Transcripts For CSPAN3 Politics Public Policy Today 20240622

Lgbtq plus community and i know that gay marriage was just legalized in all 50 states and i dont under mine that. Yeah thats awesome. [ applause ] but i was wondering what you specifically were going to do about antidiscrimination laws in the workplace. Because i dont want to be able to get married to someone of the same gender but also be discriminated against in my workplace. Thank you. Thank you. [ applause ] well youre right. The supreme courts decision was an extraordinary historic milestone. And i think its worth if you have any interest in this looking at this decision. Of course its a constitutional decision. But more than that its a decision about how we treat each other, how we respect each other, how we acknowledge that as Justice Kennedy said people shouldnt have to be lonely. People can have relationships and love one another and on and on. It was a quite moving decision to me. But you put your finger on the next big challenge, and that is discrimination. When i was in the senate i supported the end of law to end discrimination against people based in those days as we used to say on sexual orientation. And i think we have to do more to make sure that we end discrimination in the workplace in particular. So i am committed to that. I will work for that and as president ially do everything i can to get that enacted into law. [ applause ] right there. Wait. May we get a microphone . Here comes one. The room got so overcrowded. We were going to have microphones set up but then we got more chairs. Thanks all of our aides who are doing the work they are doing to get us in here. I want to thank you senator clinton for speaking out about the corporations are having too much leeway to write the rules. Dover has gotten a grant to acquire military equipment from the federal government. In this case an Armored Vehicle called a bear cat manufactured by a Company Called lanco. Now lanco actively helps cities do the paperwork so they can qualify for the money that the federal government will provide so they can get the military vehicles which then cause problems with Community Relations in communities where the police start to act perhaps more like military forces instead of like people protecting the community. So i guess my question for you is what steps will you take to make sure that our local Law Enforcement do not become just another Profit Center for the military industrial complex. [ applause ] you know thats a very important question on several levels, one of which you just mentioned. And also because the militarization of local police has been in many way as problem over the last couple of years with some of the incidents that weve had in communities across our country. So i have already spoken out. We really do need to look hard at preventing the militarization of local police forces. And that means a lot of this heavy military equipment that was already manufactured or manufactured after 9 11 which is made available to local communities should not necessarily end up there. Let me just make this point. Part of the reason for this is that after 9 11 i was a senator from new york. So i, i was there within, you know, hours, the next day, seeing what had happened in new york. And as part of the effort to try to protect our country through the new department of Homeland Security a lot of money was appropriated that would go through that process that could then be used by cities and towns across america. I think it was too broad. I think it was unfortunately lasting too long so that its still going on as you rightly say here. And i just think that local communities working with the federal government need to take a hard look at whether we need to be paying for and subsidizing the transfer of such equipment to local communities. There still may be places in america where it is warranted. But i think its gone too far and needston to be reigned in. Thank you for raising that. [ applause ] excuse me. Excuse me. Sorry. So many hands. I want to go back to the stage because you guys had my back the whole time. Go ahead. And here comes a microphone in a hurry here. Secretary clinton thank you so much for coming out to New Hampshire and speaking to us today. You talked a lot about building our infrastructure and the future in this country. As a young person im really concerned about the threat of Climate Change the threat of Climate Change to our families, our country and around the world. And scientists have shown that we need to keep 08 of fossil fuels in the ground to prevent a 2 degrees celsius warms which would be really dangerous. So my question is will you commit to banning fossil fuel extraction on public lands in this country where is where 70 of fossil fuels lay under ground . Yes or no, will you ban this. Thank you. [ applause ] the answer is not until we got the alternatives in place. And that may not be a satisfactory answer to you but i think i would have to take the responsible answer. I am 100 in favor of accelerating the development of solar, wind, advanced biofuels, energy efficiency. Everything we can do. [ applause ] and i would hope that we could get to the point that you made, which is looking at our public lands and cutting back over time, phasing out the extraction of fossil fuels. But i will say this. We still have to run our economy, we still have to turn on the lights. We still have to make sure that businesses operate. So i want to do as much as i can as quickly as i can to make this energy transition. But i could not responsibly say to you that i could automatically stop the source of fossil fuels right away without having a substitute in order to keep the economy going, to keep people employed, the keep the lights on. But your larger point i think really bears repeating. Climate change is an egs tenl threat. Climate change is real. Everybody on the other side who says to you that [ applause ] you know, they say to you when you ask them about Climate Change, well im not a scientist. You should say back, why dont you start listening to the scientists, because the scientists are telling you the truth. [ applause ] [ cheers applause ] and once you do, then you will be urgently trying to act in your own personal situation trying to be more energy efficient, trying to figure out how to get alternatives available to your home to your business standing up against some of the really poorly thought out plans by some states to prevent the further acceleration of solar and wind and enabling businesses and individuals to sell back to the grid, all of the things that can make a difference more quickly to speed us toward the moment. So i think weve got to have a comprehensive and very well thought through antiClimate Changes pro Clean Renewable Energy plan. I really applaud what the president has done without having the authority of congress, what hes done with executive orders. We need to continue on it, build on it protect that. And hopefully [ applause ] hopefully we can get to the point where we develop Something Like a consensus in our country. And heres what really upsets me. The people who are against doing something on Climate Change have no alternative. Its more of the same. Keep doing it. Keep doing what were doing now. That is a losing policy. So we do need more people in congress who understand and believe in the importance of addressing Climate Change. We need a president who will keep moving as far as possible on executive authority until we can get more legislation passed. We need the United States to set the example. But i dont want to say i will do something that i know would be very difficult to do until we get everything moving in the right direction and we get better results. And we get more people doing what their piece of the action might be. So i want all of us to think through what can we do. And if we can get to the point where we end the extraction on public lands and at least until we phase it out, get more money to fight Climate Change from those who are doing the extraction, well be on the right track to get to where we need to be. [ applause ] how are you . Im doing okay. Just wanted to ask you a problem that i personally see thats coming is regarding policy. [ inaudible ] [ applause ] im really glad you asked that question because most people think the student loan problem is just a Young Persons problem, and its not. Its not only that people like yourself went back to school to get additional education, but a lot of parents and grandparents are cosigning and guaranteeing and taking out student loans, sometimes mortgaging their homes in order to do that. This is a multigenerational problem. We have 1. 2 trillion in outstanding student debt held by 40 million americans. This is a terrible drag on individuals. Its a budget buster for so many individual families. And its also bad for the economy. Because a lot of the people who are weighted down from all ages by the student loan debts, they cant start a new business they cant buy a house. Ive had young people tell me they cant afford to get married because of their student loan debt. Heres what i want to do. I want to refinance the existing debt. The Interest Rate is too high compared to what the real Interest Rate in the economy is. [ applause ] and i will be rolling out a specific plan about how i think we can refinance it. You are absolutely right. The big concern is that a lot of that money is owed to the government. So if you refinance and you lower the payments, you know that creates an additional budget strain on the government budget. But i think weve got to do it. I dont see any way out. In part because i think that the Interest Rates were too high to begin with especially when they didnt reflect the real Interest Rates. The other thing is weve got to get the cost of college to be more affordable so going in it has to be more affordable. [ applause ] and i also really appreciate what you said about how you had to defer a payment. Because youre paying a flat rate based on that 6 Interest Rate, right . So when i went to law school i had to borrow money. I didnt have money. I came from a middle class family. My dad said i can help you go to college. If you go to law school, youre on your own. I worked got a little scholarship but i borrowed money. I borrowed money that was affordable to me and my husband at the time, my boyfriend he borrowed money and we signed up for an income restin gentleman payment plan. I went to work out of law school for the Childrens Defense Fund. I went to work i think i made like 14,000 a year as i remember. We paid back as a percentage of our income. So that with didnt have to defer payments because we didnt have a high Interest Rate that was literally causing us to have to crowd out other obligations. I want to have more people have access to new york contingency repayment programs as well. [ applause ] and i believe at a certain point, particularly if you do a Public Service thing, to go back to the woman with the alzheimers challenges in her own family if you become a nurse, you become a social worker, a firefighter, a police officer, a teacher name the Public Service jobs that our Society Needs you ought to have your loan forgiven after a certain period of time. [ applause ] and if you have another kind of employment, we could look at how we get the Interest Rate down we get the payment schedule down. But even look at forgiveness eventually there too. Because think of the amount of money 1. 2 trillion. Think of what that would mean going into the economy. And i think we can see that its a really good trade off if we make it. Were going to be looking to see how we refinance and make college more affordable. [ applause ] yes, right there. Yeah. Yeah. Here comes a microphone. Im sorry. Hi secretary clinton. Thank you for taking my question. Im a Public Schoolteacher and and i just wanted to know what your stance on education is and the economy because the last 17 years that ive been teaching ive seen Public School really decline and its really a concern of mine and im sure many people here. [ applause ] what do you teach . Special education. Okay. Well, first of all, thank you for teach inging. I am really concerned about what were doing to our teachers and oush students and our Education System because i dont believe that we have recognizing the challenges that kids bring to school these days that have to be addressed by the teacher in the classroom or the teacher in the Specialty Program like special ed. So i believe strongly weve got to do more to support what works in school. And what works is recognizing what a hard job this is for so many teachers with so many kids [ applause ] you know i have a great friend, one of my friends really from sixth grade who taught for you know, 35, 40 years and retired and i asked her what was the difference between the beginning of your teaching career and the end of your teaching career. She taught in a superbburb of chicago. She said a lot more kids with problems that came to school that didnt really have any support and i had a difficult time trying to help them. Number two she said i felt like every kid i taught had a little Remote Control device in their brain and the they were turning me off all the time was they were so used to quickness and fast responses and you know, the slow hard, sometimes very boring work of learning something was just hard for them to concentrate on and to grasp. So heres what i want to say. I want to support those tried and True Research proven approaches that help you as a teacher do the west job you can. Help. Your students to succeed to the best of their ability. Help the school youre in to be a success. And i fear that weve gotten so focused on test taking to the exclusion of nearly everything else. And i really believe [ cheers applause ] you know i believe in tests. I mean, you know, they should be diagnostic. You should figure out how you can help somebody learn more. Theyre a good benchmark. But there are a lot of other things that help you teach the children that are in front of you that may not ever be reflected on a test. Special education when we passed it was a great accomplishment of the United States. One of the things that i did as a young lawyer work fg are the Childrens Defense Fund was to gather evidence about how many children in our country were not in school because they had some kind of disability. We forget those days. I literally knocked on doors in new bed ford, massachusetts saying do you have children who are not if school. And i melt blind children and deaf children and a little girl in a wheelchair. There was no place for them in their schools. So we did pass a law and we integrated them into our schools schools. But the federal government promised it would pay for the additional cost of special education. And the federal government has paid about 17 . And so what weve done is to say we want you to educate all of our children a noble important goal but were not going to really give you what you need to do that. The other thing we didnt do is to recognize that as important as elementary and secondary school is the first five years of live determine so much about how successful a child can be. [ cheers applause ] and, you know this is something ive worked on every since i was in law school because it just struck me that if you want law abiding citizens, you want productive worker, you gotta make sure kids go to school with the right about of discipline and love, the guidance they need to take advantage of the learning. And along came the Brain Research in the last 15 and 20 years. 80 of your brain is physically formed by the age of three. Think about the kids you now, like my wonderful amazing adorable nine and a half month old granddaughter. We are reading and talking and singing to that child. Have been since he was a week old. Oi told bill the other day, her first words are going to be enough with the reading the talking and the singing. Heres what we know because we have actually looked at the scans of little brains. It fires up that brain. I kree were doing this like crazy with her. And then weve got other little kids who have a lot harder time. They may not have two parents in the home and if they do they both may be working like crazy to put food on the table. They may have difficulties with drugs or alcohol or other problems. So by the time my little granddaughter gets the kindergarten the Research Shows she will have heard 30 million more words than a child from a less advantaged background. I want you to be the teacher. Put yourself in the teachers position. First day of kindergarten heres little charlotte. Since she does have some clinton genes, her problem is shes probably talking too much. But then think about Little Charlie who had just as much potential, pants to learn just as much but his vocabulary is nowhere near what it could be. And then we turn to the teacher and say okay from the first day of kindergarten youve got this achievement gap, you fix it and close it. Were going to point fingers at you if you dont. That is not right people. That is just not right. [ applause ] so many people oh my gosh, okay. This young man right there. Rightback against the wall. Yeah. Here comes a microphone. Back against the wall. Yeah. Here comes a microphone. [ inaudible ] say i gechb. They couldnt hear you. I think as we all know, the new horizons probe just passed within 8,000 miles of pluto. I hate to say it but its not a planet. Its a dwarf planet. But thats not the point. Im wondering if you think that space exploration, considering that nasas funding is dwindling as it has been for the past 50 years, if its still a relevant a relevant pursuit or fits an obsolete leftover of the 1950s of if we should leave it to corporations. Im wondering what you think about this. Youre talking about someone who wanted to be an astronaut. When i was a little girl i guess i was a teenager by then. Like 14, i think. And the Space Program was getting started. And i wanted to be an astronaut and i wrote to nasacying what do vi to do to be prepared to be an astronaut and they wrote me back and said thank you very much but were not taking girls. That thankfully changed with sally ride and a lot of the great women astronauts. To be fair i never could have qualified any way. Not something i spent a lot of time losing sleep over. But i really do support the Space Program. Heres why. You asked the right question. One of the great advantages we have had over the last 50, 60 were 70 years, visavis the rest of the world is the investment weve made in science and research of all kinds. And it is a huge economic boom. You know back in the early 90s our country invested in mapping the human genome. And my husband was president when it finally was revealed. Money had been put in by both republican and democratic and congress because we wanted to know msh about what this meant. And in the years sense hundreds and thousands of jobs have been created and many millions of dollars have been generated for our economy. I saw an estimate of in the hundreds of billions. We have also had lots of businesses spin off from nasa research. Weve had the benefit of that Research Going into the Public Domain so that it could be used not just for Academic Research purposes but also for commercial research purposes. So i personally believe its one of americas advantages. Nobody is as innovative, creative, smart about taking research and scientific breakthroughs and translating them into commercial and economic activities. I would like to see us continue to explore space. I think were just at the beginning of understanding what is a black hole why is it there, what does it mean for us. We should be mapping the meet reitz and the meet roids and asteroids that people worry about. Theres a lot for us to keep learning. I think its a good investment. On my list of things that i want our country to invest in in terms of research and innovation science, exploring space, exploring the oceans lets not back off now. I dont have an objection to partnering with commercial partners but they are more in the Applied Science arena, not in the discovery and Research Arena that i think only the government can support. [ applause ] oh my goodness. Yes, here we go. Hello, id just like to ask you, last time you were in the white house we had a balanced budget. Do you think thats possible again . [ applause ] thank you for asking. Yes, we did. We had a balanced budget and a surplus when my husband left the white house. And we had [ applause ] we had the opportunity and i know there are not only democrats here, there are a lot of independents in New Hampshire and a lot of republicans. I hope youre here too. I think the conversation we need in this campaign and election i hope gets beyond sort of the usual partisanship and looks at what we can do together as a nation. And with respect to the balanced budget and the surplus, we were on track had we stayed on that fiscal course to paying off our national debt. Not just eliminating deficits which is what a balanced budget and a surplus means. But really paying down our national debt. I went to the senate from new york in january of 2001. And i remember very well that you know, president bush and his administration had a very different philosophy. The fist thing they wanted to do was to cut taxes very deeply. I said look, i can support a moderate tax cut, you know, because we do have a blansd budget in the surplus but lets not do it in the extent that we lose the balance that we have to control our other fiscal destiny. I lost that argument. I voted for an alternative. But i lost. And then 9 11 happened and i knew it was going to cost many billions of dollars to rebuild new york, to rebuild the pentagon, to start doing what we needed to do to start protecting ourselves. And the administration asked for another big tax cut. Then we had two wars and i think it was if not the only time certainly among the very few times we waged war and did not pay for them. So by the course of that eight years, we basically saw huge expenses going into Homeland Security going into our military and we saw our balanced budget once again turn into big deficits certainly no surplus. And we had the economic crash. So i would hope with sensible Economic Policy we could get back moving toward balance. My problem is i feel a little bit like my husband and president obama im not quite sure how were going to put it all together because we need to be fiscally responsible but we also need to make investments that will make us richer again in the future. Weve got to keep our eye on abuses from wall street and other financial institutions. Which is why we have to defend dodd frank and other efforts to reign them in. We have a lot of business to do. I was proud that we had a balanced budget and a surplus. I wish has we had paid for the wars and ended up in a better fiscal position than we currently are because of the collapse. And everything that president obama has tried to do to dig us out of that hole has been important. But now that weve got our head above the rim, weve got to figure out how to get it out of it and do what we need to do. [ applause ] this man has been very patient and very angst. Yes. Here comes a microphone somewhere. Good afternoon. First of all how do i address you . As ambassador, secretary or just plain hillary . Hillary is fine with me. Okay. Hillary, as you can tell im the old man. One of the things that ive enjoyed by being in New Hampshire is contributing to society and one of the ways i can do that is because vi this wonderful thing called Social Security. Thank god for Social Security. Lets hear it for Social Security. [ cheers applause ] and to remind people to remund you it was a democrat that got you Social Security. [ applause ] so with that in mind will i still have Social Security. Thank you. Yes. The answer is yes, you will. And you know, we do have to if defend against the efforts to privatize Social Security which makes no economic sense at all. We also have to do more to help people make more savings themselves and have the savings produce results which means that weve got to have better efforts to get the advisers who tell people about their investments in 401 k not to be turning and not to use the money for other things. We need a savings plan on the one side but weve got to defend and strengthen Social Security which remains the base for the vast majority of americans in their older years. Now you dont look old to me, but in their older years. And i just want to say a quick word about this. You know most people who actually are on Social Security or whose spouses or whose parent is or who have some firsthand knowledge of what it means in supporting someone they care about understand why this is an essential safety net program. And weve had awe lot of efforts. As a senator i was very involved in beating back president bushs efforts to privatize Social Security because it would have been a disaster for the vast majority of people. But we do have to take a look at how its operating. For example, one issue im concerned about again is that the wellbeing of older women particularly single, widowed and divorced women on Social Security who themselves never worked out of the home or who worked at very modest jobs with low wages or who worked only intermittently, theyre having a really hard time of it. So we have to look at Social Security, we have to protect and defend Social Security. And i tell you, if we do this right, it will be there for these young people as well. It is not going away if we take care of it and do what is necessary. [ applause ] yes, right there in the white shirt. You have many titles. We are all very, very proud of that. [ applause ] you have the most experience and i do wish you the very best and i think it will be a runaway. My complaint is very inane but it affects every Single Person in this room and i dont know if its something you can help with or not. Its a do not call registry. But if you initiated a call and this happened to myself and it was with the National Health care which i thought was a Marketplace Health Care Organization to look at reduced health care costs. Come to find out it seemed it was kind of a spam a scam. And i was getting upwards of 20 calls a day. Ive tried everything. Ive tried blocking. Our phone company only blocks 12 numbers so that isnt helping. Short of me changing my phone number that everybody knows, i really dont want to do that. But we have elderly, we have sick relatives, we have children that need to reach us. And this phone is constantly bouncing across the country, even New Hampshire numbers. But when they dont get me it goes to seattle or washington, d. C. Somebody is always calling me and im always running for the phone because im waiting for a Family Member to contact me. What can we do . Even though we initiated the call and the do not call registry says, im sorry, you initiated that. How can we stop these robocalls . Please help us. It is out of control. Thank you. You know i have to tell you this is the first time ive been asked that. And i dont know the answer. But i will try to find out if there is an answer and i would love for somebody on my campaign to meet with you and well figure out. I cant promise you. I will only tell you that i will look into it. Ill try to figure out if theres a way to help you. Its really annoying. Its really annoying. And i know. I mean i had the same issue we have the same issue you know at home. And its really so annoying when youve told somebody im not interested, please dont call me and they kind of go through the cycle and they call you again. And call you again. And all of the rest of it. I will try to find out what if anything we can do to help you. Okay. Yes, sir. Here comes a mic. Yeah thanks. Congratulations on that grandparent thing. Its great isnt it . Isnt it the best . Yeah, the best. Youre the only candidate with international experience. [ applause ] and i was telling me 95yearold motherinlaw who drove up from connecticut to see you today that i think that secretary of state job is probably the most demanding thick weve ever seen, especially bouncing around. With that in mind and your experience, are we going to regret in ten years from now, and will charlotte regret the fact that the iranians will now begin to move as fast as they want in ten years to develop Nuclear Weapons and in five years theyre going to be selling arms to all the people all the bad guys in the middle east . Well, its a very fair question. And it is going to be something i hope people will follow. Because the consequences the potential consequences as you point out are ones that we all have to address. Let me tell you how i look at it right now. And ill just go back a little bit of background. The iranians mastered the Nuclear Fuel Cycle when george w. Bush was president. They built two covert facilities that we know of. And they began to stock them with centrifuges that were increasingly sophisticated despite the worlds and our best efforts to try to prevent that. The efforts that we began when president obama came into office and i became secretary of state were directed at trying to force them into a negotiation to do as much as we could to put the lid on their Nuclear Weapons program. I spent the first 18 months of my time in the secretary of states job working to put together the coalition that passed the Security Council resolutions that imposed the crippling sanctions on iran and then enforcing them because there were a lot of people in the world, a lot of countries that dont share our concerns, especially in asia. All theyre interested in in energy. Just give tus energy and dont bother us. You guys worry about iran. We had to convince them it really was their worry because the only alternative to some diplomatic negotiation might very well be war which would be a disaster for the region, for Energy Supplies and all of the consequences that would flow from that. So we really did put in place a very tough regime of sanctions. And then after the iranian elections, when ak mod jad was finally gotten rid of, we e plord, starting with a trip that i took, we explored where there would be a serious time to negotiate a serious end to their program. The interim agreement that was reached was generally accepted as a positive step on the path toward trying to get the iranians to back off from Nuclear Weapons research. And then the final agreement, which is you know, over 100 pages, has lots of annexes. If youre interested, i think its on the internet now. Basically does put a lid for a time period on the iranian program. There are people on the other side of this whom i respect who have said very clearly they cant support it they think its a mistake, they believe that the iranians will cheat on the agreement. And even if they dont cheat, 10, 15, 20 25 years when certain of the provisions sunset, then they will have a free hand. I think that is a respectable argument. However, i think its important to ask what are our alternatives. And when i say that i mean not just what are our alternatives today, tomorrow and 20 years from now. What are our alternatives right now that could have gotten that lid put on in any other way. And do i trust the iranians . Absolutely not. This is not ronald reian who made arms agreements. Here i say dont trust and verify. We will have very intrusive inspections. We will have monitoring equipment that is highly sophisticated that even without inspections will be able to alert us to cheating. We will have a chance to put the iranians to the test on what they are doing if we think they are cheated without having to get russia and china on board which is a very important achievement in this agreement. The secretary of Energy Secretary secretary moniz who is a very respected Nuclear Scientist have certainly told many of us that this is the very best inspection agreement and intrusive monitoring that we could have put into place right now. Im hoping that we we move forward on this agreement with our eyes wide open because i think it gives us a chance to tackle the other serious threats that iran poses. Because even if we put this lid on the Iranian Nuclear program, we still have state sponsorship of terrorism, still have use of proxies, we still have so many of the problems from irans bad behavior. But i would rather deal with their bad behavior while we have a fighting chance to prevent them from continuing their Weapons Program than to try to deal with with that and the Weapons Program. For me this is a very cold calculating assessment. I dont expect their other behavior to change. I dont expect them to wake up and say they want to be part of the world. I dont expect the ayatollahs to begin to seek power. I dont expect any of that. I just believe that when it comes to protecting our friends and our alleys particularly israel in the middle east, this gives us a better chance than a lesser chance. Thats why i end up on the side of supporting it. In five years 10 years 20 years, if we get there without the agreement blowing up before then, which given the iranian behavior and their lack of trustworthiness its certainly possible, at least we will have had a chance to do what i have advocated for a number of years which is to be much more forceful in putting together an umbrella of security around the region that includes israel and our arab allies so its very clear to iran if they cheat, if they break out, if they do anything theyre going to pay a very serious price. I think its, like any diplomatic, any diplomatic agreement, its got its pluses, its got its draw backs but i think its in the National Security interest at this time. [ applause ] yeah. Thank you for taking my question, secretary clinton. So im going to be honest. I was disappointed by the answer that you gave before about Climate Change. You said earlier that you think this election is going to be a really deciding election for this century. And i think that Climate Change is a really important part of that. And so im wondering is your answer and your refusal to take leadership on Climate Change due to the fact that you have contributions from the fossil fuel industry in your campaign . No. No. Its not. And i look. I understand i know what the right answer in terms of getting votes would have been. The right answer would have been you bet i will ban extraction on public lands. And then if somebody said how are you going to do that . Well want i will advocate for it. How are you going to get it done . I will keep advocating for it. We have to change or energy policy. I have been clear about that. I have been repeatedly clear about that. And we also have to do it in a way that doesnt disrupt our economy. Its really easy to say, yeah, lets ban all of these fossil fuel extractions and forget about all of the people who are employed, who have jobs, who rely on the energy. So i am a strong believer in tackling Climate Change in the very strongest way we can to have that transition away from it into Clean Renewable Energy solar and wind and advanced biofuels and the like. So i will have to say to you im sorry if the answer, the specific answer wait just a minute. [ inaudible ] [ chanting ]. Thats okay. Thats okay. I am all in favor of acting on climate. You know what . I have said in this campaign, im going to tell you what i believe. And some people may like it and some people may not like it. And i believe strongly [ applause ] look, i believe i respect i totally respect the passion and the urgency. I understand it. And i believe we have a lot of work to do if were going to have the kind of Energy Agenda that will actually create the millions of jobs that i think can come from clean, Renewable Energy. So from my perspective Climate Change is an absolutely essential issue and there are candidates who will tell whatever you want to hear. I will tell you that we have to address it. There are lots of things we need to do to address it. Number one, we have to prevent back sliding. Thats why i said watch out for utilities that want to stop clean, Renewable Energy and enabling customers to sell back to the grid because they want to prevent the transition. And weve got a lot of work to do to make that happen and so i certainly i certainly would have public lands on the list of things we need to address. Theres no doubt about that. My biggest problem is trying to figure out how we do what we need to do absent a congress that will support what we need to do and, therefore and therefore, its absolutely imperative that we elect people who care as passionately about Climate Change as you two do. I would urge you to run for offices and have your voices heard in the Climate Change debate. It is also imperative that we support president obamas courageous efforts with executive action because he has pushed forward despite congressional opposition. So we have a lot we have a lot to do. Yes, right back there. In the striped shirt. Go ahead. Here we go. Yeah, go ahead. I just called on you and here comes a microphone. Working its way towards you. Thank you, madam secretary. I want to know your stance on immigration, its a hot topic now. How would you help stem the flow of Illegal Immigrants into our country . Let me say this, i support comprehensive Immigration Reform with a path to citizenship and i i i believe its not only the smart path for us to take. Its economically smart. And it will also help us get the labor market working for everybody again. Heres what i mean by that. I think the legitimate concern that people have and i hear it across the country is people who are undocumented are doing jobs that used to be done by people who are american citizens. I deplore that and here is why it happens. Thank you. It happens because if youre an undocumented immigrant with no legal right what is ever so and youre here among the 11 or 12 million who are here, employers can exploit you. They can pay you less than any minimum. They dont have to provide good working conditions and they displace jobs of people who were doing them before. One of the positive results of comprehensive Immigration Reform is to remove that incentive. There would be no incentive because the rules would apply to everybody. Because i dont believe we are going to deport 11 or 12 Million People who are living here. And when someone says that they want to do that, i just think theyre saying something which is never going to happen. And maybe they can get people to nod and agree and cheer but its never going to happen. I believe we have to do a better job securing our borders and not just our southern borders but airports and ports and everywhere else because i think if we move toward comprehensive Immigration Reform, and we provide a path to citizenship, then the country is going to want to take a deep breath and say, okay, lets figure out how we live with all of that and how we make sure people are going to be treated fairly and we have the right approach economically. So i thought the senate bill remember back in 2010 there was a Senate Compromise bill, republicans and democrats supported it, and it had a comprehensive immigration plan with a path to citizenship and it never got a vote in the house. I believe it would have passed the house by both democrats and republicans. Many republicans voting for it. That was a real lost opportunity but i think that particular bill still remains a very Good Foundation to start to try to get comprehensive Immigration Reform accomplished. Here you go. Thank you, secretary clinton. You mentioned earlier in your answer to the Climate Change debate the congressional opposition that that would face. I was wondering if i could bring that to a different issue. You mentioned several times you would support a constitutional amendment on Campaign Finance reform. And i was [ applause ] and its a very important issue that i think almost everyone is in support of. The question is, do you think given contemporary electoral conditions thats something that could happen during your presidency and if not, do you have any alternative approaches you could take to that issue . Thank you. Great question. Look, i think we should do everything we possibly can legislatively, regulatorily and theres a debate going on among the experts i have talked with. Some experts say there are things that the congress could do if you can really put the pressure on them to get them done. Whether they will or not, you know, thats up in the air because if we still have a very lopsided majority in the house unlikely but at least it would be a path forward. There are others who say, no, under the Citizens United and the buckley case you have to change the constitution. So i would i think we would have to make that a voting issue. We would have to make it an issue that in every town hall every meeting in every District Across our country, incumbents and challengers would be asked. There is another route besides going through the congress. You can go straight to the states so i think going straight to the states might be a great organizing tool. But it would certainly raise the visibility of this issue and make it clear that we were really serious about it. So thats what i intend to do if necessary. Yes, right there. Yeah. Yeah. Here comes the microphone. Thank you. Climate is my issue and im listening, im listening to all of the issues that people have here and what im realizing is that the question is what if you have a lopsided congress . What if what are you going to do . What is your plan . Ill tell you exactly what it is, because first of all i hope we dont have as lopsided a congress, i really do. I really do. First of all, there are a lot of states that are far ahead of the federal government. Do you know iowa just to name another state, iowa gets 25 of its energy right now from wind. So does texas. So its not like nothing is happening. Its just that at the federal level not enough is happening. So the more we can incentivize states and local communities to do much more the better off well be. That means even if we cant get the Big Solutions adopted by congress, getting the production tax credit, getting other kinds of financial credits, the winds and the solar and advanced bio fuels, and lets not forget energy efficiency. Its the easiest path forward and there are hundreds of thousands of jobs with energy efficiency. So theres a lot we can do besides wait for the congress. It wasnt about energy. I realize i dont have a question about energy right now. Because if you cant work with a lopsided congress, we dont i see, youre talking about everything. Right. The way i did when i was in the senate. Because when i served in the senate i was both in the majority and in the minority. There is no substitute for building relationships with people and trying to piece together answers to problems by one step at a time. And i will go anywhere, any time, to meet with people about Common Ground and you know i did that in the senate. I sponsored legislation. I worked to pass legislation with people with whom i had nothing else in common. But i found that link and thats what i did as senator. Thats what i did as secretary of state. Its really to be fun in this campaign, and im going to let you hear all of that as the Campaign Goes forward because, you know theyre going to try to forget that they said that. Well because i would work with them. I would listen to them. So i know how to find Common Ground and i know how to stand my ground. On a lot of the issues of principle and values, i will stand my ground. So many hands, oh, okay, this young man. One of you young men. Okay. Anybody who still has his suit and tie on deserves to ask a question. Thank you, secretary clinton. So my question is about National Service programs. We mentioned rewarding citizens for their Public Service and im an alumni of both city and americorps vista. Im really grateful for my opportunities to serve and not only did they enhance my personal and professional development, but they allowed me to make a difference in my community and they have earned me financial scholarships to help me complete my undergraduate degree. So my question is, if elected president , would you support the expansion of National Service programs allowing american citizens to serve their country domestically . Yes, yes, thank you for your service. Absolutely. You know i am a very strong supporter of National Service and im pleased that you took advantage of the Financial Aid to get your undergraduate education. Thats one of the ways to go back to the question about you know, debt and the like. We need more National Service linked to payments for college for training, and other kinds of advanced education. I will definitely push the support of it. I think its really its quite a tribute to how well the program has operated, that it is still alive. That the congress has not you know, they take whacks at it, but it has survived because fundamentally its a really american patriotic thing to do to serve your country, so yes, i support that. Let me let me just say one thing. As you folks all know, this election coming up the next president ial election is not about her. Its about us. Youre on a Job Interview here. Thats right. Thats right. And i think you have done a heck of a job. So lets take one more question, okay . Thank you. Thanks, george. Thanks. Oh, my gosh. One more question. Oh, my gosh i cant believe it. I have no idea. I mean i feel like i should shut my eyes. You have been in the back. Okay. Here comes the mic. Here it comes. Thank you, madam secretary. I represent the towns of new fields and our state legislature. We hope to welcome you very soon. Due to the sequester we lost our program for oh, my goodness, mental block. It was the program the children in early learning. Head start, yes, thank you. My head was in the way. 18 children were going to head start and think couldnt because of the sequester. What can we do about that . Thank you for asking that. It means a lot as a public official you asked me about Early Childhood education. To me thats where it all begins. I want to have universal prek so that every child everywhere in america can have a good experience getting ready for school. And i support head start and when i was first lady i helped to start something called Early Head Start which was 0 to 3yearolds to get them at the earliest possible moment to get them prepared. So i intend to advocate strongly in favor of Early Childhood and have it be something that is a partnership between the federal government, states and local communities like yours because not every local community will want to do it the same and different communities have different numbers of kids who would be eligible and the like. So i want to have a Good Partnership and i will make that a high priority. I just want to say youre doing very well on your Job Interview, by the way, today. Thank you. I want to thank you on behalf of the people of dover and the region for coming here and holding your first town meeting. You did a great job. Thank you. Thank you all thank you very much. Thank you. Josh earnest is scheduled to brief reporters at noon eastern. White house briefings frequently run behind schedule. Whenever it begins you can see it live here on cspan3. Coming up in just under an hour on cspan, a forum from house Energy Democrats on Climate Change and its affect on communities in the u. S. Community democrats will hear from local officials environmental experts and military officials. From the u. S. Naval academy in annapolis, maryland. You can see that live on cspan at 11 00 a. M. Eastern. Then at 1 00 p. M. , nasa holds a briefing to reveal new images of pluto and discuss the fly by of the new horizon spacecraft. Thats also live on cspan. This weekend on the cspan network, politics, books and American History. A road to the white house coverage features nearly all of the president ial candidates and begins tonight in iowa. At 8 00 eastern, we are live from cedar rapids, iowa, for the hall of fame dinner. All day saturday were live at the family leadership summit in ames iowa. Sunday evening little after 6 30 eastern interviews with two republican president ial candidates. First Lindsey Graham and then Ohio Governor john kasich. On book tv saturday morning beginning at 11 00 a. M. Eastern we are live from new york city for the 17th annual harlem book fair with author talks and panels on economics, africanamerican identity, and race and politics. With historians. And sunday night at 10 00, ann coulter says the greatest facing the u. S. Is immigration. On American History on cspan3 saturday afternoon at 1 00 p. M. We are live with the warren g. Harding symposium. Speakers are authors and the executive director of the National First ladies library, patricia kreider. A little after 9 00, the National Archives of kansas city shows how the u. S. Government used propaganda during world war ii to persuade citizens to join the military by war bonds and keep national secrets. Get our complete schedule at cspan. Org. Labor secretary thomas perez is our guest on news makers this weekend. Hell answer questions about increasing the minimum wage, overtime pay, family leave and employment numbers. News makers is on sunday at 10 00 p. M. In may president obama nominated James Dunford to be chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. A week ago the Senate Armed Services Committee Held a confirmation hearing for general dunford. Senator john mccain chaired the 2 1 2 hour long meeting. Questions for the military nominations. Well, good morning. The Senate Armed Services committee will consider the nomination of general dunford to be the chairman of the joint chief of staffs. Hes no stranger to the members of this committee. We have known him as commandant of the marine corps and our commander in afghanistan and many posts before that. He is a warrior and a leader of the highest quality and we are grateful for his 38 years of distinguished service. Were also thankful for the sacrifices of general dunfords family has made over the years and their willingness to lend him to the nation in service once again. As our tradition, at the beginning of your testimony, we welcome you, general dunford, to introduce the members of your family joining you this morning. I would like to take this moment to express our special thanks to your wife ellen. We know how much of your husbands service and his future absence will rest on you and we honor the sacrifices you are making through your continued support to our nation. And not to mention the downgrade in your residence. That will be part of this. The next chairman will have to prepare our military to confront the most diverse and complex array of global crises since the end of world war ii. In iraq and syria, isils terrorist army has continued to succeed on the battlefield including taking ramadi and other key terrain in iraq. Capturing over half the territory in syria and patrolling every border post between iraq and syria. A lack of a coherent strategy has resulted in the spread of isil around the world. To libya, egypt, nigeria and even to afghanistan where i visited last weekend. There are troops that are supporting our afghan partners in sustaining a sustainable and democratic future, but even as isil and the taliban threaten this future the president remains committed to the drastic reduction in the u. S. Presence at the end of 2016. Before the Afghan Government and Security Forces are fully capable of operating effectively without our support. This would create a security vacuum and we have seen what fills similars kinds of vacuum. Given your experience, we will be interested to hear your thoughts about the appropriate u. S. And Coalition Presence going forward. Meanwhile, iran continues to threaten peace and stability across the middle east. Through its support of terrorist proxies, pursuit of Nuclear Weapons and the missiles needed to deliver them to targets far beyond its shores. In europe Vladimir Putins russia continues its onslaught in ukraine but even as Russian Troops and equipment execute this neo and imperial campaign, the United States has refused ukraine the weapons it needs and deserves for its defense. In the asiapacific, china is continuing a pattern of destabilizing behavior. Its reclamation and militarization of vast land features in the south china sea, its continued military buildup designed to counter u. S. Military strengths and its blatant and undeterred Cyber Attacks against the United States. While our rebalance to the asiapacific has shown some successes, especially in deepening of our alliances this policy has not deterred china from the increasingly assertive course. Yet, while worldwide challenges like these grow, the Defense Department has grown larger, but less innovative more proficient at defeating low tech adversaries, but more vulnerable to hightech ones. And worse, the selfinflicted wounds of the budget control act in sequestration level defense spending have made all of these problems worse. Army and marine corps in strength is dropping dangerously low. The air force is the oldest and the smallest it has ever been. The navys fleet is shrinking to preworld war i levels. With the tempo and drastic reductions to defense spending we will continue the downward spiral of military capacity and readiness that will compromise each Services Ability to execute our defense strategic guidance at a time of accumulating danger. Budget cuts have slowed, imperialing our nations ability to preserve the technological advantage. This isnt just about the Weapons Systems we hear the most about. Fighter aircraft submarines or Armored Vehicles. These are important, but budget cuts also threaten our ability to seize the future and make vital investments in cyber, space and break through technologies such as directed Energy Autonomous vehicles and data analytics. The current chairman of the joint chief of staffs has stated that even if the Defense Department receives the additional 38 billion above the budget caps that the president s Defense Budget requests, our military would still quote remain at the lower ragged edge of manageable risk in our ability to execute the defense strategy. More worrisome, every one of our military Service Chiefs yourself included has testified that continued sequestered level defense spending puts american lives at greater risk. Unless we change course eliminate sequestration, and return to strategy driven Defense Budgets i fear our military will confront depleted readiness, chronic modernization problems and deteriorating morale. No matter how many dollars we spend, we wont be able to provide our military the equipment they need with the broken defense acquisition system that takes too long and costs too much. With this Years National Defense Authorization act, this committee has embarked on major effort to reform this system including ways to empower our Service Leaders to manage their own programs in exchange for greater accountability. General dunford, we are very interested in hearing your views about improving the defense acquisition system based on your years of service. Finally, the chairman of the joint chief of staff is the principal military adviser to the president. We need a leader that offers his best and unvarnished advice. The president wont always take your advice, but it is my hope that he will always have an appreciation of the military dimensions of the difficult problems our nation confronts with you at his side. Thank you for your willingness to serve once more. We look forward to your testimony. Senator reed . Thank you very much. Let me join you in welcoming general dunford and thank him for his Extraordinary Service to the nation during 38 years of military service, general dunford has served with courage and distinction. Im confident hell continue to do as the next chairman of the joint chief of staff. Let me recognize and thank his family, ellen, thank you. Patrick, thank you for being here today. I know joe and kathleen wanted to be here, but they are serving elsewhere. But thank you very much for what you have done to serve the nation and the marine corps. Last week, the current chairman of the joint chief of staffs released the National Military strategy. In his forward, general dempsey stated that the current global securing environment is the most unpredictable he has seen during his military service and that global disorder has increased while some of the comparative military advantage has begun to erode. Without question the United States faces a wide range of challenges around the world. If confirmed of the chairman of the joint chief of staff youll be advising on the complex international issues. Possibly the most complex issues for the next chairman is countering the threat from isil and iraq and syria and the spread beyond the middle east region. As the president said earlier this week, our counterisil campaign will be long term and deploy all elements of power including military and diplomatic and economic. If confirmed, general dunford you will be advising on the u. S. Military control and supporting our broader counterisil campaign, including denying safe havens and Building Local forces to counter isil with training and support from the International Air coalition. The success of the efforts will ultimately depend on the border complimentary effort to address the conditions that gave rise to isil and allowed it to thrive. I look forward to hearing your views on iraq and syria and your thinking on the most effective role that the military can play in supporting the diplomatic front. Regarding iran, while there remains no clear outcome to the negotiations over Irans Nuclear program, the department of defense will reaffirm our shared priorities with our partners in the region. Confronting common threats and working to deescalate or resolve these threats. General dunford if confirmed youll bring valuable experience to oversight of the mission in afghanistan where you have led the u. S. And Coalition Forces with distinction. While they have fought courageously against the taliban attacks, more needs to be done to build the afghans capabilities and deny any safe havens for extremists. The next chairman will play a role in the size and footprint of the forces in afghanistan in 2016 and beyond. Another security challenge will be deterring russian aggression against ukraine and reinforceing the minsk ceasefire accords and including the defense of weapons to help the ukrainian people to defend their sovereignty and territorial integrity. We will be interested in your views of the security situation in ukraine a what you suggest for protecting themselves in the kind of hybrid warfare attacks in crimea and Eastern Ukraine. Our men in uniform and women in uniform remain the committees top concern. I know theyre your top concern also. We are nothing without the people and the department continues to juggle of providing a high quality of life through pair pay and exceptional training. In my view its incumbent on the congress and nation to provide the size and equipped military and with character and talent to meet National Defense requirements. Sometimes that means making hard choices especially in the budget constrained environment we find ourselves to that end, as we well know from your time as commandant, we have several years considered various proposals for compensation in health care to show the growth of the personnel course so they can be redirected to buy back modernization benefits. I would be interested in your views on such proposals and the impact if such changes are not enacted. Now, during consideration of the fy2016 National Defense authorization act, this committee had a robust debate and i repeatedly stated that sequestration is not the approach that we need to address our nations fiscal challenges and more pointedly it undermines or National Military readiness. Defense budgets should be based on a long term military strategy. Thats the point that the chairman made very eloquently. Not sequestering the budget caps. Even a one year increase does not provide dod with the certainty it needs. As a consequence this unstability undermines the morale of our troops and families who want to know their futures are planned for more than one year at a time. The confidence in the Defense Industry partners, we rely on to provide the best technologies available to our troops. I hope youll share your thoughts with us today. Thank you for your willingness to serve our nation and i look forward to discussing these issues. Chairman, before your statement, there are standard questions that the committee always asks of military nominees, we have always done that so i would like to proceed with that before your testimony. Its important that this committee and other appropriate committees of congress are able to receive testimony, briefings and other communications of information. Have you adhered to applicable laws governing conflicts of interest . I have, chairman. Do you agree when asked to give your personal views even if these views differ from the administration in power . I do. Have you undertaken any actions which would appear to presume the outcome of the confirmation process . I have not. Will you ensure your staff complies with deadlines established for request in communications including questions for the record and hearings . I will, chairman. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefers in response to congressional requests . I will, chairman. Will those witnesses be protected from reprisal for their testimony . They will. Do you agree to testify before request before this committee queem. I do. Do you agree to provide copies of electronic forms of communication when requested bring the duly constituted committee or consult regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in providing such documents . Yes, chairman. Thank you for applying with that formality. Please proceed with your testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to an pea before you today. Im truly honored to be nominated as the chairman of the joint chief of staff. I want to recognize general dempsey and his wife for their Extraordinary Service to the nation, our military families. Joining me today is my wife ellen and our son patrick. Our son joe and kathleen were not able to be here. Ellen has been a great mother to the child and has served as an advocate for the families. Her flexibility and endurance has been tested in over 30 years as a Military Spouse and i wouldnt be here today without her love and support. I want to thank the committee for the commitment to soldiers sailors, airmen and marines. They compromise the most well trained, well equipped and Capable Military force in the world. As i appear before you this morning, im mindful of the complexity of the current security environment. You mentioned that. This committee is well aware of the pressing challenges with efface in europe, the pacific, the middle east, africa space and cyberspace. While dealing withnese and other issues we face the need to restore readiness and modernize the joint force in the concept of budget uncertainty. If confirmed ill provide the secretary of defense and the president with my best military advice in a full range of military options for addressing the current and future challenges to our National Security. When asked, ill provide the congress with my best military advice. And when delivering best military advice i will do so with candor. Ill also work with the joint chiefs or civilian leaders and members of the committee to maintain a joint force thats capable of securing the National Interest today and tomorrow. Most importantly, if confirmed ill dedicate myself to properly leading, representing and keeping faith of the men and women in uniform and in the civilian workforce who volunteer to serve our nation. Thank you again for allowing me to appear this morning and im prepared for your questions. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, general. Yesterday or the day before yesterday we received testimony that so far with 500 million committed, theres been 60 individuals who have been trained to go in to syria and fight against isis. What do you know about that particular situation . Chairman, what i know is that we have got a general who has been working there for some months. Those numbers are certainly much less than what he estimated. The feedback i have received is those numbers are largely attributable to the vetting process that they think they have learned some things during the process of these first 60 that made some other contacts, but frankly chairman until i have an opportunity to get on the ground and speak to the commanders, what i really know about that is secondhand. Do you believe that we should be getting a pledge from these recruits that they will not that they will only fight against isis and not Bashar Al Assad . What i understand right now, chairman, we do not have the authority to take action against assads forces so unless that policy would change then that pledge would be required. Given your experience in the military, do you think its a good idea to train people and send them in to a conflict to be attacked and barrel bombed by another entity and them not and not defending them . Chairman, i dont. If we train those individuals and they go back in to syria to fight, then i think if we expect them to be successful we need to provide them with enabling capability to allow them to be successful. In other words, prevent them from being barrel bombed by Bashar Al Assad, which is routine now . I think we need to provide them with the full range of capability for them to be successful. I was recently over in afghanistan over the fourth of july and theres great concern, both amongst our military and with the ash a ghani about the present proposal to have the force in afghanistan down to a quote, embassy centric force by 2017. Meaning that we would be giving up or turning over our bases at bagram, kandahar and a force that is only based in the u. S. Embassy. The great concern was voiced concerning this plan. Or articulated announced plan by the president of the United States. As you know, the taliban did not respect the nonfighting season. As you know the afghan casualties are extremely high. Higher than they have ever been and we now have isis getting ahold and we have the iranians providing taliban with weapons. Is this a wise decision on your part to have a calendar base withdrawal of american troops rather than a condition based withdrawal given your background and experience there . I think youre probably pretty well qualified to make a judgment. Chairman, im aware of the consequences of our mission and the importance of our mission in afghanistan and clearly also i have a degree of personal commitment. Having spent time there. I can assure you if im confirmedconfirm confirmed i will provide advice to the president that will allow us to meet the desired end state and thats based on the conditions on the ground as you have articulated. Rather than a calendar based decision . Chairman, sometimes the assumptions you dont pertain to time and thats certainly the case in afghanistan. Thank you. In ukraine its obvious that the russians continue their military buildup. I was in Eastern Ukraine and watched the Surveillance Video that was made by the ukrainians showing the gradual buildup of Russian Forces inside ukraine. Do you believe that we should give the ukrainians with counterbattery system with which to defend themselves from rocket strikes and should we provide them with javelin or antitech Missile Systems to defeat them . From a military perspective, i think its reasonable that we provide that support to the ukrainians and frankly without that kind of support, then they wont be able to protect themselves against russian aggression. General dunford, i would like to repeat again of my appreciation and for your service and im confident that you will serve with distinction. And you are the principal military adviser to the president of the United States. And that is a unique role, as designed in the 1947 act, i believe. So i hope that you will keep in mind your obligation to the president , but also to the men and women who are serving. We may have to send in to harms way and make sure theyre provided with the best capabilities and finally, i hope in answer to some of these questions, because i run over time that you will talk about the devastating effects of sequestration on our ability to defend the nation. Maybe youll make a brief comment on that now. Chairman, i have dealt with the issue of sequestration as a service chief and quite frankly if we go into sequestration well be unable to support the current strategy to protect our nation and quite honestly the readiness of the joint force will describe and its catastrophic consequences. Thank you, general dunford. Senator . Well, thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Once again, thank you, general, for your service and your sacrifice. And following a bit on senator mccains final question about sequestration, the administration and secretary carter made this clear, has adopted an antiisil campaign with nine lines of effect. Two principally controlled by the department of defense. Are you comfortable with that overall approach at this moment . I am comfortable with that overall approach. The other lines of effort are controlled by other elements of the government. The state department, Homeland Security and et cetera. Apropos of senator mccains questions about effects of sequestration, are you concerned that the partners in the effort could be hamstrung just as much as you would be if the bca went into effect for . Senator very much so. I would say not only did we just represent two of the nine lines of effort, but we cannot be successful in either iraq or syria or frankly any of the other endeavors without the whole government approach. Let me just ask you since youre the expert, youre in afghanistan. We had a significant military effort, but we had a significant civilian agency effort. The state department, fbi, Drug Enforcement administration, all of these agencies. I would assume you considered them to be integral and essential parts of your effort and without them or without their ability to provide services, you couldnt have accomplished what you did. Is that fair . Sir, i think its absolutely fair. And although we had challenges remaining i think we have accomplished quite a bit over the last few years. From my perspective thats because we have been able to integrate the capabilities of those organizations that you mentioned. And in particular i think the relationship that we have with the state department in afghanistan was absolutely critical to our success. One of the most difficult issues you face is building the capacity of the iraqi Security Forces. This has been an endeavor frankly that we have tried for a long time. Do you have any sort of sense at this juncture of what we can or should be doing differently, how do we do this . We have heard colleagues come before the committee your colleagues and suggest that you know theres gaps in leadership at the upper levels. Just your perspectives on the length of time and the efforts we have to undertake to get a credible iraqi force in the field which is ultimately which will secure the country. Sir, with the caveat that i have been away 11 months and certainly ill confirm and go back immediately the areas of most concern were intelligence logistics. Special operations capability and the aviation capability. Then more broadly the ministerial capacity. Frankly our estimates were that was a long term endeavor. It would take years to grow the kind of capacity that we have in this country and were not trying to develop what we have in this country. But the ability of the ministerial level the minister of defense and minister of interior to support tactical level organizations. I think continuing to stay the course in the plan that general campbell has, recognizing that will require continued resources and patience will require us to be successful. Let me focus for a moment. I know your practical experiences is in afghanistan and other places, but in iraq, theres the same capability problem. Does your analysis apply there also in the long term need to build up the iraqi Security Forces ministries . It does. In some way the situation is the same and there are vast differences. I think one of the Biggest Challenges in iraq is when Prime Minister maliki was there he eliminated many of the capable quality leaders that were in the iraqi Security Forces. I think its fair to say that the Afghan Forces have some solid leaders. We have seen them, they have gone to our schools. I feel pretty good about where we are with the afghan leaders. I think we have some work to do to rebuild the iraqi Security Forces. Frankly to get them back to where they were a few years ago. Well, one other aspect, many aspects to the situation in iraq. One is this tension sectarian and geographic tensions in the country. But our policy is that to support a unified government in baghdad and work with them so that they are able to integrate their ethnic communities. Is that the approach that you think makes much sense . Senator, that is going to be very difficult to do. But at this point, i believe thats the best prospects for long term success is the unified multisectarian government in iraq. Frankly, if confirmed if at any point i no longer believe thats possible, then my advice to the president will be adjusted accordingly. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you for your service. Have. Thank you, mr. Chairman. In responding to one of the chairmans questions, you talk about you didnt have the authority to go after assad, is that what you said . You do not have the authority to go after assad. Senator thats my understanding, that we dont have the Legal Authority at this time to go after the assad regime and its also the policy of the administration not to go after the assad regime militarily. Okay. Well, i think for the record id like to expand have you expand a little bit on that. Because as to whether or not it would be desirable for you to have that authority. We have been talking for a long time and with you also at these hearings about the amount of risk that were at right now. You were quoted as saying our Combatant Commanders face increasing risk. So we talk about the risk thats out there. You know, risk equals lives. But what is the how do you define too much risk . Are we there yet . Senator, i believe today we are capable of providing Adequate Security to protect our National Interests, i also believe were at the razors edge and that has been a subject of testimony several times before this committee. Our readiness, were ready to go below this level we would have to adjust the end of the strategy. Thats a similar response, whether its the general, theyre concerned about the level of risk we never had to accept in the past. In the ukraine, i happened to be there when they had the election that resulted in for first time in 96 years no communist serving in their parliament. Weve talk about what they really should be having there. Are there obstacles to keep if you were to make that determination as to giving them more to defend themselves the things that we all agree they should have . Is there an obstacle that we could help with or do you think its or do you think that you have that authority now . From the military perspective, additional security to the ukrainians would help them deal with the separatist and the russian threthe ukraine. There are some policy issues associated with that that dont fall into the dod i understand that. Yeah, i understand that. I appreciate that answer. Kind of the same thing with the kurds. Now, we they have a need for i guess antiarmor and those kinds. I get two conflicting stories, one from some of the top people in charge saying that by sending through baghdad, you have a problem in getting it up there to the fight. And yet i heard just yesterday from someone who is in charge of that that problem has been resolved now. Is that really resolved and do we have a problem getting the equipment that they need up there, those fighters, to effectively fight . I watch carefully the hearing on tuesday and the exchange that took place on this particular issue. And, you know i have been briefed that in fact the issues have been resolved and the support is getting to the kurds right away. But this would be one of the issues that if confirmed again iraq, afghanistan and the places where our young men and women are in harms way would be the first places i would go to visit. With this issue because its so important, its one i would look into personally. Good, i appreciate that. And this morning, the hill general petraeus had a couple of quotes in. There i would read these, we can schedule an end to our role in that nation talking about afghanistan, in that nations conflict but we cannot schedule an end to the war there, the threat from al qaeda or other extremist elements of the global jihad. Going to a zero option next year would be playing roulette be with afghanistans future. Is petraeus right . Senator, i think hes right with regard to the war it would continue whether or not were there or not. You can assume that the war would get worse were our presence not to be there. Again, my assessment is that our presence ought to be based on a on the conditions on the ground and ill check those as soon as and if confirmed. Thank you very much. Senator nelson . Thank you, mr. Chairman. General, isis with regard to iraq and syria would you generally ascribe to the fact that in iraq its going to require the iraqis to have the will to fight to meet isis in iraq and be successful . Chairman senator, our Current Campaign is dependent on the iraqi Security Forces to deal with isil. Go over to syria. Now, thats a hodgepodge. How much do you think that the assad regime staying in power would complicate the issue of us being able to take down isis in syria . Senator, my assessment is that it plays a significant role. I think assads brutality to his people was certainly the primary factor giving rise to isis is one of the assessments and i ascribe to that particular assessment. I think his remaining in power has certainly continued to inflame people and gives isis the recruits and the support they need to operate inside of syria. I agree with that. And then the question is when do we really press to have some kind of political settlement for assad to exit . Do you have any thoughts on that with . Senator, i dont. Im not involved in the dialogue today in that regard. The political resolution is one of the lines of effort thats part of our overall strategy and while i dont know i would assume that today that issue is being addressed and certainly if confirmed i expect to be part of the conversations and know a bit more than i do today. And general, someone of your stature, its going to be very comforting to us to have the confidence to know that those very tough decisions that will be made with regard to limiting the effectiveness and ultimately defeating isis will be made with you sitting there at the table giving council. If you just look at a map of who is in control of syria in the different geographical areas of syria, it is a mess and how you bring order thank you senator mccaskill has shown. This is syria and the different colors representing the different entities that in fact are in control in that geographic area. So its comforting to know youll be there giving your wide counsel. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator sessions . Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. And general dunford, with regard to the control act which includes the sequester, the budget committee, the Armed Services committee, with a bipartisan strong vote has voted out legislation that will add 19 billion or i believe 23 billion above last years spending for the Defense Department. I believe the Appropriations Committee has already voted out that same spending level. Its on the floor. The problem is that the commander in chief, the president of the United States is insisting on blocking that bill and encouraging democrats to filibuster it. Until theres an agreement to spend an equal amount on nondefense. I just believe that the fact that we have a crisis internationally and we need to spend more on the defense does not require that this nation spend more on nondefense. So that is the difficulty we face on youll be seeing more of that i guess as time goes by. General dunford, with regard to iraq and this isis situation isnt it true that the threat in iraq is not just a threat to iraq, but it implicates the National Security interests of the United States and that we have a National Security interest in blocking a takeover of iraq by this Extremist Group isis who chops off heads and does other extreme things . Senator i would agree that the issue of isis has both regional issues creating regional instability. But absolutely we have the u. S. National interests in a stable iraq thats not a sanctuary for extremists. And so i think its a mistake sometimes to sit back and say, well, were going to wait on the iraqi army to get its act together. We have trained the iraqi army for over a decade. They have battalions and companies and organizations. Theyre not well led and their morale is not good. But they have an army. The question is can we help encourage them to be more effective in fighting back against isis . Would you not agree . I do agree with that, senator. I would just say despite the challenges we have had as you know some thousands of men and women from the United States Central Command that have been in iraq and conducting strikes into syria over the over the last year. And despite the challenges and pretty difficult conditions i think they have had some accomplishments over the past year that we can be proud of. Clearly well do more. I think secretary carter made that clear on tuesday. Clearly we need to do more to assist iraqis in moving forward and i think thats the plan. Well, the president s press conference two days ago did not encourage me and did not clarify in my mind that we have a good strategy for iraq and frankly i think our general dempsey and secretary carter following up on that were not very persuasive either in convincing me or the American People that we have a good plan. Now, based on your experience, isnt it a fact that if we had a limited number with an iraqi be talion of 600, that that can make give confidence to the battalion and help improve their morale and help them be more effective on the battlefield. Senator, its been my experience is that when u. S. Forces have accompanied iraqis or for that matter my experience in afghanistan, that those units are more effective. Well, general dempsey said he had not yet recommended we embed a limited number, a very small number of search forces in the iraqi army but he would do so if he thought it was appropriate. Dont think its time for us to maybe move from being in baghdad in headquarters and move out to help provide this kind of confidence, the air cover, the direction of munitions, giving confidence of resupply and american commitment. Isnt it time for us to move forward in that direction . Senator, without appearing to be evasive, what i really would like to do if confirmed is have the opportunity to get on the ground, speak to the commanders and provide a more comprehensive recommendation to how we can move the campaign forward in iraq without focusing on one or the other factors. I hope you will do that quickly. Just one more thing, senator mccain warned yesterday, we could be facing the same situation that he warned about iraq in 2011 when we pulled out prematurely. Now we are going to be facing this decision in afghanistan and i hope that you will be clear and firm in your recommendation to the president , if you believe this plan we have today, they the specific withdrawal is in error, and i hope you will do that. Will you do so if you think its in error . I will do that. Thank you. Thank you. My good friends in colleague, senator session and i have worked together on matters of fiscal accountability and trying to spend less money. I have a different take on where we are in terms of the military budget. I cant figure out any reason why we would be putting the 40 billion increase into the war fund instead of into the base budget. I cant think of any reason to do that other than one of misleading the American People about whether or not were balancing something. Because thats the only place they can put the money and not have to pay for it. So they put it there. So it didnt have to be paid for and completely shortchanged National Security for our country in the form of cyber security, port security, airport security, fbi, cia, all of which i know you would acknowledge, general dunford is a very important part of the role of keeping america safe. Would you agree with that . Senator, i would absolutely agree, those organizations play an inextrickable role in keeping us safe. Lets make clear, if we go down this path of pretending we are balancing something, putting it in a funds we dont have to pay for, will in fact the war funds as i like to call them, will they do anything to avoid the four structure cuts looming across our nation if we do not get off this path of misleading the American People, not what were balancing . Senator, i think all of the Service Teams that have to balance a budget, certainly me included where i sit right now would much prefer that money to be in the base budget. Because that provides a degree of predictability and we can get after the two main issues we have to deal with and one is modernization of the force. The second is to get the readiness back to a level were comfortable with. The cuts we seen this week, they are a drop in the bucket as to whats coming if we continue on there bizarre idea of putting all of this money in the war fund as opposed to the core budget where the core strength belongs, correct . If it goes below what is requested in budget 2016, there will be significant additional cuts made. Thank you. You know how hard we have all worked on the problem of Sexual Assault in the military. I am pleased that the incidents are down, i am pleased that reporting is up. I am pleased that the efforts that are being made to measure Victim Satisfaction with command look good. I think its too early to tell declare, success, obviously. We have a lot of work to do. The core problem that remains, one i want to make sure you have at the top of your list is retaliation. I know there have been some initiatives begun, but i would like to see a written plan from you as chairman of the joint chiefs with all of the chiefs signing off on, what is your path to getting at this culture . The problem is not based on the survey, the command. The problem is primarily lower level command, unit command and piertopier. Not that there may not be outliers there. Thats the bulk of the problem. Thats a culture issue. And that means from the top. Im disappointed that we have not had more prosecutions, retaliation is a crime. I know its new. I would be very reluctant to bring people up on that charges. Thats where you guys come. In i would like a commitment from you today that you would be willing to put a plan from writing that we could follow. Senator, id make that commitment. I think you have correctly identified pure retaliation as the real issue that were trying to grapple with in the wake of the iran report and i can assure that you the leadership across the department has been careful looking at that issue in an effort to set the right climate. Where retaliation is unacceptable. I will patriot question for the record about the unused report that he pointed out in afghanistan. I know there was an investigation that you, of course, were not found to be a problem in this. But it is a problem. The investigation found not a problem, and in reality there was a huge problem where somebody signed off on a building for 36 million that is never going to be used. It is sitting empty. My final question is, if you dont have time to do it now. Im just about out of time. I want to make sure you get your take on isis in afghanistan. I know theyre trying to move everywhere. Obviously, this is a shiasunni issue. That is something that is pref prevalent throughout the region. With your experience in afghanistan, are you comfortable we have a handle on what isis is doing in afghanistan . What i know and the intelligence is we have seen a number of taliban rebrand themselves as isis. But beyond that i dont have a good feel for the depth of the problem. Certainly its one of the issues to look into if confirmed. Thank you very much. Mr. Dunford, i think are you the man for the job. You have a lot of crises to go preside over. I would simply ask you, during the course of your term in office, tell us what you need, come on and tell us what our men and women in uniform need to get the job done because i dont think we are quite there. I was privileged to lead a bipartisan house and Senate Members over the past week to ukraine we met where the president in kiev. He was grateful for the 300 million this government provided in the military assistance during the past year, and he also mentioned the need for missiles. I think your testimony is earlier today that that is a reasonable request on the part of ukraine and it will be necessary to get those in order to defend his country. Was that your testimony . Senator, from a military perspective, those types of capabilities in my judgment will be necessary to deal with the separatism issue he is dealing with in ukraine. Separatists that are backed by the russian hierarchy. Would you agree this armor humvees, in the ukraine, took over a year to process due to bureaucratic delays of dod and the state . Senator, if it took a year to do that, it would be unacceptable. Im not personally aware of that issue. Well, look into that for us. Also led a delegation to helsinki the os parliamentary assembly. Before the delegation left in mass because of the dispute over five delegates being on the sanctions list the head of the delegation delegation Nikolai Kovalev said russias neighbors have no reason to be threatened by russia. Now, of course, russia has, mr. Putin under mr. Putins leadership, russia has twice invaded, georgia if 2008. Ukraine last year and we see now there is a russian official investigating the legality of mr. Khrushchevs transfer of crimea back in the day saying that this perhaps wasnt an invasion because crimea was never legally transferred to ukraine by the russian federation. It concerns me that this same official is now investigating whether the transfer of the baltic states, whether the giving of the independence to the baltic states, that lithuania and estonia was also legal. Perhaps that wasnt legal at all this russian official suggests and we can get to the issue this way. I just want to ask you this about our nato commitment. I can envision a situation where there are small jurisdictions within latvia that have a majority of russian speakers, small jurisdictions within estonia that have a majority of russian speakers and the pretext