of government was -- we want a one-year delay for obamacare. obama should have grabbed it and run like a thief in the night. he is now delaying it for six weeks. the final offer was my favorite one.
the final offer was, we will fund the entire government. are one requirement is everyone has to live under it, including congress. you say this program will be so great for americans but not for us. host: you called the government shutdown magnificent. americans do not approve of that strategy. you are talking about winning elections in 2014. guest: these two polls are not polls but propaganda. it is a poll of all adults. all adults include people who can tell you all about "american idol" but cannot name the vice president. those are the polls that take the temperature of the public's mood.
suddenly we have the public's mood. let's see the likely voter polls. they all showed the public split about equal on the government shutdown. the network news is running 62 stories and i blaming it on republicans and none on the democrats. and majority of americans and likely voters oppose obamacare. host: let's talk about your book and the title. what are you saying here? guest: i thought it was a funny title. is a takeoff on the old hippie slogan from the 1960's, never trust anyone over 30. i was hoping bookstores would be confused and put it in the
parenting section. there are plenty of republicans who are liberal, which is why there is a note in chapter one do not purge all of them. taking the advice of the first chapter of my book, imagine the situations are reversed. republicans get a freakish majority in both houses of congress, passing wildly unpopular bills that will upend everybody's lives. a huge majority into the house of representatives and the democrats in that house who are elected fund the entire
government except the massively unpopular bill. do you think the networks would spend every night attacking the democrats for what the people want their representatives to be doing? do you think you have elective democrats calling their own members wacko birds. can we just concentrate on obamacare? host: what is the republican alternative to obamacare? guest: one of the liberals i would include in my subtitle had nothing to do with creating it. john mccain had a great plan. right-wingers have been talking about this forever. it is to sell health insurance on the same market they gave us cheap cell phone and flat-screen tvs and everything else we buy in the consumer market they gets better and better and cheaper
and cheaper. the problem with health insurance was a problem of government intervention. it was mandates coming from the state and federal governments. if you wanted to buy health insurance in missouri, and was one of the better ones. you have to buy insurance including all -- you have to buy the insurance. you have to buy insurance for speech therapy, marital counseling, gambling addictions. that is not what most people think of as catastrophic. if you are 75 years old, you have to buy insurance for prenatal care. what most people want in insurance is for a catastrophe
that will bankrupt their family. the idea they are talking about birth control is health insurance -- how much is an abortion? a couple of hundred dollars? no buddy's family went bankrupt on the street, birth control. it is not supposed to be covered by insurance. you would be allowed to buy insurance that would cover all of that. your prenatal counseling. for someone just starting a business, you want insurance in case you're hit by a truck. host: valerie in alabama, independent caller. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i want to thank you for your voice. for the people that get up every day and focus on solutions. i listen to the elite in
washington and even in business when we mix business and government inappropriate, we get to this point. i would like to see american agenda and getting the essence of the proper role of government. we are seeing more and more people confused about what a true benevolent community is. when we protect the individuals and putting the crooks in jail. we have a government that is forceful and course of and it is terrifying. guest: there is nothing i disagree in with what you said. whenever the american people or a republican says government has gotten out of control, liberals
always leap to the very few programs, the 20% of government that of course we support. it is called the firemen first rule. people in a town say the taxes are too high. we will keep the firemen. if we can reduce the number of people working in a different program. the first job of the federal government is to protect the borders and defend against enemies and to protect the channels of interstate commerce. when it gets moved from local and state to the federal government, you have a lot of waste and a lot of unionized government employees and he keeps getting bigger and bigger. when you see a government program pushed by the democrats, their constituents and not the
minorities or poor women. their constituents are more government workers. host: karen is next. caller: good morning, ann. whenever bush was president and even after, isn't if funny how everything was his fault? now with president obama, nothing is his fault. the republicans wanted for the president to say that he would delay it and work out the kinks. the president said no. i am low income. i am 50 and i work and have bad health but i do work. i can see our country cannot
survive with so many people not working and contributing and so few people trying to carry everybody. host: ok. guest: yes. thank you for your call. it looks very dark right now, which is why i wrote a fun book that covers every subject under the sun. if you're bored with politics, this is the ann coulter book for you. a lot of people were feeling despair. i have to say there is always hope in america. you say you are 16 years old, think of how dark it looked under president carter. i am from connecticut.
i do not remember this in real life but from history. when i think of how the world must have seemed to my parents with john lindsay coming in and suddenly race riots, which they denied. garbage on the streets, cops being killed. koch could not fix it. everybody talks about new york city going bankrupt. giuliani came in and made a difference like that. and ronald reagan came in. our hostages taken and reagan turned it around like that. so things can change. thus the theme of chapter one of my book, republicans need to win elections. host: we have a tweet. guest: dana, i disagree with you
on the abortion issue hurting us. i am pro-life and i would say do not drop it even if it hurts you. there is not much indication that is hurting us. maybe in particular states. ronald reagan was the most pro- life president we had. he wrote a book in office in 50 years. and what was the book about? it was about defending life. he had a wife that was pro- choice. "no, nancy, i am not changing my position." chris christie -- i no longer support him for president. but he won in new jersey and he is pro-life.
he has not gone liberal on. i know people who voted for reagan and they were pro-choice. if you believe it is a human life, you will be a single issue voter. if you do not believe it is a life and just a convenience, it is not a single issue voter. if that romney believed everything he believes -- they wanted to have a special ceremony up and down main street, i still would have supported them. it has not hurt us. in some states it is kind of a killer. host: democratic caller from georgia. caller: hi.
i am a democrat and i will like to give praise to ann coulter about her book. it sounds like a great book. as far as obamacare is concerned, i look at america -- in congress, we have great minds. i look at it that way. with great minds, i am looking at the health care for the seniors that are getting older and i am looking at some of the young people or people that are less fortunate that do not have jobs and that is not good. you need health care. rather than depict this act, i would like to see a more supportive role from the democrats and the republicans to support their president. the president is sensitive
because it affected his life. he had a mother that was affected by large medical bills. host: ok, caller. ann coulter. guest: i hesitate to disagree. i love you, caller. working together. i do disagree on obamacare quite strongly. for the poor, we have medicaid. for the elderly, we have medicare. now we have a hundred million taking off of medicare for obama care. i think medicare could it can run better. i do not think young people will be signing up for obamacare. the whole structure -- in order
for obamacare to work, they need young people to overpay for their health insurance to support the elderly and sick people going to doctors. why not just pay the fine? they will not spend a week online to get a plan to overpay for something that they have now a lot cheaper. there are better ways to distribute things. it should not be that hard to understand with insurance. health care is important. having the government run health care exchange is not going to work. when you buy insurance for your car, your house, depending on what car you have, you might get
different insurance. you have an old beater car, you only want insurance if somebody is harmed. obamacare -- it is as if for what the mandate did that made health insurance expensive to begin with. any insurance you buy has to cover all these things. it's as if every car would be covered as a fully loaded jaguar. we are giving this to you and we will mandate every car be as good as a jaguar. most people cannot afford a fully loaded jaguar. let's let the government sell cars on the exchange. there is nothing that is not gotten better by having the
private sector run it. host: mark is next from florida. caller: good morning, ladies. don't you think it is time for us to get information to the voters to turn our attention, being the tea party makes me a hater, to turn our attention to the media and protest and force them to tell the truth about what is going on in this country because people listen to people like yourself and those that are speaking and a look at us at haters and racists. if we go after the source, maybe we can go after them to tell the truth. a real story on sunday.
how do you feel about having the media do something? guest: i have to take exception about "60 minutes." they did an amazing story on the medicare disability fraud. according to the report, you can look up the transcripts online. it is that law firm you see advertised all the time, at least on cable news. according to the report, they had x attorneys working at binder, binder, and binder. they have attorneys on staff and they write a script for fibromyalgia and for things that cannot be disproved.
they collected hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars that is intended for people with disabilities. we have a lot of things to be fixing with government. a lot of these programs are good programs. they are subjected to massive fraud when they are run by the government. it would be better if they were run locally. have the states send it out to the cities. your neighbor knows you're living in a nice house and golfing and not completely disabled and need a huge check every week. i have a chapter on the media in my book. i think there is despair everywhere i look since november 6. there is the internet and talk radio right now. most the people i know use the mainstream media as a table of contents.
"oh, a kid was shot in florida. i will go online and find out what the story is." the things the media has not reported. there was something similar that reminded me of it. cbs atlanta and other conservative websites reported on the irs sending $46 million in fraudulent earned income tax credits back to 24,000 illegal aliens allegedly living at the same address in atlanta. i could not find that being covered in "the new york times," "the washington post." host: it was on the front page of "the washington times." guest: that seemed like a pretty big story to me.
if they were $46 million in defense contractor payments going to not illegal aliens, it would have to go to a tea party group, i think we would hear about it. host: you can follow ann coulter on twitter. here is a tweet from her this morning. dave from nevada, republican caller. caller: pleasure to talk with you. i have participated in seven focus groups in the past years. there is a common thread in every group i participated in. negative ads, attacks on character work. the average low information
voter that provides a body for votes in election, if they even show out, just has the ability they just respond the rumor. i always listen to republicans and all the shows and some of the people that you appear with and it is always like, we are better than that. we just cannot do that. i am saying to myself, but we are losing. this alan grayson is a classic case. he goes after the absolute worst of the worst but he is in a safe district because of redistricting. guest: i do say i do not think
republicans should behave like alan grayson. you are right about negative ads. the media is always telling us, "people do not like negative ads." but they work. they say they want to cut government spending in the abstract. "do not touch my social security." the media wants all power. they want to run the negative ads. just a quick comment -- i do not understand the urge to get mitch mcconnell, who was the ted cruz of campaign finance reform. he opposed john mccain's all power to the media bill. he has been a brave fighter for a long time and he is and incumbent.
we need to pick up seats in alaska and alabama. host: here is an e-mail from wanda about elections. guest: we could go back -- what month is it now? -- october, 2005, and i do not believe the caller would agree with me that george bush's reelection was a mandate and stirring things up. incumbent tends to win, according to the brookings institute. obama had the worst in, reelection in about 100 years. he did less well than every other incumbent.
republicans had ronald reagan in 1980. i would not be counting on my mandate on that one. host: i know you dismiss polls. guest: i dismiss polls of all adults. i want the likely voters. if you talk about "american idol," you should not pull me. host: there was a poll by cnn where they asked -- let me pose the question. if you had to choose would you rather see john boehner remain as speaker of the house or replaced by another republican? 63% said replace boehner as speaker.
guest: i do not have a strong opinion. i have to admit it is a suspicion that basically wants to slip through amnesty. host: on immigration reform? guest: yes. that is the end of the country. he made some statements to that effect. that is the only thing i have against him. now i have to say, just shut -- this shutdown was magnificent. i am so proud of mike lee and ted cruz and the rest of the republicans in the senate. i don't understand why some conservatives are, "they chickened out." what are you going to do? keep hitting your head against the wall? they expose democrats as hypocrites.
we do not have a majority in the senate. let's concentrate on getting a majority in the senate. host: on that poll -- guest: i am not sure which way that would go. host: north carolina, democratic caller, dusty. good morning. caller: i wanted to make a couple of statements. the disease was fibromyalgia. there are three branches of government now. how she can support these people that lack the knowledge of basic female anatomy. she said women do not deserve the right to vote. i just want to hear what you expect the president to do. you talk about standing your ground and this and that.
you really have an argument -- i do not think you have an argument there. guest: what is your argument that republicans do not understand basic female anatomy? tearing its little body apart are people who are suppressing their knowledge of human anatomy. and based on demographics, it seems christians, religious jews, and catholics are demonstrating their knowledge of at least fertility, how to reproduce better than upper west host: will you run for office? guest: no, no, no, and i should not.
what is gone wrong with our party? why do we keep screwing up elections that we ought to win? part of the reason is because we cannot trust the political parties in washington and the political consultants. the job of people like me -- it is to be provocative, to inspire debate and be thought provoking. that is not the job of any office, dogcatcher. that person's job is to reflect the beliefs of people, but hopefully you have been moved by some people in the chattering class. these are different rules. when the consultants abandon what they were supposed to be doing, which is electing republicans, that is how we
ended up running richard murdoch and christine o'donnell. how did that work out? host: one more phone call. house energy and commerce is having a hearing at 9:00 a.m. to look into healthcare.gov. but first, this caller from illinois, if you can make a quick. caller: i can help you out. get rid of people like vitter, foley, and larry craig and other people who claim to be pro-life that do not have children. guest: you have to go back five years. tom foley? the speaker? the one that gingrich the one that gingrich threw out? you have to go back pretty far
with a party like spitzer and wiener which all broken the last year. as for vitter, i defend him. he apparently hired a prostitute in washington. i don't know if this wife called him, but he apologized to his wife and became a christian. nobody knew about this. he did this quietly with his family. it was about eight years later. his name was released. liberals say when they tried to cover up some horn dog like gary hart, you have to be perfect to run for president. when you go back, that is what is going to find people for running for politics.
everybody has something bad. it is one thing to be caught. to be digging up something from the past -- vitter is famous for completely predicting what would happen to the levees. host: we are out of time. for talking to our viewers. >> the house energy and commerce committee held from contractors for launching the healthcare.gov website. we will show the entire hearing at 8:00 p.m. asked whether the october 1 launch date should have been pushback.
here is his response. we are focused not on monday morning quarterbacking, but on improving the access americans have to the information they need so they can shop for and purchase affordable health insurance. , tests were done, and what we'd learned upon launch is that the problems with the site ,ere greater than expected significantly, and that significant work needed to be done to fix those problems, and that is what is happening. /2 weeks into a six-month process. we will make sure that information about the progress is made and will be available to you through regular briefings,
at cms, and information be provided by the teams that are working on the improvements. our focus is on getting it right, because the endgame -- the fact there are problems with is something that we acknowledge, and that is why we are addressing it head on. the fact that the critics of the affordable care act who have worked assiduously for years to try to do away with it, repeal it, to fund it, sabotage it are now expressing great concern about the fact that the website is not functioning properly i think should be taken with a grain of salt, because the we are focused on getting affordable health insurance to the american people. some folks in washington, especially republicans, of course, principally, were
entirely republicans, have been focusing on preventing that from happening. >> a contractor said this should not require a month of testing. >> what i said is there are regular briefings at cms where you can get your questions answered about the work that is being done to improve this. is --sis of your question goes to the heart of the matter -- should the website you been functioning better on october 1? the answer is yes. we are not satisfied, the president is not satisfy, ebelius iss not satisfied. what the teams are focused on is making those improvements so that the goal can be achieved, which is the availability of affordable health insurance to millions of americans. >> does the president think the launch date should be pushed back? >> what the president believes
is the website should have been at her functioning on october 1. what you are asking the and what, again, these questions from the general direction of people who wanted either to a limited obamacare oort delay it so they could eliminate it later, it's to the other part of the matter is how much longer u.s. americans with pre-existing conditions to go without health insurance? how much longer do you ask a single mom with breast cancer on light the white house and the naval observatory, how much longer do you ask her to go without coverage? it answer is time is now and is available now, from day one, from october 1. americans have been able to shop for it, apply for, and it rolenl in affordable health insurance
plans. one portal in which they can do that has been in adequate and has functioned poorly, and we are fixing that. >> a reminder, we will air all of today's hearing at 8:00 on c- span. also tonight, the final virginia 9:20 pm's debate at eastern. this morning, we spoke to a richmond reporter about -- for a preview of tonight's debate. host: what do you expect from the debate? who has the most to gain? polls suggesttest .hat mr. mcauliffe is way ahead the republican nominee, can cogently, clearly playing catch up. in the argot of contemporary politics, he he is hoping he can change the narrative, and
one of the things we have been seeing a lot in recent hours from the coachella campaign is a new fresh, more vigorous attack on health care reform. this seems to be more an effort to rally the republican base van really reached to vast numbers s, swing voters, independent who decide elections in virginia. in thehat do you see past few hours from the kuchen cucinelliaign -- campaign? mr. mcauliffe has said he would like virginia to expand its mitigated -- medicaid problem to comply with
obamacare, and there is debate within the state government over that. the republicans who controlled the house of delegates are dead set against that, or so they say , and it promises to be a big flashpoint if mr. mcauliffe is elected. what we are seeing here is guilt by association. host: deuce backed -- do you expect mcauliffe's lead will narrow? guest: it is likely as voters come home. the biggest issue in this campaign seems to be mr. cucinelliy -- himself. when he ran for attorney general in 2000 and nine, racking up over one million votes, he was not subject to the closest scrutiny by the electorate.
him scrutiny has elevated in the years he has spent in the attorney general's office with a number of high-profile crusades, if you will. one of the first attorney generals in the country to challenge the aca, a big struggle in court, although unsuccessful, against the university of virginia about research on climate change, and continuing efforts to restrict abortion in virginia, and that shows up consistently in the polls in terms of an enormous gender gap. women are breaking to mr. , andiffe by double digits this seems to be largely a consequence of the republican nominee's outspoken opposition to abortion rights. host: are these independents
that are breaking former collect -- breaking for mcauliffe? guest: do women who are breaking are not only democrats. there are a good number of republican and independent female potus. for them come a big issue is abortion rights. host: what about the libertarian candidate? sarvis seems to be cucinelli.drag for the polls suggest he is running in the low double agents. he is clearly presenting some republicanr the candidate in terms of drawing away the libertarian republican votes.
he has not had a chance to participate in any of these debates because he has not really maintained a double-digit standing in the polls. we are expecting to see him tonight in blacksburg where he may be live tweeting from virginia tech. host: how will the government shutdown play out in tonight's debate? guest: virginia has a substantial portion of its economy, about 26% of its economy is directly drawn from federal spending, military, and civilian. the beneficence of uncle sam
touches the lives of many virginians. as a result, there are many virginians who were very upset over this shutdown. it is not just those who work for the federal government or federal contractors, largely concentrated in northern virginia, but all along the i-95 interstate 64 corridor, down the atlantic seacoast, the southeastern region, also a big factor down there. it is clearly driving up the negatives for the republicans. mr. cuccinelli has gone to great lengths to distance himself from what occurred in washington. however, he is doing this at the same time, relying on such important national republican figures as ted cruz and also rand paul. host: so, jeff shapiro, finally the "richmond times" did not endorse a candidate. why not? what does this say about this
race? host: the editorial page of the "richmond times-dispatch" for the past 40 years has shown great preference for republican gubernatorial nominees. it has not endorsed a democrat for governor in 10 elections. so it is widely assumed to have been a default republican newspaper, certainly in gubernatorial election years. the conventional wisdom is the silence of "the times-dispatch" on this governor's race is an indication of continuing republican discontent with mr. cuccinelli. host: jeff schapiro, thank you for your time and for setting up this debate. coverage tonight with ted cruz who will speak at the iowa republican party reagan
dinner. we will have live coverage at 8:00 eastern on c-span. neil degrasse tyson on --rica's call for sign forsyth and engineers. >> if nasa is helping, you do not need a program to convince people to understand that science is good to do, because they will see it writ large on the paper, and they will be calling for engineers to help us go ice fishing on europa where there has been an ocean of water that has been liquid for billions of years. we are going to dig through the soils of mars and look for life. that will give me the best i'll adjust. look at the national polio today. geology, electrical engineer, all the stem fields, science, technology,
engineering, and math, revisit -- represented in the nasa portfolio. "book tv," every weekend on c-span2. >> this past weekend, panelists were asked about president obama canceling his asia trip. in asiase official said showing up means a lot. the foreign-policy initiative hosted the event. it includes randy forbes who spoke about the impact of budget cuts. this is just under an hour. >> in 2009 the obama administration embarked upon an ambitious plan to pivot american attention to asia. some clever people and the white
house vacation shop renamed the plan from pivot to rebalance, but i am told there was one official who preferred the term himself, and regardless of what you call it, the first term of the obama ministration saw a shift of attention among resources, and rhetoric toward the age of height -- the asia- pacific region. not only has the dramatic and military attention cap on the middle east, several edge crises, and the exit of hands from the administration and congress have called into question the administration's efficacy and competency. we cannot have a better panel to discuss this today. let me introduce them to you. randy forbes is representing virginia's fourth congressional district.
prior he was a member of the virginia house of elegance and chairman of the republican party of virginia. he is a leading voice on defense and national security related issues in congress. he is a member of the committee on the judiciary and he is also a member of the china caucus which is no less active than any other congressional caucus. sleyssador kim bea was first elected to parliament in 1980. the laborinister in holding positions and training aviation and special minister of states. have i left any out?
>> that proves i cannot keep his job. >> he was leader of the opposition. he is known for throwing some of the best barbecues in the washington scene. we also have the political minister from the embassy of japan. his areas of responsibility include u.s.-japan relations. prior to october 2012, he served as cultural affairs minister. he has been director of the northeast asia division. was deputy time he head of japan's delegation. he is preparing to run his first united states marine corps marathon. i will invite the speakers to give five minutes of opening remarks. these begin. >> thank you for being with us
today, and it is always honored to be here. i'm looking forward to the questions and listening, so i will be brief. i will talk to you from the small part of my world that i see, the defense part of it, as we look at the asia-pacific rebalance, or pivot, as josh mentioned. people will ask me, what he you see regarding, and they might pick the topic and it could be in iraq, afghanistan, the navy, or whatever, and you could go on -- each of us could talk about the lanes we run in, but in the minutes i have today, what i would like to emphasize is what is missing. what is missing from the debate, what is missing from what we see, and when i hear any one orking bout the asia-pacific rebalance, the first thing i see
that is missing is the capabilities. i can meet with any general and we have been nomenclature pretty good. we can write about what it should be, what it might be, but if you look, we have a huge disconnect between the topic itself and actual capabilities that have put their to implement that policy, whatever it is. the second thing is just coming off that huge budget crisis that we have had in washington, and i have never in my career seen such a disconnect tween what people thought they were fighting for and what they actually had on the table. be that as it may, the one issue that was not talked about except in a very small circle and that we kept trying to emphasize, but we could not get traction on, was the impact of this whole budget and sequestration on what it is doing on defense and our capabilities. it was difficult to get -- to talk about this.
we had many people talking about other types of things. by question was, how can i cast a vote on legislation that is -- continuedinuous taking us down a path that will create a national security issue for this country? no real discussion of that. the third thing, as you look at the asia-pacific event, that you have to recognize has some context that is relevant to it is one of the things missing in congress is a knowledge about what is going on in defense today. it is so great that we actually had to have a letter that was written to our leadership that was signed by most of the chairman, asking the leadership of both sides of the aisle and people, not only armed services committee, to have a classified reefing on
where we are going to defense and what gets we may have the capability that are coming along. we are shocked i these discussions and find out that many of those people have never had those briefings, including leadership. we hope that we'll be taking place in the next few weeks. last two points i want to throw out, for things i think are missing, if i go to the end account, one of the things missing today is strategy. the are not seeing this kind of strategy and planning that i think is going to the so crucial for us am a we have this asia- pacific pivot, or anything else the pentagon would do, and i give you two examples. last couplering the of weeks, and i asked a top- ranking official, how do you make procurement decisions, how do our allies make procurement decisions when we do not have a national defense strategy, the only thing we have is a
guidance? an response we got back, appropriate one, is that is a very good question, and they could not answer it. the subcomponent of that that i think we have seen this thing, look strategy, is if you at what they are getting ready to do with that assessment, i think it has been a catalyst for our strategy in the pentagon for years, and i am concerned as we see that either go away or entity that another i think we are going to miss the opportunity of strategy. the final thing i would tell you, and this i think is particularly love and the asia- pacific pivot is i do not see agency guidance we need to have. requested that take place, but so far none of it has taken place. it is important when we look at this topic at some point in time
not only to have strategic guidance from the pentagon, not only to have congress have an awareness of what is missing, but only to have this budget debate, but it is important our agencyes have an inter- review where they say we understand our strategy, we do not have to rely on speeches or interviews that we review to get that. toh that i will look forward your questions and being with the ambassador. >> thank you, and as a treat for our audience, i am happy to break the news that the office be foldedessment will into the office of the secretary of defense for policy as part of the ongoing efficiency review. that is an article coming on the daily beast tomorrow. >> thanks. let me say what a privilege it is to be here with my colleagues, and particularly with the congressman. he has discussed the thing that none of us can --
critical toity is any particular set of u.s. objectives, and it is critical as --t happens to you at to the u.s.'presence in the pacific. the u.s. spends a huge amount on defense. for us to offer critical comments about what the united states is doing, give or take, is not within our moral purview. i bow to what is an extraordinary performance and being responsible for global liberty. on the asia-pacific issue, bad news and good news. add news, the inability of the president to be present at the meeting was very bad. variousspokesman of the
maderies at the time certain they made remarks that was supportive and said they understood completely what the president was not there, and indeed, they did understand completely why the president was not there. it was like abandoning his post in his crisis. he could not do that. nevertheless, that haven't been done, it did raise privately minds, both their on the intentions regarding the pivot and the capability. it raises questions not so much in the northern parts of asia. the notion that american commitments in north asia is anything new is nonsense. when the strongest alliance has the pacific is with japan, and arguably, in the case of strongest the second is the korean. the united states has a sophisticated detailed engagement with the chinese.
standing u.s.g involvement. the issue is a southeast asian issue. you got to look to history. thenixon doctrine took united states out of a great deal of southeast asian diplomacy. what the southeast asians are trying to do now is to work out where the u.s. fits in. i do not know quite that they are delighted that the u.s. is engaged, and that is terrific, but how the u.s. that sin, they in, they're seeing if they can get a reaction and engagement in the south china sea, or they can get a bit of a change in policy on arms. i do not really know, because i cannot come as the u.s. has been itself working through these issues, so when something like this happens it is not good. that is the bad news. what is the good news? thatood news is this --
the reality is the u.s. is engaged. the reality is the asian pivot is understood by american policymakers as critically matching changes in the global distribution of power. there is the economic future of the globe, there is america's prosperity, there is america assad opportunity, but in trade terms and investment terms and as the asian adult last expands from 20% of the world's middle class to about 60% over the next 15 years, so you move from 600 million total class in asia to 3 billion, that is a shift that to the u.s.ery much advantage, because currently asia is about exports. then it will be about consumption. forthat is simply fantastic the united states. that is good news. continue to be
engaged. i want to make one final point. this is mildly critical of our asian colleagues, and sometimes of our commentators in this regard. one of the reasons we value the united states is that it is a global power. we like the fact that the u.s. -- if allg, but it is that meant that the u.s. is a regional power, it will not be much use to us. the u.s. is a global power. when you come to considering something like the middle east, and i have seen commentary about this -- secretary kerry is coming, secretary clinton is out the door, she was about asia, secretary kerry is about the middle east. if i were honest, whatever secretary clinton or assistant secretary campbell turned up in half the countries of southeast asia, the first question i would ask them is, what are you doing about the middle east, what are you doing about palestine?
answers on that. this will effect of the matter is that fact that the u.s. plays a role in the middle east is critical, too. 20 years market, the only market will be the asian market. stability and access to the gulf waterways to the asian countries is critical, and only the u.s. guarantees it. the second is the world's muslim powers are not in the middle east. the world's muslim powers are in asia, india, indonesia, pakistan, bangladesh. probably the largest genuine well, it isracy -- wasnesia, but prior
malaysia. what happens in terms of how confident people of an islamic background feel of the nature of the global system respecting them them that confidence is felt through aly large proportion of south and southeast asian's great the fact of that the u.s. asian is -- the fact that the u.s. is engaged in these things is an important asset in their relationship with the united states. sometimes they protest too much on the issue, but the americans do need to start to include the dow you of their global responsibilities and the willingness to play global roles into the general recitation about why the u.s. is useful to people in asia. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. it is my great privilege to be here with the ambassador to talk about asia.
with most of the asian countries, fully supports the u.s. rebalancing policy to asia, because the united states has played an indispensable role regional stability and economic development. as the region now faces a series of historic changes and challenges, the robust presence and strong commitment of the united states is even more region,t to ensure the the asia-pacific region, remains --in the world. when the asian countries talk about u.s. rebalancing policy, we asked what the united states will do for us with this rebalancing policy.
is theseo remember it asian countries who want to see the united states truly engaged and showing strong commitment to the region, and if that is the case, the question we should be asking is not what america will do for us, the question should do for together we can the peace, stability, and prosperity for the asia-pacific region? on this point, the prime minister abe and japanese government is truly committed to working together with the united states as we try to achieve our eace,d goal of this p stability, and prosperity of the region. the prime minister made a very difficult decision on the economic front to join the ttp
negotiations, and japan and the united states them together with australia, are working at the forefront of the negotiations toward a common goal of achieving a comprehensive agreement by the end of the year. points, theity prime minister of japan is very evident to working with the united states. recently we had a very historic meeting in japan, and the joint statement of that statement declared that the united states and japan resolve to be a full partner in the more balanced and effective alliance in which two and rise ton enjoy meet their global challenges of the 21st century. let me talk a little more about the initiatives we are taking
that testify to japan's commitment to working together with the united states. preparing to now establish national security council. we are also preparing to acknowledge our first ever .ational security strategy and japan is increasing our and enhancing, their capability to defend themselves, and also enlarging our contributions to the region, capacity enhanced building contributions to the region. we are also examining the legal basis for our security, including the matter of exercising our right of collective self-defense. take these initiatives with full consultation with the united
states, because whatever we do to enlarge our role in the security field is to enhance japan -- u.s. security alliance. and united states in this document shoddily welcomed japanese efforts -- strongly welcomed japanese efforts, and the japanese recent foreign minister stated that australia also looks forward to seeing japan making larger contributions to the security in the region, as well as beyond. so one more strong outcome of two document, which signifies the united states and japan will work together for the richest the below -- for the regional stability is we agreed to revise our guidelines for japan-u.s. defense cooperation. this document has never been
revised since 1997. the revision of this guideline will certainly ensure that the alliance will continue to play a vital role in deterring conflicts or advancing peace and security in the region in the emerging range of threats and challenges to the international norms in the region. japan and united states also are working together to realize u.s. force posture in the region, which is geographically distributed and operationally resilient and politically sustainable. as a part of this u.s. force islignment, japan making a significant cash contribution to the guys face to prepare for us alignment as well
as to develop training areas in m and the commonwealth of the northern mariana islands. when joint exercises are conducted in this training areas by the japan, the united states, and also australia, perceptive capabilities will be enhanced. asia rebalancing, it is easy for us in the region to ask , but united states is not alone in offering this policy. friendsonal allies and who are joined with the united states in achieving this common ,oal of regional peace stability, and prosperity, and deceive united states continue to be fully committed to this region. -- i conclusion, i can'
can't say that japan is a full partner as united states moves forward in its path to asian rebalancing. congressman, you talked about sequestration policy. we saw something strange last month. for three weeks during the shutdown, republican leaders of both parties -- in both chambers said the shutdown was about obamacare, obamacare, obamacare, and at the moment the shutdown ended, the senate minority leader mitch mcconnell can do and declared victory because i had held the line on sequestration. it became the official gop policy that the sequestration numbers were to be maintained and that this represented a successful negotiation with the obama administration, which all the sun is in the position of having higher defense budgets than republicans, which is a
history the switch from what we are accustomed to. what happened there, and is this debate over i within the republican party? will there be an effort to take the party back? mentionedf all, you republicanve word leadership, because that is who you're focusing on. at thehaving that debate very beginning of this. we started it before sequestration was ever passed. we went around the country tried to tell people when they were having to grab sources to find out what sequestration actually meant that this was going to be incredibly important. we have carried this debate within our conference. we will continue to have it. it is very important whether republicans or democrats or independents or americans that we come back as i mentioned in at least knowing the facts. that is what we have been
pleading on both sides of the aisle, get the classified briefings so you know what is happening to national defense. i think as we have that debate and we carry it to the mac and people we will see this type turn and people will get in coming back and trying to change sick restriction, at least as it relates to defense. it is crucial for us to do that. it is crucial for us to do it as a nation. >> i remember that debate. at times there were strong constituencies on both sides of the republican party, and buck mckeon. this time it seems like mckeon has sided with the leadership. >> he has been trying to get people to change this within the republican conference. we are having these debates. it is important for us to make sure that whether it is republicans or democrats, we understand what this is doing to
the national defense of this country. you come back to what my friend said, this is a global commercial source of about whether australia japan, it cannot function without an effective national defense in the united states, and you cannot have that if you continue on this track of sequestration. >> what are the chances of convincing mcconnell, owner, to come around to this line of thinking that this aggressor should needs to be pounded and -- abandoned? >> you have to educate them. secondly, we are creating a dialogue within members of congress so that we do bring in some of the top uniformed people, writers, thinking ers around the country. it is important that we asked the american people is this the kind of national defense you want, and we need to start
painting pictures of that and not use the clincher of reset that normally go over people's heads. >> i want to ask you, you mentioned alaska a strategy. -- you mentioned a lack of strategy. there was a policy toward taiwan. it seems like there was a lot of people think about it, tucking about it, and that the administration was supposed to be active on it. i do not see much of that. what happened to our taiwan policy? is there anybody working on this behind-the-scenes? >> you have not heard a lot about it. it of the things we have done recently is we have requested that the administration include invite them tond be a part of that. it is a tough sell, but we begin to get that debate and that policy discussion taking place. it is not just related to taiwan. what i first came to congress, i limited the fact that our planning was six-month planning. now i plan 46-month planning.
we got to go back to the time when we have a strategic planning, whether taiwan or any other foreign policy. , last monthsador the conservative liberal national coalition replaced the labor coalition in elections. what does this mean for the us trillion -- for the australian national security plolicy? >> there will be an impact. there is a lot of bipartisanship,. the new government is less focused on multilateral organizations. on issues focused and manyate change other features of the global agenda. very intensively focused on very, on the tpp,
intensely focused on the military aspects of the relationship with the and knighted states, and that said, in the course of the election campaign, they want to list defense expenditures. i would expect it to be a real -- there is a strong relationship on those military matters. after all, it was the previous government that invited the -- but you will see the new government will very strongly on all of that, and the tone of its conversation will be much more about alliance building, and i will be interested in a trilateral security dialogue with japan, the united states. nuanced see certainly changes and maybe some stated once. >> the reason they have been deployed, what do they do? what are they doing there?
we understand the diplomatic effects of having the relationship. >> currently they are being built up their it this next year it will be a battalion. their issues to be settled in relation to their accommodation, the air component associated with the like. that will be a matter for the new government to handle. prime minister has already indicated that he intends to spend a bit of money on it. that happened. ,he australian advantage for us the us trillion army is going amphibious. the fact that we can operate with the marines, exercises of marines, is a very big loss for us. >> very good for the area in terms of indicating to the region u.s. interests. region,orce in the
therefore, opportunities for third parties. there's a lot of interest in doing collaborative activity on disaster responses. and the fact that the u.s. happens to be very good at it makes them a good exercise partner. minister,ask you, mr. you did not mention in your opening topics the maritime disputes that are ongoing in your region. this is a security issue, not just for the region, but for all of us. every time i have interviewed a senior official from an asian country and asked them about these disputes, i have gotten the same answer. the land is ours, there's no dispute. every single time. my question is, as a mature democracy, how can japan hoped to solve these very serious and mounting problems without first acknowledging that they exist
and need to be solved? >> thank you, josh. with regard to the maritime we certainly do not see china having any legitimate, legal claims over the islands. china only stated those claims in 1970. japan is a country which accepts the compulsory restriction of international court of justice. if the chinese side is so confident with their legal framework, they can also upset the compulsory jurisdiction and bring the case to the international court of justice. have on thet we ground or in the water, on the water, is not limited to the east china sea. we have seen similar programs of
behavior in the south china sea. the issue is not just a lateral issues, but issues of a bigger strategic question of how to patterns ofese assertive actions and in a bigger way how to deal with china. thegoing back to relationship, although i talk about a legal upset, but on the ground we are fully aware that thatttention -- tension is very high and we need to avoid accidents. the japanese have proposing the chinese side to sit down to established lines of communications. so far the chinese side has not been forthcoming on these offers, but i really hope that we can start this kind of discussion as the prime minister said. the door is open on the japanese
side. interests ofshared japan, china, and the international community to avoid any accidents. >> we will turn to the audience questions now. the first one does not have a name on it. air-sea battle concept, something that we hear a lot about but do not understand, but it requires the active anticipation of u.s. allies. let me ask the representatives of the u.s. allies, what is your understanding of your country's role in it, and is this leading stability orgional perhaps leading to the possibility of miscalculation? sea battle is a strategic concept, and it has to it is ailitary -- general strategy. the general strategy has to be formed around land warfare and
continental asia that has one set of military strategies which result from that basic concept. if it is going to be formed around dominance of the air and sea approaches to a [indiscernible] set of has another strategy attached to it and another set of equipment concerns. the air-sea battle involves maritime forces, and ground forces associated, essentially, marines. bad news for the army, generally speaking, when you talk about consequences. australian point of view, our fundamental of the same strategy is the defense of australian's approaches. there is a heavy emphasis placed on being able to technologically dominate the airspace around response and your technologies.
35.ce, our interest in the f- response, soa there is a renewed emphasis in australia on submarines. getssubmarine forfeits capable of -- the american forces do not have conventional submarines in southeast asia waters. the australian point of view is its focus on conventional submarines is filling that gap. we also have to look to the surface vessels we create and work out whether they can be done effectively with u.s. forces, and that is an important criteria. it will be an important criteria when we do our -- is to work with
the anti--access area denial capabilities. for that, we think this strategy is very important. -- the congressman talked about restrictions on the budget , but even in this difficult encouraging some signs on the part of the united states, because the secretary hagel made it very clear that the unitednt -- states will defend investment to counter this area of anti-access denial areas. plus two meeting, we are now in a series of deployment of advanced capabilities to japan, including the first deployment of -- to j
apan, and we talked about various other advanced capabilities, including the deployment of global -- in japan. all those initiatives tie into battle, and a part of this evolving strategy of the united states. >> there is only one question that poses a threat, and that is china, so japan views air-bsea battles as a strategy? >> i was not talking about specific countries, but it is important to enhance capabilities to deal with the emerging situation in the region. >> congressman, would you like to talk about any specific countries? >> i disagree. there are other countries that close that kind of -- that pose the kind of danger for us. you can look at iran, and you
could go right on through a number of different countries in the world. basically, the difficulty we land conceptold air-al was should teach it. it was different than what the pentagon is viewing air-sesaa. their view is more tactical than strategic. they are trying to get a concept of joint nests and how they work together on some of these concepts. the problem is when the concept first came out, they got behind the curve on trying to define what it really was, and so people filled in their own seainitions of that air- battle concept. if you look at the pentagon's view, it is how we look at the anti-axis area denial problem wherever it exists on a global basis. >> do you think the problem is fixed? >> i do not think it has been
fixed at all. it is work we have to do. one of the things we will focus on any armed services committee is having hearings to flesh that out, but also do a focus on what we believe -- one of the problems we have is sometime we go to the squeaky wheel and we ignore the problem that could be there 10 years other at. we're trained to focus on that in the next several months. you will see a lot more of that. >> excellent. our next question comes from twitter. the question is, how will regional security issues affect economic factors, driving the agent pivot -- asia pivot? >> anytime you have conflicts, you have the economics that come with that. are huge.ey you cannot predict where they are. this panel could sit up here and we could think for the problems will be over the next two years, and all of a sudden we get to bed and wake up the next day and it is not.
of both former chairman house and senate armed services committees and appear before a committee not too long ago, and one of the things they talked mentioned skelton theyduring his tenure, have had 13 conference and 12 of them they have not predicted. that is the difficulty, but anytime we have them, we have economic a people. >> i think the critical role the u.s. is trying to play is not to military- provoke a situation, but the opposite, to get a common acceptance of a bunch of rules which are being over theved globally last 40 or 50 years, jalal's 4 -- which allows for peaceful summit of the streets and waterways to be used for peaceful purposes. that is what the u.s. is about as far as the u.s. asia pivot is
concerned, and the fact that they are enacted that gives credence to the political argument they make is a unique capacity that the u.s. is bringing to the table that does not exist anywhere else. it is the ultimate purpose? but what is the ultimate purpose of all this? the ultimate purpose is to see this region of the world, where this becomes the most important economic engine of the global economy, is allowed to become the most important economic engine of the global economy. without the u.s. being engaged in the region. i think there is a big question about that? >> when i talk to u.s. officials, they say it is hard for the u.s. to have a leadership position. they are rife with internal disputes, with the approach on international security and economic issues. >> this was