representative tom price and the incoming chairman of the budget committee in studio with us. economic policy reporter with "the wall street taylor, aand andrew reporter with "the associate co--- with "the "theiated press your co -- associated press." >> you have the opportunity to pass a budget resolution that doesn't have any legislative teeth. then you get to send the president other legislation, particularly a bill. you can send its tentacles to every corner of the government.

what are your plans for that? >> it is important people know the power of a reconciliation bill. to bringation was used about the balanced budget act that was used in the early part of the last decade for the tax reductions in the early part of the obama administration. it cannot be used for everything. we are talking as a committee, and with the leadership. and these answers will probably be determined at our retreat later. >> you mentioned it was used in alan's they to budget and it led to negotiations with president clinton that did bounce the budget for a few years. you past the ryan budget for years in a row but you never

really followed up on some of the really difficult things you have done on that, on medicare, on tax reform, on cutting social programs. if you past the budget, why wouldn't you use the reconciliation bill to implemented? >> we might. the budget is a visionary doctorate. what it also does is lay out our vision for how we believe we weht to solve the challenges face. social security is going broke. medicaid is no longer providing the services it needs to provide to those in the community from a health care standpoint. tobelieve we ought to work strengthen these programs, not

let them die on the vine, which is apparently what the other side the leaves. they have not brought about any fundamental reform. i am excited about the opportunities to be able to put forward our vision. this is how we believe we would save and strengthen our medicaid. it doesn't get to a point where it is no longer able to provide the benefits to its recipients. >> republicans have control in both chambers of commerce. you guys are in the driver seat heading into 2016. there have been some healthy and arguably unhealthy disagreements . imagine the reconciliation, it is such a powerful tool. how comfortable are you going into that january retreat that you are going to come out with a unified strategy?

>> i am very optimistic. the american people made a decision in november. what they said was the government was too large, it was too expensive, it was too prescriptive in all sorts of areas. the senate isf now 54% republican and the house of representatives has the largest republican majority since 1928. republican now control 62 62%.nd -- now 70% of legislatures are controlled by the republicans. that is something we ought to be listening to resignation. we hope we can bring our democratic colleagues along and say this is an imperative time for this country to solve the challenges that we face. i think the nation is frustrated that congress hasn't done its job.

cruz along,ring ted whether it be obamacare or not to include open obama care. >> as we move through the every single member of -- house of representatives every single individual will have an opportunity to talk with their colleagues about what they think should be the solution that they bring forward. it was an ambitious process that will allow individuals to say, i know it can't be everything i wanted it to be, but i wanted to affect the outcome. >> for the viewers who do not the process, can you do something and try to repeal it? >> it was passed through the process of reconciliation.

this is a give and take. this is a process that has to work through the house and senate. the rules have to be adhered to. can improvele we some things with obamacare and reconciliation. whether or not we can repeal the entire law itself is a point that is under question. >> your budget is going to call for a fundamental change to medicare. right now you pay premiums, you copayments. pay what your party wants to do is people my age and our age is we would get a fixed subsidy. most of us would go out in the private market and purchase

insurance. is criticism of that overtime i would pay more and more out-of-pocket or eventually i would not get less benefits -- or eventually i would get less benefits than i do now. why is it a good idea for the country? >> it is a good idea because the process is going broke. something that is my conclusion. this the conclusion of the medicare trustees. these are the folks that are charged with not -- it is viable for the long-term. it would be reckless and foolish not to look at this situation. that is what needs to be done. it was the voluntary option.

not the government's choice. whether or not they remain in the medicare system or use their resources and purchase something that may be more responsive to them. the patients actually get a higher level of quality of care. the current system is going broke. that is the current law. that is not something we can live with. >> why don't we address the doctor pulls? >> that is part of the discussion.

they say they don't want medicare to grow -- to go broke. they were destined to go bankrupt. encourage them to help us out. hasne of the rallying cries been to repeal and replace obama care. is that going to be vital to the >> i have message? always been a champion and promoter. the patient centered health care, they are making medical decisions. they have been working on it for five or six years.

it was a bill that was going to provide for every american to have the financial feasibility and wherewithal to purchase the health coverage they want, not what the government forces them to buy. they develop a system that allows individuals and every single americans own their own coverage regardless of who is paying for it. the relationship between the patient and the insurance company it's a whole lot different when the patients have that kind of power. then we have a process that allows us to save hundreds of billions of dollars every single year through what we believe is ending the practice of medicine. put people in charge, put patients in charge. all of that without putting washington in charge. >> we have talked about reconciliation. does isr thing a budget

it sets the overall amount of money for the appropriations bill. bill.ropriations this funds the day-to-day operations of government as opposed to social security and medicare. they fund a lot of things. and you have this fundamental problem, you have a bunch of people in your party saying this is too much money. now that you have a republican senate, the equation changes. can setelieve that you a level that can get these bills passed? do youadly speaking how think those bills would look differently now? >> i believe that is what we have done in the past. we have passed these on the republican side.

difficulty had getting all the appropriations bill passed. >> we believe it is time to .egin rightsizing government there are things the federal government ought to do and ought not to do. that is the level that congress controls without having to touch the mandatory program. had af those have difficult time getting through the house. the senate hasn't done any of that. we have been as responsible as we can be. i think the dynamic is going to change. enthusiastic and excited about the article one portion of the constitution, the legislative branch, being united as a party and working together to solve these challenges. there are a lot of tough decisions that are going to have to be made if we are going to get our economy back on trap --

on track, if we are going to get jobs that will allow the next generation to realize their dreams. and it makes us competitive in a global economy. >> one of the problems the ryan budget had is after we had sequestration the caps went down very low. you wanted a pumped up defense and you took away from domestic bills. you are still stuck now with the freeze. are you going to try to take away from domestic? or are you going to try to cut mandatory and help out these accounts? >> every single day we

seek greater and greater example of the dangers the united states faces and the world faces from a security standpoint. what is it -- we need to know what the mission is that accomplishes the mission. -- we don'td to say need to fit whatever mission you can and that budget. that is backwards. one of the greatest responsibilities is to protect the american people. but we need from the defense department is the defense -- is the definition of what that mission is and we need to fit the budget to that mission. the $500 billion that has toeady been cut and harmful their preparation, to their ability to fill fill the readiness that needs to be

fulfilled. right now, on the projection with current law is further reductions in the defense arena that will result in an inability for us to accomplish what the mission has been defined us so far. either we say that is not our mission anymore and reduce the budget or we say that is still our mission and provide a budget that will allow us to accomplish that mission. it is an incredibly important debate. >> we have had a busy month since the midterm. the president has this new immigration policy. and the sony hacking case has scared a lot of americans, unsure about what can happen. or --re any space or role or role in your budget to

acknowledge or try to address with the president has done on immigration with cuba, or to account for tyburn -- for cyber terrorism? do you need to acknowledge that, or is that something better left to the committee? >> one of the aspects is the discretionary spending side, and that is sending a hard number for what they are able to spend in the next fix -- in the desk -- in the next fiscal year. next is to lay out our vision. out our visionay for how we solve many of the challenges we face. immigration is something we can interest in our budget, the national security issues we talked about. from what house republicans believe ought to be done as it relates to federal government in these areas. are reallyn people concerned about not just where our standing as in the world right now, but the actions of this administration.

to other districts i hear people all the time say they are not certain this administration is following the letter of the law. certain this administration is confining itself to the role of the executive branch as we have known in the past. byy are very troubled president who seems to be making it up on the fly, without congressional consent. we will look at that. we have 10 new members on the republican side. we will be looking at all of these things. few things we looked at as a dressing social security. is this something you plan to include in your budget? >> social security is going broke. that is not my assessment, that

is the assessment of -- >> in 20 years, there is a long fuse in that program. >> must individuals can remember what they are doing in 1994. 20 years is a long -- is not a long time. 20 years ago we had much greater latitude on the financial side as a nation. muchdn't have as flexibility. securityl see a social party for the budget? >> it is part of the discussion, i am hopeful they will be able -- they will be able to address it. nobody thought a republican budget would have laid out a path to strengthening and securing medicare.

the american people understand and appreciate it is house republicans who are taking the challenge and saying we want to solve these remarkable difficulties we have as a nation moving forward. we want to make sure that make certain they are there for future generations. aspects of the isrent economic recovery that jobs for people in the lower end to income portions of the economy, people are getting jobs at typically little wages lower than that. meanwhile we have this small segment of wealthy individuals who are disproportionately able to prosper. the big criticism you are going is cutting spending to

medicaid, which is important to millions of people. on the other hand you have a tax reform goal with a top-down rate of getting to 25%. can you respond to that criticism? premiseld not buy your that our program cut social safety net. we will continue to put forward the positive solutions for the social safety net. to make sure that individuals are able to have the kind of resources that they need. in order to move things forward and a positive direction and make it so we do not continue to have these it or budget battles

in washington, we have to grow the economy. you cannot simply reduce spending and have things balanced. we had annual deficits of over $1 trillion in this country. you wouldn't even balance the budget. that is the magnitude of the challenge. we have to get this economy rolling again. we would suggest to you and the american people that many of the programs out of this administration are harming economic growth, whether it is affordable care act or obamacare that is punishing businesses. you have small businesses trying to grow and expand. they are tamping down their ability to expand. you have folks moving from full-time to part-time

employment. that is what the administration has dictated to them. what once were 40 hour weeks are now 30 hour weeks. this administration has resulted in an economy that is not growing as rapidly as it should end up creating the jobs for those individuals to be able to climb out of the economic difficulties they find themselves in. >> we are expected to see a lot more people throw their hat into the ring in the next few months. coincide with the budget process in the house, where you are going to need a lot of unity and people coming together. worried presidential politics is going to overwhelm what you guys are trying to pull off in 2015? as more and more republicans try

to position themselves to be either to the center or the right? excited about the opportunities for those individuals to be able to look at the house republican budget and say, that is what we think should be done. our budget is more than just numbers on a sheet of paper. it is a vision. to saveould be able this nation, the greatest nation in the history of the world, that is the opportunity we have. i am hopeful that as many candidates on that side of the aisle will look at house budget committee for leadership on those programs. whether it is an energy policy that allows us to get this economy rolling again. whether it is a national security policy that recognizes national security is the number one responsibility of a federal government.

those kind of goals will be what we lay out in our budget. >> do you think the more the merrier? >> i have more than i can say grace over the house budget committee. have thoseto individuals who believe they can move this nation in the right direction. >> tell our viewers what happens in january. when do things pick up for the budget committee? >> it starts right away. the budget is frontloaded in congress. budget have to pass a through our committee and through the floor of the house of representatives by march 26. you have to get going right away. get the committee together, both republicans and democrats, and formulate the rules under which we operate.

we will then move through a process of hearings, listening to what the president will present. listening to those individuals in the defense community. giving us their ideas of what their budget should look like. we will work through in work sessions and have that wonderful new enthusiasm and vitality of those 10 new folks coming in in our community -- in our committee. through all go marker, where we finalize the budget in our committee. usually an 18 hour day. we do that with our friends on the other side of the aisle. then we will pass a budget by the 26th of march. >> the incoming chairman of the budget committee, thank you for being this week's newsmaker. >> thank you so much. back with our

reporters, damien paletta of the wall street journal, and david from the associated press. replacing a better-known paul ryan. what is going to be tom price's role in the budget? >> he does have a tough act to follow. paul ryan has written a budget for four straight years with this republican majority in the house. it adjusts for economic conditions and the opportunity to balance. his budget is going to keep the mystic spending platforms flat, depending on whether it is for agencies or medicare, and he is going to try to balance it in 10 years. role is to manage that process by educating members of congress and coordinating staff work to get it done. thesend dealing with

senate, which is a whole different animal than the house. he is smart and articulate, which are two of the qualities he needs. his political judgment is large and intensive. >> we have seen the fight rake out in the republican party over the budget. what is it going to be like? what do you hear about these new candidates about getting on board? >> the civil war will be interesting for these first few months. most important thing was how it became the republican defective platform going into the 20 12 election. whoever the nominee would is will be tended to this price budget.

democrats use the ryan budget like a weapon in the 2012 elections. trying to get a lot of senior citizens worked up about the changes to medicare and cuts to domestic programs. i think they know the selling points. this budget is going to be very significant. there are going to be these potential candidates see what works and what might blow up in tom price's face. particularly if there is a revolt on the house or senate floor. >> what did you hear about trying to avoid their budget being used as a weapon a? >> they are going to try to avoid the house and senate floor, by allowing everyone to air their grievances and so everyonetially feels like they get a fair shake. proposehe wanted to

social security but he was noncommittal. that is what democrats would lead on -- would leap on. i think you like it told to back down by leaders. >> the big difference between the ryan budget and the senate republicans budget is the ryan budget was just a house only exercise. it was a document they passed and put on a shelf and never wrote the legislation that was implemented. they never actually written a bill to implement that. they are going to write a bill to implement cuts which are going to create controversy. they have this big conundrum on the appropriations process.

they've always needed democrats to pass those bills. that will be a big test. factions of the party are going to be severely tested by this. it will be interesting to see. >> who will be his counterpart in the senate? they are going to have the majority in the senate. fight going on behind the scenes. for some reason mike enzi has superiority. he's going to be the next chairman. hasn't had a big imprint on policy thus far. other then health education labor community where he is working in a bipartisan way.

not providing a communicator with the public. need to remember is they are representing entire states. tom price represents the district that is very strongly republican. most of his colleagues are in the same boat. difference a big between senator and see and jeff sessions as chairman of the budget committee. >> i looked at this. they are equally conservative. they both opposed the rubio immigration bill. they both voted against reopening the government. their style is much different. senator sessions is much more out there in terms of poking and prodding.

if he opposes something he sings it from the mountain tops. is a quiet guy. republican leaders see him as predictable and easy to figure out where he is going to go. sessions may have been more fun for us to cover. >> what is the first budget fight or battle? >> i think the first fight is going to be whether they use reconciliation tool as a way to go after obama care and save themselves from the heartburn of trying to impose their budget or whether they are going to say let's just do it. that would be a much bolder move. and much more challenging. paletta of the wall street journal, thank you both. we appreciate it.

>> this month is our 10th anniversary of this -- of the prime time program queue and day. we are featuring an on court -- encore presentation from each year. kenneth feinberg's interview on the september 11 compensation fund. from 2006, lonnie bunch on the importance of the african-american experience to u.s. history. robert novak on his 50 years of reporting in washington. 2008, higher education in america. from 2009, conservative commentator -- the 26 on2 through c-span. >> here is a look at the programs you will find christmas day. holiday festivities start at 10 a.m. eastern with the lighting of the national christmas tree. followed by the white house christmas decorations with first

lady michelle obama, and the lighting of the capitol christmas tree. celebrity activists talk about their caucus. at eight, former florida governor jed bush on the bill of rights and the founding fathers. on c-span two at 10 a.m. eastern, venture into the arm of good writing. 12:30 jill lepore explores the history of wonder woman. on american history tv on c-span3 at 8 a.m. eastern, the fall of the berlin wall with president george bush and bob dole, with speeches from presidents john kennedy and ronald reagan. at noon, fashion experts on first lady fashion choices and how they represented the to -- the styles of the time they lived.

that is this christmas day on the suspend networks. -- on the c-span networks. >> before heading to hawaii, president obama held a year and news conference to take record -- to take questions from reporters. this is 50 minutes. >> hello everybody, we have a full house today. let me say a little bit about this year. in last year's conference i said 2014 would be a year of action

and a breakthrough year for america. and it has been. yes there were crises we had to tackle around the world. many of them were unanticipated. we have more work to do to make our economy, our justice system, and our government work not just for the few but for the many. but there is no doubt that we can enter into the new year with renewed confidence that america's making significant strides where it counts. the steps that we took early on to rescue our economy and rebuild it on a new foundation helped make 2014, the strongest year for job growth since the 1990's. almost all the job growth that we've seen have been in

full-time positions. much of the recent pick-up in job growth has been in higher paying industries. in a hopeful sign for middle class families, wages are on the rise again. our investment in american manufacturing have helped fuel this best stretch of job growth also since the 1990's. america is thousand the number one producer of oil, the number one processor of natural gas. we're saving drivers about 70 cents a gallon at the pump over last christmas. and effectively today our rescue of the auto industry is officially over. we've now repaid taxpayers every dime and more of what my administration committed and the american automotive industry is on track for the first time since 2005. we've created about a half a million new jobs in the auto industry alone. about 10 million americans have gained health insurance this past year thanks to the affordable care act. enrollment is beginning to pick up during the open enrollment period. the uninsured rate had a near-record low since the law

passed. we've cut our deficits by about 2/3 since i took office, bringing them to below their 40-year average. meanwhile, around the world, america's leading. we're leading the coalition to degrade and ultimately destroy isil. a coalition that includes arab partners. we're leading the mission to check the russian immigration in ukraine. we're leading the global fight to fight ebola in west africa and we are preventing an outbreak from taking place here at home. we're leading efforts in climate change. we're writing a new chapter in our leadership here in the americas by turning a new page on our relationship with the

cuban people and in less than two weeks, after more than 13 years, our combat mission in afghanistan will be over. today more of our troops are home for the holidays than any time in over a decade. still, many of our men and women in uniform will spend christmas in harm's way and they should know that the country is united in support of you and grateful not only to you but also to your families. the six years since the crisis have demanded hard work and sacrifice on everybody's part. but as a country, we have every right to be proud of what we've accomplished. more jobs, more people insured, a growing economy, shrinking deficits, booming energy. take any metric that you want. america's resurgence is real.

we are better off. i've always said that recovering from the crisis of 2008 was our first order of business, and on that business, america's outperformed all of our other competitors. over the past four years we put more people back to work than all other advanced economies combined. we've now come to a point where we have the chance to reverse an even deeper problem, the decades-long erosion of middle class jobs and incomes and to make sure that the middle class is the engine that powers our prosperity for decades to come. to do that we're going to have to make some smart choices. we've got to make the right choice. we're going to have to invest in things that secure faster growth and higher paying jobs for more americans. i'm being absolutely sincere when i say i want to work with this new congress to get things done, to make those investments,

make sure the government's working better and smarter. we're going to disagree on some things, but there are going to be areas of agreement, and we've got to be able to make that happen, and that's going to involve compromise every once in a while. as we saw in this lame duck session we see that lame duck may be coming to the fore. i'm energized, i'm excited about the prospects for the next couple of years. i'm certainly not going to be stopping for a minute in the effort to make life better for ordinary americans. because thanks to their efforts, we really do have a new foundation that's been laid. we are better positioned than we have been in a very long time.

the future is ready to be written. we've set the stage for this american moment, and i'm going to spend every minute of my last two years making sure that we seize it. my presidency's entering the fourth quarter. interesting stuff happens in the fourth quarter and i'm looking forward to it. but going into the fourth quarter you usually get a time-out i'm now looking forward to a quiet time-out, christmas with my family. i want to wish everybody a merry christmas, a happy hanukkah, a happy new year. i hope that all of you get some time to spend with your families as well, because one thing that we share is that we're away too much from them. and now, josh has given me the who's-been-naughty and who's-been-nice list and i'm going to use it to take some questions. we're going to start with terri brown at politico. >> thank you, mr. president. north korea is the biggest topic

today. what does a professional response look like to the sony hack? and did sony make the right decision in pulling the movie? or does that set dangerous precedent when faced with this kind of situation? >> let me address the second question first. sony's a corporation. it suffered significant damage. there were threats against its employees. i am sympathetic to the concerns that they faced. having said all that, yes, i think they made a mistake. in this interconnected digital world, there are going to be

opportunities for hackers to engage in cyber assaults both in the private sector and the subsector. now, our first order of business is to make sure we do everything to harden sites and prevent those kinds of attacks from taking place. when i came into office, i said up a cyber security agency, team, to look at everything we could do at the government level to prevent these kinds of attacks. we've been coordinating with the private sector, but a lot needs to be done. we're not even close to where we need to be, and one of the things in the new year that i hope the congress is prepared to work with us on is strong cyber security laws that allow for information sharing across private sector platforms as well as the public sector, so that we are incorporating best practices and preventing these attacks

from happening in the first place. but even as we get better, the hackers are going to get better, too. some of them are going to be state actors, some of them are going to be non state actors. many of them are going to be sophisticated and many of them can do some damage. we cannot have a society in which some dictator some place can start imposing censorship here in the united states. because if somebody is able to intimidate folks out of releasing a satirical movie, imagine what they start doing when they see a documentary that they don't like or news reports that they don't like or even worse, imagine if producers and distributors and others start engaging in self censorship because they don't want to offense the sense abilities of those whose sense abilities

probably need to be offend. so that's not who we are. that's not what america's about. again, i'm sympathetic that sony as a private company was worried about liabilities and this and that and the other. i wish they'd spoken to me first. i would have told them, do not get into a pattern in which you're intimidated by these kinds of criminal attacks. imagine if instead of it being a cyber threat, somebody had broken into their offices and destroyed a bunch of computers

and stolen discs and -- is that what it takes for suddenly you to pull the plug on something? so we'll engage with not just the film industry but the news industry and the private sector around these issues. we already have. we will continue to do so. but i think all of us have to anticipate occasionally there are going to be breaches like this. they're going to be costly, they're going to be serious. we take them with the utmost seriousness. but we can't start charging our patterns of behavior any more than we can stop going to a football game because there might be the possibility of a terrorist attack, anymore than boston didn't run its marathon this year because of the

possibility that somebody might try to cause harm. so let's not get into that bay of doing business. >> [inaudible] responsive, would you consider taking some sort of symbolic step like watching the movie yourself or -- >> i've got a long list of movies i'm going to be watching. >> would this be one of them? >> i never release my full movie list. let's talk of the specifics of what we now know. the f.b.i. announced today -- and we can confirm -- that north korea engaged in this attack. it says something interesting about north korea that they decided to have the state mount an all-out assault on a movie studio because of a satirical movie starring seth rogan and james flacco. i love seth and i love james, but the notion that that was a threat to them, i think, gives

you some sense of the kind of regime we're talking about here. they caused a lot of damage and we will respond. we will respond proportionally and we'll respond in a place in time that we choose. it's not something that i will announce here today in a press conference. more broadly, though, this points to the need for us to work with the international community to start setting up some very clear rules of the road in terms of how the internet and cyber operates. right now it's sort of the wild west.

part of the problem is you've got weak states that can engage in these kinds of attacks. you've got non state actors that can do enormous damage. that's part of what makes this issue of cyber security so urgent. again, this is a part of the reason why it's going to be so important for congress to work with us and get a actual bill passed that allows for the kind of information sharing we need. because, you know, if we don't put in place the kind of architecture that can prevent these attacks from taking place, this is not just going to be affecting movies. this is going to be affecting our entire economy in ways that are extraordinarily significant. by the way, i hear you're moving to europe. where you going to be? >> brussels. >> brussels. >> i'm going to start a new adventure. >> congratulations. >> this is a new beginning. >> i think there's no doubt that what belgium needs is a version of politico. \[laughter]

>> the waffles are delicious. >> shell, you've been naughty, go ahead. >> thank you, mr. president. looking ahead to your work with the congress next year, you've mentioned an area of possible compromise, tax reform. so i am wondering, do you see a republican congress as presenting a better opportunity for actually getting tax reform next year? will you be putting out a new proposal? are you willing to consider both individual and corporate side of the tax ledger there? and also, are you still concerned about corporate inversion? >> i think an all democratic congress would have provided an even better opportunity for tax reform, but i think talking to

speaker boehner and leader mcconnell that they are serious about wanting to get some things done. the tax area is one area where we can get things done, and i think in the coming weeks leading up to the state of the union, there will be some conversations at the staff level about what principles each side are looking at. i can tell you broadly what i'd like to see. i'd like to see more simplicity in the system. i'd like to see more fairness in the system. with respect to the corporate tax reform issue, we know that there are companies that are

paying the full freight, 35%, higher than just about any other company on earth, if you're 35euing 35%. and -- 35%. and there are other companies that are paying zero because they've got better accountants or lawyers. that's not fair. there are companies that are parking money outside the country because of tax avoidance. we think it's important that everybody pays something if, in fact, they are effectively headquartered in the united states. in terms of corporate inversion, those are situations where companies really are headquartered here but on paper, switched their headquarters to see if they could avoid paying

their fair share of taxes. i think that needs to be fixed. so fairness, everybody paying their fair share, everybody taking their responsibility, i think is going to be very important. some of those principles, i've heard republicans say they share. how we do that, the devil's in the details. i'm going to make sure that we put forward some pretty specific proposals building on what we've already put forward. one other element of this that i think is important is -- and i've been on this hobby horse now for six years -- bless you -- we've got a loft from structure weave got to build if we're going to be competitive. infrastructure we have to build if we're going to be competitive. we are way behind. early on we indicated that there is a way of us potentially doing corporate tax reform, lowering rates, eliminating loopholes so everybody's paying their fair share and during that transition, also providing a mechanism where we can get some infrastructure built. i'd like to see us work on that issue as well. historically, infrastructure has not been a republican or democratic issue. so i'd like to see us return to

that. >> julie pace. >> what do you think dissidents or democracy advocates inside cuba could give the castro regime about -- when your -- you saw commitments of reform on myanmar. do you have any indication that north korea was acting in conjunction with another country, perhaps china? >> we've got no indications that north korea was acting with any other country. with respect to cuba, we are glad that the cuban government has released slightly over 50 dissidents, that they're going

to be allow the international committee of the red cross and the united states human rights agencies to monitor what is taking place. i share the concerns of dissidents there and human rights activists. this is still a regime that represses its people and as i said when i made the announcement, i don't anticipate overnight changes, but what i know deep in my bones is that if you've done the same thing for 50 years and nothing's changed, you should try something different if you want a different outcome. this gives us an opportunity for a different outcome, because suddenly cuba is open to the world in ways that it has not been before. it's open to americans traveling there in ways that it hasn't been before. it's open to church groups visiting their fellow believers inside cuba in ways they haven't

been before. it offers the prospect of telecommunications and the internet being more widely available in cuba in ways that it hasn't been before. and over time, that chips away at this hermetically sealed society. and i believe offers the best prospect then of leading to greater freedom, greater self-determination on the part of the cuban people. i think it will happen in fits and starts, but true engagement, we have a better chance of bringing about change than we would have otherwise. >> \[inaudible /[being at the end of your presidency? >> i think it would be unrealistic to map out exactly where cuba will be, but change is going to come to cuba. it has to. they've got an economy that doesn't work. they've been reliant for years first on subsidies from the

soviet union. then on subsidies from venezuela. those can't be sustained. the more the cuban people see what's possible, the more interested they are going to be in change. how societies change is country specific, culturally specific. it could happen fast. it could happen slower than i'd like, but i think this change of policy is going to advance that. leslie clark. >> thank you, sir. i have a number of questions for you as well. >> ok. >> appreciate that. >> do i have to write all these

down? the numbers sounded intimidated. >> quick as i can. >> ok. >> i want too see if you got any assurances from the cuban government that it would not revert to the famous habit of sabotaging the deal when we've made similar overtures to the government. >> what do you mean? >> when the administration made overtures, they shot down planes, they had a pattern of doing provocative -- >> ok. so just general provocative activities. >> provocative activities. i wanted to see what is your knowledge of whether fidel castro, did he have any role in the foxx? -- talks? when you talked to raul castro, did raul castro's name come up? how is he doing. from lifting the embargo, any of the changes you're doing, are you going to personally get involved in terms of stalking to them about efforts that they want to do to block money on a new embassy >> ok.

this is taking up a lot of time. >> all right. >> all right. so with respect to sabotage, i mean, my understanding of history, for example, the plane being shot down, it's not clear that that was the cuban it was a tragic circumstance ended up collapsing talked to had begun to take place. i have not seen a historical record that suggests that they the plane down to cifically in order is not president for the president of the united states and the pr