Transcripts For CSPAN2 Tonight From Washington 20130718

This is the hearing of the Senate Relations committee will come to order. Good morning ms. Power and welcome to the Senate Foreign relations committee. Your nomination as ambassador to United Nations has come with much fanfare and with some criticism which at the end of the day means he must be doing something right. But without fanfare or criticism i dont believe anyone can question your credentials nor can anyone question your service. And certainly no one can question your willingness to speak your mind. Often forcefully, always passionately and usually without hesitation and i commend you for your willingness to speak out particularly on human rights issues around the world. Where there is a war correspondent in bosnia or in yugoslavia are one door sedan as you said in your Pulitzer Prize winning book genocide witnessed evil at its worst. Youve been in on balancing voice when it comes to human rights and crimes against humanity and i know that boys will be heard around the world should he be confirmed. Personally i am incredibly appreciative of the principle position you have taken on many of these issues but on genocide. In 2,000,007 you wrote in Time Magazine quote a stable fruitful 21st century relationship, referring to turkey, cannot be built on a lie and i completely agree. Your belief that we should use the lessons of a clearly was an atrocity of historic proportions to prevent future crimes against humanity is a view consistent with my own and many others on this committee and which is supported by the role of the president s atrocities prevention board. I agree with us to acknowledge the past and understand how and why atrocities happen to put into practice a new meaning to the phrase never again. As the son of immigrants from cuba won his whose family and friends bore witness to suffering is contained to suffer the castro regime i appreciate exposing the disregard for human and civil rights and for not idealizing the harsh realities of communism in cuba. I know from a conversation we had in my office that you appreciate the suffering of the cuban people, the torture abuse detention of the civil and human rights of those who voice their dissent and i also welcome your commitment to reach out to the daughter of a longtime dissident who died under mysterioumysteriou s circumstances last year in cuba. She was in washington this week accepting a post you must award from the National Endowment for democracy and a half of another young actress from cuba who died alongside her, making your commitment to reach out to her much more timely. Yesterdays news of the discovery of illegal arms shipments from cuba to north korea reinforces in my view the necessity of the United States should keep cube on the list of countries who are the sponsors of terrorism. I share your view that we should not lose sight of these moral issues even as we are addressing the pressing economic and Security Issues that confront our nation. Its fitting that you will be at the United Nations which was created after period of conflict with the goal of bringing nations together to achieve peace and stability. In the words of the u. N. Preamble it was creative quote to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights and the dignity and worth of the human person of equal rights of men and women of nations large and small. If confirmed your focus on the United Nations will no doubt be on the crisis du jour the middle east area iran north korea afghanistanpakistan increasingly north africa and the nations that emerged from the air of spring but i would encourage you to also keep your focus and castor staff to what is happening off the front page as well as on it. What may be happening on freedom of expression and latin America Fighting hiv aids malaria and polio in africa, the status of talks to resolve the 66 year long question of cyprus womens rights in Pakistan Labor rights in bangladesh and sri lanka. The u. N. For all its faults has the credibility great ability to serve as an arbitrator factfinder and overseer of peace. I urge you to harness and strengthestrengthe n the interest of our nation and not coincidentally in the interest of fulfilling the stated purpose of the United Nations which is to unite our strength to maintain International Peace and security. We will address these issues among many others in our questioning but let me take this opportunity to welcome to the committee to say we look forward to a full and frank dialogue on the issues. Let me also say for the record there additional questions for the record of this nominee and they should be submitted by 5 00 p. M. Today. With that let me turn to the distinguished Ranking Member of the committee senator corker for his Opening Statements. The mr. Chairman think of chairman think you are having this hearing and i want to welcome the nominee. We had a very good meeting. I will be brief. I think youll be received well here despite the two introducers you have beside you that i do appreciate the time and the candor in our office and i want to thank you for being willing to serve in this way and i think you know our massacre to the u. N. Is one of the most important diplomatic posts that we have. You have daily contact with leaders from all around the world and therefore are may be out there amongst the people around the world more than anybody else. And they can be a critical component of our diplomatic efforts. Wewe are the largest contributor to the u. N. I think you know that and i hope one of the things he will pursue and i know you are very policy oriented and i appreciate that but i hope youre also going to pursue reforms and a much better way for not only the u. S. Taxpayer but for the world. All too often i think you know this, the u. N. Acts as the voice were bad actors to fight find criticism and i hope that you will, i think you will actually but i hope you will follow the footsteps of predecessors like Daniel Patrick monahan and James Kilpatrick who basically got up there and championed our National Interest at the u. N. Even when it was unpopular. Again i thank you for coming before us today and i look forward to your service. I know there will be a number of questions that i know you will answer well and again thank you for your willingness to serve and mr. Chairman look forward to hearing from our extra distinguished guests today that i know are looking at their watch wanting to go to the next next too even though they are glad to be here now. See thank you senator corker. We are pleased to have our distinguished colleague from george introduce ms. Power to the committee so i will not recognize the Senior Member from georgia senator chambliss followed by senator isakson. See thank you very much chairman menendez and senator corker. I have come today to introduce Samantha Power to the Foreign Relations committee. Samantha is already wellknown to this committee but suffice it to say she is an irish born american and matriculated to atlanta to become educated in high school to prepare herself not just for this job but to go to yale and harvard law school. Credentials coming out of Lakeside High School in atlanta. She has a passion for human rights as you stated mr. Chairman and she takes her passion very seriously. She is a prolific writer who believes in what she is writing about to the extent that she gets into the fray as she did in yugoslavia by dodging bullets to report on the war in yugoslavia. She is the Pulitzer Prizewinning author. She has extensive Foreign Policy experience as a staffer as well as a member of the president S National Security team. The job that she has been nominated by the president to assume is a very difficult job. Its one that requires charisma and at the same time toughness. I am told by her friends that Samantha Camby kind and gentle but she is one smart and tough lady who can express herself in very strong terms when she needs to and shes going to need that ability. I look forward to seeing her as an adversary to some of the tougher leaders around the world that she will be dealing with at the United Nations because i am confident that the same passion she has for human rights she has for this country. She will express that paion in no uncertain terms. She is going to be a great representative of the United States as ambassador to the United Nations and i commend her to you highly and i look forward to seeing her confirmed in short order. Thank you mr. Chairman. Senator isakson. Thank you chairman menendez and senator corker. Its an honor to be here. Samanthas parents brought her from ireland United States and she ended up at Lakeside High School where she graduated. I did some research to find out what others said about her when she was in georgia and a good friend of mine who is a sports director in atlanta had her is one of his interns in 1989 and i want to quote directly what he said about samantha. He said she seemed to be a fish out of water. Oh my god was she bright. I dont know if you got a better introduction or compliment than that but jeff said she is one of the brightest people he has ever known. I appreciate your asking me to introduce her today and i will share a few thoughts additional to those that senator chambliss said. As you know ive traveled to sudan and travel to or want that. Ive been to some of the the places the methods written about in her book about rwanda which was a great book she wrote about her couldnt believe in three months the slaughter of over a million there wasnt even a highlevel meeting at the white house. That was the motivation to the special envoy for president bush to the sudan who i met with in dartboard senator corker travel with me too dark for gives her high marks. My dear friend senator bob dole sent an email on her nomination and said this is one woman who is most appropriate for the president and for which has been nominated. I am the republican nominee for this session of congress and senator leahy is a democrat. Ive traveled to the Security Council watch the challenges senator corker for your two. I have no reservation or doubt whatsoever that Samantha Power will be what her name employs a powerful representative of the nicest of american a powerful body. Its safe pleasure and privilege for me to chase her and i wish you the best of luck in her confirmation. We thank both of our colleagues and we welcome senator isakson back to the committee. Senator isakson was a distinguished by the committee and we miss him on the committee and we hope at some point he will return here if we know you have a busy schedule so when you feel its appropriate please feel free to leave as you need to. With that a great set of introductions ms. Power you are welcome to start your testimony. You have family and friends here. Please feel free to introduce them. We understand this is a commitment not only of yourself but family and we appreciate that. Her full statement will be entered into the record. Without objection and the floor is yours. See thank you sir. Thank you Ranking Member corker and distinguished members of this committee. It is a great honor to appear before u. S. President thomas nominee to serve as the u. S. Permanent representative to the machinations. Representing the United States would be a privilege of the lifetime. Im grateful to the president for placing his trust in me. I would like to thank my friends and my remarkable family my parents who brought me here from ireland my husband Cass Sunstein and their children for your old dylan and 1yearold reagan who has proven less interested in this hearing then others here today. I would also like to thank senator chambliss and senator isakson for their generous remarkable introductions are growing up as an irish immigrant in Atlanta Georgia can say that the u. N. Was a popular topic with my classmates at Lakeside High School budha was in georgia while working at the same local television station that i witnessed footage of the massacre in Tiananmen Square and resolve them but i would do what i could progress my life to stand up for American Values and to stand up for freedom. My georgia friend supported me every step of the way and im so proud now to count these two great Public Servants senator isakson and senator chambliss among them. When i first came to this this country a few the United Nations is a place for people assembled to resolve their differences. It was a stage as senator corker said on which iconic americans like Daniel Patrick moynihan and Jeane Kilpatrick stood up for whats right. Unfortunately when i travel to the balkans i saw a different side. U. N. Peacekeepers have been sent to protect civilians but in the town of show the need to men and boys were executed in cold blood while peacekeepers today goodbye. The u. N. Is multifaceted and its record mix. It was the support of u. N. That i travel in 2042 door for where he discovered a mass grave hallmarks of the genocide carried out by the sudanese government. Today it is the World Health Organization helping to provide polio vaccinations even as terrorists wage and the station Nation Campaign against doctors. Last friday the u. N. Provided the stage iv mullah left the brave young pakistani girl shot by the taliban on her way home from school. Together she and the u. N. Will inspire millions to stand up for girls education. Alongside all of this within the u. N. An organization built in part to apply the lessons of of the holocaust we also the holocaust would also seem acceptable attacks against the state of israel. We see the absurdity of their brand cheering disarmament. A disgrace that history will judge harshly. What is also clear 68 years after United Nations was founded in San Francisco is an effective u. N. Depends on the effect of american leadership. The war in bosnia didnt end when the u. N. Acted. It ended because president clinton backed by congress including senator mccain took robust action. Some possible to imagine an aids Free Generation in africa not merely because of the essential work of u. N. Aids but because president george w. Bush decided to provide lifesaving drugs on a massive scale. I believe america cannot and indeed i know america should not police every crisis or shelter every refugee. While her goodwill knows no bounds or resources are finite stream by pressing needs at home and we are not the worlds policeman. We must make choices based on the best interest of the American People and other countries must share the costs and burdens of addressing global problems. There are challenges across that cross borders of the United States alone cannot sanctions against iran or north korea where u. S. Efforts pack farmer punch than we are joined by others. There occasions as in molly today when the u. N. Has to step up to prevent state failure. An effective u. N. Is critical to a range of u. S. Interest. Let me highlight quickly three key priorities that would take up if confirmed by the senate. First the u. N. Must be fair. The United States is no greater friend in the world than the state of israel. We share security interest, core values and the special relationship with israel and yet the General Assembly and Human Rights Council continue to pass onesided resolutions condemning israel. Israel not a rant, not sudan not north korea is the one country with a fixed place on the Human Rights Councils agenda. Israels legitimacy should be built be beyond dispute and just as ive done as the advisor at the white house that will stand up for israel and work tirelessly to defend it. Second the u. N. Must become more efficient and effective. In these difficult budget times in the American People are cutting back the u. N. Must do the same. This means eliminating waste strengthening whistleblower protections ending any tolerance for corruption and getting other countries to pay their fair share. It means closing down those missions and programs that no longer make sense. The United States has the right in and the duty to insist on reform and if confirmed i will aggressively pursue this cause. Third, the u. N. Must stand up for human rights and Human Dignity which are American Values and universal values. Today the universal declaration of human rights is widely hailed and only selectively heated. Taking up the cause of freedom is not just the right thing to do it is of course the smart thing to do. Countries that violate the rights of women and girls will never approach their full potential. Countries that dont protect religious freedom creates cleavage is that the stable holes could destabilize whole regions. If given the honor i will do what america does best stand up against her pressure of her scenes and promote human rights. I will also do everything in my power to get others to do the same. This means contesting a crackdown on civil study carried out in countries like cuba iran russia and venezuela. It means calling on the world to unite against Human Trafficking and against the grotesque atrocities being carried out by the assad regime and that means uniting peoples who longed to live free of fear in the cause of fighting terrorism. Mr. Chairman frankie member corker and other distinguished members of the committee the late ambassador my friend Richard Holbrooke told this committee that congress should be in on the takeoffs and not just the landings. I appear before you today not just to seek your support for test to join you in a conversation about how to strengthen what is right and fix what is wrong at the u. N. If im confirmed i will continue this dialogue directly and personally and at at that the prospect of visiting the u. N. Doesnt immediately entice you to my son has resolved to become a tour guide like no other. If im given the privilege of sitting behind americas United States of america you will be able to count on me. I will fight fiercely every day for what is in the best interest of the United States and the American People. I will be a blunt outspoken champion of American Values and human rights. I will be accessible and forthright in my dialogue with you and above all i will service a proud american amazed that yet again this country is provided in an immigrant such an opportunity. Here the ultimate privilege of representing the United States fighting for American Values at the United Nations. Thank you and i look forward to answering your questions. Steve thank you very much for your statement. We will start a round of questioning and i would just say following devlin at the u. N. I would not get lost because i would see that red hair no matter what. He is being very wellbehaved despite the fact that this is boring. The day is young. Let me start off. I appreciate your statement on israel and i agree with you wholeheartedly. Above and beyond fighting battles to those who seek to delegitimize israel the u. S. Has been helpful and promoting the position of United States nations. As you know israel seeks to represent the Security Council in 2018 representing the pentacle of the u. S. System. Working to promote israel for the Security Council and how can we work in that regard as well as the other injustice that israel faces that in geneva by mike in new york israel is not part of any regional grouping. So would you commit to the committee that you will make efforts should you be confirmed to have israel among the family of nations to have an opportunity just like every other country . Absolutely, sir. I did speak in my upcoming opening remarks about fighting delegitimization by the complement to that is legitimation. We have had modest success to secure leadership such as Vice President of the General Assembly several years back and leadership roles in human habitat and membership in new york but you are right the Security Council is one that has eluded israel despite his many contributions across the years and i commit to wholeheartedly you wholeheartedly to go on offense as well as playing defense on both legitimization of israel and make every effort to secure greater integration of israeli Public Servants in the u. N. System. This committee has had a great deal of focus and the chairs at a great deal of focus on the question of iran sanctions. You mentioned it in your remarks that we are stronger when we can multilateralize the sanctions and i agree with you although often we take the lead and we get others to then join us in a multilateral effort so sometimes leadership is important in order to bring others to a point which they may not be but for american leadership. As iran continues despite her best efforts to launch Nuclear Weapons capability clearly the senate doesnt always express itself unanimously. It has on this issue. To continue our efforts from iran from becoming the next nuclear state. How do you plan to use your position at the United Nations to build consensus for additional measures against iran and how do you see bringing that continuing multilateral effort to the next stage . The clock is ticking and the centrifuges are spinning and the window is increasingly closing for us. Thank you senator and thank you for all of your leadership on that issue. Let me start by saying that the last four years have entailed a rampup of significant pressure on iran including of the multilateral kind kind of directly write the foundation for our leadership is the domestic measures that we have put in place which other countries have also replicated with their own national measures. The Security Council passed a crippling resolution back in 2011 that i think has had a great effect. They are some of the most stringent we have seen put in place in the multilateral system and i was very much a part of that effort by virtue s. My position working with the team in new york. I think there are a couple of things we need to think about Going Forward. First of all given way to increase the pressure until iran is willing to give up its Nuclear Weapons program. We should always be prepared to look at new measures and see whether further action of the Security Council is required. In addition a panel of experts which is very useful way of holding countries accountable a body that is accountable for their compliance already as pointed out in its most recent report that their affair number of tactics being used not only by a ram but other members of the u. N. , the United Nations and so one of the things we need to move forward on with haste and new york is seeking to do this is the panel of experts recommendations as to how those loopholes can be closed in those countries and deviants of sanctions can be called out and held accountable and how these practices will stop. The other thing i would draw your attention news the human rights this situation in iran. We have had some success in the margin in which the General Assembly passed larger than it ever has been i believe. We have also created the firstever country specific human rights repertoire at the Human Rights Council for iran and i talked to senator kirk about this earlier this week. It deserves our full support as the crisis the iranians are facing inside the country is extremely grave. So what i commit to you sir is to be maximally consulted up with you and to hear any ideas you have about things we could be doing with the u. N. System that we are not doing in ways we can shore up any additional measures we should be contemplating to try to increase the pressure on iran because i agree wholeheartedly with your premise that there is a window that the window will not stay open forever. Finally, this committee acted in a bipartisan manner as it relates to syria and the conflict in syria has killed over 100,000 syrians and created a 1. 7 billion refugees and millions more displaced outside of the country. There is a continuing in my mind tragedy of enormous proportions, probably one of the largest ones in the world if not the largest one in the world but we have seen russia and china continued to obstruct action by the Security Council so much so that your predecessor ambassador reiss said the councils inaction on series disgrace that history will judge harshly. I assume you agree with that characterization and how do you work to move the Security Council to a more vigorous role on syria . Thank you senator. I agree one of the most Critical Issues facing us today one of the most devastating cases of mass atrocity that ive ever seen and i dont know that i can call a leader who has in a way written a new playbook for brutality in terms of the range of grotesque tactics that the assad regime has employed in response to a democratic uprising. What i will say is that the situation on the Security Council is incredibly frustrating. I described it as a disgrace and history would judge harshly in my Opening Statement and i certainly agree with ambassador rices claimed claim that this is a moral strategic disgrace in both respects. What we have sought to do as you know is not simply rely on the Security Council but to proceed with multiple, multifaceted approach aimed at isolating that regime and bringing about the te end of the regime and strengthening the opposition etc. We have worked for the General Assembly to signal just how isolated syria is even as the Security Council remains paralyzed. Wherefore, human rights counsel to investigate the abuses because when the assad regime falls and it will fall the individuals responsible for these atrocities will need to be held accountable and to base needs to be built now. We have gone outside the u. N. To coordinate the efforts of the likeminded. I think we have to be cleareyed about her prospects for bringing in the russians in particular on board of the Security Council and not overly optimistic. By the same token there interest also are imperiled with the rise of terrorism in the region with the use of chemical weapons and we will continue forcefully repeats elite to make that argument to russian officials and to engage them given the urgency and again that devastating human consequences of allowing this crisis to persist. See one final point before he turned to senator corker. Am i correct in that right now is the turn of United States . We have the president have the presidency of the Sacred Council in the month of july which happens once every 15 months. Right now that presidency and the person is sitting there isnt at being position. A wonderful rosemary decarlo. I am sure she would like to have the United States ambassador sitting in that chair. Thank you mr. Chairman and thank you again for being willing to serve. I enjoy their meeting and our discussion about what a liberal interventionist is and certainly filled with like two talk about the responsibility to protect. First of all following up on the Security Council discussion that just was had, do you believe that for us to take unilateral military action that we need a u. N. Security Council Approval to do so . Sir, i believe the president always should act in the interest of the American People when the u. S. National security is threatened in the Security Council is unwilling to authorize the use of force. The president believes it is judicious to do so and of course that is something he should be free to do. And that was brief. What exactly does the responsibility to protect mean to you . Well, served as i mentioned in my Opening Statement some of the foundational events of my life i shouldnt say to you. What does that mean to us knowing that you are going to be at the United Nations. Youve no doubt are going to be a force and i think anyone who has met you knows that is going to be the case but how will that affect our efforts . When is it that we should respond to atrocities and what are the guidelines as to whether we do that unilaterally . Thank you, sir. I believe that the way the president has articulated this is very important which is that the United States as a National Interests, National Security interest in a moral responsibility to respond to cases of mass atrocity. When civilians are being murdered by their governments that does not mean the United States should intervene militarily every time there is an injustice in the world. With the president has asked us to do and what i strongly support doing and to do again if confirmed by you is to look at at the tools in the toolbox of diplomatic radio jamming expelling diplomats from institutions etc. And maybe deploying peacekeepers, providing different forms of assistance. There are so many tools in the toolbox so i think the concept of the responsibility to protect which is less important than u. S. Practice and u. S. Policy which is that when civilians are being murdered by their governments and nonstate actors is incumbent on us to look to see if theres something we might do in order to ameliorate the situation there is no onesizefitsall solution and there is no algorithm nor should there be. If im im confirmed for this position will im confirmed for this position will act in the interest of the American People and in accordance with our values. And that action might take place under the u. N. Under a u. N. Resolution or unilaterally. Is that what youre saying . The president was referring to the use of military force in and the president needs to make judgments when to use military force. I think what we found in history is there are times when we have to work outside the Security Council because the Security Council doesnt come along along although president s have along although president believes its in our National Interest to to act. Periodparagraph and they find it beneficial of course to have the Security Council authorization because then we tend to be able to get buyin on the backend and maybe get some assistance with peacekeeping or reconstruction assistance and so forth. Theres no question internationally the Security Council authorization as helpful but from the standpoint of American Interest aS National Security interests and the needs of the American People that our power paramount. Thank you so much. We care about the overall growth of the United Nations and i noticed in 2000, a 2. 5 billion budget is doubted by. 4 and some have advocated a zero growth policy. I would like for you to speak to that end where they believe there are many duplicate of programs they are that are wasteful and should be looked at and streamlined . Thank you senator and again as i said in my opening remarks i completely share the spirit of your question. These are such tough times for so many people here at home that we have to be zealous in our scrutiny of every program and every initiative that the American People are helping to support through their generosity. We have had i think significant success over the last four years on the reform agenda building on some of the work done by our predecessors. We have found in the peacekeeping budget to 560 million to cut and that is a very substantial amount of land as you say a share of that budget is significant. The cuts can calm him and we have found in the case of peacekeeping duplications or the peacekeeping mission in one place is staffed or service logistically by one base and then another mission there is another base supporting that peacekeeping mission. Those of now been consolidated and that is where some of savings have come. We have also posted on Security Council is closed down to peacekeeping missions over the course of the last four years and thats an important cost savings. Looking at the situation on the ground making sure closing down omission is something that will not squander again set of already then made it very cognizant of the tough budget times we operate in. We actually brought about the first Budget Reduction i believe in 50 years in the history of the United Nations. Its very important that the keypad sensitivity that i think we have inculcated in new york Going Forward and as you you and i discussed that belief in her office there are always countries who want to throw these programs onto the table but what i will commit to you, when i sit down if confirmed in new york with the team to go over the landscape and be as aggressive as possible in seeking to deliver again on the generosity of the American People see and that includes looking at longstanding peacekeeping measures that may or may not be necessary . Indeed and looking out on the rise and we see some that canon will be reduced in size which will bring about savings. Richard holbrooke was able to negotiate our share back in 2000 i think it was at being 25 and it got down to just a little under 26 i think in 2009. Its back up today to 28. 4 am just interested in your thoughts there and where they would be willing to try though i know there is lots of holbrooke doctrines that this would be one he would try to adopt . Certainly, sir. I will commit to you all do everything in my power to reduce the u. S. Share of the peacekeeping budget. They are complicated formulas involved in that that we have inherited from our predecessors but i will do everything in my power to address that. I will say also again that the absolute size of the peacekeeping pie is critical to this as well so in addition to dealing with their shareware to bring down if we can the overall cost and that becomes ever more challenging with al qaeda and other terrorist actors out there on the scene targeting the United Nations as they are because the cost to peacekeeping missions has gone up and the light of the threat posed to u. N. Workers which we have seen cause very tragic consequences in recent years. Briefly and i know we have to move on but your view of expanding permanent seats on the Security Council. Security council. I know there has been some discussion there. Thank you, sir. The effectiveness of the Security Council is important for u. S. Interests as i have described in my Opening Statement. An expansion of the membership of the u. N. Security council should be one that both increases the representativeness of the council which has a lot of aspirants have emphasized but also ensures the effectiveness of the council and so its not enough just to look to representativeness but the International Peace and security and we do oppose of course giving up the veto. We have lots of people who have come before us, some of which are more interesting than others. I have a feeling that you certainly are going to carve a path at the United Nations and i look forward to watching that and i do appreciate the comments and the conversation we have had privately. I look forward to carrying out in the same way we discuss things and i thank you for your willingness and they certainly look forward to your service. Thank you so much senator. Senator shaheen. Thank you so much mr. Chairman and ms. Power thank you so much for being here today and for your willingness to take on this very Important Role. I certainly intend to support your confirmation and i hope the entire senate does as well. You had an Interesting Exchange with chairman menendez about iran sanctions. Obviously one of the things that has changed changed recently in iran is the election of their new president mr. Romani. I wonder if you think that offer his opening he has indicated its his intention to improve relations with the United States. Do you think there is an opening there with the new president elect and how can we pursue that and does the u. N. Have a role in trying to move mr. Rahimi to resume negotiations with the p5 1 . Thank you senator so much. For raising that issue. I would say first that whatever the public statements are out of iran we have to remember conditions that gave rise to that election. Which were the furthest thing from fair and i dont think anyone can say that the election in iran represented the will of the iran a people. The democratic will of those people crushed so that is. 1. Second i would say that our policy the administrations policy serving in the administration is i think very much reflective of the views of people here in this body as well which is verified and then trust, deeds not words and again we have a negotiation track. It is something that we want very much to succeed and we recognize we need to increase the pressure in order to increase the chances for success. And so we call upon the iranians to engage in that process substantively and a way that has not happened to date. Is there further action that can be taken at the u. N. That might help move the discussion . I think we have to look at everything. This is so critical and this is so urgent. The clock is ticking. If there are steps that we can take in the Security Council we should take them and again this is at the top of the list of urgent priorities but beyond that i think its probably best to get into the specifics in the event i am confirmed and look at what is possible. You mentioned in your Opening Statement and you have written very eloquently about the tragedy in bosnia and we have seen since those days that croatia has achieved e. U. Membership. We are seeing some breakthroughs with serbia and kosovo but bosnia really seems to be stalled and in talking to some of the folks who have been involved in the efforts in bosnia for a very long time they have suggested that the structure that was set up with the results of the accords has made things more difficult there. To really achieve longterm resolution in the country for some of their challenges. Can you speak to that and what more we might be able to do to support efforts in bosnia to move them towards e. U. Integration and further into the west . Thank you senator and as you know yes bosnia is a country very close to my heart. I think what i would say is that first its important to put todays challenges in some context. The country is at relative peace. It is an inspiring tribute i think to leadership when he traveled to the country and you see the cafes open and see the hills no longer a source of target practice for nationalists and extremists but instead a source of beauty and its a remarkable country and a remarkable facility of people. I think the United States can and the americans who support the u. S. Leadership can feel some sense of satisfaction at what the United States and our allies have done in preventing what was one of the most horrific crises in the last halfcentury. Second though, in terms of polarization i agreed completely with your position. I think it is extremely problematic when you go to central bosnia npc interest is is entrances for croatians on one side and bosnians and muslims on the other side. How is that possible in 2013 in europe . With regard i think to the degree to which the dayton structure is to blame versus the absence of clinical will in the leadership across bosnia, having worked on that issue very much over the last four years is something i certainly would be eager to look at if i return to the administration but since starting with popular will, Popular Culture doing away with the polarization is a matter of social norms is also something that needs to be done. Again there are real efforts and an amazing set of contributions and amazing leadership of the Civil Society in bosnia but we havent seen that commitment to multiethnic cities thank you. Finally there is a relatively new office at the United Nations that deals with women and empowering women around the world. One of the things we have realized more and the last several decades is how important empowering women is into the success of communities and countries and women have human rights and the opportunity to participate fully in a society that communities and countries do better so i wonder if he will commit to doing everything you can to ensure that office continues to operate in a way that continues to support women around the world and recognize the importance of the future legacy for that office . Absolutely senator. I think president actually did a remarkable job. As you know we worked behind the scenes with the secretarygeneral in order to bring about a consolidation of the efforts on women and girls across the u. N. System. We are very encouraged with this launch but needless to say the stakes and the urgent needs in the real world are very high so the more support we can give and i think u. N. Is operating in tandem with bilateral programming on these issues as well. Senator rubio. Thank you mr. Chairman. Good morning and congratulations on your nomination. I know your family is proud of you. As you recall from our meeting i highlighted at the time and i am sure youre aware as part of these hearings when i told you i never wanted to be nominated to anything but one of the parts of any nomination is the nominee will be asked questions about previous statements they have made it to clarify those and i want to give you an opportunity to do that year to do so. I did want to go through a few and im sure youre familiar with them. Let me start by 2002 in every way advocated the use of a mammoth Protection Force unquote to impose a solution to the israel arab conflict saying external intervention was needed. Do you still hold that view and how it should play set in the context today . The thank you senator and thank you for giving me an occasion to clarify in a public setting my actual views. I have disassociated myself from those comments many times. I made a long rambling and very remarkably incoherent response to a hypothetical question that i should never have answered. What i believe in terms of middle east peace is what is obvious to all of this year which is peace can only come about during the toshiba solution. There was no shortcut and that is why palestinian efforts at statehood and by the way my daughter does not like that quote either just for the record. We have all been heckled, dont worry. You have answered the hypothetical question. Palestinian unilateral statehood efforts and shortcuts of that nature just wont work. Than in 2003 in an article you recommended a historical reckoning of crimes committed sponsored or permitted by the United States unquote. Which crimes were you referring to and which decisions taken by the Current Administration would you recommend correct. Thank you senator and i as an emigrant to this country think this country is the greatest country on earth as i know do you. I would never apologize for america. America is the lie to the world. We have freedoms and opportunities here that people dream about a broad. I certainly did. And with regard to that quote, one of the things that have moved me, i had as someone written critically about the clinton response to the rwanda genocide in 1994 and president clinton himself had come forward and expressed his regret that the United States didnt do more in the face of the genocide. When i traveled through on a however i was stunned to see the degree to which clintons visit to rwanda, his apology for not having done more in how it resonated with rwandans how it impacted their sense of United States and the kind of regard the United States had for them and it moved me and i very much overstated the case in that article but the point i think that i was trying to make is that sometimes we as imperfect human beings do things that we wish we had done a little bit differently and sometimes it can be productive to engage in foreign public, excuse me engage with foreign citizenry and productive dialogue and that is what president clinton did in the wake of the rhonda genocide. Had a great effect and amanda great deal and that really was all i meant. I would categorize the rwanda situation is a crime committed by the United States. What were you referring to . Again this is the greatest country on earth. We dont need to apologize for it. You dont have any in my now that we have committed or sponsored . I will not apologize for america and i will stand proudly if confirmed behind the u. S. Packard. I understand that you believe the United States has committed or sponsored crime . I believe United States is the greatest country on her. Answer to whether we have committed or sponsored crime is the United States is the leader in human rights. As you know one of the things that makes us so formidable as a leader in human rights is that when we make mistakes and mistakes happen for instance in the case of abu ghraib in iraq. Nobody is proud of that. Virtually every american soldier operating in the world is operating with profound honor and dignity. We hold people accountable. That is what we do because we believe in human rights. We believe in International Humanitarian law and we observed those laws. We are again unlike any other country, a country that stands by her principles. What is the the reckoning he referred to . What would you consider reckoning for the senses as you just highlighted for example . I think when any of us who have the privilege of serving in Public Office deviate in any way we have procedures in order to be held accountable, deviate in any way from our own laws or regulations and standards. I understand that thats true of individuals that committed those acts but what about the country because your quote was about the United States committed or sponsored crime. Certainly that wasnt the command. Again sir, i gave the rwanda example. I think sometimes we see in the course of battle you know we unlike most militaries around the world have put every target, every choice through the most vigorous scrutiny and occasionally there is Collateral Damage in the face even after all of that energetic effort and in those cases we engage with foreign publics. That can be done at the National Level and that can be done at a local level. My time is about to expire. Given an opportunity to restate what he wrote in the three article it sounds like you with stated differently. Indeed, sir. In a 2000 out that you describe the bush administrations concern about iran is an imagined crisis and these are redundant reminders of military force strengthen the regime. Do you still hold that view is that you held in 2000 with regards to iran . Is still an imagined crisis and you believe reminders strengthen the uranium Iranian Regime . Thank you, sir. I have never referred to irans pursuit of a Nuclear Weapon as an imagined crisis, ever. What i have it is important both to have a pressure track and a negotiation track and is we discussed here today its essential to kick up the pressure to tighten the vise. That is the sanctions i work over the past four years have done and that was what we need to do in terms of again closing loopholes that have been established by the Iranian Regime and so pressure is of course, part of pressure is making clear that military forces on the table. Going back to the article i was expressing the importance of having a negotiation track so social pressure could be intensified there was an offramp so iran good its Nuclear Weapon if they ever chose to do so. Thank you. Senator murphy. And so without asking you to explain how you are going to essentially initiate every political issue, i would love you to talk a minute about what the role of permanent representatives are to continue to raise these issues in Civil Society and issues of human rights abuses in russia and knowing as we heard at a hearing not long ago that the state department is preparing, as they told us, to send forward another set of names to be added to the act which will further complicate relationships with russia but also give us a renewed but farm to rate some of raise some of these issues. To the administration is always in a difficult position. It makes it difficult for them to try to raise issues of human rights. It may potentially compromise our ability to call them to the table on the way in which they are treating political opposition there. Talk to me about how you strike that balance. Senator, thank you so much. It is, of course, one of the most import relationships that has to be managed to new york. We have all range of issues that flow from moscow. I think the challenge is to maintain to stand up for u. S. Interests and values. It is a simple formula. Sometimes our interests, of course, necessitate cooperation as you, again, alluded to, supplying troops in afghanistan, the north korean and iranians sanction resumes where russia has stepped up and supported multilateral sanctions are critical. These are examples where we have found a way to work with russia, but we can never be silent in the face of a crackdown on Civil Society, something a mentioned in my opening remarks today. We can never be silent t2 in exchange. And no senator mccain had earlier in the weaker last week. We can never be silent when the russian government senses rather than looking into those who are responsible for his death. I mean, we have to use the pulpit. We have to use the platform. We have to recognize that when the placards as the United States people are around the world including across Russian Society are looking to the United States foreign leaders, and i do think that we can do both at once. I think it is extremely challenging and there is no question that threading that needle and making sure that you dont silence yourself and silence the evolved value of your nation and the service of, you know, shortterm needs. Is a big challenge. Every diplomat has faced is, but our greatest ambassadors in new york i remembered for how they stood up for our values. I dont want best deal senator mccains under on this issue, but we are at a fulcrum point. The problem is not only the very quick downward slide, but the neighbors are watching. We are confronting many of the same issues, whether it be in the ukraine, and when the United States is not stand up at the u. N. , that is a signal to them that we may allow for them to engage in that same kind of behavior. Quickly, to turn to the issue of climate change, really the wonderful new initiative at the un surrounding the issue of shortlived climate pollutants and fact best acting climate pollutants, specifically working with other nations to try to engage in best practices for the capture of methane coming out of landfills to work at the u. N. , building a new type of cookstove to downgrade the amount of bio carbon escaping into the atmosphere. There is technology and best practices out there today with respect to non Carbon Dioxide emissions. You have a big fight over a new International Global warming treaty, but there are some relatively simple things the you can do when it comes to just managing landfills better or trying to get 15 cookstove into the hands of more indians and chinese. I think the answer to my question as to whether youre going to continue to help lead on this issue is merely selfevident. This potentially allows for some of the quickest gains in the interim between now and when we ultimately get an operative Global Warming agreement in 2020. You can play an incredibly Important Role in trying to move for the work of the went to engage in voluntary measures of member countries to try to engage in best practices as to decrease in pollutants. Who would love to see lead on that. Thank you. You will have it. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Welcome. I think the senator. I certainly enjoyed our conversation. It was very interesting. I think it will be enforced. I also wanted thank you for your willingness to serve. You have the and family and it will be sacrificed. I also recognize your you are a pretty prolific writer. I had another two dozen three article which i found very interesting. Number of interesting comments and i do have asked some questions. Realize your thoughts concerning the change over time, but there are certainly some cultures that disturb me. Going back to what we talked about in our office, i was very disappointed going around the country, basically what has been called an apology to work. Youre saying you will never apologize for america and how that is good, but back in this article this was full force the new republic march 3rd 2003. He said the country has to look back before it can move forward, as a chilling and doctrine of mayor koppel would enhance our credibility by showing that american Decision Makers to endorse their predecessors. Kind of going back to what senator arubia was talking about, which sends a you talking about . And do you think president obama is a policy toward was well advised . To the work very well . Thank you, senator. I dont know if it is good news, but the is the same quota as this. So my response is similar, but let me start just by saying what i should have said, perhaps, at the beginning which is i have written probably 2 Million Words in my career, million, 2 million, suddenly lost track. Only my husband well, there are others perhaps have written more, but he has less left most of humanity in the dust. I there are things that i have written that i would write very differently today. That is one of them. Particularly having served in the executive branch. Move forward in terms of president obamas policy toward. Was that a good strategy . Go across the world and that surely provide that medical but . I mean, do you think that was good or bad . Im not sure. Now you talking about the reset . Sure. The reset, again, i think is something that has yielded a very complex set of consequences. In some respects such as syria the reset has not produced the kind of dividend that we seek in new york. And with devastating consequences for the people of syria. Shipping, supplies to reinforcing our troops in afghanistan, the fact that we have a channel of dialogue and cooperation with russia has produced results. Honestly, the sanctions imposed back in 2011, the sanctions resolutions that we impose reason in mockery of, they come about in part because of bilateral relationships that are strong doormat least Strong Enough to allow us to agree on issues of a shared interest. There is also a lot which added not mention that goes on scene. Again, none of this takes away from the crack down on Civil Society, takes away from snowdon and his presence in moscow, takes away from syria, but there are things that happen on the Security Council, for instance Russian Support for robust peacekeeping action on the ivory coast. It was a major atrocity averted. Rework with them where we can get them to see that their interests aligned with hours and that their interests aligned with maintaining International Peace and security. Not a matter of if but when. The situation on the ground right now is very worrying for a host of reasons. First, the military gains that the regime has made lately. Second, the fact of chemical weapons use in recent months. Third, something uni talked about the mob believe the growth of the extremist presents within the opposition. So i think nobody is satisfied with where we are today. I know the president does not. And the administration is constantly examining and reexamining how it can heighten the pressure so as to hasten the day that he departs. I guess to come back to my comments were given some of the facts on the ground right now how i could Say Something about nature, again, history shows that regimes that brutalize their own people, totally forfeit their legitimacy, do not abide by basic norms of human decency. This is to not have the support to sustain themselves. So the day of reckoning will come. I agree certainly wholeheartedly with your concern that the day is not coming soon enough. Obviously he will fall because we all mortal. Getting back to the article, the final concluding paragraph, i am betting u. S. Power in an International System and devastating humility would be painful and the Natural Steps are in the empire, never mind the most important empire in the history of mankind. Far less pain later. Do you believe america is an empire . I believe that we are a great and strong, powerful country, the most powerful country in the history of the world and also a must as operational. Again, that is probably not a word charts that i would use today having served. Fair enough. Be that size giving of a pension of 70, the tremendous military and economic leverage it has. So youre basically recommending that we give up. Is that still your view . One of the things that i would do every day is confirmed for this position, defend u. S. Sovereignty. Nothing that i support, have supported the last four years would never have that effect of giving as u. S. Sovereignty. Serving in the executive branch is different than sounding off from an academic perch. I appreciate your answers. Welcome and congratulations. No accord toward in the other. I dont think plantin outspoken is a great qualification. But for this one is. Its vague and amorphous and then you translate that into six languages. I think that the u. N. Could use a lot more blunt an outspoken and i think thats part of the reason why youre going to do a very good job in a position. I visited recently in spent the day with ambassador rice. I would encourage any member of the senate to get to a Security Council meeting, even on a topic that may not be the one in your most passionate about. It is instructive and you immediately sense some of the dynamic, some of the good, some of the bad. One of the things that i came away with that, seeing good and bad was a real pride in this country for having been such a key part in creating the institution. It was an american president who had the visionary idea in the aftermath of world war one to try to create Something Like it in the league of nations. The American Public nor congress are really the world embrace the idea, america would not let the dream died. The closing days of World War Two president roosevelt and his advisers planned it. President roosevelt did not get to see it. President truman had to decisions to make of that to keep tech roosevelt cabinet and the second one, we can easily cancel or postpone the San Francisco meeting that was going to happen within weeks of president roosevelts death in the second decision made was, no, we need to carry forward. So for all the frustrations of the United Nations, and there are many. I will ask you about my cspan2 in a second, but for all the frustrations it was the analysis that would not let the dream of an International Institution of this type die. It was birthed year. We nursed along. Refunded it. We kept it going. We hope for its improvement. The battle for its improvement. Of the many things to be brought about about this country, the United Nations to my think, is one. And yet there are a lot of frustrations. I was in israel in april 2009. I was as a guest of Prime Minister netanyahu. And at the very moment we were there the u. N. Had convened an anti racism conference. It invited the president to be one of the keynote speakers. The United States, this a ministration boycotted that conference in geneva, encouraged of the nations two as well. Many other nations did, so others attended and then walked out during his speech. But i think one of the things that we wrestle with here and i think the American Public wrestles with this, explain this psychology within an institution that was so critical to the formation of the state of israel , to the beginning of this state of israel. Explain because you have been involved with the institution, the psychology that puts israel on the permanent agenda to talk about human rights for north korea isnt, when some many other nations are not. Israel is not perfect, but neither is the United States or any of the member nations. You can be frustrated about the lack of pace, but we can think of frustrations about any nation that is a member of the u. N. That think the single thing that is the hardest for american citizens to grapple with is the continual drum beat out of the United Nations that is hostile to the nation of israel and seems stalled israel to a standard that is different than other nations that want to also have their time under the microscope in terms of the analysis of their flaws and the recommendations for the improving of those laws. With your experience in the institution and in working in these areas, would love for you to explain what is it about the psychology of the body that makes israel the perennial punching bag at the United Nations . Thank you so much. The constant deal is a nation of israel across the u. N. System as i indicated in my opening remarks is a source of almost indescribable concern to me and to this administration. We working with the team in new york, a team in geneva, and elsewhere bush day in and day out to contest this kind of did that summation. In terms of the psychology, what i will say is that fewer than half of the countries within the United Nations a democratic. Were not democratic it helps to have a diversion. It helps to escape cut other countries. The thing that is part of the psychology. Its just having a sort of reliable way of changing the subject, and that is what these countries have done over so many years. We have contested this again day in and day out. I was spearheading the decision not to participate in durban to because it reaffirmed the first which was so problematic. We stood up against the gulf report, against attempts to politicize over the foothill incidents. In the Human Rights Council which we joined in part to be within that institution, to stand for is era, we have succeeded in cutting down the number of special sessions, condemn the number of countries specific resolutions in a but given what i said the start, the fact that there is a standing agenda item for one country, and that is as rare, and not for cuba and not for a free and not for ron just reflects a lack of seriousness and how political and politicize this has become an unfair that this has become. I dont have another question, but i will include the chair by sank i think the bond and outspoken part will be placed preston the service. At think the best ambassadors we have had have been willing to do that. It is issues like this double standard with respect to israel that really remand demand punt and an outspoken american. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate you coming by my office for the discussion. Ice discover we have a visual interest in time spent in zimbabwe and riding on this subject. Thank you for sending the articles. With regard to the wind, the are law requires we compile lists an analysis of who goes with the senate votes against this. Sometimes its frustrating to see some many countries where we play a vital role, to see them just continually go against us. It sometimes seems if it were not for israel and that Marshall Islands we would not have any friends. In fact, i think 131 countries in the u. N. Vote against the u. S. Position more than 50 percent of the time. And it 2012 General Assembly there are about eight resolutions that one before the General Assembly that were deemed important by the state department. And countries voting with us, just about 34 percent of them voted with our position. How we can change that culture . Will we can do to better that situation . Uni have seen situations, take the country of namibia where the General Assembly had long declared just one of the parties as that representative of the namibian people which was highly detrimental. The Security Council came in with the revolution that paved the way toward independence. And so we see both within the same institution the difference between the General Assembly and the Security Council. How can we in the General Assembly of a better situation where countries recognize that we are friendlier than we seem, i guess. Thank you, senator. This issue of voting divergence is critical. It has been acutely frustrating. I will say if you could look at the charts that show the trend lines, we are trending more positively than you would expect i would say a low base. It is. I very much agree with that. I dont think the convergence rate is trending positively in the General Assembly on israel. Again, that is something that we have to fight every day to try to change. But with regard to other countries it is a qb frustrating. Some of it relates to my response to senator mccains question which is standing up to the United States can be a cheap and easy political win for a leader of a small country to show that there not with us. Again and again we see them voting is their interest. In the case of the countries that are democratic, either fully or partly free, we see them acting in defiance of the values that they are most proud of their own countries. That is a conversation, you know, i have said they sought to have of the last four years with countries to vote on mass as part of regional groupings reflexively rather than the fully. Again, we are nibbling away at it, but it is an urgent priority for any incoming official in new york and if i am confirmed, getting countries of of their interest in their values, giving them to see the importance of maintaining International Peace and security. During that has huge consequences for the United States and these countries as well. Taking advantage of the fact that a lot of including several important african countries are involved in u. N. Peacekeeping, to get their countries engaged in the politics in the countries where there are troops and police that the deployed, so there are just a lot of disconnects between at least what we would perceive as beneficial for those countries and, as you suggest, how they have performed on various votes. We just have to keep fighting every day and be aggressive in our pursuit of convergence, not divergence. On that last point, the zimbabwe country, elections are scheduled july 31st, likely to send to have any real prospect of free and Fair Elections are alleges that mean anything. Is very difficult for the United Nations programs that zimbabwe most needs, the human rights office, development assistance, that is spread equally, the kinds of standards we would want to see as part of our assistance with the regime almost impossible to operate in that environment. And so i think, you know, though it would be that in the wake of the election and certainly with the passage of authority that there is an opening to have a conversation about what an impact will u. N. Presence would look like and how it can contribute to what has to happen in zimbabwe which is a meaningful transition to democracy. I no youre more familiar than i am, but the Civil Society is unbelievable. I mean, they keep plugging along and battling it out, going to court, getting released from court, going on Hunger Strike in going again and again back at the regime, refusing to accept that zimbabwe cannot achieve its promise. Again, i think the United States as a critical role, they look to us. They have some friends in the u. N. System, but they are now lives. You know, friends like cuba. They are not credible. So given that there is a moment of opportunity potentially upon us to think we have to look at what programming could be helpful. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator mccain. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome. A thankyou for your continued service and advocacy on behalf of human rights. I am glad youre able to correct the record of some of your past statements. Speaking for myself and my colleagues who have never said anything that i later regretted or wanted to correct. And i note your young son there has a future in the diplomatic corps if he has been able to sit quietly through this ordeal. I congratulate you. There he is. Could i in your testimony you called the failure of the un Security Council, philly to respond in syria a disgrace that history will judge harshly. Appease the published in the Financial Times that said that the article 52, the un charter could serve as a basis for International Action in the event that a regional organizations like nato and the arab league notify the Security Council of their actions as required by article 54, but not necessarily seek approval. Do you believe that article 52 to serve as a basis for International Military intervention in syria by regional organizations . Well, senator, as you know, the president s policy is to focus on all forms of assistance to the opposition to bill of the opposition. In terms of the legal rationales , that saw something i feel equipped to weigh in on. I hope you will look at that because that is typically under your area, article 52 of the u. N. Charter. I think the hundred thousand people massacred, were going to have to look every option that we possibly can. Center lindsay gramm, with the help of hours chairman and Ranking Members, past a couple of authorizations concerning iran and is now offered with a large number of los a resolution that would, by the senate or congress that would authorize the use of force if the Iranian Nuclear progress reached appointed that the president has described as unacceptable. What do you think about that . Well, sir, as somebody aspiring to go back into the executive branch, it may not surprise you that i would want to insure that the president had the flexibility that he needed to make a judgment that he thought best on behalf of the American People. It authorizes him to use force. In fact, it gives them flexibility. Having not studies the author , i probably should not comment. Maybe you could look at it. Happily. For the record give us your opinion on that. I think it is very important because i dont think there is anyone who would argue that the iranians have preceded undeterred from their pursuit of the ability to acquire and use Nuclear Weapons. I think you would agree with that. Which means it matters will come to a head in the view of some experts within six months to year. You would agree. That is certainly what our assessments of shown. Everybody has to offer you, the cheapest commodity in this town. That is a vice. So i will not exempt myself from that privilege. I have noted and admired many men and women who have served as our ambassador to the United Nations, and i agree that it is a very important position. The one i admire most as a woman named jeanne kirkpatrick. I hope he will look at our record of service in the United Nations. She took on, spoke truth to power, took on the vested interest and argued for budgetary restraints. She spoke up for the United States of america in a way that things still many of us admire and revere her memory. So when you look at the record of your predecessors as i have looked of mine to mine and my process is in the United States senate, i hope you will be instructed to some degree by her performance, which i think made all americans who had a very poor opinion of the United Nations very proud of the role she plays, speaking for them in the United Nations. Absolutely. I got to know her low bid as an intern in this town in the early 1990s when she was a forceful advocate on bosnia long after service in new york and absolutely will study per legacy. Well, i hope you will continue the work you have done in speaking of for human rights. We are about to see a middle east that is already imploding. You may be faced with issues before the United Nations and the Security Council the likes of which we have not seen. And so ive know that you will preserve the fundamental beliefs in the supremacy of the role of the United States in the world and our advocacy for the freedoms that are so important to all of us. So i look forward to going to work as soon as possible. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, madam chairman. First of all, your work in idaho has not gone unnoticed and we thank you for that. It is greatly appreciated. Thank you for coming to see me. You and i talked about a number of things, one of the things i am concerned about this one of the matters that senator corker raised. That is performed at the United Nations. People in america are not happy with the growth and particularly with what seems to be this expanding reach. The United Nations place an Important Role when it comes to peacekeeping, nations being able to sit down and resolve their differences, but this continued growth and this continued reach into areas that really are the sovereign concern of an individual nation bothers me and i think it bothers a lot of americans. May ask you to be more specific . If not peacekeeping, what do you have in mind . Well, im talking abut the continued growth and size and its reach into areas. I have one particular item in mind, but i wont raise it. It would probably divide the panel. But this continual reach into matters that are sovereign concerns of individual nations, its concerning. Let me if i could address two dimensions, the growth and then maybe treaties, you injuries which tend to a raise sovereignty concerns. So in terms of the size, you mentioned peacekeeping and i appreciate your recognition. We discussed this in our meeting as well. But peacekeeping can perform an important service. Molly is a great example of a mission that three years ago if you said we going to have a peacekeeping mission we would have said, why . And yet in the wake of the french intervention we cannot afford to squander the gains that have been made and to allow al qaeda to regain a foothold in that country. Again, there will be challenging al qaeda, but there will be strengthening the armed forces to hopefully then will have occasion or will be in a stronger position to all of any further resurgence. So that is one example of something that comes on our plate because the world demands it. The iraqi afghanistan missions are much bigger now than there were five years ago. The political questions. Of course it is in our interest to see those missions do important work, particularly in the wake of our withdrawal. The last thing we want to see after all the sacrifices is those gains in terms of political reforms and transition and the road to democracy, those gains squandered. That is the good side. Let me ask. In the areas for the un to expand into that they are not already . Adelle main geographical. I mean just issue concerns. Again, is there reached broad enough is lambasting . I think there are two issues. One is other places that the u. N. Should go where they havent . Testing is coming to mind. And not talking about places. No. Im instamatic areas. Then there is the you in texas and many social and economic development, peace and Security Issues, but there are plenty, and i would cite corruption as one where theyre is a un convention. The modalities of actually tackling corruption in countries around the world are not as strong as i think they could be. And so there is an example where there is reached but not necessarily substance or sufficient substance. And so those are the kinds of gaps. Rather than thereto forms of cuts. One is, it just extraneous stuff being done that was started 50 years ago for one reason and persists today for no good reason . That, of course to hollywood need, even if it started to know five years ago. It is are we drawdown peacekeeping missions when the original functions has gone away or has been addressed. And then there is beyond shrinkage, the things that they are doing that they should be doing but that there not doing well. And so i think both have to be an area of emphasis. My message to you which i hope i have expressed forcefully is that the American People and making cuts. This congresss, and this president is negotiating have to get the fiscal house in order. It is not tenable for the United Nations to existing yen from that conversation. I dont think that it has. Think that is where we found nearly half a billion dollars in savings. Let me touch. My time is running out here. First of all, as senator mccain said, the advice is rampant in this town. I want to give you mine. Albizzia go to the United Nations you will take the view that america is unique and exceptional. We need to all the heads high, be proud, not apologize for things that we do. Real leaders in this world. We need to be leaders in this world. And i certainly hope that when you go to the United Nations you will convey that that we are proud people call we do good things and if you look around the world, the world would not be what it is today without the american leaders. Finally, one of my concerns as we talked about is a zero. There are a lot of us. In fact, senator who rubio dropped to build on united naissance transparency and accountability in reform act. I know if youre familiar with that. There are a number of those that are cosponsors. It has some really good reform provisions. Particularly has to do one of the provisions has to do with withholding the United States contributions to any u. N. Entity that grants full to the palestinian authority. As you know, there has been a push to do that and some of the operations of the United Nations to include the palestinian authority. In the absence of a negotiated peace settlement with israel. We want to see that. Im sure you want to. One of the ways that we need to is to insist that the u. N. That the u. S. Withhold contributions to any you into the that would grant full to the palestinian authority. Any thoughts on that . Thank you, sir. On your first point, i spent my whole career standing for American Values. I will not apologize for america. American leaders of a light to the world. Second, we need to deter the palestinians in any way we can. We need to get their attention. They have held off, as you know, they have made clear their previous intention to join various agencies in the wake of the General Assembly vote last fall. A one caution i would issue, and our concern is we are completely aligned on preventing the palestinians from seeking unilateral actions. The one caution is that while were out of the un agencies which would be the consequence ultimately of defunding un agencies we can stand up for israel or the American Values. We are not theyre leading a range of other u. S. Interests. I think we have to find the right balance. That is the decision the agency has to make if it goes ahead with that kind of proposal. Think we ought to put them in a position where if they make that judgment delivered the consequences. Thank you for your thoughts and your candor. My time is up. Senator. I would like to follow up the little bed. Congratulations to you and your family and i appreciate you coming by to visit on issues. Want to talk about the u. S. Arms trade treaty. When secretary kerrey came before this committee in january of this year i asked him during his confirmation process if he would support any treaty that allows the United Nations to establish and maintain a gun registry on law abiding u. S. Gun owners. He stated in writing that we will not support a treaty that impact domestic arms transfers are creates a un gun registry. I have the you an arms treaty trade treaty, article 12 is called recordkeeping which encourages countries to maintain records on the importation of conventional arms including small arms and specifically request that the states maintain records on the quantity, value, model, type, and end user. These records must be maintained for a minimum of ten years. Article 13 type of reporting requires signatories state to issue annual reports to the un on all imports and exports. The question i have is, do you believe that this framework could lead to a un gun registry . Thank you, senator. Let me start by saying, again, that we in this of ministration and certainly i if i had the privilege of going to the york would never do anything that would infringe on u. S. Sovereignty or that would interfere in any way with american law. Second amendment rights are paramount. American law is paramount. The constitution is paramount. Again, in terms of what the u. N. s designs are in taking that tree fort, i am not myself about here. I think what is important is that secretary carry as giving you the assurance that nothing the administration before with regard to that treaty would ever contemplate a gun registry in this country or our participation in a gun registry. I think that is the key point. Irrespective of the provisions that you have pointed to, the United States in dealing with this body in any future engagement on the arms trade treaty would never allow anything in that treaty to interfere with american law or practice. The simple question, do you support the United Nations establishing and maintaining a gun registry. No. Thank you. Following upon what other members have asked about in terms of the un budget, reporting to congress. In 200910 the office of management and budget provided congress with a list of total u. S. Contributions to the United Nations from the state department as well as 18 other u. S. Departments and agencies. I believe this information is valuable for all citizens. Think it is important for everyone to understand how the u. S. Spends taxpayer money. I dont want to quiz you on the specifics of the budget, but i would ask, do you support transparency of u. S. Funding . I do. And support the congress and the American People receiving a report on an annual basis on u. S. Contributions provided to you in . Full transparency to sustain support for their generous contributions of the American People make, you have to provide transparency with the other question, you raised the issue of sovereignty. Your position is very important. Could you just talk about how you plan on preserving and protecting american sovereignty within the United Nations . Well, one starts, of course, sir, by asserting again and again the importance of american sovereignty. It also involves protecting the interest and projecting the values of the United States within the United Nations. When countries seek to judge us and take steps to many steps that would interfere with domestic law or domestic practice to stand up against that and to fight for our laws to be ascendant as they are. Can you talk about your commitment to challenging the actions of the United Nations that run contrary to our standards and values and interests . Well, i think there arent at least two dimensions to that. One on the mismanagement side would certainly runs contrary to our aspirations for how we govern ourselves. And then again on the value side whether it is corruption or those countries that trampled Human Dignity or that stand with human rights abusers. We have to use the bully pulpit and the forceful and contest that wherever we can and also creatively think about what other tools we can do beyond speaking out, tools like to put in place in order to hold those practices. Can you talk a little bit about what measures he might use in assessing whether or not to deal with specific resolution . Obviously any discussion or decision about using the veto would be something that one would have as in the context of the interagency and so forth, but we will not allow anything to go through the Security Council that we deem a threat to u. S. National security interest. And that is, i think, a broad standard, but a critical one. Zero one to the followup a little bit on the palestinian authority. A number of questions that i will submit. And wondering how youll make it clear the palestinians that there actions that the United Nations will have serious implications and consequences. Well, i know from having worked this issue for the last two years that we make it clear in every bilateral encounter we have that it will have serious consequences. Moreover will have serious consequences, not just to the u. S. And palestinian bilateral but the peace process. I think there is legislation appears as well that would impose a direct symbolic and financial consequence in terms of the Palestinian Office and some of the funding. The palestinians have been made aware of those consequences as well. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Congratulations on your nomination and thank you for coming. Was there recent military takeover in egypt back to . Thank you. As you know, as we discussed, i share the president s concern and your concern over the seizure of power from the president , the suspension of the constitution, arrests. On the legal matter and on the review that the administration is carrying out, i just dont feel equipped to comment. So for the record youre unsure. I dont feel equipped to comment. Very politic. You stated that whenever a government is killing its citizens it is morally incumbents for us to intervene. In pakistan they kill their citizens for certain types of speech. Does that mean that we should intervene in pakistan . Thank you, senator. That quotation that you really surprises me because that is not language that would normally use. Let me refine my own view, if i could. Intervene is a word that can mean a range of things. Las of atrocities, that is the form of intervention, youre in a way meddling in internal affairs of state on behalf of human rights. Economic sanctions are a form of response. I think in the face of gross violations of human rights, mass atrocities, genocide, this is something we discussed yesterday, we have a vast array of tools. I guess my specific question would be, are you willing today to speak out against the practice of killing people for making religious statements that are objectionable in certain religions . Absolutely. I spent my whole life speaking out. That is part of it. Become so timid with certain of these, you know, at the very least we can call them intolerances, but basically killing people for religious speech i think is something we should not be is in the speaking out about. Im not proposing we invade pakistan to tell the metal live their lives, but i am saying that not only should we speak out about it the we should make your a contingent upon it. The think that any aid to this country should be dependent upon the victim back. Again, as we discussed, every tool in the toolbox is to be reviewed. All of it to speak in the abstract. We need to use the levers we have our disposal consistent with our other interests because read the to and other interests. Certainly examine anything we can do to deter such or will practices. When we intervene in countries, who is to make that decision to iraq to president of the congress . Thank you. Let me just say that and i hope the last few weeks, the past is prologue. If i am confirmed i would benefit enormously if i could maintain the relationships that i have felt like i have begun to forge these last weeks and continued his conversations. Consultation is indispensable. I cannot do this job even if confirmed. Congress of the president. As you know, there is a longstanding debate between the executive and a legislature that has caused republican and democratic administrations about authorization for the use of force. All i can say is that i promised to consult with you extensively at all times. Is sounds like a non response response. The thing is is that these are important questions. The vast majority of the public is not in favor of our main islamic rebels who in all likelihood will be killing christians and syria. The best majority of the public is not in favor of giving arms to people who are basically allied with al qaeda. The vast majority of the public does not believe that we will have a way of knowing you are friends and to our phones are. We cant even tell in the afghan army which is a much more stable situation and syria. I find it incredible to think that we will. The thing is, those can be honest disagreements among people. Absolutely we can say to the good people are. I will only get weapons to give people. Find it a ridiculous argument, but it is one that some could make. Nothing theyre is a valid argument for fighting six wars without the permission of congress. Basically, thats where we are right now. It is also untenable to the American Public for the administration to say, well, were going to go over there and arm them. We will really try to win, but we would really like to try to get to a stalemate so we can get them back rushes to negotiate not too exciting. They might lose lives and limbs should we be stuck in another war in the middle east to be too excited about this. Our goal is stalemate. Dino, i think that you have a noble purposes and wanting to eradicate human rights abuses around the world. Realize that you know, war is a messy business. People do lose their lives. People you know. A young sergeant in the neighboring town lost both legs and an arm in iraq. These are not geopolitical games and are not things we can say we will make the world this great groovy place where nobody has any human rights abuses, but we will do it through war. And so my caution is that to be careful about what we wish for and to be careful about the belief that even though we are good people and what good things i think youre a good person and what good things. In all likelihood as you do this there are unintended consequences. As we slip into this new war in syria, halfhour trainers that are over there, then its better says several hundred trainers are over there, americans, if they get killed what is the typical response . How will be mad the people of kill them. But then the response that we send more soldiers and an platoons and regiments and generals and then all the sudden we are another decadelong war, you know, which people said they want to fight the stalemate. I would just say that even though noble intentions i think are yours, be very wary of what intervention means. It is wanting to send bread but another thing to send guns. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you, senator. Some final questions and then we will hopefully let you go. You have been been resilient. Your son is doing exceptionally well. Is amazing what food can do. Let me ask you, first of all, when you get confirmed, and i believe you will be, i would like you to look at our charge and mandate at the u. N. On the question of cyprus and the division of cyprus and where we are in that regard. I believe that a new president and some new initiatives even though their economic challenges i would like to see us be able to be more vigorous in our engagement through what is an ongoing un effort to end the division of the country for quite some time. I hope youll be able to do that. Absolutely, sir. I take it that the special representative is hoping to restart talks october. Feels like of ripe opportunity. Now, these are to generic but important questions. Is genocide genocide only when it is convenient to college so . Or is genocide genocide when it violates the convention on the prevention of by esmond . I have written a great deal about this. At the Genocide Convention is a worthy instrument. I would not the political groups are excluded from the convention as a potentially targeted group by virtue of the soviet union in the drafting of the convention, so it is not a perfect instrument, but it is an agreed upon tentative International Law today. Was moved aside. Is genocide genocide when all of the facts that we observe would lead to a conclusion that that genocide has taken place or is that only when it is convenient to acknowledge it as genocide . The former. The fact should drive the analysis. And if the facts drive the analysis than we should call that set of actions with a historical and natural presence, god forbid in reality it genocide. I believe so, yes. And is a violation of human rights a violation of human rights depending upon where it takes place or is a universal . Universal, sir. I think you understand why i asked you those questions, and i hope that your past history in this regard, even in the context of understanding the new role that you will play will not diminish your fire for making the case internally why genocide should be called genocide when the historical facts attain themselves. All right. With that in the final remarks . I want to thank you for having the hearing in know what to think this power for coming before us. There are very few people nominated to positions like this that have so many people in advance giving strong opinions about your service. As i mentioned on the front end, sometimes nominees are more interesting than others. You no doubt are one of the interesting nominees. And i very much appreciate the conversation. I think you handle yourself exceptionally well today. And based on those conversations i know nothing about media a few weeks ago . I think youre going to be a significant and positive force at the United Nations, something that certainly our nation and the world needs at this time. The worlds greatest nation. So i happen to be, based on the interaction and the way you have answered questions today, exceptionally excited about the fact youre going to be in this position. And i hope that you will continue in your service along the lines that the answer is word today and certainly the meeting that we have at our office. I think you will. Look, we need very strong representation, especially today. My sense is you are going to be again an exceptional advocate for our country and for causes around the world we care about. I am thankful that you are going to be in this position send that think your family. I have enjoyed getting to know them. I had a chance to spend little extra time with her daughter in the back. Thank you very much. Theyre is a letter written to both myself and senator corker. Foreign service and support of ms. Powers nomination. I ask unanimous consent that it be included in the record. Without objection so ordered. I would remind members that at 5 00 today we have a close for any questions submitted for the record. I would urge you to answer the questions as quickly as possible. It is the chairs intention to put your name on an executive calendar meeting for next tuesday which will depend upon answers to questions being submitted in a timely fashion which i would expect you would do so that we could get hopefully you seated while we are still the president of the Security Council and get you to work. With the thanks of the committee this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] today to Senate Confirmed another term for the president of the import export bank. He will continue to make the nominations for the Labor Department and Environmental Protection agency. Senator harry reid of will round out the work on executive nominations by considering a group for the National Labor Relations Board by the end of next week. Watch live coverage at 9 30 a. M. Eastern here on cspan2. Next, Federal Reserve chair ben bernanke testified on the economy. Followed by congressman sensenbrenner on the Voting Rights act. And another look at president obama is u. N. Representative Samantha Power. We do not know enough about our first ladies. Scratch the surface, you will find allies that oppen surpassed their husbands in drama and fortitude. Richard norton smith looks at our original series that examines the private and public life of these women. Watch the encore presentation weeknights in august at 9 30 p. M. Eastern starting at 9 30 p. M. On cspan. Reporter ben bernanke testified on capitol hill this week and appeared today before it is House Financial Services committee. He testified on the Federal Reserve policy. This is his last appearance before his term ends next year. We join us to our and 45 minute hearing during his opening remarks. Reporter im pleased to present the semiannual Monetary Policy report to the congress i will discuss current outlook and i will finish with a short summary of the ongoing work on regulatory reform. The economic recovery is continuing at a moderate pace despite the strong head winds created by fiscal policy. Housing has contributed contributed significantly. Honesdale, house prices, and residential constructions have moved up over the past few years. This includes improved outlooks and confidence in the Housing Markets and the economy. Construction and home sales are at or above what has been expected while reducing the number of homeowners who have underwater mortgages. Housing activity and prices seem likely to continue to recover notwithstanding the recent increases of Mortgage Rates, but it will be important to monitor the sector carefully. Conditions in the labor market are improving gradually. In the months before the committee initiated Asset Purchase Program, employment has increased by an average of about 200,000 jobs per month so far this year. Despite these gains come, the job situation is far from satisfactory. The rates are much too high. Moreover, this includes longterm predictions and we continue to remain stable. We have an increasing outlook of inflation. My colleagues and i projected that Economic Growth would pick up during the coming quarters resulting in gradual progress for the level of unemployment consistent with the Federal Reserve and statutory mandate and price stability. Specifically the gdp growth beginning to step up during the second half of this year and eventually reaching a case between 2. 9 and 3. 6 in 2015. The projected Unemployment Rate between 5. 8 and 6. 2 by the final quarter of 2015, we see inflation gradually increasing towards the 2 objective. The pickup on Economic Growth has been profound. We have seen inflation diminish. We also believe the risk to the economy has diminished since the fall, reflecting financial stresses in europe and the gains in housing and labor markets that i mentioned earlier. This is involved in a way that hampers the recovery. This includes the possibility of global Economic Growth could be slower than anticipated. Inflation is running below the committees objective in the highly accommodated Monetary Policy will remain appropriate for the foreseeable future. In normal circumstances, the basic tools providing monetary accommodation is a target for the federal funds. The second tool is exploring that ends about the federal funds rate over the median term. This includes the substantial improvement in the context of stability. We have made some progress towards this goal the labor market has been realized. In addition, the Federal Reserve will be holding the Agency Security off the market and reinvesting the proceeds even if the economy strengthens a decline from its more normal levels. An appropriate combination can provide the high levels of policy needed to promote a Stronger Economic recovery with price stability. In the interest of transparency, Committee Participants have been laying out the purchase programs specifically with those to provide information. This does not reflect the policy. The committees decision is in regards for assessment and the chemo to progress for our objective spirit of course, economic forecasts must be revising information must arise and are therefore provisional. I know the economic outcomes that many participants sought is most likely in the projections involve continuing gains in the markets supported by moderate growth over the next several quarters as the restraint and fiscal policy diminishes. Committee participants also saw inflation moving back over time. Up to 2 objective overtime. With the income data that would be broadly indicated, it would be appropriate to talk about the purchases later this year and normalizing inflation. We expect to continue this with respect to the first half of next year around the first of the year. At that point, it would be at the vicinity of 7 unemployment and we would be moving towards our objective. Some outcomes would be with a program that we established in september. I emphasize that because the asset purchases depend on economic development, they are by no means on a preset course to on the other hand, if they improve faster than expected and they rise decisively back in the asset purchases are reduced somewhat more quickly, on the other hand if the outlook becomes less vulnerable and inflation does not move back to below 2 or financial conditions, which have titan recently were judged to be insufficient to allow us to obtain our mandated objectives, it is the current pace that we could maintain for longer. If we could prepare to have an increase for time to promote a return to employment in the context of price stability. It is forward items in regards to the path of the federal funds rate in the committee has said that it intends to maintain a high degree of monetary accommodation for considerable time after the Asset Purchase Program ends and in particular the committee anticipates the range for the federal funds will be appropriate at least as long as the Unemployment Rate remains about 6. 5 as i have heard on several occasions, at least as long as, is a complete part of the policy guidance for these words indicate that the specific numbers or thresholds and not traitors. Reaching that threshold will not result in an increase in this target. Rather it will be the committee to consider whether the outlook in the broader economy justified such an increase. For example, a substantial part of the reductions reflect crimes and Labor Participation rather than gains in employment. The committee will be unlikely to view a decline up to 6. 5 is a sufficient reason to raise its target for the federal funds rate. Likewise, the Committee Says that inflation is below the previous rate. As long as the economy remains short of maximum employment, Inflation Expectations would remain well anchored and increases of the target for the federal funds rate are likely to be gradual. I will finish by providing you with a brief update on progress on reforms through produced the risk on the larger financial forms. It also includes regulatory capital by establishing a capital ratio including capital ratio buffering. It also can contain a supplementary ratio and after that apply only to large and internationally active banking organizations consistent with their systemic importance. The Federal Reserve in addition will issue a proposal on Systematic Risk and the attribution requirements of their faces over the next two years. Federal reserve is considering further measures to strengthen the capital positions at large internationally active banks, including the proposed rule that will increase the leverage rates for firms. We are also working to enhance the standards set out in sections 165 and 166 of the doddfrank act. Among the standards, stress testing already earned plays and we have been actively engaged in stress tests and reviewing the first wave resolution plans and coordination with other agencies we have made significant progress on these issues related to the volcker rule and we hope to complete it by yearend. Finally we are preparing to regulate nonbank Financial Firms and last week the Financial Stability Oversight Council designated to nonbank Financial Firms for the designation of a third firm before the council. We are developing a supervisory and relatively framework to be tailored to each firm and risk profile of a systemic footprint consistent with the collins amendment and others under the doddfrank act. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im pleased to take questions. Thank you. The chair will recognize himself for five minutes for questions. Mr. Chairman, the first question is obvious as you testified before the joint economic session for the wall street journal. Mr. Bernardis testimony was released early in this and the dow jones has dropped almost 600point. These commons of july 10 have been part of the s p record highs. This is an easy type of money, quote and unquote. You have described or thresholds is providing guidance to the market, which have also qualified that the thresholds provide or how the policy will change once those thresholds have been reached. A recent survey of 55 economists by the wall street journal gives it a d. So if you could comment on these comments, that would be great. Certainly, mr. Chairman. We are a difficult environment economically and financially and we are dealing with unprecedented Monetary Policy developments. I continue to believe that we should do everything we can to price the market and the public and how we expect to move forward. I think not speaking about these issues would have risked a dislocation and a the moving of Market Expectations away from expectations of the committee and it would have risked excessively risky positions in the market, which i believe it is part of the reason for some of the volatility that we have seen. Second its been very important that we communicate as best as we can water plants and thinking are. I think the markets are beginning to understand our message and that the volatility has obviously moderated. Changing subjects, this committee tomorrow will have a hearing with a bill designed to reform fannie and freddie will take place with the housing policy in america. But a number of years ago, it was recently studied that it was passed with near seven basis points subsidy and it was by burgess. Does the defense still stand by that . Cemented a good study, yes. You havent voted in the past with respect to the privatization and several problems associated with this model. This includes private shareholders and Public Policy and the Systemic Risk as well that it is more innovative and efficient than a Government Agency and they can operate with less interference Going Forward. I stand by the view that the gses have very serious flaws in terms of the implicit guarantee from the government and i agree that the gses are a significant problem. When it comes another one of these statements, he said the gse type organizations are not official to successful mortgage financing and this includes many others to achieve homeownership rates that are comparable to that that has been widely used as covered bonds. Do you still stand by that statement . Yes. As i understand it, you do believe that it is advisable to retain some type of government in times of great turmoil. Yes. The senate has put forth a plan and i think that it is important that it is reviewed by the board of governors. Regrettably, the time has now come to an end for me. The turnout recognizes the next for five minutes. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, i am interested in survey that was done by the imf and it was reported that the u. S. Was adapting a more balanced case of fiscal consolidation, especially at a time when medicare policies are limited and specifically the imf recommended that congress will would pull the sequester and raise the debt ceiling to avoid any severe shocks and adopt a set of measures to restore fiscal sustainability. Would you agree with that conclusion that the current policies in place have significantly offset these consequences and what can we do with fiscal policy . As i said many times, i think that it is focusing a bit too much in the short run and not enough on the long run. In the near term, the policies which include not only the sequester but the tax increases and other measures, according to the cbo, they are cutting about a percentage point and a half in growth in 2013. Instead of 2 growth, you may enjoy 2. 5 growth. At the same time, congress has not addressed a lot of issues where sustainability remains not yet achieved. So yes, my suggestion is to consider possibilities involve somewhat less constraint in the near term and more action to make sure that we are in a sustainable path in the long run. I think that is probably consistent with the perspective of the imf. I like to ask a question. Since determined mention about this bill that effectively ends the governments reducing the footprint, i am concerned that such a drastic reduction will adversely and how this ended a 30 year fixedrate and how does this affect the credit and how the fed needs to continue the extraordinary support of the Housing Market of quantitative easing. Welcome i think its very important that average people in america have access to mortgage credit and that is what their financial situation and needs are as long as the product is consumer friendly and safe in that respect. And its financially affordable. I dont think it necessarily has to be in a specific form. I think there are different types of mortgage structures. I think the main thing again is not the instrument itself but rather access of the average american to hope ownership and mortgage credit. To extend is the scepter of the financing system contributing with volatility . Would you believe that Housing Finance systems are the product of more vulnerable cycles in the Housing Market . That is a good question. I have not seen evidence on him. Unfortunately Adjustable Rate Mortgages were often sold to people who werent really able to manage the higher payments. They were not very well disclosed. There are others that have other problems that are alike, but just one small advantages in the central bank changes Interest Rates it shows up immediately in the cost of housing and maybe more powerful in that respect. But i think the most important issue is disclosure and making sure that people can afford the cost of the mortgage even when the payments go up. Thank you very much. I appreciate this explanation and i suppose this is consistent with concerns that we we have about documentation loans and other kinds of things where we cannot guarantee that those people taking out the mortgages are able to repay them. Is a question . Im sorry, i cant hear very well. The time and the gentlelady has expired. Thank you. The chair recognizes mr. Hunsinger for five minutes then i think you. Thank you mr. Chairman. Quickly covering three areas, one we are talking about Interest Rates and to we are talking about too big to fail in three were talking about the taylor rule. I would be reticent if i didnt have one question on my friends had, should you refinance right now. I think that is probably a question that a lot of people have. You would be able to answer if you would like. Im not a qualified financial advisor. That might be part of the problem with doddfrank. If you dont qualify, nobody qualifies. But i think that there is that fear out there, the increase in mortgage Interest Rates. A lot of us coming out of the real estate background, we were watching what your comments are going to be and maybe we are clued in. But when i am really concerned about, and this is at some risk to myself of not having a very warm welcome, im concerned that wall street is too dependent upon the fed and the signals they were having on main street while main street is getting offended about whether Interest Rates, tax policy, certainly regulatory policy as well we need to make sure that we are moving beyond nine. Maybe the market just is took an uptick based on my comments, or who knows, we know that they will be following your comments much more closely. But we have to make sure that this is about main street and not about wall street and how this is going to be affecting people back home. With too big to fail, we had a hearing last week regarding this and the president from the Federal Reserve and richmond testified about section 133 of the Federal Reserve act and what we used to bail aig out at the time. And he said i think it is an open question as to how constraining it is. So there has to be a program of market based access, but it doesnt say that more than one firm has to show up to use it. But it certainly seems conceivable to me that program could be designed that essentially is only available by one firm. Do you agree with him in the new restrictions added will not be effective in limiting the future bailouts and the carrying out of that, if it did, would you have the authority to force those limitations . We are focused on this and we are trying to create jobs. We are trying to make housing affordable. Although Interest Rates have created a lot of ability to buy automobiles is it fair to say that wall street has benefited more than main street has . I dont think so. We are working with the mechanisms that we have with the Interest Rates and financial asset prices. And our goals are main street, jobs, low inflation and i think we have had not all of the success that we would like, but we have had some success. I dont think that this has significantly been modified and could be used to bail out individual firms. According to doddfrank, has to be a broadlybased program open to a wide variety of categories and it cannot be used with an insolvent firm and it requires the approval of the board and the secretary of the treasury to be used and it must be immediately communicated to the congress. I do not think that could be used in that way. Odyssey i would love to work with you on typing that out. Very quickly in the last minute here, a grade of a d was given for its guidance. I would hate to see what it had been 10 years ago. But you believe these facts indicate a guidance function that needs more work . I dont know what it refers to. It could be the fact that there are many different voices at the fed, a lot of different views and i think there is a benefit to having a lot of different views due to the debate and on the other hand, people looking for a single signal that can be a little bit confusing. I think were doing a reasonable job of communicating our intentions of Monetary Policy strategy. I have 10 seconds, so i will make it more of a statement. Many of us are concerned when you roll the threshold guidance out, you described it as a taylor rule, and many of us are afraid of that may not have as much similarity and we look forward to working with you on a. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The turnout recognizes the gentleman from missouri and the chair of the subcommittee, the gentleman is well. Thank you both for being here. As you know, the Unemployment Rate is 7. 68 . The economy added a little bit over 2000 jobs per month for the First Six Months of this in 2012. We averaged about 180,000 jobs per month. This is a slight increase in the say the private sector added most of the jobs under this quester. State and federal governments have lost jobs. Is there any forecast on the sequester stays in place and what the condition of the economy will be next year . At first observation, which is quite right, in this recovery, even as the private sector has been creating jobs, governments at all levels of cut Something Like 600,000 jobs. In previous recoveries, usually the government sector was adding jobs. So that is one reason why the recovery has been so slow. Again, this year the best estimate that i have is the cbo estimate of 1. 5 Percentage Points on growth this year. I cannot say we are certain about how long those effects will last or that the the anticipation is the later this year and into next year as those effects become less restrictive, that the economy will be again to pick up and we will see benefits are not. But of course that has not happened as of yet and we have to keep monitoring that. Shifting to the Housing Market, which has been a drag on the economy for the last couple of years, it has recently begun to show signs of turning around. You believe the increase in housing prices is working. Do you believe that there is a casual or correlated relationship between the two . Yes, i think there is. Historically the two areas of the economy which have been most impacted by Monetary Policy, it is housing and on those. Those are the two areas that are leading our recovery. Evidently low Mortgage Rates have contributed to household formation and others. The housing sector is certainly an important component of the recovery at this point in housing prices going up are not only beneficial in terms of stimulating more construction, but they also improve the Balance Sheets of households and make them more confident and we are more willing to spend on other goods and services. So youre not concerned that recent increases could jeopardize the fragile housing recovery . Mortgage rates remain relatively low. But they are higher than they were and we do have to monitor that. We will see how they evolve. But we do have to monitor that and we will see how housing and house prices go from here. You believe the labor market in which the Unemployment Rate hovers just below 8 and it reflects a new normal as some have suggested . What is a sustainable rate of unemployment interview over the medium and longterm and what, interview can be done in regards to spread this beyond the rate of employment, including wages and loans and Labor Force Participation . I think we are still far above the normal Unemployment Rate. To give you an illustration, the projections suggest that it may be somewhat closer to 5. 2 or 6 . But even beyond that, that amount reflects the fact that there are people who dont have the right skills for the available jobs. Those who are located in the wrong parts of the country. So training and education and improving the functions of the labor market, there are things that can be done through labor policy that could lower unemployment further than the fed can are just increasing demand. s a safer instance in the Africanamerican Community where male unemployment hovers around 13 or 14 . Community colleges and others need to do a better job of connecting job training to targeted growth industries. I have seen some very good programs for employers and Community Colleges and state governments Work Together to try to wake up people with jobs and given the college provides the right training. Thank you. The time of the german has expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from alabama and mr. Baucus. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Chairman bernanke it, im not seeing a lot of discussion concerning the reduction in treasury of the deficit coming down. It seems like that would give you more latitude to reduce your purchases. Would you like to comment on our . The flintstones a relatively small share of all of the outstanding and as the new issuance comes down, that this becomes part of the new flow of treasuries coming into the market. We have not seen that our purchases are disrupting the treasury market anyway. We believe that they have been effective in keeping Interest Rates low. Were using the tools that we need to maintain high level of accommodation. This is a factor that i think you are considering. We could consider that. But again, our view of it, which people disagree, argue is what matters is the total and not the new issuance. Chairman bernanke you, you mentioned last year that you view unemployment is cyclical. Do you still believe it is structural . Is what my answer moment ago, i think that probably about two Percentage Points or so, it is cyclical and the rest of it are what is called structural. Okay. You think maybe 5 structural and 2 cyclical . So far we dont see much evidence that the structure of unemployment has increased very much during this period of time. Its something we have been worried about and they lose their skills and their cash into labor market and the concern is that they will become unemployable. It appears to us that we can attain an Unemployment Rate somewhere in this area. In the most recent minutes but didnt specifically address this unemployment target, but you mention in your press conference after, was that 7 target discussed and agreed on in the meeting . Yes, it was. 7 is not a target. It was intended to be indicative of the amount of improvement that we want to see in the labor market. So i described a series of conditions that would need to be met for us to proceed with our moderation of purchases. We have a goal around where everyone in the committee, including those that were not voting, they get to express their general views and there was good support for both the broad plan, which i described, and the use of 7 of indicative of the kind of improvement we were trying to get. Okay, thank you. The assessment of the longer run normal level has been lowered. Do you agree that . A rough rule of thumb is that longterm Interest Rates are roughly equal to the inflation rate plus the growth rate of the economy. Inflation rate we are looking to get to 2 . To the extent that in the aftermath of the crisis and other reasons that the economy has a lower growth rate Going Forward, that would imply a low equilibrium as well. You mentioned gdp estimates continue to comment. But they were too optimistic. I think earlier you said you believed one factors in policy decisions made and failing to address the longterm changes in entitlement programs. That is right. Although i should say that we should keep in mind that these are very rough estimate thicket revised and for example, you get somewhat different numbers when you look at gross domestic income instead of gross domestic product. But yes, as i have separable times already, i think the congress would be well advised to focus more on the longerterm and i thank you. Of the gentleman has expired. The gentle lady from new york is now recognized. It is my understanding that we are going to people who did not have the opportunity to ask questions at the last event. So the next individual is coming forward. We are very happy to recognize the gentleman from colorado for five minutes. I think the chair. I think the gentle lady from new york. It is good to see you. As always, i just want to compliment you on being a steady hand through all of this in terms of fiscal policy. We have had a very contractionary policy and to piggyback a little bit on this question and that of mr. Clay, i am looking at page 11 of the report. Words of the Congressional Budget Office estimates in current law generate 2. 4 and we will also restrain the case of real gdp growth by 1. 5 Percentage Points this calendar year relative to what it wouldve been otherwise. What is 1. 5 of real gdp mean in terms of jobs and wealth and one half precent is just a number. What is that . It is very significant. The cbo estimates that 1. 5 Percentage Points to something in the order of 760,000 fulltime equivalent jobs. I think with another 1. 5 Percentage Points in growth, we would probably see unemployment down another seven or eight times, Something Like that. So it makes a very big difference. It is very substantial. Again we are hoping that as the economy moves through the period, we will be able to see more rapid growth later this year and next year. Okay, lets talk about you have a graph, i dont know if you have the report in front of you, but the graph on the preceding page total structural budget deficits, 1980 through 2018. Do you see that . Yes. Can you explain that . It looks to me that at some point you project where there is a projection here of no structural deficit in about 2017. What does that mean . That means that taking away the effects of the business cycle, it causes extra deficit. You get more spending on social programs of various kinds. What that says is that if we were at full employment, and then in 2015, i believe it is, the structural deficit would be close to zero and that is a cbo estimate. Turning now to some other questions, if i could. The gentleman was also asking about Interest Rates and you said that we are at historically low Interest Rates, and i would recommend to you and you probably know an application that you guys have that is called the economy. And this one shows how we have been doing over the last 40 years. It was way up here in 1980 at about 18 . And then we dont hear about 3. 3 about two months ago. So we have come way down, except that in last two months, what is good about this, you can also do it on a oneyear basis. On a oneyear basis that show is from april 2013 to the end of june, we rant about straight up about 33 increase in Interest Rates, which was from a. 3 to about 4. 5 . Are you talking about mortgages . Yes, sir. So how did that come about . Well, there have been three reasons for it. The first is that the Economic News has been a little better. For example there is a pretty strong labor Market Report that caused this to go up as investors became more optimistic. A second factor is probably that some excessively risky or leverage positions unwound and last month or two, as the Federal Reserve communicated about policy plans. The tiny associated with that is unwelcome, but at least there is the benefit of reducing some of those positions in the market. The concern i have, and i think that was expressed by mr. Clay is that one of the underpinnings of this recovery, you have said that housing is beginning to really get much stronger. It was historically so weak. But this kind of increase is going to slow that down. Would you agree . I agree that we need accommodating Monetary Policy for the foreseeable future. Thank you. I yield back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. Miller, for five minutes. Welcome. I want to thank you for listening to us. It is very different from banks and we have postponed a negative decision on that and that was a very bold move. We are about to consider a housing refinance reform bill. I have looked at idiocies in the past and i have always had a problem with the way that they were funded. We had a hybrid situation where the private sector made all the prophets and the taxpayers took all the risk. Which was problematic from the beginning and you can go back to a time when you can say they perform their functions very well. But they created major problems in recent years, they did not appear to underwriting standards, they were caught buying predatory loans and chasing the market rather than playing and countercyclical role and that has been very problematic. Now we look at the situation and say what do we do and where do we go. If the u. S. Were to end the function of the gse as it applies to conforming loans with the private market be able to provide liquidity to the market and would investors be there to purchase mortgagebacked securities and would Interest Rates tend to rise and that type of a situation . I agree with your analysis and gse. For many years we were warning about lack of capital, the conflict between public and private motives and we agree that something needs to be fixed. There are a number of plans out there for reform. One of the key questions of everyone agrees upon is what role, if any, the government should play. It seems pretty clear that the private sector should be playing more trouble than of a role than it is now. Right now we have a government run mortgage securitization market. But in order to protect the taxpayer and allow for more product innovation, we would like to have more market participation. The question is what role should government play. I would say that first if the government does play a role, that it should be fairly compensated. Instead of having an implicit guarantee, that like the fdic or some other similar institutions should receive an insurance premium. I think that is important. I very positioned that if youre going to have a conduit, lets say, then the proper one to go into reserve accounts to make sure that if you have a reinsurance the, that should also go into a reserve account. When the town build up large enough over seven or eight years, there is no need for government guarantee because the reserves will be so huge based upon the prophets that they would turn on what they have done and you wouldnt put the taxpayer in that position. When you have investors investing in gse is, the gse at that point in time chases market share to make investors happy. That is not their role. The role is to be countercyclical. But im also concerned that if we make a mistake, the government will still be on the hook because were not going to let the Housing Market crumble if something goes wrong. We dont have some entity that is selfsufficient and has huge capital to make sure that it can withstand a downturn, we will end up in that situation again. Maybe you can respond about. Either you have to be 100 confident with what you set up, or if you think there is a scenario which the government would come in with, that might be a good idea to make sure the government gets paid appropriately and that the rules of the game are laid out in advance. Instead of the government, if you could create a facility that was independent of government established by government, lets say, that the prophets were held and they were not abused by congress as a slush fund, if you just look at the prophets of the gses are making, it was backed by some guarantee for a number of years to allow the market to recover and stability to occur. And those reserves will probably be eight to 10 billion. That is probably 200 billion in eight to 10 years and you have a trillion dollars, which is six times the risk the government took in the worst downturn we have ever seen. Would that not add to market security stability . The questioner is whether this new entity could charge those fees if you had competition. And would you be allowing this . We still need to provide a surety and liquidity. That is right. The time of the gentleman has expired and the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome, mr. Chairman. I thank you for your service and your willingness to come before the committee and help us. I would like to stay right on that line of questioning. As you begin with both the house and the senate actively considering legislative proposals to reform the gse, which i think most of us on both sides realize some reform is necessary, i wont ask you to comment on any particular legislative proposal and im not sure you would anyway. But you are a scholar of the great depression. As you know, fannie mae and the fha, the sort of creation of the new deal and i wanted to ask you historically a 30 year fixed mortgage, which is really a major renovation. Prior to the government getting in the gse getting in and providing that backstop. Was unavailable . Was the private sector successful in trying to create that . During the depression or not. Matter of time, people usually took out these mortgages and finance them sequentially. Well, in terms of the last 80 years of government supported, that is really, that is what has created opportunities for middle income homeowners from getting into the market. As we are grappling with this reform, i am very concerned about what happens to the raids. I do agree with mr. Miller that there seems to be some requirement of a backstop at some point. Obviously one the taxpayer to be as far back as possible. The initial cushion or loss, if necessary, is absorbed by the private sector. We are trying to figure out a way of preserving an affordable 30 year fixed mortgage and keep that market going without having the taxpayer take all of that risk up front. That is what we are trying to grapple with and am wondering if you could help us with that. The chairman earlier asked me about subsidies and passing them onto the consumer. I dont think that government backstops are very effective in lowering rates unless they have a price control in the interestrate. Is that not a function of risk . At the private sector knows that at a certain point, like with the terrorist Risk Insurance that we debated here, because the industry knew that there was a backstop beyond which they would not be responsible for. But it did get resolved with a lower rate. To some extent. But what i was going to add is that the argument for thinking about government participation is the situation we faced last few years where there is a big housing problem and private sector mortgage providers or whatever, for whatever reason, they are not willing to act counter cyclically, then is there a rule to government to support this process and if that is going to happen anyway, is there a case for setting up tools and advanced in some sense and figuring out what the government ought to charge for Water Protection and is prepared to provide . Okay. Well, sir, i want to thank you for your service and i have heard stories of this might be your last appearance before this committee for that purpose. And i want to tell you that i think you have served us very well under difficult circumstances and i appreciate your service to your country. Thank you. The gentleman yield back in the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I think the risk at the end of the day is only as good as the metrics that we develop. Im thinking back to the final of the three, that includes a risk of 20 of debt issued by fannie mae and freddie mac. In the rule includes a risk of zero for unconditional debt issued by ireland and portugal and spain and by other countries with no risk classification. Both the country and both of these risks are identical to the risks under this. So my concern is that we should have learned a few things about those metrics, given the consequences of the clear failure. Yet here we have 1988 looking exactly like this particular court. Given what we have experienced, the failure of the gse. The propping up of many european economies. Do you think that these weightings accurately reflect the actual risk posed by these exposures . So these are part of International Agreements and each country can take that anhef International Agreements and each country can take that and do whatever they want above about fuller. We would not allow u. S. Bank holdout at zero way, i assure you. In terms of the gse, the mortgagebacked securities have not created any laws whatsoever. Not to the holders of those securities. And i dont think that that has been a problem. Its not just the risk rates, but it has significantly increased the high amount of capital that they have to hold for a given set. It seems like to me, at the end of the day, with respect to what you are working out as a calculation. You have a