Transcripts For CSPAN Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20240622

Voting, we have to weigh those risks. Absolutely. And at least the agreement in front of me limits the risk. It is a completely unlimited risk. You may be right. They wont do that. What if youre wrong. What if in fact they will. There is a hard line as you pointed out in teheran. They are licking their chops to see this agreements falling apart. I think from all of the elements in iran they want this agreement because it is so good for them economically and it strengthens their position in the middle east. Doesnt do anything to stop them from supporting and in fact it helps them support their proxies throughout the region more than now. I want to agree with you that i cant predict whatll happen. I cant predict with certainty anymore than anybody can whatll happen if Congress Rejects the agreement. I can just say from what i have seen this morning and based on what i saw come out of lozan in april, this disagreement has more risk for the u. S. And more reward for iran than i hoped it would. One final point. By the way, i would just note for the record, actually there were hard line elements protesting these negotiations in iran. I do not agree with you that there is unanimity of opinion for iran. But you also in your statement earlier said this will strengthen the hard line in iran freeing up resources that they can use for bad things. Would you at least concede that again, there is an alternative scenario that that is not what treal happens. It reinforces the element that engagement with the west produces good economic things for us and we should do more of it. Isnt it at least worth conceding that also could be true . It is possible. It is. Burr i think the much more likely is that the billions of additional dollars that the iranian government and economy will get will be used by the which is as i said early, the ayatollah are the powers in iran. They will be the ultimate beneficiaries of this additional money. Not the moderates. I wish the moderates were but i dont believe they will be. Can i just comment on one thing . Yes certainly. On the issue of what happens if Congress Rejects this deal . I went to college in the 1980s and it was possible at that time to major in something called arms control. Youre such a young man. I have to say for a while did. It happens all the time. They were repeatedly renerkted salt 1 and salt 2. Senator liebermans idea that they have to go back and renegotiate is actually the way that arms control happened with the big, bad soviet union. Lets say the United States disapproved of this agreement overrides the president s veto and the entire International Community blames the United States and iran begins to develop its capacities and rushes toward a bomb. Surely the International Community will not that. They may think americans were irresponsible and unwise for destroying the deal but if they are seeing iran edge towards a weapons threshold, surely they would rejoin the United States in imposing some sort of a measure to prevent that. I would imagine. My time is up. Thank you senator lieberman. During your time as a senator you were afforded the opportunity to vote on a few treaties, i suspect. Why do you think that the administration pursued this as more of a political agreement than a treaty . What was the rational for that . I have heard several times today that this is probably the most important decision that congress has weighed in on. Some have said in the last 3040 years. Some in the last 50 years. With that important of a decision, why would it be pursued as a political agreement rather than a treaty . So oh, you mean letterly . Literally. I dont think the administration if they were here would say it is a political agreement. They would say it is a diplomatic negotiation and not a treaty. I will tell you myself and this is a closed issue. That what is on the line as a result of this agreement which in the p5 1 in iran is much more consequent rble than any treaty i was asked to vote for or against this my 24 years in the senate. If it is considered a treaty then it would require 2 3 to pass, not the other way around. The president under the constitution and Court Decision has the clear right to make the decision he did. This is not a treaty but it is an International Agreement and it has to meet different standards in congress. I think that many of the cynics believe that the reason is because the president could have never succeeded in crossing that 2 3 threshold in the senate and given the fact, as you said, you voted on treaties that have far less consequence than this document. General hayden you stated that the inspections have become a political, not a technical issue. And so one of my questions is that whether you believe the baurgs Obama Administration and its p5 1 partners would make ultimately make the political decision to call out any violations, of the agreement, i mean, whether they are technical in nature or small in nature or large in nature, do you think that the administration who is staking its whole reputation on this agreement would have the political will to call out any infractions and make them public going the political ramifications could be quite stark . You bring up a great part, congressman. It seems maybe a little counterintuitive because were all concerned about iranian cheating. The burp burden of proof, let me go back to my previous life. Walk into the oval officer and say mr. President , that treaty that was so important to both you and the country . I think those guys are violating it. The time i would need and the body of evidence that would be required to turn that into Political Action is a dynamic we used to call in the business the dynamic of the unpleasant fact. It takes always more evidence and more time to generate action. Beyond that, congressman that is just inside the american bubble. Look at it from the p5 1 and how many other sfrolings a real vested interest folks have a real vested interest in admitting that the violations have taken place. Im really concerned about the access to the regime because it will be at the political not the technical level. The snap back, so to speak, whether it is our sanction or International Sanctions has immense financial implications to many of these countries involved and so the likelihood that they would speak out of a violation, im worried those violation also just be swept under the rug and that they will never even see the light of day. As described, i cannot and i will not support this deal. Iran has proven time and time again it cannot be trusted to meet International Obligations and agreement. I believe the administration is naive to suggest that the hundreds of billions of dollars that iran will access through this agreement will not be used to continue the proliferation of terrorism across the globe. On the contrary the terrorism efforts will only get better funded and furthermore despite the president s bold statement, this agreement will ensure that the islamic rep of iran will not develop a Nuclear Weapon, in reality it puts them on a path toward legitimately developing and possessing a a nuclear bomb in 10 years. Im wondering if this administration has a penchant for doing things that only has a shelf life during his administration with no how about the of consequences to the hereafter toward our children or grandchildren. I think this is a frightening deal and it didnt it also didnt address the americans that remain hostages in iran. In fact, im really disgusted that they were not even really front and center in any of the negotiations. They were sideline comments at best, for all the reasons stated above i cannot support this deal at all. I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you. We proceed with Brian Higgins of new york. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I too want to thank the panel. You have been very professional. You have a body of knowledge individually and collectively that is invaluable to our deliberations on this issue. A lot has been talked about. The nuke frur, centrifuges proliferation of them, this deal cuts them by 2 3 which i think so is very, very significant. Also the material that is used, the nuke material, you have under this agreement, as i understand it, less than 4 of enrichment. Of that material, which is a far distance from bomb grade material and then you the inspections process which i think is important. I dont think enough has been focused on the iranian people. And the politics of iran which i think are very significant here. The military historian david chris wrote a book the twilight war. He said since the 1979 ref revolution there have been seven attempts by either side to improve relations and they all failed. This anticipated nuclear deal, when he was writing at the time was unchartered territory. And i think when you look at what is going on in iran today, you know, the last five years the currency has lost half of its value. There has been 50 inflation meaning what whatever you had in the bank prior to all of that is worth half and whatever you were buying cost you twice as much. Rouhani won an election as a reformist within that context. It is not the american projection of what we would view as a reformist. He was pretty vocal about how bad the iranian economy was not only during the election but after he won. The difference in large part from 1979 to currently iranian officials are turning on each ear. I think that reflects in each other. I think that refleshts in this nation of 80 Million People you have probably 65 Million People who are very, very young and want normalizeation with the rest of the world. And then you the hardliners made up of the revolutionary guard and forces, it has been said here and many panels previously what a Destructive Force he is relative to stability in the region, with his work in being on the ground in iraq, directing the shia militias. And their support of hebs. But because of the Economic Situation in iran, the occurreds forces benefit. Kurd forces benefit. Why . Im just here to say that i think this 10year period is very, very important because really nobody knows with certainty whatll happen. But what in fact could happen . A normalizeation with the rest of the world the promotion of a more diversified lenlt mat economy n in iran could in fact undermine the current regime and produce the kind of changes the vast majority the vast majority of young iranians want. And i just kind of want your thoughts on that. I think some of your diagnosis is correct in terms of the notion of population estranged from the reform. The effect of this particular agreement on the regime. I think whatever the life span of the islamic rep may be, and i do think there is a termination dates, has actually been extended by an agreement that leads to infusion of economic resources. You can make a case and frankly quite a good one that the kim dynasty in north korea has something to do with his possession of Nuclear Weapons. They love their isolation. They dont want anything to do with the rest of the world. The Iranian Regime at this point, at the level of institutional arrangements. I think what is going on here, the day cotmy within the politics of dichotomy within the politics of iran, there is a serious population that wants normalized relations with the rest of the world and wants to see the economy unleash its potential. I dont think thept to leave in this kingdom. I would just say that you cant compare north korea and iran. There is a very strong reform movement. The young people they are a trading culture. They want to be connected with the rest of the world. If youre looking for change and you want to build a case, that is the case that you would make. I agree very much with your comments. I think it is quite plausible. I dont think it is likely but it is quite plausible. Clearly the ayatollah has decided that this agreement will not facilitate regime change. Otherwise he would not have signed it. I agree. Plausible, optimistic scenario. I wish trp so. I think not likely because i think this agreement strengthens the current government of iran, which is the ayatollah and the republican guard, but the hope here, but we have never really as america supported it is that clearly whatever the numbers are, there is a very significant number of iranian people who would like to be freed of this fan at cal regime. Unfortunately this regime will not let go of power in the vent of an upraise rising is likely to respond in the proxy which is to turn their weapons on the people. Thank you very much. Thank you mr. Chairman. Senator lieberman does that mean that youre pessimistic about peace in our time when it comes to iran . Yeah, i must say if my wife were here she would say im an optimist by nature, and i am. But i am pessimistic about peace in our time with iran. Because i dont see any fundamental change in their radical ideology and their aggressive support of terrorism. I normally agree with a great deal of what you come up with from scratch yourself based on your experience but in this case im going to ask you questions more relates to the deal. Related to the deal. The distinguished senator, once he left office, he is by definition, extremely distinguished, would not be considered to be a dove. Lets view this as doves. If this is the chamberlainesque appeasement that is going to work, lets review the next 10 years. Under the agreement with the sunset clause. During the next 10 years, incrementally, iran is clearly going to have more money, more access to weapons and more freedom of movement than they would if we did nothing at all under the current sanctions. Isnt that true . Congressman, there are tradeoffs here. No, no, i dont want tradeoffs. I want answers. Isnt it true that there will be a gradual easing thatll give iran access over the next 10 years they will have access to more money, the ability to buy weapons and the ability to develop at least the nonweapons portion of their nuke ambition. The nuke program is going to be frozen for 10 years. They are going to be set back. I appreciate your talking points. I would like you to answer my question. Im trying to be very, very pro active here and positive. Clearly this agreement lets them have access to money. Large amounts of conventional weapons that they already have and have already been providing them to hamas and hezbollah. The real question is if they are going to have a fazeout, in 10 years from now, they clearly get to continue to work and use Nuclear Materials for purposes nonweapons related. They are going to continue to know more about nuclear during this 10 years, even if they dont cheat on the program. That is in the base of this. The question i have for you is very 1015 years from now under this agreement assuming that the sunny side snare dwrow that they break out in peace and love for peace and love for their neighbors, we will be safer, assuming it doesnt happen isnt it true that iran will be more able to build a Nuclear Weapon and wage war 10 years from now, from where they are today, 10 years from now, they will be able to do that with more money andless sanctions. I was asked to testify here and to give you my best perspective. I tried to convey a sense of how difficult this is. How complex it is. I wasnt brought here i came on my own volition. I appreciate that. My view is that we can stop them from becoming a Nuclear Weapons power 10 years from now if the president at that time is toughminded enough to do that. That brings up sort of the history of appeasement of the sove yets. Jimmy carter forgave them their debt. Gave them a week they put the hammer and sickle on and told people it was russian wheat. Reagan took a different tact. 10 years ago, you were in the administration, correct . Right. 10 years ago, is it true without disclosing any classified information, that iran was behind weapon enhancements in iraq that led to americans diagnose on the fields in iraq 10 years ago . I actually told National Security adviseor hadley that it was a policy of the american government. 20 years ago without disclosing any classified information, to your understanding is it true that iran played a critical part to the u. S. Airmen who were killed in saudi arabia . That is my understanding. 32 years the ago, is it true that iran through its precursor to hezbollah took an active and in the killing in beirut or had a participation . I think that is true but i dont have the personal knowledge to give you that answer with confidence. I chose those questions and i will summarize mr. Chairman. 30 years ago, iran clearly was promoting bad activities on the streets of beirut including kidnapping and so on. This is when they were a 5yearold government. 20 years ago americans died for sure in no small part because of irans hand. 10 years ago americans were dying. When we look at 10 years before they get an outright go under this and their ability to have the materials and the to suit their ambitions, my only question to aufl o you and general hayden if there is only time for one, it would be you. If they were doing this 30 years ago, including kidnapping on the streets of lebanon, 20 years ago they were killing americans in saudi arabia, 10 years ago americans were dying on the battlefield in iraq, why do we believe 10 years from now anything will be different based on your history and intelligence . Three years ago they prepared to explode an i. E. D. At a restaurant in georgetown to kill the saudi ambassador. I have hope, but i dont know that we can base policy on that expectation. Hope is not a strategy. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We now proceed to grace ming of new york. Thank you. Thank you to aufl our esteemed panelists for being here today. Ill reserve final judgment on the deal until i am ready to read it through completely, im deeply concerned and disappointed by what appears to be in this terms. For the last couple of months i advocated that we provide the bunker buster bombs to israel and the planes to deliver them. Now we have a deal that neglect in any way to address irans providing arms and support to terrorists. Fuths more, we have a deal to our surprise that will allow for the lifting of the arms embargaino against iran. In lathe of a all of this in light of all of this do you support the administrations unwillingness to provide israel with the 30,000 pound bunker buster capability which is totally outside the four cornerors the deal. Obviously i support the security of israel, but i think in this instance, if force has to be used against iran, it should be by the United States. We are much more capable. We have much greater legitimacy given that we have been leading this coalition. I feel if israel used force ahead of the United States, i dont think it would be as effective militarily and politically it would be difficult for the israelis and for us. I would rather see the United States if we have to use force be the one that does its. Im kind of in the same place, congresswoman. If we empower them to do that, i think we have given another nation the ability to put us at water. War. A question i generally have and ill be a little and not suggest anything behind the screen. It is obviously against our policy that israel conduct an overt strike against the Iranian Nuclear system. What are our views and what are we prepared to do if israel attempts covert action gns the Iranian Nuke Program and whatll be our policy prescription in our relationship with israel with regard to that question . Thanks for your statement and your question. I have a different point of view. I think particularly if this agreements announced today is not rejected by congress and goes into effect, the willingness of the United States to provide israel with the socalled mop, the big bunker buster, will be part of a necessary strategy to regain the confidence of the israelis. Frankly, i think it will have even though i agree that if military action has to be taken against iran because it has take an nuke breakout, it is preferable more many reasons that the United States takes that action. The willingness of the United States to give the big bunkerbuster bombs to israel will have a dernt effect on iran. It will encourage iran to keep the agreements because i think frankly iran has less confidence that the israelis wont take military action against them than they do that wont take military action against them. One thing to that. It seems to me if you look at disagreement as a this agreement as a best means of safety, the best way of doing it is negotiating a strength in arms agreement. In the aftermath of an agreement that is so deficient you have to transfer such weaponry to mitigate the consequences of a deficient deal. Thank you. We now proceed to congressman randy weberor texas. Thank you. I hope to have some Pretty Simple questions for yall. Do yall agree that if this agreement goes into effect that money will ultimately find its way to hezbollah . Yes or no . Yes. You pretty much all agree that thatll happen. So how much of that money is acceptable . 1 million . 5 million . How much . Will anybody give us a value . I would say none. Ambassador . I would say none as well. Ok. Good. So ambassador byrnes you said that you wished obamas war of words with israel would stop and this they would make up, to use your words. In your estimation, which is worse . Obamaas war of words with israel or the hateful rhetoric between the United States and israel . Obviously what the iranians have done in threatening israel is the problem here. President obama is not the problem. The difficulties between obama and neatia huh are twosided. Netanyahu are twosided. There has been talk if the veeth is sustained what would happen . Would yall agree with me if the president said his remarks that we agreed to position and strength and power something to that effect, would yall agree with me if went in there, number one release our hostages halt all enrichments, number three, give the iaea 24 7 access any time, 24 7. Four, stop hezbollah from access and six, stop the rhetoric and seven stop the behavior, would that have been a position of strength forecheck to negotiate, senator . Sure. Again, i wasnt there. Its too easy to say this from this perspective, but it felt to me but they are a great power economically and culturally pardon the interruption but general, would that have been a position of strength . It would have been prior to our negotiation it was to narrowly focus on the investigation. Had we acquired those six items . Im confident president bush and president obama start there had. But thats not how negotiations work. John kerry told me himself about the hostage release and they were not going to make this part and parcel to this agreement. In our conversations with the iranians all those are important but you cannot just insist on what you want. Forgive me but i think they came to us wanting relief. We didnt go to them wanting relief. Doctor would that have been a point of relief . The point of these negotiations was to have nuclear relief. But i do believe regarding the detaining of american hostages and other things were a bipartisan concern and president obama and president bush have spoke of the mistreatment of but they are all important. Talk is cheap. Apparently its not because iranians are getting hundreds of millions of dollars because of their talk. We want action and want them toe demonstrate their willingness for action so if we do overtried president s veto, can we come back then and negotiate from a position of strength . I would say as general haden and ambassador burns suggested, going back is going to be tough. Im not sayinghit that shouldnt happen bun we shouldnt minimize the impact. I think it can be done but we shouldnt discount the difficulty of actually achieving that. I believe we should not stride bunker buster bombs. We now proceed to you. I know its getting to be a long morning. We appreciate your testimony. I think its been reiterated a number of times today that we feel this is a much better deal for iran than it is for the United States and really on paper we should have the upper hand in these negotiations. You know therefore if it is our goal to ensure peace and stability in the middle east why have we conceded to their demands especially in regards to domestic uranium enrichment . I feel the safe. The good macro view is the iranians needed the deal far more than we did and we wanted the deal far more than they did. This was very hard and there were no easy answers but it does appear to me we have had a series of concessions just to deep iranians talking. Why have we not set our ground and insist iran import its uranium just as italy and spain and many others . I think we moved away from that particular parameter. I suspect quite a while back and maybe in the bush years. The parameters i think we should not have moved from is the position of the United States and the Russian Federation and peoples republic of china in 2013 was that iran should have an Enrichment Program but only one to satiate their public demands but not necessaryably misused. I dont know why that position was changed in 2013. I think its obvious if certain serious about not obtaining Nuclear Weapons. Thats the claim they are trying to make then they should be able to join 24 nations doing the same thing importing their uranium, so i think we clearly dropped the ball there and it clearly shows irans intentions are not sincere. Enriching uranium fairly rapidly and then the production times would be shrunk to almost zero. Do you or do you not support that outset in the agreement . I understood the president saying when he spoke out that when the agreement last in the 2015 period is when the iranians could reconstant institute the uranium themselves i think he was talking about the period beyond the freeze of the first 10 years. So do you think its a good idea for i mean do you think thats a good idea for iran to have an industrial side to the nuclear sflam no, i do not think its a good idea but the president and secretary of state have to operate in the real world of whats possible and whats not possible. Its going to take a lot to make it work, and weve talked a lot about that this morning. Youre the only person on the panel that has openly supported president obamas deal. But you have stated that you think iran will try to cheat. Well having worked on this issue in the Bush Administration how difficult and complex it is i think our National Security will be met and improved by locking them up in a box and freezing them for 10 years and then of course any american president if iran tried to preak out with a Nuclear Weapon would have the right to so i think the president and secretary are to be commended which it looks like an obama legacybuilding because from all other points this is not a good idea. Youre basically hoping to next president will be able to achieve what you say they should be able to achieve and they are doing going to take this unfreezing of assets and immediately use them to start tunneling to israel and do you think its cheating . I think we are going to have a very tough time implementing this agreement but i also think its a generational struggle so it will be up to democrats and rep dance figure out a way to contain them. I worry that boasting to disprove and override the president lit weaken the United States and weaken our position in the United States. I disagree with that. We now continue to you. I dont know where to start. Theres so many conflicting things here, and i want to start with scott. If the goal of peace when this all started i remember president obama saying iran will not be allowed to have a Nuclear Weapon. Period. Again we see a red line drawn in disappearing ink. If we are delaying it for 0 years, sitting on this panel over and over i have heard experts say iran has enough material to have a nuclear bomb in five or six months to a year. So eisenhower then said if the goal is peace, a Peaceful Nuclear program a civilian Nuclear Program is only through openness but a this is something i read the other day a pessimist that doesnt think peace will occur in the middle east is an opt taste in studied iran. Youre suggesting we cant see into the future and it may be that the iranian people will rise and change this regime. That happened in 2009 as senator elaboraterman we didnt as it we had in the past. Do you think if iran gets a Nuclear Weapon and my prediction is it will be between now and 0 years from now. We know they detonated a Nuclear Trigger device. Do you think there will be more allowing their citizens to rise up and have a change in regime or politics . My answer in two points. One, i think its not at all probable that iran will achieve a nuclear we engine 10 years. After that, and then i think the calculations change. I think regime change is desirable. I would like to see a change in the regime to a democratic. It doesnt matter what we think. But i dont think we have the capacity to produce that change on our own. Not now we dont. Theres an old proverb i read that said if you want to see ones past look at their present situation and it will tell you what their past investments and habits were and youre saying we cant predict whats going to happen in the future if you cant see the future look at what they are presently investing in. I see them shouting death to israel and death to america and propping up that regime and they are going to be mohr emboldened with a Nuclear Weapon. I agree with senator lieberman in that youre stating that this is a bad deal, and i said last week being a veterinarian, if it walks and quacks like a duck, its a duck. This is a bad deal. We need to walk away from the table and the reason i say that and correct me if im wrong. Because if we wait and other countries invest into iran, the Economic Development they are seeking, other countries that go in there, the p 5 if we wait two or three or four years and they have Economic Development, whats the likelihood of a snapback which is a fictitious condition if we wait five years or versus if we walk away and say the sanctions are in place and we cannot sell it to the American People. Whats going to be harder is i hope what you describes happens that we walk away but its clear the administration is not going to walk away voluntarily, therefore, the only way that the u. S. Walks away is if congress exercises its authority to reject this agreement and then overrides the veto. Yes, sir . One quick thought. You talked about what happens if. Its a very defenseible proposition that absent a Nuclear Detonation in iran. It will be more difficult to reimpose sanctions in five years than it will be to sustain sanctions if we turn our back on this agreement. I would like to say congressman if we walk away now then we will have lessal leverage on the iranians, and they will have a Nuclear Program without restrictions compared to all the restrictions they are going to be put under in the next 10 years. Thats not a good deal for the United States. But question talk about iran has always skirted the restrictions. They have been playing the cat and mouse game for over 30 years and what i see is an administration that is incompetent on this agreement and i think iran has done a great job. But i think we should prepare for detection in the future and put the None Research and development and find out where the Nuclear Research is and prepare for the day they will have a nuclear arm, and we shouldnt delay. Yes . Mr. Chairman after all the Committee Members have had the opportunity to speak we have a dilemma in that congressman gentlemen just came and would know he would want to proceed. Mr. Chairman and mr. Deutsche, i would be very happy to yield to the gentle lady for her remarks and questioning. I think our witnesses are going to see the ultimate politeness and courtesy and would only say to the rank and chair members thank you for your curtesy and if its clear to go forward, please tell me how to proceed and im more than happy to follow protocol and given the time i will handle it in that manner. Congresswoman the sometime yours. The patriotic witnesses that come today. I serve on the Homeland Committee but i am an adopted daughter of this committee and they have been very kind when ive had the opportunity to come having worked a lot in the mideast and as well as congressman wilson and the chairman of the committee and let me thank them for their courtesy. Let me start before i go to senator lieberman who im excited to see and fellow alum start with general haden and secretary burns, thank you for your leadership. The first thing that we heard as we for many was they break through the exciting news but appropriately cautioned because of the many friends we have in the mideast that this would begin an arms race for our allies sunnis in particular saudi arabia and i will ask would you respond to that . The second question is that as we were negotiating i was leaning towards the spontaneous inspection that would come about, i now hear that if regulated and youre either going to be able to go to bases or not go to bases which gives me a concern. But if you would answer those questions, i guess i want them abbreviated only because i have others and congresswoman, i agree with you. The aspects of the inspections i think are problematic in regard to how the sunnis will respond, i probably dont have the confidence to say its inevitable that they will race in the direction of a Nuclear Infrastructure but i think its rather than less likely. Thank youall for this long process. I think president obamas agreement diminishes the chance that the saudis will try to obtain a Nuclear Weapon. It will give them some assurance that they will not be a Nuclear Power themselves. Secretary burns, i understand the agreement sort of lays out a 0year, under 15year scenario. Is that too short a period of time before we might see iran moving towards that concept of a Nuclear Weapon . I think i would have preferred an entirely different set of parameters this negotiation. An entirely different framework. But it is the framework that we have now just negotiated and i want to see our country succeed. I think we all do. And i think theres a chance for success but i would have rather seen 20 or 30 years rather than is 10, if you ask me. Let me follow up with you, the collective body of politics having sat around that table having been engaged directly when secretary clinton was the secretary of state and you were dispatched to begin these discussions over a period of years, do you take comfort in the individual nation that joined the United States to be part of the enforcement of this agreement and given it more strength for peace . Mrs. Congresswoman there are many burns well take the credit. He deserves all the credit. I saw you looking and thought uhoh, thats not the same burns. I worked for president clinton and president bush. Thank you bill burns. We should thank bill burns. I think the choice we had and still should have depending on what congress does is do we want to go it alone or go with a coalition . I think in this case were stronger leading a coalition keeping the coalition together and using the leverage of that coalition to get what we want. A congressional disappointment would put us on our own. We are very powerful but the iranians would profit. Also senator lieberman, i do not want the iranians to profit. I have worked for a long period of time on camp aster and individual camp liberty and people who continue to want to trays question of protecting my friends who believe in liberty and peace. And so senator lieberman, how would you fix this if you are not seeing this agreement as the way it should be . You mean on the specific question of the uranium . Im concerned i dont give iran too much happiness until they ultimately fix that issue. But on this, how would you move it to a position where you would want it to be . Well, the most disappointing. Two parts to this bothered me. The first was clear from the Framework Agreement which was that we were not going to achieve what we originally wanted. In return for the end of sanctions. They were going to promise to freeze for 10 years if they keep the promise and then that far we basically legalize after becoming a Nuclear Power, but as i looked at the agreement this morning with things i hadnt seen before the most disappointing part of it is the inspection part. Its not anywhere any time anything remote lively like that. It allows the iranians to reject as things go on, it takes 14 days. There can be an appeal for seven days. Its not clear that theres a real enforcement mechanism. This is the real hole in this agreement and if i had my drothers, thats the part i would dramatically change. This committee has been very courteous to me and simply thank them for extending me this time and say in conclusion that i Want Congress to take its past seriously and to immerse itself in many different committees with the homeland security, Foreign Affairs and others in the importance of this agreement and peace in the mideast, i finally say i want to thank this committee for its concern of my friends in camp liberty and camp aster, they are still not where they need to be treated with dignity and allowed to get medical care and as we proceed i think it would be necessary to continue these negotiations with iran who seem to want world legitimacy and they cannot get world legitimacy putting aside the Nuclear Ethics this administration as worked on and i want to congratulate president obama for his earths but if they are going to get world noticed for being a country in the world arena with dignity for all its persons then they are not at that place right now in my mind because of the horrific treatment of some of their own citizens and particularly those that are fighting for justice and equality and freedom over in camp liberty and the other camp. So i thank you so very much and i yield back my time. We now proceed to the congressman of new york. Thank you mr. Chairman and i thank the distinguished panel for being here as well as for your service to our country in so many different ways. I know you have been here for many hours and its now the afternoon and i want to say thank you for being generous with your time on such a timely important appearance. I dont need to wait 60 or 30 days to decide this is not an acceptable deal. Its ok to be openminded it doesnt mean a requirement is that we are naive. Its a bad deal. And i think about as a really important question for you. You work for president s a tremendous amount of generations of administrations over the course of your time in government. The next president comes in whoever the person is, republican democrat, it doesnt matter. That person decides that something that wasnt even part of these norblingses so briefly recapping some of this stuff that werent even part of the negotiations iran overthrowing foreign governments sponsoring terror unjustly imprisoning United States citizens including a pastor, a reporter, a United States regime and chanting death to america in the streets and we are handing them this 50 billion signing bonus in but not even giving it to them with Strings Attached and they have plood on their hands from killing u. S. Service people. So if a president comes into office january of 2017 and lets say god forbid any of these u. S. Citizens are still being imprisoned or they decide we need to stop allowing them to overthrow foreign governments or provide funding to hezbollah if we give away all these sanctions right now, tactically what are the options that are left . The reasons the iranians are at the table right now is because the sanctions were working. Whats the impact of this deal to impact or tackle all the other issues we have an issue with. We did not have sustained contact with the iranians from 1979 and couldnt actually mix it up with them and get in there and work with them and try to move them and leverage them. Now Obama Administration made a tactical decision that they wanted to argue only this one shift. We do have the capacity to talk to them and senator kerry is in a professional wrap them of sorts and i believe the Obama Administration should take on the hostage issue and try to do what we can whats the motivation for the iranians to change their position . They were not negotiating with us because they are good actors or good world citizens. These are people that are bad blowing up mock battle ships and going war with others. Whats the leverage other than to say for obama to go back a few month or secretary kerry to go over and say pretty please can you stop overthrowing foreign governments, whats the actual ledge left other than asking nicely . Im not sure i would ask nicely but i think the sleverage to strengthen our relationship with the saudis and others to retain iranian power in the gulf and close ranks with israel and make it difficult for the iranians to do what they are doing in the middle east. But why would the iranians do anything they just said if what they want we are just giving them right now with this deal. My opinion the president of the United States should be sitting at a table and with that goodwill and that american exceptionalism say this is everything that we want in exchange for 50 billionplus of sanctions relief. All this stuff was left out. So i guess, what is what do we have to give the iranians . Now that the sanction relief, if the sanctions relief was met, what do we have to give to the irans in exchange for the issues we have left . Well, the focus was the greatest most immediate danger. Now that that is under way and we have an agreement that will be implemented, were going to have to build up the power against iran. Its about us outmuscling and outpowering them. We should say it again, to warn the m. And i time is running short. I think the time of the Obama Administration. No one in the entire world whether its in the United States or elsewhere believe if the president says the military option is on the table that he would actually do it. We saw what happened with syria. There would be consequences for using the Chemical Warfare and nothing happened. So whatever he agreed to the irony is it caused the Nuclear Arms Race to some degree in that region as well. Im just concerned that, that which brought the irans to the table in the first place was america got played. Now the American Public and representatives in congress, we should have the final say not president with a stroke of a pen and this morning made it a white house filled with falsehoods like 2047 anytime inspections that arent real. I am appreciative of you all being here. Im just concerned maybe a little more aggressive than what nick just suggested. Live by executive order die by executive order. You are not going to lift these sanctions. The president is going to use his authority within your legislation to lift sanctions on his executive decision. A future executive can reverse those decisions. Im just concerned when you get rid of sinkses that took eight years to put into place and youre working with foreign entities its just difficult to snap them back. It is. Talking about national sanctions. Youre not going to reach the oval office. I think thats clear. So we will ease those sanctions based on the world executive. And i appreciate the generals remarks and i would encourage my colleagues in the spirit of the discussion of what congress the what power the congress has or doesnt have and what power the power of others, i yield pack my time. Thank you. And thank you for your military service to our country too. Thank you mr. Chairman and thank you for the witnesses. A lot of what goes on here is we do these hearing and take meaningless votes about affirmative louse issues. This is really a big vote and a big issue. Al Congress Needs to step up and do the right thing for the American People and in my judgment its stop this bad deal. When i was in iraq back in 2007 and 2008 the number one cause of death was not al qaeda or iraq. It was iran. The forces that they funded and they killed our Service Members and i notice they are relieving sanctions on those sources. 140 billion is a huge influx of cash to the Iranian Regime. Is the regime going to change . I just left and they were promoting death to america and i think it enhances irans power in the region and i think they are going to emerge from this the dominant actor in the middle east and weve seen their authority grow over this course over the course of this administration. I think its actually good for iciss. If the choice is between an Iraqi Government backed by a shiite power and Shiite Militia or isis which is a sunni arab group, a lot of those folks who are not bad people, are more likely to side with isis as opposed to the United States because i think youre going to see more recruits flood into isis. So we may be killing some of them but the verification as i read it is a joke. Its not anytime we want to go in. Theres a committee you have to go through and by the time you get in any kind of questionable conduct could be concealed. This is a country that iran boasted a onebomb country. They boast that they want to wipe them off the map. And i think the relationship this administrations had with the Israeli Government has been a disaster and i dont think this is way you treat an ally. Let me let me ask you, because i think you did as good a job of anyone to justify your position, what would be the position of removing sanctions off the corps . Its an extraordinarily difficult thing to do. Its because of how the negotiations were constructed. So it really has nothing to do with the nuke program or does it . Because on the one hand were told the Iranian Military never had any uses for it but then you are moving removing sanctions, is there a relationship there or is this a totally unrelated concession about removing sakses and we have been told by administration witness after administration witness that they didnt want to discuss terrorism and only wanted to discuss the nuclear negotiation. And its because of the american blood they have on their hands. And i think it was announced this morning framed as such that all the sanctions passed against iran and executive orders in other places are going to be lifted whether they are directly about the Nuclear Program or not . So is it a problem that the revolutionary corps may have the money before them . Yes. When i testified earlier i said i support that on balance, its the right decision for the United States but there are risks and tradeoffs and some of them are very difficult to digest. Thats one of them. Senator elaboraterman, this influx of cash to this regime is there any doubt in your find the so many of those funds will be used to fund the Terror Network . None at all. How much is spent is up to obviously the iranian authorities. The other thing i mentioned briefly when you were here is a lot of the rest of the money may go for domestic purposes but it will be used to strength at any position of the current radical regime in teheran and to essentially undercut the popular op zhation is there. And getting the cash, that going to the fact that they are getting these concessions, i guess the hope is oh, maybe they will change. Would you be willing to bet this would not change their ideology . I bet that it would not and the agreement strengthens their hand as youve said and ambassador burns said, tough choices in a negotiation but basically the negotiation did focus on the Nuclear Program that they have and t not that we accept all the terrible things they do, but initially it was off the table. Now, congress does have a role to play here in the months aheads which is to come back, and the administration, too, to strengthen sanctions based on human rights and their treatment of the people in the camps which was horrendous. So right nowen i think this message is not only did they get a good deal on the Nuclear Agreement but they are basically free to do whatever they want to do in every other part of their radical program. Thanks, i yield back. Thank you congressman and thank you for your military service. We have one final followup from ambassador deutsche and ambassador burns. Thank you. To follow the up on that last point, since its a very big agreement we are going to be sorting through but your assessment is that all the sanctions are being lifted as a result of all this . I just want to make sure you understand what i said. In my response i said the framework of this agreement is that the many of the sanctions that were passed under the authorities are being lifted as part of the overall agreement. So there are multiple typings of sanctions here. That was my answer. I appreciate it. Thank you mr. Chairman. As we conclude i want to thank each of you for being here today. Your insight has been very helpful. We are certainly concerned for the security of the American Families and you have expressed that and you can see the bipartisan and level of concern and participation, im very grateful for everyone participating today. And i know that many of us are just so hopeful for Democratic Change in iran. With that, we are now adjourned. Dd [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] Federal Reserve chair janet yellen will be on cspan 3, starting at 10 00 a. M. And an investigation into fifa the goverpbling body of international soccer. We will hear from the filmmaker andrew jennings. Watch live coverage at 2 30 eastern from a Senate Subcommittee also on cspan 3. This sunday on q a, artist and journalist Molly Crabapple on her drawings to tell stories from around the world. Drawing patterns or even having a tattoo, pelican bay is alone in this. Your gender status. Your Sexual Orientation or your friends . A lot of times thats not necessarily often when you have a camera it puts a distance in between you and the person. Youre taking images. They cannot see what u taking. Even though you may see beautiful things later to where as when you draw its a vulnerable thing. They can see exactly what youre drawing. If you suck, they can tell you. More people are delighted to be drawn so more often i like drawing people, because i can talk to them while i do it. President obama announced that he was commuting sentences of 46 drug offenders this week. Up next the president talks about making changes to the criminal Justice System in a speech to the naacp annual convention. He is the first forth visit a federal prison. Hello. Ahh. Its good to be back. How are yall doing today . You doing fine . You look fine. All right. Everybody have a seat. I got some stuff to say. Ive got some stuff to say. [video clip] we love you president obama i love you back. You know that. So now, whatever people when you have signs, yall have got to write bigger. Because im getting older. And i like that picture of me. Its very nice. Thank you. Let me get something out of the way up front. I am not singing today. [applause] not singing. Although i will say your board sang to me as i came in for the photograph, so i know there are some good voices in the auditorium. Let me also say what Everybody Knows but doesnt always want to say out loud. Yall would rather have michele here. I understand. I dont blame you. But i will do my best to fill her shoes. And she sends everybody her love and malia and sasha say hi as well. [applause] i want to thank your chair and your president , corn nell brooks. I want to thank your Governor Tom Wolf who is doing outstanding work and was here. The mayor of philadelphia, Michael Nutter who has been a great friend and ally. And governor malloy of connecticut who is here today. And some outstanding members of congress who are here. I want to just say thank you to all of you for your love and support but most importantly further work that you are doing in your communities all across the country every single day. Its not always received with a lot of fanfare. Sometimes its lonely work. Sometimes its hard work. Sometimes its frustrating work. But its necessary work, and it builds on a tradition of this organization that reshapes the nation. For 106 years, the naacp has worked to close the gaps between the words of our families, and we are all created yall, equal, bound by our creator with certain unalienable rights. Those words we try to match with our reality each and every day. Your first entry this organization stood up to lynching, jim crow. Segregation. Helped to shepard a Civil Rights Act the Voting Rights act. I would not be here and so many others would not be here without the naacp. [applause] in your second century we worked together to give more of our children a shot at a quality education. To help more families rise up out of poverty. To protect future generations from environmental damage. To create fair housing. To help more workers find the purpose of a good job. And together we made real progress. Including a my brothers Keeper Initiative to give people a fair shot at life including a passage that includes health care is not a privilege for the few but a right for all of us. [applause] we made progress, but our work is not done. Just about every measure chances for black and hispanic youth still lag far behind those of their white peers. Our kids, americas children who so often are isolated, without hope. Less likely to depraut from high school, less likely to earn a college degree, less likely to be employed, less likely to have health insurance, less likely to own a home. Part of this is a legacy of hundreds of years of slavery segregation and structural inequality thats the compounded over generations. It did not happen by accident. [applause] partly a result of continuing the sometimes more subtle bigotry. Whether and who gets called back for a Job Interview or who gets suspended from school, or what neighborhood youre able to rent an apartment in which by the way is why our recent initiative about fair housing law is so important. [applause] so we cant be satisfied and are not satisfied until the opportunity gap is closed for everybody in america. Everybody. But today i want to focus on one aspect of American Life. One aspect of American Life that remains particularly skewed by race and by wealth. A source of inequity that has ripple effects on families and communities and ultimately on our nation. That is our criminal Justice System. [applause] and this is not a new topic. I know sometimes folks discover these things like they just happened. Theres a long history of inequity in the criminal Justice System in america. When i was in the state legislature in illinois we worked to make sure that we had videotaping of interrogations, because there were some problems there. We set up racial profiling laws to prevent the kind of bias in traffic stops that too many people experience. In my First Campaign i talked about how in too many cases our criminal Justice System ends up being a pipeline from underfunded, inadequate schools to overcrowded jails. What has changed, though is in recent years, the eyes of more americans have been opened to this truth. Partly because of cameras. Partly because of tragedy. Partly because the specifics cannot be ignored. We cant close our eyes anymore. And the good news, and this is truly good news, is that good people of all political persuasions are starting to think we need to do something about this. So lets look at the statistics. The United States is home the 5 of the worlds population but 25 of the worlds prisoners. Think about that. Our incarceration rate is four times higher than chinas. We keep more people behind bars than the top 35 European Countries combined. And it hasnt always been the case. This huge explosion in incarceration rates. 1980 there were 500,000 people behind bars in america. Half a Million People in 1980. I was in college in 1980. Many of you were not born in 1980. Thats ok. I remember 1980. 500,000. Today there are 2. 2 million. It has quadrupled since 1980. Our prison population has doubled in the last two decades alone. Now, we need to be honest. There are a lot of folks who belong in prison. [applause] if we are going to deal with this problem and the inequities involved, then we also have to speak honestly, there are some folks who need to be in jail. They may have had terrible things happen to them in their lives. We hold tout hope for redemption, but they have done some bad things. Murders, predators rapists gang leaders drug kingpins. We need some of those folks behind bars. Our communities are safer thanks to Brave Police Officers and hardworking prosecutors who put those violent criminals in jail. [applause] and studies show up to a certain point tougher prosecutors and stiffer sentences for these violent offenders contributed to a decline in Violent Crime over the last few decades. Although theres also the case that you get to the point of diminishing returns. But it is important for us to recognize that violence in our communities is serious. And that historically, in fact the Africanamerican Community was underpoliced rather than overpoliced. Folks were very interested in containing those areas. But within those areas there wasnt enough police presence. But heres the thing. Over the last few decades we have also locked up more and more nonviolent drug offenders than ever before for longer than ever before. [applause] and that is the real reason our prison population is so high. In far too many cases the punishment simply does not fit the crime. [applause] if youre a lowlevel drug offender or parole violater, you have to be held accountable and make amends. But you dont owe 20 years. [applause] you dont owe a life sentence. [applause] thats disproportion nat for the price that should be paid, and by the way the taxpayers are picking up the tab for that price. [applause] every year we spend 80 billion to keep fobalings incarcerated. 80 billion. Not now put in in perspective. For 80 billion we could have universal preschool for every 3yearold and 4yearold in america. Thats what 80 billion buys. [applause] for 80 billion we could double the salary of every High School Teacher in america. [applause] for 80 billion we could finance new roads and bridges and air ports. Job training programs, research and development. Were about to get into a big budget debate in washington, and what i couldnt do with 80 billion. Its a lot of money. For what we spend to keep everyone locked up for one year, we could eliminate tuition at every single one of our public colleges and universities. [applause] as republican senator and president ial candidate ram paul has said, and to his credit he has been persistent on this issue. It costs the taxpayers money without making them any safer. Roughly 1 3 of the Justice Department budget now goes toward incarceration. 1 3. And there are outstanding Public Servants at our Justice Department starting with our outstanding attorney general Loretta Lynch. [applause] but every dollar they have to spend keeping nonviolent drug offenders in prison is a dollar they cant spend going after drug kingpins or tracking down terrorists or hiring more police and giving them the resources that would allow them to do a more effective Job Community policing. And then of course theres a cost that cant be measured in dollars and cents. Because the statistics on who gets incarcerated show that by a wide margin, it disproportionately impacts communities of color. Africanamericans and latinos make up 30 of our population and 60 of our inmates. About one in every 35 africanamerican men and one in every 88 latino men is serving time right now. Among white men that number is one in every 214. The bottom line is that in too many places black boys and black men, latino boys and latino men experience being treated differently under the law. [applause] and i want to be clear, this is not just anecdote. This is not just barbershop talk. A growing body of Research Shows that people of color are more likely to be stopped, friss ked questioned, charged, detained. Africanamericans are more likely to be arrested. They are more likely to be sentenced to more time for the same crime. And one of the consequences of this is around 1 million fathers are behind bars. Around one in nine africanamerican kids have a parent in prison. What is that doing to our communities . What is that doing to those children . Our nation is being robbed of men and women who could be workers and taxpayers, could be more actively involved in their childrens lives, could be role models, could be community leaders. Right now, they are locked up for a nine a nonviolent offense. Our criminal Justice System is not as smart as it should be. It is not keeping us as safe as it should be. It is not as fair as it should be. Mass incarceration makes our country worse off and we need to do something about it. [applause] here is the good news good news dont get me preaching [laughter] i am feeling more hopeful today because even now lets face it, it seems like republicans and democrats cannot agree on anything. A lot of them agree on this in fact, today back in washington, republican senators from utah and texas are joining Democratic Senators from new jersey and rhode island to talk about how congress can pass meaningful criminal Justice Reform this year. [applause] that is good news. That is good news. Good news. That does not happen very often. Its not just senators. This is a cause that is bringing people in both houses of congress together. It has created some unlikely bedfellows. Youve got van jones and newt gingrich. Youve got americans for tax reform and the aclu. Youve got the naacp and the koch brothers. [applause] youve got to give them credit. You have to call it like you see it. There are states from texas and South Carolina california and connecticut, who have acted to reduce their prison populations over the last five years and seeing their crime rates fall. M seen their crime rates fall. Thats good news. My administration has taken steps on our own to reduce our federal prison population by signing a bill reducing the 101 sentencing between crack and cocaine. I have commuted the sentences of dozens of people under old drug laws that we now recognize were not fair. Yesterday i announced i am commuting dozens more. [applause] under the leadership of attorney general eric holder now continued by Loretta Lynch federal prosecutors got what he called smart crime which is refocusing efforts on the worst offenders pursuing mandatory minimum sentences 20 less often than they did the year before. You dont always have to charge the maximum. To be good prosecutor you have to be proportionate and it turns out that we are solving as many cases with just as many plea bargains and its working. Its just that we have eliminated some of the excess. And recently something extraordinary happened for the first time in 40 years. Americas crime rate and incarceration rate both went down at the same time. That happened last year. [applause] so so there is some momentum building for reform. There is evidence mounting for why we need reform. I want to spend the rest of my time laying out some basic intervals, some simple ideas for what reform should look like. Because we are at the beginning of this process and we need to make sure we stay with it. I will focus on what happens in three places, in the community the courtroom, and the cellblock. So, i want to begin with the community because i believe crime is like any other epidemic the best time to stop it is before it starts. [applause] i will go ahead and say what i have said 100 times before or 1000 times before and what youve heard me say before if we make investments early in our children, we will reduce the need to incarcerate those kids. [applause] so one study found that for every dollar we invest in prek, it gives us at least that in reducing crime. Getting a teenager a job for the summer costs a fraction of what it costs to lock them up for 15 years. [applause] investing in our communities makes sense. It saves taxpayer money. If we are consistent about it. And if we recognize that every child deserves opportunity, not just some, not just our own. [applause] what does not make sense is treating entire neighborhoods is little more than danger zones where we just surround them. We asked police to go in there and do the tough job of trying to contain the hopelessness when we are not willing to make the investment to help lift those communities out of hopelessness. That is not just a police problem. That is a societal problem. [applause] places like west philly or west baltimore or ferguson, missouri. They are part of america too. They are not separate. They are part of america like anywhere else. The kids there are american kids. Its like your kids and my kids. Weve got to make sure boys and girls in those communities are loved and cherished and supported and nurtured and invested in and we have to have the same standards for those children as we have for our own children. [applause] if you are a parent, you know there are times when boys and girls will act out in school and the question is are we letting principals and parents deal with one set of kids and we call the police on another set of kids . That is not the right thing to do. [applause] weve got to make sure our juvenile Justice System remembers that kids are different. Dont just tag them as future criminals. Reach out to them as future citizens. [applause] even as we recognize that Police Officers to one of the toughest, bravest jobs around and we do everything in our power and as we do everything in our power to keep those Police Officers safe on the job, i have talked about this, we have to restore trust between the police and some of the communities they serve. [applause] a good place to start is making sure communities around the country adopt the recommendations from the task force i set up that included Law Enforcement but also included young people from new york and ferguson and they were able to arrive at a consensus around things like that her training better Data Collection to make sure policing is more effective and accountable is also more unbiased. [applause] these are steps in the committee that will lead to fewer folks being arrested in the first place. It wont eliminate crime entirely. There will be crime and thats why the second thing we need to change is the courtroom. For nonviolent drug crimes, we need to lower longer mandatory minimum sentences or get rid of them entirely. [applause] give judges some discretion around nonViolent Crimes so that potentially, we can steer a young person who has made a mistake in a better direction. We should pass a sentencing reform bill through congress this year. [applause] we need to ask prosecutors to use their discretion to seek the best punishment, the one that will be most effective instead of just the longest punishment. We should invest in alternatives to prison like drug courts and treatments and probation programs which ultimately can save taxpayers thousands of dollars per defendant each year. Even if we are locking up fewer people, even if we are reforming sentencing guidelines, as i said before, some criminals still deserve to go to jail as republican senator john cornyn has reminded us, virtually all of the people incarcerated in our prisons will eventually someday, be released. That is why the thirdplace we need reform is in the cellblock. On thursday, i will be the first sitting president to visit a federal prison. [applause] and and i am going to shine a spotlight on this issue because while the people in our prisons have made some mistakes and sometimes big mistakes, they are also americans. And we have to make sure that as they do their time, and payback their debt to society, that we are increasing the possibility that they can turn their lives around. [applause] that does not mean that we will turn everybodys life around. That does not mean there are not some hard cases. It does mean that we want to be in a position in which if somebody in the midst of imprisonment recognizes the errors of their ways, is in the process of reflecting about where they have been and where they should be going, weve got to make sure they are in a position to make a turn. Thats why we should not tolerate conditions in prison that have no place. In any civilized country [applause] we should not be tolerating overcrowding in prison. We should not be tolerating Gang Activity in prison. We should not be tolerating rape in present and we should not make jokes about it in our popular culture. These things are unacceptable. [applause] whats more, i have asked my attorney general to start a review of the over use of solitary confinement across american prisons. [applause] the social science shows an environment like that is often more likely to make inmates more alienated, more hostile potentially more violent. Do we really think it makes sense to lock up so many people alone and tiny cells for 23 hours per day for months and is sometimes years at a time . That is not going to make us safer. That is not going to make us stronger. If those individuals are ultimately released, how are they ever going to adapt . Its not smart. Our prisons should be a place where we can train people for skills that can help them find a job, not train them to become more hardened criminals. [applause] i dont want to pretend like this is all easy. But some places are doing better than others. Montgomery county, maryland put a Job Training Center inside the prison walls. To give folks a head start in thinking about what might you do otherwise than committing crime. Thats a good idea. Here is another good idea, one with high partisan support in congress lets reward prisoners with reduced sentence as if they complete programs that make them less likely to commit a repeat offense. [applause] lets invest in Innovative New approaches to link former president is with employers former prisoners with employers and help them keep on track. Lets follow the growing numbers of our states and cities and private companies who have decided to ban the box on job applications so that former prisoners who have done their time and are now trying to get straight with society have a decent shot in a Job Interview. [applause] if folks have served their time and they have reentered society they should be able to vote. [applause] you know, communities that give our young people every shot, courts that are tough but fair, prisons that recognize eventually the majority will be released and so seek to prepare these returning citizens to grab that Second Chance that is where we need to build. I want to add this we cannot ask our police or prosecutors or Prison Guards for our judges to bear the entire burden of containing and controlling problems that the rest of us are not facing up to and wont do something about. [applause] yes, we have to stand up to those who are determined to flash investments in our committees of any cause, cutting job training programs, cutting Affordable Housing programs, Cutting Community policing programs that is shortsighted. Those investments makers make our country strong. We got to invest in opportunity more than ever africanamerican man roughly 25 years ago has a o caller 1 in 2 chance of turning his life around. We properly recognized this is a crisis. Right now, the unappointed rate among africanamericans is 9. 5 . What should we call that . It is a crisis and we have to be just as concerned about continuing to list Job Opportunities for young people. [applause] today i have been talking about the criminal Justice System but we have to recognize that its not something we can view in isolation. Any system that allows us to turn a blind eye to hopelessness and despair, thats not a Justice System, it is an inJustice System. That is an extension and a reflection of some broader decisions that we are making as a society. That has to change. That has to change. This is what the marches on washington, what the marches in selma new, what folks like julian bond new, what the marches in this room still no. Is that justice is not only the absence of oppression, it is the presence of opportunity. [applause] justice is giving every child a shot at a great education no matter what zip code they are born into. Justice is giving everyone willing to work for the chance at a good job with good wages no matter what their name is, what their skin color is, where they live. 50 years after the Voting Rights act, justice is protecting that right for every american. Justice is living up to the concrete that says i am my brothers keeper and my sisters keeper. Justices making sure every young person knows they are special and they are important and that their lives matter, not because they heard it in a hastag but because of the love they feel every ingle day. Not just love from their parents or neighborhood emma but love from police, love from politicians. Love from someone who is on the other side of the country but sees that young person is still important to me. [applause] that is what justice is. In the american tradition, and in the immigrant tradition of remaking ourselves, in the christian tradition that says none of us is without sin [applause] and all of us need redemption justice and redemption go handinhand. [applause] right before i came out here i met with four former president s, ex offenders. Two of them were africanamerican and one of them was latino and one of them was white. All of them had amazing stories. One of them dropped out of school when he was a young kid. Now he is making films about his experience in the prison system. One of them served 10 years in prison then got a job at five guys which is a tasty burger. [laughter] and they gave him an opportunity and he rose up and became a general manager there and now is doing antiviolence work in the community. [applause] one of them, the young latino man, he came out of prison and was given an opportunity to get trained on green jobs helping the environment but also gave him a marketable skill. He talked about how the way he is staying out of trouble. He just keeps on thinking about his two daughters. I can relate to that because you dont want to disappoint your daughters. You dont want to disappoint those baby girl so he says i go to work and i come home and i grab that little baby and get a kiss and thats keeping me focused. Than one of them was arrested six times before his 38th birthday. He was drinking, using drugs rack up dui and sentence after sentence and admits that the sentences he was getting for dui were not reflective of the trouble he was causing. It could have been worse. He spent so much time jogging in place in his cell that inmates nicknamed him the running man. He was literally going nowhere. He was running in place. Then somehow jeff started examining his life and said this is not me. He decided to hold himself accountable and quit drinking and went to aa and met a recruiter from the Reentry Program at the Community College in philadelphia, enrolled in classes once he was released, nature to show up every day graduated summa comeum laude, with a 3. 5 gpa and this fall he will graduate from Temple University with a major in criminal justice and a minor in social work and he volunteers helping him inmates get their lives back on track. [applause] its sort of a cliche he says we can do anything. Just two years ago, the running man ran his first marathon because he is going somewhere now. [applause] you never look at crossing the finish line, he says of his journey, you attack at putting one mile after the other. It takes steps. It takes steps. That is true for individuals its true for our nation. Sometimes i get in debates about how to think about progress or the lack of progress when it comes to issues of race and inequality in america. There are times when people say the president , hes too optimistic or hes not talking enough about how bad things are. Let me tell you something, i see what happens. My heart breaks when i see families impacted. I spend time with those families. I feel their grief. I see those young men on street corners and eventually in prisons and i think to myself, they could be me. The main difference between me and them is i had a more forgiving environment so that when i slipped up, when i made a mistake, i had a Second Chance and theyve got no margin for error. [applause] i know how hard things are for a lot of folks. But i also know that it takes steps and if we have the courage to take that first step then we take a second step in if we have the kurds to take the second step and suddenly we have taken 10 steps. The next thing you know, you have taken 100 steps and thats not just true for us as individuals but true for us as a nation. We are not perfect but we have the capacity to be more perfect mile after mile, step after step , they pile up one after the other and pretty soon, that finish line starts getting insight and we are not where we were. We are in a better place because we had the courage to move forward. [applause] so we cannot ignore the problems we had but we cannot stop running the race. [applause] that is how you win the race. Thats how you fix a broken system. Thats how you change a country. The naacp understands that. [applause] think about the race you have run. Think about the race ahead. If we keep taking steps toward a more Perfect Union and close the gap between who we are and who we want to be, america will move forward. There is nothing we cannot do. Thank you, god bless you, god bless the United States of america. Host [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] we will have live coverage at 1 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan three. Washington journal is next and we will look at the news and take your calls. The u. S. Houses back in for member speeches on them they were on a transportation funding bill in the afternoon. Watch live house coverage on cspan. This weekend on cspans road to the white house two Major Political events from iowa and we are the only place you can watch and listen to these events. Friday night at 8 00 eastern, we will be live in cedar rapids for the Iowa Democratic party hall of fame dinner. It will mark the first time that all five democratic president ial candidates share the same state and all day saturday beginning at 11 00 a. M. Eastern, we will be live in ames, i would for the iowa. On cspan, cspan radio, and cspan,org. The road to the white house, we take you there. We will get an update on the iran Nuclear Agreement and whats ahead. On the show we talk with a couple of capitol hill lawmakers about that accordingly republican darrell issa california, a member of the Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the middle east and north africa. Than senator ben cardin of maryland from the Foreign Relations committee and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. Host good morning, everyone this wednesday, july 15. The Iran Nuclear Deal has been signed and now the sales job begins for the president and his team to congress. The Vice President woman he would lawmakers this morning on capitol hill and the president himself will make personal phone calls. He will begin today with a pitch to be mark and during a News Conference at 1 00 p. M. Our coverage will be on cspan three. Lawmakers will have a chance to read the 100 page nuclear deal and decide in 60 days of a support or oppose. We want to know from you