tv Today in Washington CSPAN July 8, 2010 6:00am-7:00am EDT
there is a microphone being run to you. >>we will come back to the point where fran made earlier. >> i do not think the problem is so much a question of the wiring diagram. people are saying this is share. going to these huge fields of data and figuring out what is important enough to share and what is the priooity and not the party to share. people get swamped with information. they do not understand what is valuable to other people. that is what the challenge is. fran put a finger on it. the way you overcome that is by driving it frrm the top. making it clear what the priority missions are. if your prioritt mission is i
want to know about any reasonable thheat that is out there in short to medium term and you drive the organizations to handle their data and exchange and focus on, that is your outcome, if you do that relentlessly, we had the president and if there was an unanswered question in the morning, by the afternoon, you had better have an answer. that is what drives organizations. otherwise, they lapse into habits of behavior. they can miss things that ought to be caught. >> keep the microphone if you would. >> i think we ought to get to a place where it does not require in my perfect world -- it does not require the meeting in the oval office.
three times a day videoconferences -- you can speak to this. we do not need to call to ask did we answer that question? you can develop a system that allows you, you can said those priorities that have thosthat hn without a conscious thought process. human beings are busy and they will make mistakes. you can reduce the likelihood they will miss a critical piece of information. i think we will need to evolve to the next level. >> could we have an information system -- both of you could address it. in which state and local governments, the fbi, and dhs are expected to put into one information system? >> you could do that.
they had the idea in l.a. beginning a program of suspicious activity reporting. we have been talking about intelligence. most people are thinking afghanistan or pakistan, what we're getting from satellites or spies. you are getting this from the streets of our city. bill and people in l.a. with this together. suspicious activity reporting. not simply haven't come into one -- have it come into one place but creating network servers giving any company in the country to look at what was+ flown in. the fbi has an opportunity to do that but not to be a gate keeper. to allow the information to be available to everyeveryone.
i think that caused some negative reaction from people who believe that every time you collect or gogot information, we were on the road to totalitarianism. if you can overcome that knee- jerk reaction, a combination of redistribution of the data over networks systems and the kind of analytic tools that allows you to set the data in real time, using algorithms and data mining, data analysis, that is how you get that issue. you have to get that in place. >> when you put the airline reservation system in that, too ? >> you would like to be able to add that in. what we would like to see as the federal government looks at the
national intelligence system and seize certain threats emerging. that has the -- got to go down to the centers. they make sure they understand where the threat is coming from and collect. getting it back in -- the federal government loves forms. this has to be absolutely easy for the guy and his crews. he is done putting in that information and you have to distribute and analysis. the federal goverrment has the ability to look at it and discern patterns and share that back. we are getting their but we're not there yet. >> suppose somebody in closure city -- bozier city buys
fertilizer and strange chemicals and a local copper ransom. does that go into a data system somewhere? >> that goes into the fusion center. >> do we have that? >> we built them and they are working. not all of them are equal. not all of them have the same capability. it is the first one where you can get this information and push it back in both directions. >> i do not know where we are with the microphones. >> i am going to ask the impolitic question because you work for it. -- you are up for it. you have a lot of carryover in the current obama
administration and the ct community. one of the staffers helped the organization. they are aware of those problems. still trying to fix them. are you saying that abdulmutallab's attack would not have happened under the previous administration? were the have not kept up the pace from the oval office to drive the agencies to do what you were doing to marshal this information together. >> i do not like the choices she is giving me. i am not saying it was not a priority. it is confident this is not about a political viewed world or political party. if it was going to happen, it would not matter who is in the oval office. i have been concerned about the
time and attention against this issue. i will be honest. i struggled to get time and attention for this issue when i was in john brennan's seat and i understand the struggle that can be. it is hard. that is why you need sommbody -- i do not think you what the person in that seat. it needs to be someone who was full time dedicated, cross government job is -- their job is to solve this problem. i am not satisfied with the amount of time and attention. in some ways, we have not organized ourselves right to give this the president and party it requires. >> -- presidenand preprecedent
is required. >> there is no way that humans with the number and variety of signals can set a constant agenda on their own. therefore, in our company, we are working on solutions which set up an intelligence agenda. i support the point that you made and this way, you can cope there. >> talking to mike, there are so many dots, you cannot make sense of hem. you cannot understand them. you cannot comprehend the mall. which is what you need the system to organize that. -- you cannot comprehend them all. which is why i need the system
to organize that. >>-- why you need the system to organize that. >> i will tell you we have been involved in the orgainformation initiativinformation sharing. it consists of 280 jurisdictions aaross four states. there is a challenge. they are asking for nothing more than a indemnifying themselves for an agent ms. uses that information if they do not have liability associated. the response is we do not indemnify. there is a quarter of a billion records that are noo getting to
where they need to get to long- term because of issues regarding something as simple as indemnification is used. in city councils and local attorneys will say, why should we take the risk of sharing this information if we have a liability associated with it? >> that is a failure of leadership. straight and simple. there is no good come back to that. that should not be and somebody in the federal government whether it is dhs or the justice department, needs to give comfort to the state and locals willing to provide that information. that should not be and that is a failure of leadership. for those of you wondering, i said the same thing about was in the executive branch. -- if i was in the executive branch. >> way back there.
>> our conversation today and right now seems to be focused on state actors, but we are ignoring other domestic terrorism groups. i was wondering if you would speak to what efforts are needed. >> you are talking about environmental groups and that sort of thing? i want to make sure i address your question. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. i was surprised. folks would say, how often did those sorts of things come up? it is not what you hear about
publicly. i was surprised at the number of events. intended to be at the -- it tended to be at the side. burning down a housing development or crossing a wire. there are more of those than most americans appreciate. their units devoted to nothing else in the fbi. they do not talk about it as much. i will tell you there are -- people would be surprised at the amount of resources, including the local joint terrorism task forces around the country. this is a problem that is greater in some places but not a problem i and others. where there is a problem, the joint terrorist task forces are penetrating those groups in the use the same techniques you would use against international terrorism. >> right behind you.
>> sticking with the deja vu all over again, and on the narrow question, we mentioned the continued difficulties of fbi sharing information. thank you for your observation about it going both ways for once. what i thought was a pretty comprehensive report from senator feinstein's intelligence committee identifying the failures to detect the christmas day bombing was mention of, again, the fbi boss inability to communicate within itself as a
systemic failure. time and time again, we have heard about these problems. the fbi coming into the 21st century. what is your observation and what will it take to have them get it right? >> i do put this in the category of information sharing and my frustration about it. we happened to be in the oval office where there was a report that after more than $100 billion spent, the system there were planning to implement was not going to work. part of that is explained by a lack of expertise inside the system and the fbi itself in terms of the information technology. that is not an excuse. let's remember, if we're looking at a failure in sharing of information, there was a failure
to share information between dot and the fbi with the fort hood shooting. it is a broad problem. director moeller -- muller has invested a good deal of time on this. i do not have visibility into what the improvements have or have been. i have always worried about the system. this is a system that is case driven. if you file everything in no according to a case number, there is intelligence in their that maybe related to a report ingroup or individual. that is the fundamental problem to me. even if they have the best
case management system in the world. if they do not -- until they solve the problem that will not know what they know. that is worth the long-term investment. >> would you bring the microphone up, please? >> there are probably 20 people here in aspen this week who could help the fbi solve the problem quickly. from the private sector. what frustrates me in thinking about this, because we heard these apologies repeatedly and an expenditure of more than $100 billion over time. it is not yet fixed. what does it take? does it take the president of the united states to bring in a task force? who is going to get this right
side? >> i am a great believer in setting clear priorities and accountability. i think there is a good argument to be made for the president to decide he is very clearly going to task the fbi with solving this problem and directing them to bring in the outside help they need. the government has never been good at public-private partnerships, even modest ones. we're trying to -- get better at it. -pthey're acting in good faith. this is the kind of question when it comes to information and need outside help with that they have to bring in. you are right. it has to be solved or we will have another event where we will find something in the fbi case file that did not get share because they did not know they had it. >> let me follow-up. is part of the problem -- the
public is so afraid of total information awareness and information sharing that we get kind of paranoid about it. we have not educated the public well enough. >> that is right. people in washington watch one scandal after another. those of us who have watched this issue have all remembered the case of john poindexter and watched what happened to his career. a republic servant who was trying new and creative things. -- a public servant who was trying new and creative things. in thiis their way to bring than and set the policy rules that allow you to take advantage of them? the questiothis requires hard wy people like richard and others
who understand. >> there is a constituency with3 constituency. even knee-jerk among the public. there is no constituency in the other direction that says share information. >> part of that is because the natural constituency on the other side are in government. there in the executive branch. when they make that argumenn, they get accused of totalitarianism. phat is white you need an non- governmental form where you can have this conversation. -- why youuneed an non- governmental former you can have this conversation. they view privacy as a non issue. i am not worried about privacy
and i'd but information out there every day and i do not know who was looking at it -- i day and i do not know who is looking at it. >> we in the back there. >> --- way in the back. >> two questions. when the executive order was issued, that was a double-edged sword. the good news is it has private- sector average requirements. the bad news it has private sector outreach requirements. if every agency in the government starts getting engaged out there and start checking the box that they havv
their private-sector outreach program in place, how do we get the government into a coordinated fashion so the private sector is not inundated government doing their average programs? >-- outreach programs? >> i will tell you this came up for me in the context of fbi, who may be going out to have a private sector relationship, they may be going out to service subpoena. the cia, wwo has a private sector program, and dhs was greeting the sector coordinating council's. it as a group of ceos who said someone comes in and talks about my general counsel and someone invites me to dinner. little did i know that i would get pitched.
i called the cabinet secretaries together and we had a conversation. their interests and objectives and those relationships are different. you do not want to be in a position appearing [unintelligible] my notion is, is there a system that allows us to gatekeep? there are concerned with suchha system. i tried and failed but i get it. i get that we need the governmeet -- the government needs to do this better. i hear this all the time. we need to engage with the business roundtable and ceos to understand what is their view of how we can do this more effectively. >> the following i have is, as
you mentioned earlier, the c onsistent attacks. the overnment kkows there is 140 country stealing technology. the obama administration issued their report ssying that over $1 trillion conservatively was stolen from the economy from intellectual property in 2008 alone. when i broke this question to the director of national intelligence, he said it is somewhere between stopping global hunger and world peace in trying to fix this problem. how do we get the resources of the government focused on understanding that?? we're one of the few elements in the domestic, developed world that does not have an industrial policy. you cannot build five business all the time. you have to have business to support the long-term growth of the country. >> you are dead on. the legal authorities exist to
prosecute these. i am a firm believer on this. an occasional indictment is not a bad thing. we need a concerted effort. against the economic crimes, especially in a time of economic uncertainty. when better to decide to launch such an initiative? it is the question of competing priorities. demands on resources. it is necessary and can be done in a way that gets a lot of attention to this issue. >> last two questions. up front. >first with the guy in yellow. i have to get fran out at two.
>> we have heard about how americans have to pitch in for our security. we have a host of foreign countries that we plan. you have a lot of experience. i wonder if you could characterize, who do you think and why are our foreign pprtners important to us in fighting al qaeda? who wore the strange friends we can talk about besides the traditional allies? >> we understood and bbll was part of this. after 9/11, the closest ally was the british. you have to go to the places and create allies where the problem existed. that was not easy.
there was a deep sense of mistrust and suspicion. you are talking about saudi arabia. people would be stunned when you realize that 15 of the 19 hijackers were saudi. if i told you we share thousands of intelligence reports of the year with them, rivaling our counter-terrorism relationship with their british allies, people would be surprised. a good deal of this is the saudis see the threat to themselves and see it in their own national interest to collaborate with us. that is not a bad thing.. what they cooperate is less important than that they do. i ttink you're seeing this -- we need to get to a point where you are doing that in a place like dimon. we need to get to a place where there is no central government. the threatyou have to go in ande
capability that they do not have. they provide the capability so they can share. those are long-term and their expense of commitments. make no mistake. but they are invaluable in terms of intelligence that they provide. >> i wanted to thank secretary chertoff. the privacy issues may be less than we think. in light of that, what are the biggest remaining hurdles? the two that i see are how do get data to find data without being flooded? you talked about artificial intelligence and alerts. how'd you get that to happen?
how do you get it to happen. together they when the owners of data -- particularly when the owners of data say i would like to share it but i cannot. you cannot look at the data without a predicate. >> we have to get over the traditional rules. it is -- it cannot be ok to say i would like to share but i cannot. tell me why we can and we will solve the problem. we have to challenge those i cannots and solve them. i don' t think we have taken a hard enough turn. whether it is the eu or state and local regulatory agencies
that require it for different purposes. those can be solved. it requires the hard work of deciding you are going to do t and you will be public. you have to be honest about what the rules of the road are your operating under and give yourself over. congressional oversight, i will take a 10 second screen on. it is dysfunctional. the department gets pulled in a thousand different directions. good oversight can be put against us in a responsible way that helps solve the problem. >> can be solved all the ones or one by one? >>-- can it be solved all at one or one by one? >> i think you have a disciplined system to go against each of them. >> there is a gentleman i passed a way back there. last question. >> in regard to the statement
about intellectual property, i am interested in your thoughts. have the politicians not picked up on the fact that this is an american jobs lost issue? i have rarely if ever heard anything about that. i am interested in your thoughts. >> this is not a good answer. it comes down to an answer of priorities and resources. people worry about stuff blowing up. no one wants to take agents of the ct watchs. agents, we can move resources around. we have to make up our minds to devote resources.
the chamber of commerce has a private sector. they did the investigation themselves and they bring it to the government but they cannot get the government interested to do its fundamental job. that is a problem. that ought to be an embarrassment to the justice department and the fbi. we need to bring a couple of big cases. look what hollywood does. hollywood does this effort against fraud. while that is important, that does not abrogate the government's responsibility. i will take a second to -- this is an important opportunity. these conversations do not get had absent of the institute. thanks for the effort that went into it. this is terrific that you have
that is all this week on c-span 2. >> cspan is now available in over 100 million homes giving you a direct led to public affairs all as the public service created by america's cable companies. >> at the white house yesterday, president, talk about exports and progress on his campaign pledge to double exports. we will hear from commerce secretary barry locke and this is about 25 minutes. --gary locke. [applause]
>> we talked about how we can strengthen the impact of president obama's export initiative. after a decade in which america's economy relied too much on an increasingly hard- pressed american consumer for growth, president obama understand we need to get back to the basics. he believes we must reinvest in innovation and do a better job of connecting u.s. companies to the 95% of the world's consumers who live outside the borders of the united states. that is where the national export initiative comes in. this is an unprecedented and government-wide effort to be double american exports by 2015. it was designed with one
overriding goal in mind. it is to put americans back to work in jobs that provide security, dignity, and a sense of hope for the future. over one in three manufacturing jobs and almost one in five agricultural jobs are tied directly to exports. these are good jobs that provide good wages. these are the type of jobs we need a lot more of. our export goals are on track. exports in the first quarter of 2010 rose almost 17% from the same time one year before. over the last nine months, exports have contributed as much as domestic consumption to america's economic growth. credit goes to an improving global economy and american companies that provide the best products and the most sought after services in the world. our companies have been helped along by a federal government that is fully mobilized to improve our advocacy on behalf
of u.s. companies. at the same time, we are increasing access to export credit and breaking down the trade barriers that prevent u.s. companies from operating on a level playing field. i am proud that the u.s. commerce department has been involved with many of these efforts and that the president has made the national export initiative such a high priority. i am eager to build on the momentum we have seen over the last several months. with that, i will turn things over. it is my pleasure to introduce president barack obama will is accompanied by my friend, export council cochair and ceo of boeing. ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states. [applause]
>> thank you. thank you very much. what everybody please be seated? good morning. thank you, jim mcerny for being here. thank you gary locke for the introduction and the outstanding work you have been doing and commerce. that work has been my driving focus since we walked through these doors in a year-and-a-half ago. at that time, our economy was shrinking at an alarming rate. nearly 3 million jobs were lost in the last half of 2008. in january, 2009 alone, more than 750,000 jobs had been lost here in the united states.
every alarm bell was running at the prospect of a second great depression. our imperative was to stop the freefall and reverse direction, to get our economy moving and get jobs growing again. this meant that we took a series of dramatic and frankly sometimes unpopular actions. as a result of those actions, we broke the recession's momentum and we are in a much better place today. our economy has now grown for three consecutive quarters and created nearly 600,000 private- sector jobs in the first half of this year. this is a stark contrast to the 3.7 lost over the first half of last year. the spite uncertain world events and the resulting ups and downs in the market, we are moving america forward again. the progress we have made to date is not nearly enough to
undo the damage that the recession visited on people and communities across our country. our businesses are hiring again but there are still five unemployed workers for each one that has a job. the economy is growing but empty storefronts still haunt too many main street. the truth is the middle class families that are the backbone of our economy see their economic security eroding since long before this recession hit. we have much more work to do to spur stronger job growth and to keep the larger recovery moving. the question is, over the months and years to come, how do we encourage the strong and lasting economic growth required for america to lead in this new century? where will we find that the growth necessary to help us address all of our priorities from creating jobs and prosperity to boosting our businesses and our workers to
improving our fiscal health and reducing our long-term deficits? one thing we know is that this growth will not come from an economy where prosperity is based on fleeting bubbles of consumption, of debt, we cannot rely on paper gains. we saw where that led us and we are not going back. through this we have had to face over the last year and a half the truth that if we want to once again approach full employment and fuel real economic growth, we need to put an end to the policies that got us here, tackle the challenges we put up for decades and move this economy forward. we need to lay a new and stronger foundation on which businesses can thrive and create jobs and rising incomes, on which innovators and on her -- a country and ours can lead the world in generating new technologies and products and services.
we have to rely on new foundations on which america can harness what has made our economy the engine and envy of the world, the talent and drive and creativity of our people. as business leaders and labor leaders representing some of america's largest corporations and america's workers, that is what a lot of talk to you about today. america's success of another depends on your success. it is the private sector that has always been the source of our job creation, our economic growth, and our prosperity. our businesses and workers will take the reins of this recovery and lead us forward. at the same time, some might argue that government has no role to play at all in our economy. everybody in this room understands that the free market depends on the government that sets clear rules that ensure fair and honest competition, that lives within its means,
that invests in certain things that the private sector cannot invest in on its own. in the absence of this kind of responsible government, whenever government is dragged to 421 and or the other of the spectrum, we seek negative consequences for our economy. too much regulation or too much spending can stifle innovation, can hamper confidence and growth and hurt business and families. the government that does too little can be just as irresponsible as a government that does too much. for example, in the absence of sound oversight, responsible businesses are forced to compete against unscrupulous businesses who are unencumbered by any restrictions on activities that might harm the environment or take advantage of middle-class families. or they could threaten to bring
down the entire financial system. that is bad for everybody. that is the reason we pursue the wall street reforms. when the senate takes up its business again, i hope the move as quickly as possible to finish this chapter and finished this issue. in the absence of sensible policies that invest in long- term public goods like education or basic research, roads, railways, broadbent, a smart electric grid, in the absence of those investments that can be a disaster. a failure to make such investments slowly degrades us and leave the nuts without the skilled work force or basic infrastructure that a 21st century economy requires. to make sure our workers can out compete anybody anywhere in the world, we have invested in the skills and education of our people.
we are challenging our schools to raise their standards and i have pledged that by 2020, america will once again lead the world in the percentage of students graduating from college. by making higher education more affordable, we are on our way to achieving that goal. to strengthen our standing in the 21st century economy, we have invested in upgrading our critical infrastructure from high-speed rail to high-speed internet. we have enacted reforms that will reduce the drag of health care costs on businesses and consumers alike. we are committed to bringing down the unsustainable debt that has ballooned over the past 10 years. to start blasting growth, we have invested in science and technology, research and development, clean energy projects that will strengthen our global leadership. 80 months ago, american companies commanded just 2% -- 18 months ago, american
companies commanded just 2% of battery technology. we have leveraged private investment and by 2012 we expect america's capacity to reach 20% of the global market and as high as 40% in 2015. government has another responsibility and that is to remove barriers that stand in the way of opportunity and prosperity so that our people, all of our people, our workers, our intrepid ores, ceo's, can build the future we seek. in my state of the union address, i set a goal for america. over the next five years, we will double our exports of goods and services around the world. this will be an increase that will boost economic growth and support millions of american jobs in a manner that is deficit-friendly. export growth leads to job growth and economic growth.
in 2008, american exports accounted for nearly 7% of our total employment, one in three manufacturing jobs and supported a 10.3 million jobs in all, jobs that pay 50% more than average. -- that pay 15% more than average. building exports is an imperative. this is not just about where jobs are today, this is where american jobs will be tomorrow. customers andld's fastest-growing markets are beyond our borders. if we want to find new growth streams and markets and opportunities, we have to compete for those new customers. other nations are competing for those new customer. the united states of america should not, cannot, will not
play for second place. we need to compete for those jobs and we mean it to win. we have to change how we do business. to meet this goal, we launched the national export initiative, an ambitious effort to team up with america's businesses large and small and help them unless their energy and innovation, grow their markets, support new jobs selling their goods and services all across the globe. we are bringing to bear the full resources of the united states government. one of the first things we did was establish an export promotion cabinet made up of cabinet members and senior administration officials whose work affects exports. yesterday i assembled the cabinet for an update so far. we will hold these meetings every few months. i have asked for a progress report in our next meeting in
september. this is about more than what government can do. this is about what businesses can do and that is why we are re-launching the president's export council. does a group that will include business leaders that will offer their advice on how best to promote exports. we have also included congressional leaders and senior representatives of my administration. earlier today, members of my cabinet and i met with the council to begin soliciting advice. i want to thank jim, the president and ceo of boeing as well as personal burns, the ceo of xerox. our efforts are off to a solid start. american exports grew almost 17% over the first four months of this year compared to last year. a part of this is due to the global recovery. we are also moving forward on
improving conditions for america's exports. since we launch a national export initiative, we made progress across five objectives. first, we said that america would be a strong partner and a better advocate in the international marketplace for its businesses and work. -- and workers. we'll go to bat from everyone from the largest corporations to the smallest business owners with an idea that she wants to market and sell to the world. already this year, the commerce department has coroneted 18 trade missions with over 160 companies that compete in 24 countries. with eight more planned over the next few months. there advocacy center assists american companies, supporting a $11.4 billion in exports and an estimated 70,000 jobs. secretary clinton recently held
a round table with business leaders in shanghai. next week, she will host another one with secretary locke to discuss removing barriers that stand in the way of their success. we're moving forward with strengthening our business centers across the country. and in our embassies and consulates abroad so they can provide a comprehensive tool kit of services to help potential exporters gain a foothold in new markets and expand. this is especially small businesses that might not know how to sell their products abroad. second, we are increasing access to export financing for small and medium-sized businesses that want to export their goods and services but just need a boost the export-import bank has more than doubled its loans since last year. that step alone has helped support nearly 110,000 jobs.
third, we are offering our efforts to remove barriers of trade and open new markets for american businesses. on a global level, this begins with pushing hard to improve negotiations in the way that will translate directly into more opportunities for american exporters. regionally, we are working on the trans-pacific trade agreement to expand our commercial presence. we are acting. in march, we reach an agreed with china to be open their markets to american ports. last month, we reached an agreement with russia to agree open their markets to american poultry. these steps are worth more than $1 billion to american business.
we are also reforming our own restrictions on exports, consistent with our national security interests. we hope to move forward on new agreements with some of our key partners. i have instructed u.s. trade representative ron kirk to resolve issues with the korean free trade agreement before my visit to them in december. it will create new jobs and opportunities in both of our countries. we also want to deepen and broaden our relations with panama and colombia. we're working to resolve outstanding issues with the free trade agreements with boesky partners. we're focused on submitting them for congressional consideration. we will make sure that each agreement will pursue does not just advance the interest of our businesses, workers, and farmers but also upholds our most cherished values. fourth, as we help american
businesses access new markets, we are making sure that the access is free and fair. the united states offers some of the world's lowest barriers to trade. when we get other countries the privilege of that free and fair access, we expect in return. where american producers face unfair trade practices, we will use every tool at our disposal. the wto last week ruled in favor of the united states about airbus manufacturers. this ruling will help keep the playing field level and boost american jobs. finally, we continue to coordinate with other nations around the world to promote strong, sustainable, and balanced growth. at the d-20 summit last month,
we built on the actions we took last year. these are actions that replaced coal contraction with global growth and the trade that was plummeting with trade that has bounced back. sustaining that recovery involves of rebalancing our economies. after years of taking on too much debt, americans will no longer borrow or by their way to lasted prosperity. we alone cannot be the engines of economic growth. furthermore, a strong and durable recovery requires that country's not have an underwood vantage. we discussed the need for market-driven currencies. i welcomed the chance for china to response to market forces. our response to tschida addressed the importance of how to create a more -- our response to china addressed the importance of how to create more
level playing field. i made it clear to all that the united states of america is prepared to compete aggressively for the jobs and industries and markets of the future. the bottom line is this -- for a long time we were trapped in a false political debate in this country where businesses were on one side and labor was on the other and there were partisan to buy. the argument was that either you were pro-trade or your entire- trade. -- anti-trade for it we want to refocus our attention where we are in it together. businesses, workers, government, everybody is focused on the same goal. we've lived in an interconnected world. there are global opportunities. this nation has never shied away
from the prospect of competition. we thrive on competition. we are better positioned than anybody, as uniquely positioned as ever to compete with anyone in the world. we have the most respected brands, the best products, the most vibrant companies in the world. we have the most productive workers in the world. we have the finest universities in the world. we've got the most open, dynamic, and competitive market. in the world when the playing field is even, nobody can beat us. we are uoppping our game for the 21st century but we have to do it together. we have to row in the same direction. there is no doubt these are challenging times.
i am absolutely convinced that we will rise to meet them. , to grow our economy, to put our people back to work, to forge a our own future once more. we are americans and that is what we do. i appreciate all your participation and i am looking for to getting busy working with you. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]
quacks' our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and online and you can also connect with a son twitter, facebook, and youtube and sign up for our scheduled alert e-mails @ c- span.org. >> coming up next, the recession of appointment of the administrator for the centers of medicare and medicaid services and 45 minutes, a political energy reporter on the nation's energy grid. in an hour-and-a-half,