Transcripts For CSPAN3 Politics And Public Policy Today 20151029

That goes overseas to bring their product back here, not trading with a country, im talking about our own people getting their jobs where they can, where its cheap and sends it back here and sells it for as much as they can get. Put a tax on those people and they would bring their jobs back here because it wouldnt be worth going over there to begin with. Lets take that idea. Congressman . I think we have to be careful about this, a lot of the companies in my state and district that have facilities overseas often put facilities in those countries to support that market. Just by the same token we have many foreign headquartered companies that have major presences in the United States. Theyre selling products here in the United States. Theres Foreign Investment in the United States employing a lot of americans and those americans and theyre servicing local markets. By the same token, ill use one company, air products and chemicals in my district, they build Industrial Gas plants and they have to build those gas plants where their customer is. If they have to build a Hydrogen Plant by a refinery in saudi arabia, they have to build it by the refinery. And that work supports a lot of people in pennsylvania. The point im making is a lot of American Companies doing Work Overseas, they must do Work Overseas because theres not north american marketplace is not large enough for them to support the American Work force. They have to export. Sometimes they have to locate facilities over there. Now im all for making america more attractive for manufacturers and what weve done in our state, we are at the center of the natural gas boom and the fact that weve done that weve helped bring down Natural Gas Prices and given our manufacturers an enormous competitive advantage relative to others around the world so im very optimistic about the future of manufacturing. Another call from pennsylvania, john in nazareth, a republican. Good morning. Caller good morning, mr. Dent. My family, we voted for you and i have we have a lot of respect for you but the problem is theres a town called sailorsburg, pennsylvania. Mr. Gulen lives up there. He is considered a terrorist. Theres a situation that you were involved that you took money mr. Mr. Gulens Turkish Alliance and there was an investigation 2003 where 10,000 congressman were involved in that and you know youre aware of the situation because the media dont want to talk about it. But my question to you is how can you say youre for veterans when youre taking money from a terrorist group where they have underground bunkers because of the situation and the people that live there, which i know because i grew there and we moved to nazareth, they have a terrorist group up there, they have underground bunkers where they shoot semiautomatic okay, i have it. The gentleman is refer to a gentleman named fatulah gulen who was a turkish cleric, very well known within turkey. The president of turkey, president erdogan, would like to have him extradited from the United States because i believe mr. Gulan has been critical of the erdogan governments crackdown on journalists and others who want to participate in the democratic society. Thats the individual that about whom he is referring. And he is a cleric. Thats all i can say about him but hes referring also to issues i have that to deal with as chairman of tett i cans committee and ill be happy to get into that but i cant talk about members under investigation. We dealt with that situation, the office of congressional ethics as well as the committee on ethics agreed members of congress who went on that particular trip i was not one of them were complied with house rules and didnt do anything wrong. That was in our report and thats open the the public and feel free to read it. Mike is a democrat in montana. Good morning to you. Caller good morning. I would like to make two comments, one on Social Security, one on the v. A. There was a person that called in earlier about people working 40 hours a week and collecting Social Security. Actually do pay into that and they couldnt collect it unless they were over 65. Well, they did pay into that and they do deserve that. Also, i have a brother that goes to the v. A. And for some of his treatment the v. A. Hospitals over 100 miles away. They run a bus but for some of his more critical treatment like with his heart he goes to a local doctor and its Great Service and as far as construction well, mike do you have a question or comment from the congressman because were running out of time. The house is gaveling in early at 9 00 a. M. Eastern time. No, i just have those comments. Okay, let me move on to ann in indiana, a republican. Hi, ann. Caller good morning. I was calling to ask about the budget. I understand that there was an unlimited amount of spending agreed on this and i wanted to find out if that was the truth in the situation and also i wanted to ask about Social Security benefits if there will not a raise again this year. Ive been on it for six years and theres only three years that ive gotten a raise. Okay, ann. Did i hear the question about the budget . Unlimited spending. She heard there was unlimited spending in this budget deal. Oh, absolutely not. Oh, no. Not at all. In fact, i would like to say this. Since we republicans have taken control of the house of representatives, we have actually lowered discretionary spending. Discretionary spending in this country in 2010 was about 1. 275 trillion. In fiscal year 15 its 1. 1 trillion. And the budget agreement that we just passed yesterday would set et discretionary caps for nonentitlement spending for fiscal year 16 would be 1. 06 trillion. Slightly lower than 1. 1 trillion and for the next year it will be 1. 07 trillion. So we have lowered discretionary spending. The bill that was passed yesterday does readjust the caps but were still lower than we were in 2010 so i want to be clear about that and as a member of the Appropriations Committee ill do with discretionary spending. That 1. 1 trillion roughly, a third of all federal spending. Twothirds of federal spending that has grown at an unsustainable rate dealing with the entitlements of the mandatory program, medicare, medicaid, Social Security. Interest on the debt is considered mandatory payment. But my point is those are the programs growing at the rate thats more unsustainable. Particularly health care programs. But on discretionary side we have reduced spending. Not slowed the rate of growth, lowered it. The second question was about cola for Social Security. Not seeing an increase in the cost of living adjustment. Well, we did something yesterday, too, when we passed the legislation. We dealt with the medicare premium issue that many people would be experiencing a very dramatic increase. We blunted that and made this a much more moderate situation. But not Social Security . Social security adjustment is not something passed by congress. That is dealt with by the Social Security administration. They have a formula and they have deal it with. Obviously they made that decision, not the congress. Youre right, many seniors are going to feel that. Could congress override them . Pass legislation . I guess we could. We probably but we do give the Social Security administration the authority to determine the cost of living and we can revisit that issue. White hall, montana. Joy, an independent. Caller good morning. Good morning. Caller does the proposed budget include any ccc or Works Program for the Infrastructure Improvement that would put jobs back on . And if not, why not . Thank you. Thank you. The legislation passed yesterday was a budget agreement. It does not get so much into the specifics of any problem. Who what will happen is congress will have to pass the appropriations bills. Well make decisions about which particular programs are funded and at what levels. You also mentioned infrastructure, i believe. We are we congress will also have to deal with a transportation bill very soon and hopefully before the end of the year, maybe before november 30 we will have a longterm transportation bill that will provide for the infrastructure needs of our country. Our roads and bridges are deteriorating. We have so many that are structurally deficient on the bridge side that we must make those investments. Im prepared to support a longterm transportation bill, a sixyear bill. Our challenge is how do we fund it. Thats what paul ryan and bill schuster, the chairman of that Transportation Committee from pennsylvania are going to be working on between now and then so youre right. We need to do something on the structure that will be done in a separate bill. We have a minute left here. Tell us what we are going to see when the house gavels in at 9 00 a. M. This morning and a roll call vote is taken for the next speaker. About 9 00 theyll have a quorum call. This is one time where everybody pushes the yellow button, not the green or red, just to make sure youre present. Then the house will vote on the speaker and this will be done by voice vote so every member will call out a name. You can call out any name you like but i suspect most republicans will overwhelmingly vote for paul ryan and most democrats will overwhelmingly vote for nancy pelosi but whoever becomes the speaker must receive 218 votes on the floor. I believe paul ryan will receive those votes. I dont believe he will get 247 republican votes. Thats how many republicans there are, but hell get if excess of 218, im confident. You believe that even though he had 200 behind closed doors yesterday from republicans. Well, yeah. Its to wantly appropriate for any member of the house to run for speaker and thats the process. Only two candidates ran yesterday, paul ryan and Daniel Webster. Paul ryan won. Traditionally those who supported Daniel Webster will throw their support to paul ryan. I suspect most of them will. I cant say every one will but i suspect most will. And what happens then after he gets the 218 votes he needs . Does he take the gavel right away . He takes the gavel right away and im sure hell make some brief remarks. Is but ive always said the hard part for paul is not to be elected speaker. The heart part will be the day after, how do we make sure we can function better as a house of representatives and as a congress . Thats going to be the challenge moving forward and im hopeful that things will get better than theyve been in recent months. I know paul ryan shaurz my view we need to expand the governing wing of the Republican Party, demonstrate that we have the capacity to get things done. But hes got his work cut out for him. Today ends 25 years for john boehner, the outgoing speaker. What is going to be the vision for the Republican Party under paul ryan . Well, i believe paul is going to talk about big bold ideas, thats what hes always done. I believe that well hear more about that the in the next few weeks come the new year i believe youll see a pretty bold agenda coming out with paul ryan and he will have a lot of important strategy and i think a Broader Vision maybe than john boehner has had. That will be the big difference. Charlie dent, we thank you for your time, appreciate it. Reporters are beginning to quickly make their way into the White House Briefing room now. Were expecting spokesman john earnest to speak to reporters. The election of the in House Speaker paul ryan, the budget deal passed in the house yesterday, last nights Republican Debate all topics that could come up this afternoon during the briefing. We did just get twominute warning about two minutes ago so it should start here in just a moment. Live coverage here oncrh] csp. Again we are live in the White House Briefing room waiting for spokesman josh earnest to speak to reporters. We expect questions about the election of new House Speaker paul ryan, members of the house yesterday passed a budget deal and passed it on to the senate. Senators are debating that, considering that, also last nights Republican Debate could be one of the topics that josh earnest talks about today. We are expecting him to arrive here in just a moment. This is live on cspan 3. Muncy. Good afternoon, everybody. Nice to see you all. Apologize for the delay in getting started. Two more to go. Reporter [ inaudible question ] ill never pass up an opportunity do that. Just enjoy a little sip here. Laugh will have [ laughter ] reporter rub it in, rub it in. Now that we have that out of the way, we can go straight to your questions. Reporter i wanted to ask about new speaker ryan, has the president talked to him yet . Called him . Congratulated him . And can you give us a sense of when they might have the first meeting . The president yesterday had an opportunity to telephone speaker ryan and wish him well as he astoends this leadership role in the house of representatives. Obviously this is a position with substantial responsibilities and the president has spoken publicly in the past about the respect he has for congressman ryan despite their significant policy differences. And the president is hopeful that hell be able to work with congressman ryan to make progress on behalf of the American People. As weve said all along, the American People have elected republicans to be in charge of the congress and a democrat to run the white house and that means for anything to make its way through the legislative process its going to have to be bipartisan. And the president is hopeful that speaker ryan will lead the house of representatives in that spirit and with that fact in mind. In this conversation, this phone call, did they identified an agenda item now that the barn is cleared . Whats next . Well, the they didnt establish a time frame for a meeting or anything but i think the things that are at the top of the president s legislative agenda are the kinds of things÷ we have been talking about for a little while now. Obviously criminal Justice Reform is a prominent item on that agenda. The president s negotiators recently completed negotiations on the tpp. Then chairman ryan played an Important Role in building a bipartisan majority in the house for trade Promotion Authority legislation over the summer so obviously when its time for congress to weigh in on the tpp agenda we hoped wed be able to work effectively with the speakspeak speak Speakers Office to build that bipartisan majority and build support for that bill. There are some other undone items that could have been part of the barn cleaning b ining bu werent. The most prominent is the transportation budget. Obviously theres some additional funds that need to be dedicated to upgrading and modernizing our infrastructure. The administration has put forward for proposals for whfore believe is the best way to do that. I anticipate that will be a discussion moving forward. The house voted yesterday i believe it was yesterday on reauthorizing the Export Import Bank. This is something that has long been supported by democrats and republicans in capitol hill but both democratic and republicans supported t the xm bank. We were gratified to see more than 300 members of the house voted to reauthorize that Export Import Bank and that would be good for our economy and something wed like to see congress do so theres still work to be done. Cyber security, i know the senate took an important step in that regard. So theres a lot of important work facing members of congress but ill end where i began which is that none of it will get done if there is a renewed commitment on the part of republicans to try to pass those priority items along party lines. Were in an era of divided government and democrats and republicans will have to Work Together to make progress on those priorities of the American People and if republicans in congress are interested in doing that, if the new speaker of the house is interested in doing that they will certainly find a willing partner in the oval office. And if i cou reporter if change topic to the news that china is changing its onechild policy to a twochild policy, do you does the white house see this as progress . Well, while this recent policy change does represent a positive step, we also look forward to the day when birth limits are abandoned all together and the United States and our work around the world continues to oppose coercive birth limitation policies, including things like forced abortion and sterilization. So this is this would fall in the category of policies that are directly related to universal human rights and the kind of human rights that the president of the United States and this government advocates for around the world, including in our deals with china. Can you give us an update on the president s deliberations about sending special forces to syria . Jeff, i know theres been some reporting about this but a couple of things that i would say about this. The first is that i dont have any new announcements to make today. The second is that there are maybe even as we speak u. S. Military pilots flying there the skies over syria engaged in military operations against isil targets and other extremist targets inside of syria. Those operations have been doing on for more than a year now. The third thing i would point out is that there are there have been previous situations where the president has ordered u. S. Military personnel to conduct operations on the ground inside of syria in at least one case inside of syria that was an effort to rescue american citizens being held hostage inside of syria. In another situation, a more recent situation, u. S. Operators carried out a mission against an isil leader and that mission resulted in taking that isil leader off the battlefield and collecting important valuable intelligence about isil. Our approach to this all along has been to implement a strategy against isil that is building the capacity of local forces on the ground to take the fight to isil in their own country. That is a critical part of our of the military component of our broader strategy and there are a variety of ways where weve tried to build up capacity of those local forces. In some cases that was to take those fighters outside of the country and train them and equip them. And weve talked about the fact that that program didnt have the didnt produce the kind of results that we would like to see. But there have been at least a couple of situations where the United States has taken military action to resupply and reinforce those fighters on the ground to give them greater capability to take the fight to isil. Some of those American Military pilots have carried out air strikes in support of on going operations on the ground and thats an indication of how central this is to our strategy and this has been a difficult part of our strategy. At least in iraq where the situation is similarly difficult, at least we have an organized Central Government with whom we can work and that have command and control of Security Forces on the ground that we can support. Obviously thats not the situation inside of syria so its more difficult but i do not envision a scenario any time soon where that that basic strategy is going to change. Ultimately well be successful when we can succeed in building up the capacity of fighters on the ground inside of syria who can take the fight to isil inside their own country. The United States cannot unilaterally impose a military solution on the situation inside of syria. Reporter what is the president s reaction, then, to proposals that military commanders and others have made so far and when do you expect a decision on that next stage . I dont have any well, im not going to get into the backandforth the president has with his National Security team, including his military advisors other than to say that the president s approach time and again here has been to look forways that we can redouble our effort efforts in those areas where our strategy is yielding some progress. So for example we talk about this a couple of weeks ago when the president made a decision to expand our support to some of the opposition groups that are fighting isil in northern and northeastern syria. That grew out of an earlier operation to offer some support to fighters in that region of the country where they use those weapons and materials to make important progress against isil and to drive isil out of a large swath of syria. And recognizing the success of those efforts, the president wanted to further intensify them. And so the president has routinely given his instructions to his team to search for ways to intensify those elements of our strategy that are bearing fruit. But in terms of and so our military planners and the president s military advisors are always looking for ways to do precisely that. I dont have an update at in point in terms of timing of when any sort of change is along those lines will be announced if any. Reporter good afternoon, josh. A couple questions on russia if i could, please. So yesterday it appears as though russia may have flown near the carrier uss Ronald Reagan off the korean peninsula. Along with Everything Else that russia has been doing with ukraine and syria and our own relations at the worst point since the cold war and are we in a new cold war with russia . Jim, about that specific incident. My colleagues at Pacific Command can give you more details of it. I was briefed earlier today and my understanding is that the uss Ronald Reagan was operating in International Waters in sea of japan. They were involved in a military exercise with the with their military counterparts in south korea, close ally of the United States. So this russian these russian aircraft were intercepted first by Korean Military aircraft operating in the region. There were four f a18 firers from carrier air wing 5 that were launched to intercept the bombers and the u. S. Navy aircraft did escort the russian aircraft until they departed the area where the carrier, the uss Ronald Reagan was operating. We have previously raised concerns about Russian Military aircraft essentially carrying out incursions on the sovereignty of other countries. Weve raised concerns about this most recently in turkey, i believe, but including also in places like the baltic states. This was a little different. This is International Waters and International Airspace so we have regularly urged the Russian Military to make sure that their operations in this space were consistent with generally accepted International Protocols and this is a particular situation that did not result in a significant confrontation for that reason. Now go to your broader question about the relations between our two countries theres no doubt there are some vigorous disagreements between our two countries on issues like ukraine in syria most prominently. And i think weve been pretty candid about our concerns about russian behavior particularly with regard to those two countries. But the cold war, im certainly no historian, but the cold war was characterized by two International Superpowers who were in a sort of global test that was backed by the threat of the use of nuclear weapons. The situation today is much different than that. Russia is no longer a superpower. Observed in the last couple of weeks the condition of russias economy is weak and further deteriorating. They are now the 15thlargest economy in the world and they rank somewhere behind spain. And their economy is getting worse and russia is isolated in a significant way. Not just from countries in europe but as they get further engaged in a sectarian quagmire inside of syria theyre finding the only friends they have there to fight in a difficult fight with them are as a floundering Syrian Government and the iranian regime. So russia does not have the same kind of influence around the globe that the soviet union once did. Russia does not have the kind of economic power that the soviet union once was able to flex. And clearly the relationship between our two countries has been significantly affected by that. In that time period, the influence of the United States has only increased and been enhanced. Our economy continues to get stronger and that isnt just good for the American People, it also enhances our international influence as well. Reporter are you saying theyre not dangerous . I didnt say that. Obviously were concerned about some of the activity that russia has been engaged in in both ukraine and in syria. And we believe that efforts to prop up thebk assad regime in particular will be both counterproductive and have already proven to be destabilizing and theres no doubt russia felt like they had to take this step in order to prop up the assad regime and the assad regime has shown itself to be a regime thats willing to use the military might of that country against its own citizens, its despicable behavior weve seen from them and its cost a lot of syrian lives. And the fact that russia is throwing in their lot and using their military capabilities to augment that use of force is something that we are quite concerned about. I guess what im trying to get at josh is that for the American People, people sitting at home, russia meddling in either ukraine or syria is one thing. Flying over our carriers engaging with our military sounds like something totally different. Are the russians becoming now a danger to the United States rather than just a past in areas far away . Well, the relationship between our two countries has is much different than it was during the cold war and weve got significant concerns with russias behavior, particularly the use of their military in places like ukraine and syria. And obviously anywhere around the world where we need to take steps to ensure the safety and security of our men and women in uniform well take those steps. That was not a particularly threatening encounter. This was in International Waters and once the u. S. Military aircraft had been launched the Russian Military aircraft were escorted away and so i dont think this military situation that was recently reported reflects a change in the relationship between our two countries. What does reflect a change is the increasing International Isolation of russians, further deterioration of the russian economy and the question for the russians will be can they contribute to a political effort to try to resolve the situation inside of syria. Right now there are military actions inside of syria. The question is, is russia prepared to adjust their strategy and be more productive . And this is something that this is a proposition secretary kerry is testing in vienna right now. Just one question on domestic. Congressman ryan, the new speaker of the house. He was proimmigration before. He supported the Immigration Reform bill is my understanding that was passed by the senate yet he has now said no immigration bill will pass as long as president obama is in office. Hes been quoted as saying that. Are you disappointed that he is not leading in an area where he has supported . Weve made no effort to hide the deep level of disappointment here in the white house on the part of many republicans to put the perceived political interests of the Republican Party ahead of the best interest of the United States of america. Now, im not quite sure why there are some republicans who think that blocking Immigration Reform, something that has strong bipartisan support across the country, something that has strong support of evangelical leaders, Law Enforcement leaders, labor leaders and even Corporate Leaders like the chamber of commerce just across the street here, why they believe that thats going to enhance their political standing. I dont think it does but more importantly it is a missed opportunity when it comes to taking a common sense step to reduce our deficit, taking a common sense step to grow our economy and taking a common sense step to deal with the millions of immigrants that are currently living in the shadows. The fact is, a failed policy that is currently in place is not one that brings greater accountability to those individuals. The steps the president has implemented using his executive action did finally bring some badly needed accountability to this system and made sure that we have an immigration system that is consistent with our values as a country. What does it say about his leadership, i guess is what im asking you, if he believes in something but says it wont go to a vote even though he has the power to do it . Does that concern you . Well, its certainly disappointing and it was disappointing last year when House Republicans effectively blocked a bipartisan piece of Senate Legislation that would have passed the house of representatives in bipartisan fashion if Republican Leaders had allowed it to come up for a vote. So, you know, i dont know that theres i dont know there that theres anybody around here thats surprised by this recent declaration from speaker ryan, but its certainly continues to be a source of deep disappointment. Reporter defense secretary carter was peppered with questions about u. S. Responsibility to defend american trained Syrian Rebels and im wondering how far the president is willing to go to defend those rebels, particularly considering the possible of russian attacks on their positions. Well, we have indicated that the United States can be supportive of the effort of moderate opposition fighters inside of syria. In fact, this is a central part of our military strategy inside of syria because there is no Central Government there with whom we can effectively coordinate and therefore no Central Military with whom we can effectively coordinate, the United States and our Coalition Partners need to find moderate Syrian Opposition fighters with whom we can work and this means there are a variety of ways this support can be provided by to them. There have been air drops that have been carried out at least on a couple of occasions in northern and northeastern syria providing muchneeded supplies and military equipment including ammunition to fighters in that country. This is a reflection of the desire of the president to intensify the strategy that had shown some progress so there are steps we can take when it comes to carrying out air strikes against isil targets in advance of the work of these fighters on the ground to soften up targets. We have seen that with the support of air strikes that the performance of modern Syrian Opposition fighters has improve sod there is some level of coordination going on in that regard. Ultimately the president has said this is not going turn into another proxy war, or a proxy war between the United States and russia. That this is not akin to other cold war conflicts we saw several decades ago. So i think at the same time i think the russians understand the desire to deconflict their operations with ours and, you know, weve made quite clear to the russians about the importance of them doing that. Its important the United States and our Coalition Partners because of the investment weve made there but it should be fort the russians because this is a Coalition Effort to support those opposition fighters and carrying out a sustained campaign against them would only further isolate the russians. Is but in some ways the russian themselves have acknowledged that a political solution inside of syria is the only way to resolve the violence in that country. The russians themselves say they have made ending the violence in that country a top priority. Their military strategy is inconsistent with their stated political objective and that as russia continues to take strikes against the opposition inside of syria, they only further prop up the assad regime. They only make it easier for the assad regime to reach the conclusion that they dont have to engage in a discussion about a political transition inside of syria. And, in fact what the russians are doing is further alienating the Syrian Opposition and in some cases driving those opposition fighters into the arms of extremists. So thats why we have urged the russians to find a way to contribute constructively militarily and diplomatically and in terms of their constructive diplomatic contribution, secretary kerry is talking to them about that in vienna right now. Reporter i have to okay, im not sure why. I have to wait. Reporter you pushed me from my original question into a hypothetical which is essentially is the president comfortable with the idea of Syrian Rebels shooting down or shooting at the russians with americanprovided by weapons . Well, i dont think i would entertain that hypothetical. Let me set out a couple things. Ill try to be constructed. Let me restate proxy war policy here which is the president s been clear. The president said this himself that syria wont be another proxy war wont be a proxy war between the United States and russia and is certainly not akin to those cold war conflicts we saw in a previous era. The second thing thats important to understand about these opposition fighters is that while they certainly are in some situations coordinating their efforts with our coalition so they can be backed by air strikes, in some situations these moderate opposition fighters are benefitting from equipment and ammunition being supplied by our coalition, but its not a situation right now where those opposition fighters are being led by u. S. Military personnel. Theyre not under the command and control of the United States military. And i just point that out because the opposition fighters themselves are going to make their own decisions about whats necessary to protect themselves. And thats just a fact. Laura . Reporter thank you. There was a detainee freed from guatema Guantanamo Bay. Whats the reaction . I can confirm there was a detainee at the president at guantanamo that was repatriated to mauritania, that the United States coordinated with the government of mauritania to ensure this transfer took place consistent with appropriate security and humane treatment measures. That brings to the number of detainees at guantanamo now to 113 and this is part of our ongoing strategy to eventually succeed in closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay. Reporter do you think thats going happen . Closing the prison . The reason it hasnt happened is because congress has made a concerted effort to put obstacles in the way of our strategy to close the prison and, you know, its many of you have reported on the fact that the administration is working with congress to if not remove those obstacles at least lower them so that we can make additional progress in closing the prison but there are i dont know if i have the statistics in front of me here but there are weve made in important progress and we can get you the statistics in terms of how much progress weve made in reducing the detainee population there. Just this year weve reduced the detainee population from 127 to 113. The statistics over the course of the administration are more significant that that. But there obviously is more work to be done in this regard and rather than having congress impede our efforts we would welcome the contributions of members of congress to at least just get out of the way so we can get this important work done on behalf of the American People. Reporter i have another question. Former governor bush spoke about the french. I hope you didnt take that personally, laura. I can vouch that you certainly work more than most members of congress. Reporter its a big story in france. You guys are so sensitive [ laughter ] i bet you governor bush is just jealous. Reporter i was just curious to see what the president thinks about the french quality of life . [ laughter ] i havent spoken to the president about this particular exchange during the debate but i do think the president has visited france on a number of occasions and had an opportunity to talk about the warm welcome hes received from the french people on a number of occasions and he certainly has enjoyed the many opportunities hes had to visit that country. Reporter what about the quality of life . Well, it certainly seems to be a quality of life that many french people have warmly embraced. As they should. Ron . Reporter in vienna with iranians, is the administration particularly hopeful that something will really happen this time around . Is there any reason for more optimism . Well, there are a couple different ways to answer that question. I let me start by acknowledging that this kind of the political transition that is the goal of these talks is something that we have been seeking for years now and some of you have covered this more closely than i have that these talks have started and stopped and started and stopped more times that i can count at this point. And teach time they stop it seems like they have to start over from the beginning and in some cases backtrack even further so theres no irrational exuberance, if you will, to borrow a phrase, about the ability of the International Community to coordinate their efforts in the near term on this. But im feeling philosophical today. The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step, right . Reporter what about the iranian element now . Im sorry . Reporter what about the iranian participation now. What does the administration think that adds or subtracts from the process . Well, i guess these talks were difficult before the iranians were involved and there has been a conclusion reached by the administration that this is something that the president discussed in his speech at the United Nations earlier i guess it was last month but look the iranians and russians, given the degree to which they have propped up the assad regime are going to need to be involved in this effort. And the reason far is simply that if the russians and iranians prop up the assad regime it will be very difficult for us to succeed in carrying out a political transition here. Now, the asz mentioned earlier, the Russian Military strategy to prop up the assad regime is entirely inconsistent with the Political Goals that theyve laid out because at the same time the russians themselves have acknowledged that the situation inside of syria wont be resolved without a political transition. So theres theres an inherent disconnect in what russia is doing inside of syria right now. And the only way to work through that is to try is doing and the only way to work through that is to engage them in the other countries that are making making a constructive contribution to counter isil to end or at least diminish the kind of chaos that we have seen in that country. That starts first and foremost with the terrible blood shed weve seen there. But its also led to this terrible humanitarian crisis with millions of syrians fleeing their homes to escape violence, and theyre dying as they do that. So this is a significant situation and significant problem for the International Community and the United States is playing the role that we often have in trying to bring the International Community together to try to solve it. Wheth whether. On the fight against isil, isis, whatever you want to call it, there is a lot going on about the mission that seems to be unclear, questions whether they were on the same page, combat or not combat. And youve used language like redoubling our efforts, looking for opportunities where there member more direct action by american troops. So high school that whole fight reached a turning point now . Is there something that the administration sees where there is an opportunity perhaps in the its final time here are we overinterpreting this, overanalyzing this . I know that there are ongoing assessments. Weve heard all the language. But it feels like at this moment there is something that is different happening and its aggressive and it involves more americans involved in combat right now. Let me start by saying that i have no doubt about the fact that the secretary of defense is on the same page as the commander this chief with this regard. And im confident that if you had the opportunity to ask him that, he would tell you the same thing. As it relates to this moment in time, i think you are right that the president has told his team that they need it to be typically assessing our strategy and looking for ways to spence guy those elements of our strategy that seem to betypially assessing our strategy and looking for ways to spence guy those elements of our strategy that seem to be yielding the most progress. There are a couple different way where is weve done that. And what is also true that given the deeper involvement by the russians and the iranians, they now have an even greater stake than they did before in trying to bring about the kind of political transition that we all acknowledge as necessary. That as russia and iran get mired more deeply in the quagmire inside of syria, it becomes even more in their interests for the kind of political transition that even they acknowledge is necessary to occur. In the face of this increased russian and iranian involvement, is it fair to say the United States is averaging up its game, too, militarily . Well, i mean, there is again, at this point there is no denying that the United States and their Coalition Partners have made an important contribution to the joint effort to degrade and ultimately destroy isil and thats required the United States to make a significant investment here. Its far different than the kind of long term large scale Ground Combat mission that the United States was previously engaged in in iraq under the orders of president bush. This president has a very different strategy and is a strategy that involves significant risk for our men and women in our uniform and why we owe them a debt of gratitude for their courageous service. But the kind of commitment were making is a different one and it reflects the recognition on the part of this will president that the United States complaiant ia military solution on this problem. Its a solution that the International Community will have to Work Together to bring about the kind of political transitions out of syria that are necessary. The u. S. Can lead it, but we arent in position to do it alone. Ive not heard in a while an assessment of the fight against isil. Weeks and months past, youve given various statistics about what percentage of territories have been taken back, so on, so forth. And i dont want to oversimplify it by saying are we winning, are we losing, but in the state of play, is there concrete evidence that the mission is successful, that were making progress is this because again it feels like thats not the case. Ron, weve always resisted the urge, the understandable one i think the American People have, to do a play by play of what is happening inside of iraq and syria. These kinds of military situations dont lend themselves to that very well. Primarily because as the president himself has acknowledged, there will be periods of progress and there will be times of setback and weve certainly experienced both as recently as the last couple of months. Weve undertaken operations to even take out the number two leader in isil. That certainly reflects important progress. But there have been areas inside of iraq, ramadi comes to mind, that did represent a setback. And the latest statistic that i have seen on this is a little different one that i was using earlier in the summer. That if you combine according to our assessments the areas in iraq and syria where isil was previously able to that areas that were previously under isil control, these are pop laulated areas, that now in about 20 to 25 of that combined area between iraq and syria, isil is no longer able to freely operate. And again, were not just talking about large swathes of the desert here, were talking about populated area. And that certainly represents progress and that progress was yielded by the successful implementation of our military strategy on the ground. But were not ready to unfurl any banners as a result of that progress. There is a lot more that needs to get done and there is a lot more that will be required to eventually complete the stated goal of degrading and ultimately destroying isil. You mentioned the refugee crisis. The greek government was saying the other day that they were involved in the largest rescue operation of the year along the mediterranean and as you know, there are awful scenes of children, families dying in the water, boats overturned, let alone what happens to them once they get inland. Is the United States contemplating any direct humanitarian involvement there at that point where so many people are trying to come across . I know there are other ways that the United States is involved and contributing. But does the administration see that is such an acute crisis that there is a need for something more specific on the humanitarian level . The United States continues to be the largest donor of humanitarian assistance to the syrian refugee crisis. Our contribution is about 4. 5 billion. And this is money that goes to trying to meet the needs of Syrian Refugees both inside of syria but also to those countries that are affected by the large influx of syrian migrants. The degree to which that money has flowed specifically to these places in greece where many syrians are landing, id refer to you the state department on that. The incidence off the korean peninsula. Have you sought an explanation from the russians as to what they were doing . They must have known that the operation was taken place. Im not sure what sort of communication weve had with russian, but id refer to you my colleagues at the Pacific Command. Theyre taking most of the incoming questions on this and they may be able to give and you greater sense about whether there has been military to military conversation about this particular episode. You could also try the state department, too. I know sometimes theyre involved in delivering those kind of messages when they need to be delivered. A separate issue then. A case by the philippines by territorial claims in the South China Sea. I was wondering it if the white house intends to push again for the u. S. To join that body and whether you welcome countries in the region taking their cases to the u. N. Ill have to follow up with you in terms of our specific posture on joining that organization. I dont know the answer to that question. This may an appropriate time to just repeat a couple times i said before, which is that the United States takes no position on competing sovereignty claims to land futures in the South China Sea. What we have done is urged all countries with claims on territory in the South China Sea to work through diplomacy to try to resolve those differences. And no country including china should be trying to use their size or influence to try to resolve those confrontations militarily or through some other mean. They should resolve them diplomatically. And i will note there is a lot of coverage of recent u. S. Military operation in the South China Sea. The freedom of navigation operation that we carried out. And the fact is that freedom of navigation operations are not a challenge to the sovereignty of land futures, but in this case freedom of navigation operation was carried out consist event wi consistent with what the president said in the rose garden next to the chinese president and that is is that the u. S. If fly, sail and operate anywhere that International Law allows. So you would expect that those operations would continue . For future operation, id refer you to the department of defense. Those operations will be announced at that level. As a policy matter, we would reserve the right to carry out those operations in the future primarily you because we believe in the freedom of and a half gags and the free flow of commerce. And countries like china ironically enough have a significant stake. Chinese economy would be significantly impacted. The reason the United States is interested here is that as i mentioned earlier, were not making claims on those land futures there. But we certainly do have a financial interest and broader strategic interest in ensuring that free of navigation and free flow of commerce continues unimpeded in the South China Sea. I was wondering if you have a reaction given it sounds very much like the thing that the president was talking about when he addressed the eu and others. I havent seen that specific news, but what you said about the president s remarks is the first thing that popped into my head, as well. The president was quite colorful in describing why its important for leaders to follow the basic constitutional requirements of the government and people that they serve. Kevin. I want to circle back for just a second. A question about language. You probably heard defense secretary carter yesterday describe the death of josh wheeler as in combat. Is there any on behalf of the administration in the use of the word combat . I think he was clear that the specific operation he was involved in brought him into combat with in a very dangerous situation in a dangerous part of the world. Its not the first time that American Service members have been a part of a combat operation like that. I mentioned earlier the rescue mission, the attempt to rescue american hostages that were being held by isil inside of syria. I mentioned earlier that u. S. Military personnel had carried out a raid against an eye stinn leader in syria and that leader was taken off the battlefield. That is a clear indication that there was exchange of fire there. And potentially as we speak, we have u. S. Military pilots operating in the skies over syria carrying out military air strikes against extremist targets on the ground. So we have been quite candid about the significant risk that our men and women in uniform face. But what people need to understand is that while that particular operation brought Master Sergeant wheeler into a very dangerous situation, the mission that our men and women in that region of the world have is quite different than the long term large scale combat mission that they were given by president bush in 2003. The situation now while it continues to be dangerous and while those men and women in uniform face a risk that we would certainly not down play, there is no denying that the mission theyre carrying out is quite different about sgrp so just so im clear, the mission may not be a combat mission, but there will be instances potentially where they are in com the bat situations, is that accurate . That is accurate. And i think weve been quite clear about that. That certainly is an apt way to describe what our military pilots who are flying over iraq and syria right now face. That certainly true anytime our military personnel undertake an operation to go after a high value target inside of iraq or syria. And it certainly is the case when we see that our military personnel are engaged in operations to try to rescue hostages. This is certainly the kind of operation that our search and rescue sgerpts would be prepared to undertake if u. S. Or Coalition Aircraft were shot down over syria. So i think this has been part of the part of the risk that our men and women face in that reengion of the world and have since the president sent them over there. I keep going back to this because this is what the nature of the debate about terminology stems from. Which is that the mission that or men and women are carrying out is a train, advise and assist mission and that is because the president is convinced that the United States cannot impose a military solution on the effort to degrade and ultimately destroy isil. It will require us building up the capacity of local forces in iraq, that task is a little bit easier because we have local forces that are operating under the command and control of the iraqi Central Government whom we can support and we can offer them advice. And some assistance. In syria, the situation is a bit more challenging because we cant rely on the government there and we have to rely on opposition forces. But ultimately it will be the responsibility of fighters inside of iraq and in syria on the ground to take the fight to isil. Just a couple more. I want to ask you about iran at the negotiation table. In regards to syria, im just curious why if they are creating so much ham vok voc in the regiy if iran is partners with the russians to supply the Syrian Government with reps, why invite tehran to the table . I can make what is a pretty obvious observation. Given the fact that essentially the rarpians are propping up the assad regime, you might conclude iranians have influence over the assad are a geemregime. The question now, are the iranians willing to use their influence over the assad regime to compel them to engage in this discussion constructively to enact a political transition inside of syria. Its unclear right now whether the iranians are willing do that. Maybe they wont. It certainly is in their interests do so. They have the capacity to do so. The assad relies on them almost for their very exist denies. So how will the iranians use that influence. Again, that is a promise position that secretary kerry is testing out. Itsb< unlikely that it will b clear right away whether or not theyre willing to use that influence to hasten the solution. That is up in the air. But to exclude iran and russia from the conversations would be a missed opportunity. Is it your understanding that a transition out of pow foreassad is not up for discussion as has been reported in some circles . Well, i think what has been reported is whether or not there are preconditions for conversations. The position of the United States has not changed. And that is simply that president assad has lost legitimacy to lead syria and he should go. And that is not just because were sickened by the grotesque way in which hes carried out acts of violence against innocent syrian civilians. Although thats part of it. What is also true is that hes lost the legitimacy in the eyes of the syrian people. Hes used his power to attack innocent syrian civilians. Why would those innocent civilians continue to support his governance . S they wont. For all the disagreements that we have with countries like russia and iran, there is agreement about the importance of trying to protect the broader integrity of the syrian country, to protect the institutions of that country and to put in place a leadership that will to a per job of unifying that country so that extremist elements like isil cant proliferate there. So this is a tall order and i dont think it will be obvious right away whether or not the russians and iranians are going to make a positive contribution to this political transition. But well Start Talking to them to figure out if they are willing to do that. And on gitmo, is it the administrations hope or desire or even intention to drive down below 100 the number of detainees that are still in custody by the end of the year . Well, i wouldnt set a bench mark like that other than to say that our goal is to get the population at the prison at Guantanamo Bay down to zero. And the only reason we havent been able to do that is because weve run into objections from members of congress. And this is one of those instances where there is bipartisan blame to go around. Democrats and republicans have not been helpful to this effort and thats ironic because theyre actually bipartisan agreement that closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay is clearly in the best interests of the United States. This is something that president bush himself observed as well. So were hopeful that congress as i mentioned earlier will at a minimum just get out the way so we can do this important work. Okay . Is the White House Position now that the u. S. Is willing to work with tehran on Crisis Management in the middle east . I think the way that i would describe our policy right now is that were willing to engage the rarpi i iranians in a diplomatic level alongside other interested parties to determine whether or not we can enact the kind of political transition inside of syria that everybody acknowledges is necessary. Youve covered this difficult effort for a long time now. You probably have a better sense of how many times it started and stopped. So the fact is that well try this again. But i also wouldnt i think were realistic about the significance of the challenge of completing this successfully. Were also realistic about the degree to which the iranians can be an effective part they are with the United States on anything. The fact is we have grave concerns with iranian behavior. And there are innocent americans who are being detained inside of iran. Iran continues to support terrorist organizations around the world. Iran continues to support hezbollah which has destabilized the broader region including i think so of syria. To say nothing of the way that iran routinely menaces or closest do our interests align sufficiently to allow us to make the kind of progress that would benefit citizens in both of our countries. And again, thats not something that is obvious right now and im not sure something that will be obvious right away. But secretary kerry is undertaking an effort to have these kinds of conversations to determine whether or not this is possible. At this point this is the first major diplomatic conversation since the nuclear deal. That deal hasnt enbeven been implemented yet and these talks are happening. So would the u. S. Engage with iran on other issues . I think i would just say thats the only thing were engaging with them on right now is the situation where syria. Because our interests youre not r50u8i ingruling no, but i also dont have anything in the back of my mind. The facts of the matter is our interests inside of syria when it comes to the need for political transition, the desire to tee grade and ultimately destroy isil and other extremist groups operating inside syria, those are at least two areas where our interests overlap. And for all our other differences with iran, where our interests come into vigorous conflict, the president and secretary of state determined that its in our interests to test whether or not our interests overlap sufficiently that the iranians can actually make a constructive contribution to this effort. And again, this is something that the president made clear in his speech at the United Nations back in september. And this is just a continuation of that effort. On guantanamo, 15 months left in office, you still got 113 prisoners there. Is the president still trying to close it by the time he leaves office . Absolutely. Is that even a possibility given that there is not a white house plan, there is no alternate in terms of location that cant go back home . There is a plan to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay and weve laid it out. There are detainees that have been cleared for transfer. There are detainees that can be prosecuted. And there are detainees that cant be safely released. And properly determining how to deal with each of these individuals is our strategy. Now, there are elements of it that were still putting together and well eventually present to congress in an effort to try to convince them to stop making it harder for us to complete this critically important task. And thats something that we will continue to work on and voch involves scout locations inside the United States where these are facilities that have previously held dangerous people. In some cases they already are holding terrorists. So the question is could those facilities be used to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay and essentially to transfer those individuals that cant be safely released or transferred anywhere else. But all that takes time. Retrofit those places or build new ones. So given that, is there a sense of urgency and does that extend to the president s willingness possibly to use executive action to force some of these things to happen . Well, there certainly is a sense of urgency. And the president does believe that successfully closing the prison at begGuantanamo Bay is the best interests of the National Security. We know images continue to be a powerful recruiting tool for extremists and the president is committed to doing this. And again, our strategy would be much more effective if it werent being exceptissentially sabotaged by the United States congress. So executive action, that was a not willing . I think the president has made it clear that hes willing to use all of the elements of his authority to make progress on priorities that he has identified. This would certainly be one of those priorities. But there is no denying that congress has made this much more difficult and were hopeful that we can find a way for, again, enit if theen even if there are member of congress who dont care or dont want to be involved, were mostly asking for them to ben even if there are member of congress who dont care or dont want to be involved, were mostly asking for them to be even if there are member of congress who dont care or dont want to be involved, were mostly asking for them to be to not undermine the successful implementation of a strategy that democrats and republicans break is in t agree is in the best interests of the United States security. Go ahead, john. The detainndetainny released was in custody for 13 years and never charged with any crime. Does the u. S. Owe this individual an apology . Im not aware of any plan do that. Can you guarantee speaking on behalf of the president that this individual will not return to the battlefield . As you know, before these kind of transfers can occur, the secretary of defense and other members of the National Security team have to look closely both at the background of this individual as well as the arrangements that are in place at the destination country to certify that appropriate measures have been taken to mitigate any risk that this individual may pose to National Security. So the secretary of defense had to certify that was the case before this individual could be repatria repatriated. Can you say this individual will not return to the battlefield . Again, the secretary of defense has to certify that essential steps have been taken to mitigate the risks that this individual posed to the National Security of United States. And thats what the secretary of defense has certified. One final question. You epgs inned in answer to numerous questions about guantanamo that there is bipartisan support for closing guantanamo. Thats not a bipartisan majority, is it . What im referring to there is the support that was expressed by the Bush Administration for closing the prison. Okay. Joe, nice to see you. Thanks, josh. How are you . Im good. You . Im doing fine. Do you have any concerns about the budget deal given the fact that you have people on the one hand on the republican side who are saying it doesnt reduce the debt, youve got others saying it was crafted in secret behind closesd doors . When it comes to this congress, we dont take anything for granted. That said, we were gratified by the bipartisan support that the piece of legislation received in the house of representatives and we remain reasonably confident that it will receive bipartisan support in the United States senate, as well. The thing that is important is that it represents it reflects a compromise. Democrats and republicans sat town at the negotiating table, they looked at the numbers and they made decisions based on their mutual assessment about what was in the best interests of the United States. And this meant avoiding another government shutdown, it meant ensuring that our National Security and economic priorities were properly funded, and they put together a piece of legislation that im confident that nobody thinks is perfect. But a substantial bipartisan majority in the house did believe that it was in the best interests of the country and were hopeful that a bipartisan majority in the senate would conclude the same thing. Any observations about rand pauls threat too to filibuster . Not really. Purely political and motivations use of the filibuster as use of a Political Tool . Frgs. Its a tool used for centuries. Some people have found that the if i wouldly bus it ter has matt the process in the senate quite frustrati frustrating. But i know he that there are ardent defenders of that tradition. So ill let those folks fight it out. A couple other housekeeping. When was the president notified of the problem with the blimp yesterday . I dont know when the president was told specifically about this incident. But im sure hes aware of it. And the last one, inquiring minds want to know, does the president have any thoughts about about Law Enforcement officers in schools given the incident that happened in South Carolina . This is obviously a policy that is on the front page of the newspapers hes days. And i need to be careful here because there is a civil rights investigation that has been opened by the department of just sis tis into this particular incident. But as a general matter, individual jurisdictions including School Districts across the country have to make assessments about what they believe is in the best interests of the safety of students and teachers in individual schools. And we certainly would leave to those individual School Districts to make those decisions. And its certainly understandable how those kinds of decisions would be determined based on the neighborhood, the size of the schools and those kinds of things. In an urban school, you might have a huge problem with gangs or whatever, but in a rural school, it might not be so severe. Well, again, i think each School District and administrators in each district are in the best position to assess what sort of security precautions immediate to need te instituted in order to protect student and teachers. And we certainly would respect the right of individual sdrigtss to make those kinds of decisions. I suspect most are doing that mindful of the vigorous debate about Justice Reform and strength thinkiening relationsh between the Police Officers and the communities that they serve. April. I want to follow up on joe. Does the white house view it as Excessive Force and the proper thing was to fire the officer . I think that was a decision made by the local sheriff. Given the Ongoing Department of justice investigation into this matter, ill reserve comment on it. And also on the criminal justice issue, when president obama was before Law Enforcement officials in chicago, he talked about criminal justice and gun control. What is the next step when it comes to gun control . Is he going to lean in and this time maybe try to present something . Because hes out here again anxio angrier each time he comes. Is he willing to lead and do something, send something to the hill . Well, april, shortly after the terribleable incident this newtown back in 2012, the administration did work to put together a legislative package of ideas that was sent up to capitol hill. The administration also put together a couple dozen executive actions that could be taken to close loopholes and put this place policies that would make it a little bit more difficult for those who shouldnt have guns from getting them. And these are regulations that were put in place that dont undermine the basic contusi Constitutional Rights but would have some impact on keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldnt have them. The most significant step is the step congress can take, that is closing the gun show loophole. This is a step that is common sense. It is a step that is strongly supported by a majority of democrats, majority of republicans and report of gun owners. And the reason that it has such strong support is because people recognize that it would not undermine the basic Constitutional Rights of law abiding americans, but it would make it a little bit harder for somebody who is a criminal or for somebody who is the subject of a Domestic Violence restraining order, for example, from getting a firearm. And again, i think thats a pretty common sense proposition that it should not be easy for individuals like that to get guns. Since you tried it that way, do you think now in order for this to move forward, this issue to really get some legs and the not just say both sides support it, but to really get legs and to be passed in to law, do you think that it is now time for the nra and democrats and republicans to maybe sit down at the table together and try to work something out since the nra is considered the biggest hurdle and stumbling block in getting anything passed when it comes to gun control . We havent seen much willingness on the part of nra to be particularly constructive in this regard. And i think they weighed in pretty aggressively back in 2013 to block the successful passage of this common sense proposal. Is it time for everyone for sit at the table since we continue to see this and this president becomes angry . I dont think well see constructive engagement in that kind of effort by the other side until the American People make it clear that this is a priority. Until the American People make it clear that the way the americans vote on this issue will have a Significant Impact on the way they vote in the next election. Thats the only way that well see the change in gun safety laws that wed like to see. Once congress has been clear, until its been made clear what to congress what the her people want. Lastly, paul ryan. Did the president watch the new speaker of the house and his statements and nancy pelosi introduce him and the swearing in . I dont know if he had the tv on when that was ingoing on or not. Is this white house encouraged by the willingness to brey f pray for one another when it comes for honesty and working closely together to make things done, to make the house work . Look, we obviously welcome those kinds of steps and gestures. I certainly wouldnt question the motivation or authenticity of those kinds of promises. But i will say that i think the way that the House Republican majority will be judged is by their actions. If we can see a House Republican majority actually seeking to lead the country in a bipartisan fashion and make progress by taking action on some of the common sense policies that we detailed earlier in this briefing, thats the way we will see whether or not republicans can be a governing party. Right now if you just took a look at candidate, youd have serious doubts about that. And i know this is something that senator mcconnell has not said publicly, but were all quite aware of the concern that he has given the electoral map that Senate Republicans will face in 2016, that the pressure is on republicans right now to demonstrate that they can be trusted with running the country. And based on the actions weve seen from a lot of conservative republicans in the house of representatives, there is a lot of doubt about that. Now, the good news is that we can it see democrats and republicans come together on this budget bill. And that is i think an early indication that they can possibly Work Together. But now there is a new speaker in town and well have to see if that trend continues. And lastly, john boehner has finally come out saying that the holy spirit led him to make or had some portion of his decision to leave now. And paul ryan is talking about praying, each side praying for one another. And this all comes i guess a couple weeks after the pope. It the president have an epiphany as well is this because were seeing all these leaders just theyre sum csub consuming to the holy spirit. So did the president have some kind of epiphany with the pope here . Was there a spiritual awakening . I think the president did it talk about this a month or so ago. I think major asked him about it. Maybe the next News Conference you get called on, you can ask himwvwnn about it. U. S. Pharmaceutical company is in talks with allergen and if they combine would be the largest tax aversion in history. Obviously this is something that the president says is a priority to stop, but its been 13 months now since he announced that there would be rules. What is the slowdown and is there frustration about this potential merger on the part of the administration . Well, i dont have a specific reaction to the proposed merger announced by a specific company. I wont comment on individual transactions like that. For an update on the process at the treasury department, id refer to you the treasury department. But the president i think more generally mass made quite clear that this is the kind of loophole that leaves a lot of americans shaking tear head and wondering why weve seen republican this is Congress Work so hard to aggressively protect corporate loopholes that only benefit the wealthy and well connected. And not trying to look out for middle class families. Research, investment in job training and education, those are the investments that will make a real difference for the middle class and thats money well spent. And money that is spent on tax giveaways for corporations is not serving the American People well and frankly im surprised that republicans spent so much time at the debate last night defending those kinds of policies. That certainly is not consistent with the best interests of the United States. Certainly not consistent with the best interests of the american middle class. And it certainly doesnt represent a coherent realistic vision for the future of the United States with a really strong economy. Will it news today lead the president to ask for treasury to get the rules done . Again, for an update on that process, id refer you to the treasury department. Are we going to hear more on this, not the about the particular deal, but about the aversion rules in general . The president views this without speaking to any corporate announceannouncement, president s passion for closing these kinds of loopholes has not changed. The president believes that kind of money is much better spent by investing in job training and research and development and education and ininfrastructure, the kinds of things that are critical to building the strong middle class in america. The ceo specifically blamed the u. S. Tax code as a reason hes seeking this deal. Do you have a response to a ceo complaining about the tax code . I dont. I havent seen will his entire comments. Speaker ryan also urged republicans and democrats to wipe the slate clean between them. Is that something will be would be willing to engage in . Yeah. I think the president has regularly made clear, at least tried to make it clear, that hes willing to work with republicans across the aisle to advance the countrys interests. This budget agreement i think is one example of that. There are white house officials involved in helping reach this agreement that is clearly in the best interests of the country. The administration did work closely with republicans over the summer to build a bipartisan majority for trade Promotion Authority legislation. An played building that passage. And if there are other areas where republicans are willing to work with the administration to advance the priorities of the country, the president is search e certainly eager to work on that. His only interest is get things done for the American People. Does that mean we may have heard the last from the president likening the republicans to the grumpy cat . I think typically the president has described republican president ial candidates rather aptly as the grumpy cat. We heard a lot of them talk last night bemoaning questions about the size of government, the tax rate, size of the deficit. The fact is those are all operations that have dramatically improved under the obama administration. There are fewer Government Employees under president obama than when he took off. The deficit has been cut by almost three quarters. And weve seen tax cuts for 98 of the American People protected and taxes go up on only about 2 of the wealthiest americans. So these are the kinds of policies that president obama has implemented, the kinds of policies that have strong support across the country, theyre in the best interest of middle class families and the kinds of policies that have led to the longest sustained job growth that weve seen in american history. So i guess republican president ial candidates just need to turn that frown upside down. How would you characterize the phone call yesterday between the president and the new speaker . It was cordial. The president and speaker ryan had an opportunity to talk about the budget agreement itself. The president certainly wished him well on what was then the impending vote. Youve seen the president interact with mr. Ryan before. Obviously the president invited mr. Ryan over to the white house after the last election. And the president and then congressman ryan had an opportunity to talk about some budget issues when president went and spoke at the House Republican conference shortly after being elected. So there are a number of opportunities that the president and speaker rye aphave had to interact and the president certainly respects speaker ryan as somebody who has a conviction about his world view. Hes somebody who is willing to to his homework and that is worthy of some respect. That doesnt in any way minimize the significance differences between the two of them about when it comes to a governing policy, but we continue to be hopeful and were ready to wipe the slate clean and find other where is we can pocan work toge. Do you think there might be a joint golf game in the future . I dont know if the speaker plays golf or not, but if hes interested, Something Like that shou can be arched. Cheryl, the last one. This came in during the briefing. It looks like is that the will take up the budget agreement late tonight. Is there a particular deadline for the president to sign the agreement . I know november 3 is one deadline. I dont know the 34r5particu. There is a lot of optimism that the budget agreement would pass both houses of congress. So we obviously would like to see that done so the president can sign it into law before the debt limit has been reached on november 3. And unrepresented, there is legislation on a two year budget cycle. Does the president have a position on that . I would have to check with my omb colleagues, but off the top of my head, it certainly seems in one way to at least cut in half the budget showdowns that we have in this country. That would be one benefit of this proposal. But check with omb for a more robust analysis. Thanks a lot, everybody. Well see you tomorrow. If you missed any of todays briefing, you can watch it at cspan. Org. And as mentioned during the briefing, congressman paul ryan was earlier today elected the 54th speaker of the u. S. House. He got 236 vote, more than the 218 needed to win on the first ballot. His only challenger, congressman dan cell webster of florida, mr. Webster got the nine votes on the floor. Minority leader pelosi received 184 votes. All those from democrats. Well show you it tonight at 8 00 on cspan. All persons having business before the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States draw near and give their attention. This week on cspans landmark cases, well discuss the historic Supreme Court case of schenck versus the United States. In 1917, the United States entered world war i, patriotism was high and some forms of criticism of the government were a federal event. Charles schenck handed out and mailed leaflets against the draft. This is a fly produced in 1917. 15,000 copies of this were produced and the point was to encourage men who were liable for the draft not to register. The language in the flyer is particularly i lly fiery. It equate it is it with slavery and calls on every scitizen to rezifrs. He was tried and found guilty. The case went directly to the Supreme Court. Find out how the court ruled weighing the issues of clear and present danger and freedom of speech. Our guests include attorney Thomas Goldstein and beverly gage. Thats coming up on the next land mark cases live monday at 9 00 p. M. Eastern. To background on each case while you watch, order your copy of the landmark cases companion book, available for 8. 95 plus shipping at cspan. Org landmark cases. The Senate Finance Committee Held a briefing, a hearing that is earlier this week examining the Internal Revenue. John koskinen testified before the committee. The committee will come to order, and i want to welcome everyone to this mornings hearing. In may 2013, the treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration revealed in the runup to the 2012 and 2010 elections the irs targeted certain organizations with extra and undue scrutiny. Needless to say, we take this matter very seriously. Indeed at the time both republicans and democrats condemned the agencys actions. And as the Senate Committee with exclusive legislative and oversight jurisdiction over the irs, the finance committee launched a bipartisan investigation into the matter. On august 5th of this year after more than two years of investigation, we released a 375page bipartisan Investigative Committee report that included approximately 4700 pages of exhibits. This report is, i believe, the definitive record of what occurred at the irs and why. As we all know, last week the department of justice stated publicly that they would not be pressing criminal charges with regard to these events at the irs. This has led some to argue that the Justice Department is corrupt or biassed in some way. Others said this proves nothing scandalous occurred. I believe the committees report speaks for itself on this matter and in my opinion, rather than fueling the echo chamber, we would do better to focus on what we know actually happened and what changes need to take place to make sure it doesnt happen again. Thats why were here today. The committees report included ten major findings that formed the basis of various recommendations for changes we believe the agency should make to ensure the irs actions remain above board. The purpose of todays hearing is to hear directly from the irs about their response to our report. Toward that end, i want to thank commissioner koskinen for being here today and for the agencys thoughtful response to our recommendations. In that response, the irs indicated that they have implemented all of the bipartisan recommendations from the report that are within the agencys control as well as a separate majority and minority recommendations. Our overall goal here should be to restore the creditability of the irs. While i want to commend the irs for the efforts they have made thus far, it is my understanding that up to now most of the changes theyve made have been procedural in nature and very little has been done to begin work on the needed structural changes at the agency. Today, i hope to hear more details as to why these types of changes are being delayed. At the same time, i believe the finance committee should consider statutory changes. For example, there was bipartisan agreement in the report in the need to update the hatch act to ensure with regard to Political Activities irs employees receive the same considerations as employees of other highly sensitive agencies like the federal Election Commission and the federal bureau of investigation. In addition as the majority views and the report noted and as i have stated publicly on multiple occasions, i have serious concern about the influence of labor Union Activity at the irs. While i am not antiunion and why i do not oppose collective bargaining in general, we know 2 3 of irs workers are represented by an Union Organization that is very politically active and that a fair number of irs employees work fulltime for the benefit of that union. I dont think its much of a stretch to argue that such a strong Union Presence could have contributed to a politicized environment at the irs. Congress has made a number of exceptions to this policy. Generally with agencies that have important Law Enforcement obligations or perform other highly sensitive work. While i expect there to be some resistance to this idea, i think it is only reasonable that we take the time to consider whether the irs should be placed in a similar category. I hope today we can have a good discussion and get commissioner koskinens views on these and other legislative proposals. Ultimately the theme i want to stress most today is accountability. Our report clearly shows that political targeting at the irs resulted from a number of bad decisions made by a number of different officials. However, as of yet very few of these individuals have been held accountable while others have since received bonuses and promotions. I am more concerned that the irs lacks the necessary structural and procedural mechanisms to ensure as an agency it remains accountable. The recommendations we included in our report were designed to provide this type of accountability. And i look forward to discussing our ideas in more detail today. Before i conclude, i just want to briefly comment on the ongoing effort at the irs regarding the Political Activities of 501c organizations. This is an issue that deeply concerns a number of people throughout the country, including members of this committee. As we know regulations proposed in 2013 were criticized by people and organizations across the political spectrum and were subsequently withdrawn. That proposal would have created nonsensical rules and dubious speech restrictions. Oddly enough it would have created stricter standards for 501c organizations that exist for public charities, which would be a perverse reversal of roles for these types of organizations. I think its fair to say that agency still carries with it a cloud of perceived political bias. Therefore i would caution mr. Koskinen and others in the administration that have made this regulation a priority to focus instead on actions to restore the irss creditability than to abandon any effort to inject more rules and restrictions into the political process. I expect that members of the committee will want to discuss this matter today as well as once again it is an issue that is on the minds of many people. With that, ill turn to our distinguished cochairman, senator wyden, for his opening remarks. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. In early august, the finance committee released the final report on the bipartisan inquiry we undertook to examine the irs processing of applications for tax exempt status. Our investigation looked back at the period between 2010 and 2013. 8vq the committee reviewed 1. 5 million pages of emails and documents and conducted interviews with more than 30 irs officials. The finance Committee Inquiry colleagues was the only bipartisan inquiry on either side of capitol hill. What we found on a bipartisan basis was alarming bureaucratic dysfunction. Many applicants for tax exempt status were treated badly. For example, between 2010 and late 2011 a total of 290 applications for tax exempt status had been set aside for review. Only two applications had been resolved successfully. Not 200. Two. That was unacceptable mismanagement. The investigation, however, did not find any evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Chairman hatch and i both took time to speak about our views on the senate floor when the report was issued. The focus of todays hearing, however, is what the irs is doing to guarantee once and for all that this type of deeply troubling mismanagement never happens again. The finance committees report included 36 recommendations, 18 were bipartisan, 12 were democratic, and 6 were republican. Among them set minimum training standards for managers in the exempt Organization Office to ensure that these employees can adequately perform their duties. Institute a standard policy that employee must reach a decision on all tax exempt applications within 270 days of when theyre filed. Three, create a position with the Taxpayer Advocates Office dedicated solely to helping organizations apply for tax exempt status and several others. I would like to thank the commissioner for responding to those recommendations in a letter that he sent last month to the chairman and i. My takeaway from the letter is that its the commissioners view that there has been genuine progress being made to clean up the mess, and i look forward to hearing his assessment in further detail this morning. While the commissioner is here i also want to address the problem that occurred in martinsburg, virginia, several irs employees in martinsburg deleted backup tapes that likely contained emails that within the cope of the committees inquiry while it was ongoing. That mistake was completely unacceptable and it was inexcusable. There are also several reports that there was some lying afterward. Mr. Commissioner, that just cannot happen again. I want to hear what the irs is doing this morning to fix it. Finally on friday the Committee Received a detailed letter from the department of justice concerning their investigation into this matter and i ask unanimous consent that that be entered into the record. Without objection. One last point, the chairman mentioned this question of the 501c4 groups and i want to be clear on this point. The vast majority of americans want disclosure in political spending. They want all sides to be more open and more straightforward on these issues. The American People overwhelmingly disapprove of the Citizens United decision that knocked down some of the key limits on Political Campaign spending. If theres no oversight of who receives 501c4 status meaning anybody can get it and hide their donor list, then political spending will be hidden even deeper in the shadows. So, my request to you on this point, mr. Commissioner, is that you all work with this committee, democrats and republicans, you work with this committee in a bipartisan fashion to get this right. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator wyden. Todays witness is the honorable John Koskinen the 48th commissioner of the Internal Revenue service. He was confirmed to this position in december 2013. Prior to his appointment to lead thee irs he served at freddie mc where he served as the acting chief executive officer. Before that time the commissioner held various highprofile positions in Public Service including president of the u. S. Soccer foundation, deputy mayor of the district of columbia, Deputy Director for management at the office of management and budget and president clintons chair of the president s council on year 2000 conversion. The commissioner also spent more than two decades in the private sector including time as ceo and chairman of the palnieri company. He has a law degree from Yale University school of law and a bachelors degree from Duke University so we welcome you back to the Senate Finance committee, commissioner. And we want to thank you once again for being here today. So, you can proceed with your opening remarks and i ask, if you can, to limit your Opening Statement to five minutes. Chairman hatch, Ranking Member wyden, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the work theers has been erirs has been correct the mistakes associated with the determination process for tax exempt status two years ago. Let me reiterate my belief that the irs must continue to do Everything Possible to make sure all individuals and organizations can be confident that they will be treated fairly in their dealings with this agency. They need to know that they will receive fair, unbiased treatment regardless of their political affiliation, their position on political issues or whom they supported in the last election and when someone hears from us regarding their tax return, they need to understand its only because of something that is or should be on their return and no other factors. And if someone else has the same issue regarding their return, theyll hear from us as well within the limits of our budget resources. Its important because even with our declining resources, the irs will still audit over 1 million taxpayers this year and they need to be confident theyre going to be treated fairly in an objective manner. The situation described by the Inspector General in his may 2013 report should never have happened and were doing Everything Possible to ensure that the mistakes referenced in the igs report and reflected in the committees bipartisan report do not happen again. As part of our work to move forward we have implemented all of the reports recommendations from the ig. The ig noted our efforts in a followup report issued march of this year. As to the finance committees own investigation, im pleased to report as noted that the irs has accepted all of the recommendations in the committees report that are within our control, and that includes recommendations in the majority report and the minority report. And weve already made significant progress in implementing those recommendations. Let me briefly summarize the actions we have taken thus far. Weve taken steps to ensure the determination process for tax exempt status is transparent and the public can easily obtain information on the procedures necessary to obtain a determination. Weve reduced the processing times for applications for tax exempt status and were committed to resolving all cases in 270 days as the committee has recommended and, in fact, the cycle time right now as a result of the work weve taken over the last two years is down to 112 days. We continue to develop new training and workshops for employees on a number of Critical Issues connected with the application process for tax exempt status. Weve established procedures to ensure applications undergo a neutral review process. These include training employees on the proper way to request Additional Information when its needed to complete action on an application. In addition, treasury and the irs has noted our drafting guidance on social welfare and nonsocial welfare activities, a 501c4 organizations as recommended by the Inspector General. Our goal is to provide guidance thats clear, fair to everyone, and easy to administer. To ensure accountability in the determination process, the irs has done a number of things including requiring managers to conduct periodic workload reviews with their employees, information on the average amount of time it takes to complete cases is regularly shared up the chain of command with me and other irs leaders. Our efforts to improve accountability also included centralizing our exempt organization workforces so leaders now work in the same location as employees who process applications for tax exempt status. Weve also taken actions to ensure risks are managed more effectively in the exempt Organization Area and throughout the irs. We now have an agencywide Enterprise Risk Management Program Providing for the regular identification and analysis of risks to be eliminated or managed across the agency. To ensure we properly respond to requests under the freedom of information act were developing standard procedures for employees to use when they search for information and we will provide training to those employees on those procedures. As recommended by the committee and the gao we are tightening internal controls for the process we use to select tax exempt organizations for audit once they are certified. Although the gao recently found no evidence of unfair or biased audit selections we agree with them that tightening the controls will reduce the risk that any unfair selections would occur in the future. Another issue is the need for us to improve our records retention process. Weve initiated a process to secure the email records of all senior officials of the agency. In addition, were taking steps to ensure employees preserve official records created when they send messages using our Office Communicator system. While we continue working to implement the committees recommendations we also appreciate the committees bipartisan efforts and other Critical Issues. For example, the committee is considering Identity Theft legislation that would improve Tax Administration. These include accelerating due dates and allowing the irs to have minimum qualifications for paid tax return preparers and streamlining critical pay authority. Id urge the committee to do two other political legislations to amend the statutes to simplify audits of large partnerships. This concludes my Opening Statements and id be happy to take your questions. Thank you, mr. Commissioner. Again, i appreciate the way your agency has worked with this committee on our recommendations but i also want to emphasize that there remains several open issues stemming from the targeting of conservative groups. And i want to get your responses on two of those issues. The first is i understand that theres at least one group caught up in the targeting that is still waiting on a determination. Can you commit that your agency is moving with all appropriate expediency to resolve any open applications . Yes. We will do that. I cant talk about any application but were down to just a handful. Several of those are in litigation. And in some cases were still waiting for responses, but as i noted we have reduced the backlog and new application today will get processed on average in that 112 days. Okay. Well, secondly, in my Opening Statement i mentioned the irs and treasury