tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 28, 2016 12:00pm-2:01pm EST
prevention and treatment. i think what's clear is that we have to show results no matter what on lives saved and reduction in h.i.v. incidents. and obviously, what could be reasonably be expected in a short amount of time. with that, i think all of our panelists. i especially want to think -- who has been instrumental in getting this all together. and thank you to our panelists and their bosses and thank you to do, the audience. [applause]
>> if you missed any of this discussion on hiv and aids research, you will be able to watch it entirety on our website at c-span.org. looking now at the live programming still to come -- in half an hour we will have today's white house briefing. josh earnest is expected to answer questions. the passing on fidel castro, the shootings on ohio state campus university. eightspect is dead and are expected to be among the top topics discussed. we will have that live for you get-span when it does
underway. later today, a look at u.s. alliances and leadership on global stage hosted by the center for strategic and international studies. you will be able to see that live starting at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. later, an event on domestic security in the event of isis. at 6:30 p.m.ve eastern on c-span. congress is back this week after thanksgiving break. the senate apples in at 3:00 p.m. eastern. work is expected to begin today on delivering health care to rural areas. the u.s. house will we back for business tomorrow. house democrats will hold their leadership elections. nancy pelosi is likely to be thelenged by tim ryan to be new minority leader. follow the house on c-span and senate on c-span two. a live look now at the lobby of
trump tower. we have been here many times to show you the coming zend goings of the potential cabinet nominees in new york city. he will continue to make their way into the building to meet with the president-elect. david petronius is on the schedule for today. jennifer jacobs tweeting "nothing imminent today for additional cabinet staff announcements." vice president-elect mike pence concurred with that as he passed through the lobby at trump tower and briefly addressed reporters. here is what he had to say. good, good. it's going to be a busy week. >> how is the transition going?
>> and we will continue to check in at trump tower and you can watch the scene anytime today because we are streaming it live on our website at c-span.org. tonight on "the communicators." copyright will come with a requirement or framework for putting data into a depository where people can have access, where it can be searched on an individual item by item basis, but on a scale basis. because we run 2.5 million songs through and we will get more each day as we move towards an on-demand service. night on the issues facing congress and the music industry over digital music services, including copyright laws, ticket place -- ticket
price inflation. he has interviewed by a technology reporter for politico. ask they do buy tickets. is,they -- what they do they keep other fans out of the market. and what we're finding is that some fans really want to see a concert and they can match the buttons on their computer all day long but you cannot beat a bot. so they are not able to get tickets in their first run at the list price. so there are left only with the opportunity of buying the tickets on the secondary market after tickets have been passed on to promoters who raise prices. >> watch "the communicators" tonight on c-span two. where history unfolds daily. in 1970 nine, c-span was created
as a public service by america's public television companies and is brought to you today by your satellite or cable provider. a white house briefing coming up at 12:30 eastern. right now, a look at the presidential transfer of power as donald trump prepares to take the oval office in 52 days. this is from this morning's washington journal. back at our desk here to talk about presidential transitions of power from his perspective with his work at the service.ip for public and what is the partnership for public service? a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization to make our government more effective. one of the things that we do is try to make the presidential transition process smoother and more effective. what we have found is that it all begins at the beginning. government starts poorly there are consequences to the
rest of the administration. we are focused on making this the best transition ever. host: through your work with the center for presidential transition, you have been calling for both candidates, during the election, to start preparing for this transition as far back as january of last year. there was a column in the washington post about it. trumpll is donald prepared for this transition? i think we saw the very best transition season, pre-election, that there has ever been. so both major candidates, hillary clinton and donald trump, had aggressive pre-election transition efforts which started before the conventions and ramped up after the conventions. we have never seen that, historically, where both candidates have had such a positive and fruitful investment in transition planning that early on. and i think trump did the right thing.
chris christie put together a great operation. but now they are in the game time mode and they have to move with great dispatch because there is a lot to be done. host: give us a sense of how many decisions need to be made? what goes into the transition process? guest: it is impossible to overstate the complexity of this task. a $4 trillion organization with millions of people when it comes to military. 4000 political appointees, a love and hundred of them have to be vetted and confirmed. something that no other country or democracy on the planet has, that number of political appointments to come in. so it is a phenomenally complicated task. issues,with budgeting you not only have a continuing resolution but you also have a budget that you will be expected to present to congress one month after the inauguration. the list goes on and on of things that you know you need to
do. the reality is that there are a bunch of things you cannot anticipate, the asteroids that you have to be ready for. host: are you working with trump in this process? we have no authority. we are a nonprofit organization. but we are assisting in every way we can. everything from information about what is required for these jobs -- an interesting note with the 4000 political appointments, there are no available political job descriptions. so the government puts out a book which describes the titles but nothing about what the requirements are for doing the jobs well. so we are in the process of producing those and providing them to the trump transition effort but also to the senate and others who are interested, so they have some sense about what the core requirements are. these are to be job interviews. host: we are talking with max stier. if you have questions about the
process, the phone number for democrats is (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. .ndependence, (202) 748-8002 you can begin calling it now. i want to talk to you about the beginning of the turnover we have seen at this process and whether that is normal? the atlantic magazine had this to say about the early days of the trump transition -- from the outside it looked like a mess. a new president elect replace the man who had been running his transition efforts, with the soon to be vice president. other departures quickly followed in what was described as a poor job people close to chris christie. is this normal? guest: there is no normal and the bar is pretty low, given the fact that no president has done this the way it needs to be done today. and i should have started with this point. transition is not only about
taking over a complex organization but transition is the point of maximum vulnerability for our nation. so the pre-election planning that's the trump team did was strong. it creates a new issue, you have to merge the pre-election transition operations with the campaign transitions. we are still in the relative early days. the trump transition effort can recoup the last time but there is a time to be done and it isn't just naming the people or just the top people. it is about getting teams in place and making sure they are cleared with respect to ethics issues and background checks. you have to bring them to the senate for the 1100 confirmed positions. on the outcome, they should have their team in the field on the real-time. that means the top 100 positions
in place by day one. host: if we are looking for mileposts to get to, what needs to happen early december? by the end of the year? what will you be looking for to see if things are on track? clearly, you need to make sure you are putting the top people in place and are moving with dispatch to see that happen. but you have to see that activity occurring not just at the very top but further down into the organization. deputy secretaries, general counsel -- host: are we seeing that yet? guest: not yet but it is still pretty early. the tendency is for folks to compare what prior president elect have done. if you get down to what we think needs to happen, we do need to see a more accelerated process. and one of the key questions will be -- can they scale effectively? they will not be able to run everyone through the process we
have seen so far, visiting with trump, in order to get the numbers that they need ultimately. visitso 4000 different would have to take place. guest: and not all have to take place during the transition process but literally, hundreds of folks. and it ought to be about putting teams together. one of the challenges in the past is that people have picked individuals at the top and have not been looking downfield at what the requirements are for later on. did a lot of good planning and one of the things we need to see is -- are they using that planning to achieve their goals? host: what is an example of the good planning? guest: that they put together landing team operations. when i say landing teams, that is a group of people who enter into agencies and do due diligence. understanding what are the
issues inside an agency. they have to be thinking about what the campaign promises are and how to implement them. and there are a lunch of agencies that have not seen landing teams arrive. host: presidential transitions with max stier, taking your calls. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. .ndependent, (202) 748-8002 james is a democrat, go ahead. caller: i was just wondering how he learned to be bipartisan and if he would be just as willing to work with a clinton administration, if the need should arise? guest: i love the question, james. i learned through experience. like many people in washington, i have been in the partisan world and boy, do i preferred the nonpartisan world.
my view with what we do at the partnership is -- president-elect trump is the pilot of our airplane. we all have to hope he succeeds as the pilot. we all should have a common interest in making sure our country succeeds and therefore making sure our government is as effective as possible. the answer to your question is absolutely. i would be happy to help whoever was the president-elect. in fact, we have been helping both sides. one point we were helping five different campaigns to make sure that they would be ready, nods, in fact, they got the from their party and were selected by the american people. host: who were the five? cruz, in april we had ted donald trump, bernie sanders, hillary clinton and folks from the romney readiness project that we helped years ago and we had folks out of the obama white house altogether, which comes
back to the question -- all of them together for 1.5 days, focus on what needed to happen to make sure our next president was ready to govern. and everyone laid their swords down at the door. and there was a common understanding among that group interest.had a common and this is one of the phenomenal things about america. you fight hard during the election, but ultimately, we all have an interest in an effective functioning government. and that is what we are committed to. host: let's go to say in maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. a week ago, there was talk on that as trump was picking his advisers and staff and thinking about his team, a lot of lobbyists had infiltrated that process. which goes against his promise. so i'm wondering if your guest has any thoughts on that? an update on how that discussion
is evolving in the transition? guest: sure. the "drain the swamp" metaphor is a powerful one. there are things that should be done to make sure that our government is responsive to the people and not simply to special interests. and that is an area where i think we should see more activity from the trump administration. prior transition efforts have all had ethics commitments. recent presidents have done something early on in their administration when they have laid down markers about what they expect from their political appointments. easy target. an and an appropriate one to make sure that people who are serving in our government or helping to head up our government are motivated for the right reasons.
that it isn't enough, in and of itself. one of the things we need to rules andon is the regulations that the trump administration will put in place to guarantee that we have -- well, guarantee is too strong of a word, but to make sure we have in place a more ethical government. one way we do that in our country is by making sure we service andr civil going back 100 years ago, we had a president assassinated by a would-be caucus seeker. it makes no sense that we have 4000 political appointees. spoils vestige of the system. and one way we could improve the system is to reduce the number .f political appointments the president should be able to run the government according to the policies that the president has been elected on but you don't need 4000 appointments to be able to do that. strong career
civil service and ours has great people in it. but the system needs to be reformed in big ways. i wonder if you have thoughts about donald trump's proposed hiring freeze to reduce the federal workforce. retirements -- is that something that is effective? would that create an effective government? guest: not at all. the motivation is a good one. we should change our system. it is a government that has done wonders for the american people but it isn't built for today or tomorrow's world. so changes absolutely need to take lace but a hiring freeze is not one of those. it has been tried before. there was an accountability isice and what was sound that it actually cost the government more money. here is the interesting thing. you don't freeze in place something that isn't right for today or tomorrow. one you think about i.t.,
of the areas across government that needs to be reformed and has spent almost 80% of that on maintenance and look at the workforce. more people over the age of 65 and under the age of 30 in federal government. do we want to freeze that in place? what we really need to do is refresh the workforce and get the right talent in. it is appropriate to reduce the cost of government but freezing the workforce is in the way to do that. and fact, it will cost you more at the end of the day. so a good idea but the wrong way to get there. host: lots of discussion about the top of the government workforce. the appointments and cabinets. here is the lead story in the talkingeet journal -- about the emerging battle over secretary of state. trump keyy over hires."
mitt romney emerged as the early favorite for the post, despite his criticism for the nominee during the primaries. it escalated sunday when kellyanne conway, a top trump adviser, said that a breathtaking number of people would feel betrayed if he got the cabinet post after he had opposed donald trump so publicly. made andhese picks are when he finally settled on who will be in these positions, it to you have any suggestions or strategies to make the as easy androcess not drawn out as possible? guest: a terrific question. there is a tendency for everyone to focus on picking their people and they don't focus on what happens next. an example of that is, in my view, who you pick and how you prepare your folks. you need to pick and you need to
pick well-qualified people. positionr about descriptions is essential here. that then you need to make sure you get them through the process of effectively. one area that is critical here is understanding the process. a president does not have the same conflict of ethics rules apply to them as anyone else but anyone else does. so secretary state or anyone else, you have to be able to clear the ethics reviews. you have to go through a background check with the fbi. so making sure you have lined all that work up effectively and have had good communication with the committee is vital to getting these people into place quickly. committees7 senate that actually have jurisdiction over a nominee. so they all have their own individual processes that need to be working with both the majority and minority staff there. and then, you have to think
about what happens to those folks when they arrive. needosition is that they to arrive prepared to run the government effectively. you can get great qualified people from the outside but once they arrive, they have to apply those skills to the government environment. over again,ver and great people come in and not understand the differences amount -- differences around the hiring process. thathey make mistakes could be avoided. so one of the things we have done is to create a curriculum for the new political appointees so they can avoid those mistakes and start right. host: a follow-up on the mitt romney story. this coming out during our two sources at- the top of the trump transition confirmed to msnbc that they spoke to the president-elect today and that trump is furious at conway's comments, suggesting he betrayed
his supporters by considering romney for that position. if you want to talk transitions with max stier, the phone numbers are democrats, (202) 748-8000. .epublicans, (202) 748-8001 independent, (202) 748-8002. or send us a tweet. jean is concerned about the -- the double standard will be breathtaking but not surprising is what she says. any suggestions from the partnership to the incoming trump administration on how to deal with the issue of his business interests? guest: it is obviously a very challenging one and the law allows for a lot of latitude for the president but the politics are not so clear. so i think the basic point i would make is that campaigning and governments are very different. veryg the pivot is
challenging, for any presidential candidate and i think that for trump, making sure that he is investing in the necessary expertise to be able to understand that change is absolutely vital. weekend, don mcgann was named as the white house counsel. that is an incredibly important position and he will need to rely on him in lots of ways. and it will be really important for him to bring people with him who actually understand the federal government. the key advice is that if you run as an outsider, you are an outsider. you are not familiar with the institution you are trying to change. if you don't have good advisors, you will not be able to change it the way you want. so it is really important to understand that business principles ought to be applied in federal government. but the government can't be run
like a business. and that business -- that difference is essential. something the president elect needs to get his arms around. host: bloomberg reporting over the weekend that -- will be be point person overseeing any trump involvement in the recount effort that is now underway in wisconsin. so a lot for him to handle in these early days. back to the phones, ray is in louisiana, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. thought donald trump was going to try to unite the country once he got elected. but from what i'm seeing -- i'm an old man. the bigot that he is appointing and his and some of the other appointees he is thinking about, he is dividing this country more than i've ever seen in my lifetime. we are headed for destruction. i feel sorry for the minorities in america. thatonald trump will learn
mitch mcconnell -- the big players in the republican party. thank you. you have a beautiful day. guest: so, i wouldthank you. say that the last point is an important one. you have someone who is elected president in the united states and at the end of the day, we have a country with a federal government with three branches congress is an energy to be reckoned with. one of the critical jobs of the transition team is to get the team on the field in real time and also to develop effective relationships with critical stakeholders. one of those is congress. out of the gate, you have to deal with the senate to get your people through the confirmation process which could be a challenge. again, it has taken prior administrations over a year in order to get there full team or even a core team in place. on average, more than two
months. so developing that good relationship with congress is essential. to it is also important understand that you are job is not just dealing with congress. and actually running the federal government is a large entity and it is very important. in the meantime, there will be a lot of obama administration appointees who will likely stick around for some time? is, beforeanswer thousand political appointees for the serve president. they should have all submitted resignations by now or soon. letters of resignation. the norm is that those people essentially leave and a lot of left already. they left before the election because they didn't know what they would wind up doing. so they found other jobs. so we see a lot of folks leaving the government.
they will essentially all be gone by the inauguration. and there will be people in positions who will be taking place of the leadership. they are wonderful people and they are very capable. and acting individual is going to be much more conservative about what they are willing to do. so it isn't as if the government be will be without leadership but they won't have people in place to think this is their job for any extended amount of time and that is important. so this is why it is critical ist president-elect trump able to get his team in place quickly. he needs to make sure he has the full-time leadership in place as fast as possible. host: in illinois, larry and on the line for republicans. caller: earlier you mentioned you wouldn't recommend freezing the headcount but if you wanted to refresh the headcount or in some cases, reduce the headcount, what would your recommendations be? guest: starting a something
which is unusual. there are 4000 political appointments. the first place i would start would be reducing the headcount in that number. and it causesary a time of problems. not only trying to fill the jobs but those people wind up clogging up the system. so the department of education has the highest percentage of political appointments out of any cabinet agency per capita. and it isn't because they are needed but in the past, some president dumped a bunch of political appointees there and parks in there. and every prior administration simply replicated that. so i would start by just not filling those 4000 jobs, which they don't have to do. and i would actually look not just at in the headcount's actually look at particular job types. so like the rest of the world, needsvernment administrative and ergo folks and you have seen changes in a lot of private sector industries.
there are places where you could easily restructure the work and the jobs to make it a much more effective environment. would be happyce with that. the key issue is not just to look at federal workers as -- we actually have the same number of federal workers today as they did in the kennedy administration in absolute terms . so the key is to look at the money. look at the budget. what we've seen is that we see growth in federal budgets for contractors and we need to look at the whole thing. we need to be thinking about what our priorities are and where do we want to make the investments and get a return on the investments and how do we make the government run more efficiently? technology or better talent in certain areas or just hav ing better processes. looking at the enterprise. to kentucky where
bob is waiting period go ahead. meler: thank you for letting talk. i just want to make a comment on trump getting mad at conway on account of her telling the truth about mitt romney -- well, i believe that. once a turncoat, always a turncoat. then trump can't see that he isn't the man i voted for. from bob to rob in california. go ahead. caller: i have two points. i would like to see the united states debt clock on your screen. i wish you give me a couple of minutes. host: i'm listening as i pull up the debt clock now. caller: $20 trillion in debt.
how can you defend how politicians run our government when we are $20 trillion in debt? we had $24 trillion it will be unsustainable. we voted for businessman to come up there and clean the waste out we started running it by only spending what comes in or less, that is i you save money. debt, theyion in should put that in the united states senate and congress next to the flag and "in god we trust " and show that clock every day they make a law. they need to stop all the all thet programs and little programs except for the defense of this country and the agriculture and a couple of different divisions and get rid of all the waste. and another thing. i'm so tired of them saying that
donald trump not for every american. illegalsaid was immigrants that have come into this country are tearing it down. he wasn't against anybody and i'm so tired of the twist on the media. people call in and say he is against this nationality or that nationality. but he said it illegal aliens. lot there. and it is important to come back to the first issue you raised. to take apart a little bit of what you said. because no argument with you about whether political leaders have done a good job. but i think it is important to recognize that we have a career civil service that is independent of the political. and i think a lot of times the clinical folks give them a bad name. they are people who are in their job and you have been chosen on a merit basis and their focus is on trying to answer the requirements of their political leadership and providing the
best management of the government that they can. but if they don't have good leaders they would succeed in doing what they need to do. government ise the leadership failing the workforce and fundamentally failing the american people. so we need to not spend more than we actually have? one way you can do that is to make sure that we have a more effective government. we would have a more effective government if congress was a better steward of the branch. that means they actually gave budgets on time and they had capital budgets and you weren't only trying to spend over a single year, they would look at the whole enterprise of government. coming back to the i.t. issue which is fundamental, think about it, $90 million is spent? we have systems in our government that are over 50 years old and it makes no sense at all. we were not making the investments that would save us a time of money. host: how much money -- how much money is being spent of the $90 billion to maintain the old
systems as opposed to -- 80%.: a crazy number. this is an example of an implication of a government that is lovely not keeping up with the world around it. so this would be an area that i would highly recommend for the trump team to say look, we have an opportunity to do what the caller suggested. let's have a broad strategy about how we modernize the info structure of our government and we make investments that will save a lot of money downstream, not to supporting a 50-year-old system. and they need congress to go along with that. that is the kind of work that would be hugely impactful. the other thing i would add is that president obama did do good things in this area. really important that the new administration coming and doesn't just throw out everything that the prior administration did but picks and chooses and finds the things that are good to carry forward.
one area would be the talent, the tech talent that has been brought in on a short-term basis, that is something that should be carried forward. host: doug is a republican, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. a quick comment and a quick question. my comment is -- donald trump did do a good start in draining the swamp because he retired the clinton, obama and bush's. my question is, you said when new people come in, you have a curriculum. we are glad to have new people who may be are not career politicians but you said you have a curriculum that will get them trained or assimilated into the government, but doesn't that take away the new blood from coming in and having their own ideas of how to change and do things? that is my question. what do you mean by -- why do they have to be trained to work in government?
how does that help our change? guest: a great question and i think it is important that when people are brought in with different perspectives that the perspective actually is learned from. as i said earlier, i don't think you can change a system in an effective way if you don't understand it. the reason why we have our curriculum is not to change an outsider perspective to give them the understanding of the system that will allow them to successfully change government. an example would be the federal budget process. if you don't understand the federal budget process, you don't understand that you have three budget process is going on at the same time, you cannot identify resources to align against your priorities and make sure that you have the right money to get stuff done in real time. or for the hiring process which is deeply broken. if you don't understand it and you try to bring in people in a way that is inconsistent with the laws of the land then you get yourself in big trouble. so the key here is not to try to
make outsiders washingtonians -- i don't love that term because 85% of the federal workforce in the house idc, but it is to make sure that they have an understanding of the united sures government to make they can operate effectively with the perspective they are bringing inside the new environment. and it is true not just in the u.s. government that anywhere else. the military or another company -- you would have to learn that culture and what the rules are inside their in order to make the changes that you want. and if you don't, you get yourself in big trouble and it happens way too often. maryland, gofrom ahead. thank you for taking my call. i really appreciate it. --concern is that when you transition team of donald trump, we have discovered that we have -- [indiscernible]
the transition team reach out to other parties. like the democrats? i know we have people out there who could also help. because this is our country. we all need to work together. is there any way that people can reach out to those who have been in the system who could help them with the transition? guest: i think the caller is right. thannance is different campaigning and you hope that you see a pull towards a broader side of talent. sake,think in fairness the process is grueling. so when president-elect obama hundredthere were three thousand resumes submitted. i saw one number and i don't have any other data saying that trump had received 50,000 resumes but the incoming is extraordinary.
and when you think about the united states government being a very large entity that has a lot of resources, transition doesn't. so you have all the interest groups pouring into a very small team., their transition which makes this a very difficult process for them. so to some degree, being able to communicate as effectively as possible to the broader country is an important component of the transition activity. them, itl fairness to is an extraordinarily difficult task. host: is there one senior cabinet position that is usually reserved for a member of the other party? is there some place where that reaching out usually occurs? i remember ray lahood being appointed transportation -- is one innsportation recent times were you have seen an individual of the opposite party selected for that spot. theously, obama kept on secretary at the dod but it is
entirely the prerogative of the president-elect. what they want to do and how they want to communicate. important thing to recognize is that governance is different and we do have an interest in making sure whatever your party affiliation, that this president is able to succeed at running our government to provide the services that we all want and need. and part of that is the communication and outreach and also, a lot of this is, how do you make sure you have the best talent throughout the political point is that are made. next, lord jim, virginia. a democrat. go ahead. on the part of immigrants. the reason why we have so many here is because of big business. they go and they bring these people here. and a lot of the jobs that they do like picking grapes or wine orfruit in florida
california and also construction companies and maintenance companies, they go to mexico and actually, i heard one of my friends say they go over there to recruit people to come here. host: this is a topic we have talked about on "the washington journal." do you have a question about the transition? caller: i'm looking at that too. and i was listening this morning on cnn that them saying because of mitt romney and all the stuff he said about the and who speaks on his behalf that they won't consider him but i think they should consider him. because i'm not that he could be secretary of state. ambassador if you want to jump in? -- i'm not sure if you want to jump in? guest: i think what is interesting is to see this
process play out in a public fashion. and i do think coming back to the broader process that anyone interested in presidential transition should go to our website. of material there. we have position descriptions so there may be an argument about whether it should be rudy giuliani or mitt romney but what does the job do? what is required to make a successful person run the organization and they can actually see the positions on our website. appreciate that. washington, d.c., a democrat. go ahead. caller: a quick question. asing the obama transition, well, each president basically had a different method. question with donald trump is, because i think he lacks so much government experience, and i know he is
positioning himself with quite a "draininggtonians and the swamp" is probably a myth at this point because you do me the infrastructure. the i also find that appointee already haven't really been in washington. i know nikki haley, the governor. the equity -- the education secretary, a lot of them have in their past. as well as jeff sessions. helen that affect the confirmation because not all those will go through senate confirmation. and also the lack of experience? i mean he has to have some basic knowledge and if someone around him is not really going to i'm kind of, concerned about the fact that donald trump really came in with their a little knowledge and he is staffing himself with
who couldho potentially be effective but however, they also -- nikki haley doesn't have u.n. os comesce and dav from -- host: we got your point. guest: this is a critical notion. we have had the election and there has been a strong interest in seeing the outsider voice. a change to our government. again, part of the democratic process. but to be successful, the caller is right. you have to have people who are experienced and you understand the system. a from mm and i would make is that i don't see a conflict in having people who are familiar with the system to provide the expertise in the notion of "draining the swamp." plenty of people with expertise are interested in making the government more effective. for think the question
trump is, can he identify and bring into his circle not just one but a good mixture of folks from the outside? and some who have substantial knowledge of the inside and understanding what the inside knowledge needs to be about? is prettyile congress well represented, it isn't just about congress. the executive branch is a different organization and knowing how to run that effectively is vital and the caller made one last point i would highlight is that if you are also picking folks who have experience from eight years ago, the government has changed and the world has changed and we need to refresh the understanding. relying on the career workforce is one way to do that. a tweet you may appreciate -- blaming the civil state service personnel is like laming the cook for the menu. [laughter] host: julie, go ahead. caller: he seems to be very
knowledgeable. withoutestion is -- people who have worked in the how thent, does he know other countries have run? words, could another hibbler come in here and bring in all of his staff and all of the people that he wants words,r and have congress and the supreme court and everything be behind him? could we be taken over by ller again? a question on checks and balances. guest: we do have a system that has survived a lot of challenges over the years. some people complain about the difficulty of getting stuff done . we have a unique system when you think about the global environment. so i would say we have a system that is highly resilient, at the end of the day. in two another election
years and in another two years, another one. and we have both the congress and the courts. and we have folks in the executive branch. so it is a system that has worked really well. but we do need change in our government. system the civil service , that is increasingly important. it was designed in 1949. the world has changed a lot and we need to see it updated. we need to provide a market-based system for paying civil servants. the system we have now is not well connected to the market. there are a lot of changes that need to happen and hopefully we will see that with the trump administration. host: i wonder if the trump administration has taken a stance on term limits for congress? any word on the effort to push term limits? guest: that word is a little bit
outside where we have taken an opinion. political leadership you see in the executive branch -- there are four ways where congress is supposed to manage the executive branch. budgets is something else i brought up. they do the underlying laws and they do the oversight. in all four areas, there are ways they can better manage federal government. and my hope is, we could see the new congress take a more -- for the american people to have more oversight. host: bill from new mexico, go ahead. caller: on the history channel there is a documentary about the new modern plan. the leaders of the modern plan stated in the documentary that they would turn in their hoods for ties and suits. the entire level
of the government. now,this transition steady i see it as a complete transition for the claklan. i will get my answer off the phone. with thery quickly, 1100 senate confirmations, there is actually a confirmation process and a senate hearing and background checks. anyone who has a security clearance will have a background check as well. in the career civil service it is all based on merit. so there are real checks and balances to make sure that well-qualified people are selected for these positions. and at the end of the day, there are elections that occur every 2-4 years. stier.ax guest: thank you so much. you have been looking at a
live picture from the white house briefing room where we expect the spokesman josh earnest to appear soon to take questions. we will have live coverage of that when it begins here on c-span. it should be just a couple of moments when we will have it here. while we wait, we bring you a between the former nato secretary general and the future of the nato alliance. >> the future of the nato. is thefogh rasmussen
former nato secretary general. before, you said you feared for and therity of europe west if donald trump were elected. you still feel that way now? guest: my statement was based on what he said during the election campaign. was ae specific statement namely,ar concern -- that he raised doubts about the american commitment to actively defending our allies. well, that was on the campaign trail. soon he will be inaugurated as president. i hope he understands that as president, he cannot raise such data. because it will undermine nato. what have his appointments and picks for the security posts meant to you? what signal are you seeing in his national security advisor and mike pompeo as cia director?
mathis as defense secretary? well, i think he has picked -- and on the rumors about who he might pick as secretary of defense and maybe also secretary of state -- they are promising. we know these people. we know they are reasonable people. be i think it could considered a reassurance to our allies. under the current circumstances, is very important. is the proper role for the united states when it comes to nato? leadership. and that is a general statement from my side. booktly, i published a called "the will to lead." ifre my main point is that the united states retreats from the world, or even if the united
states is perceived to retreat, you will leave behind a security vacuum. and that vacuum will be filled by the bad guys. and that is actually what we have seen. nato, we also need american leadership and we need americans to leave nato. get outat does america of the commitment that it gives to nato? guest: you got a lot. defense fieldst you have ever done. because you share costs with other countries. and while i fully agree with president-elect trump that europeans should pay much more for our duty, it is the fact actuallyeuropeans have contributed a lot. for instance, in afghanistan. and also in other places in the
world. andwe have deployed troops we have helped the united states. low cost, youive get a lot of defense which is good value for money. host: does nato need to evolve? guest: absolutely. you have just seen how nato has responded to the russian aggression in eastern europe. the russianafter attacks on ukraine, nato decided to reinforce a territorial defense by employing more troops -- personally, i think nato role in the middle east, and that is an area where i believe trump could use nato much more. host: we are talking with anders fogh rasmussen. he is also the author of a new
book, "the will to lead." we will be talking about nato for the last half hour and he will be taking your comments. phone numbers, democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 outside the united states, we would love to bring you into the conversation. (202) 748-8003. up first.ou are caller: good morning. i would like to make a statement on the guy before. of hearing trumpet be compared to hiller. cast by cast -- obama by -- obama bypassed all kinds of rules. host: i think it was a caller who made that can there is an but not our guest.
but go ahead with your comment on nato. about the same opinion i have with united nations. the united states supplies most of the troops and almost all of the money and all we get is a big bill and a lot of problems. let everyone in their pay the do andount as what we put is the same number as troops is what we do and let them that, themselves like instead of the united states having to be the police force and all ofand asia the middle east and everything else. i'm tired of the united states having to do all of this stuff on our nickel. i understand very well your question. as i indicated, i fully agree that the europeans could and should pay more.
and actually, we decided to years ago at the nato summit that within the next decade, all nato allies will reach the 2% benchmark, which is that they will invest at least 2% if -- it is only five out of 28 that do that right now. we know in 2016 a lot of nato countries in the vast in much -- invest much more in defense then 2015. president putin's aggressive behavior was convinced they shouldn't pay more. i do not agree with you and you u.s. should have let other things themselves. say directly whether
you like it or not, i think the u.s. should be the world's policeman. it requires a police man to restore into international law the u.s. is the only power with a global rate. exceptional -- also special responsibility. it is in the u.s. self-interest act julie to be the world's policeman. if you do not go overseas and strike your enemies they are they will hit you in the u.s.. self-interestur to demonstrate that leadership.
milwaukee is next, brandon, a republican. guest mentioned the buildup of nato forces. extensive for gaming analysis and simulations shows russia in a seek the baltic state matter of hours. nato in regards to this whole immigration crisis in peoplef keeping the bad from fleeing into europe? latter, we have hedging procedures in europe. obviously we can't give a 100% guarantee.
i'm pretty sure we can do what peoples to prevent those from entering europe. >> what are some examples of that? thatuch will it cost to do ? >> i don't know the cost. >> a massive new investment? >> now we are speaking about europe. of course it would be an investment. i do believe this is an area where we need more. i would suggest we hand over the external border control to the european union. cannot involvewe the free movement in europe if you do not trust the external border controls.
i would hand it over to the a -- to the european union. even similar to the system you have in the u.s., you need to learn from that. >>'s first question was about russia and his abilities in the baltic state. if they make it a concerted effort to take over that territory, how can we stop that? >> this was the reason why we plan. an action that is a spearhead force, a very rapid reaction force that can be actuated within three days. and when it has been deployed it message --lowed by a
we have done what is necessary here now. i agree it is a situation that should be closely monitored. i think we need to take further if the russians continue their aggressive behavior. i believe time has come to consider the establishment of a permanent basis. eventually that is the only way to prevent a certain attack. host: wanda is in california. caller: i would like to say what good is nato when nato can't even protect europe, which has lost its will to exist. they don't even acknowledge the fact there is a self invasion happening in europe right now.
what good is nato anyhow? >> i do believe nato is and will remain the bedrock of security as well as the u.s.. this is why many european countries have already joined nato. -- the we massively european countries no that they are better defended within nato than outside nato. i don't think it is correct to state that europe has lost its will to exist.
on the contrary you still have -- if you ask ukrainians and georgians, they will very much joined nato. maybe once in the future. i think the fact we have , countries are queuing up to become members of nato and are a testament to the fact that the europeans know how important it is. >> special line, if you are -- is the number to call.
independents, 748 8002. how does one become secretary-general of nato? >> that's a good question. i chose as prime minister of denmark for eight years, before i was selected as general of whethert i didn't know it would be possible. one nation was stronger to my election of nato. maybe some of you recall in 2006 we had the cartoon crisis in denmark.
they had published some drawings . muslims -- we extend a lot of violence in the arab springs. that's what the turks publicly loot -- publicly used. eventually they accepted. host: did it have to be unanimous? >> yes. that is another important decision of nato. >> good afternoon, everybody. pleasanthad a thanksgiving holiday with your families. did not have any comments to the top swing. >> i want to ask how does the administration view fidel
impacts passing on the of normalize asian of relationships between the u.s. and cuba. josh: i wouldn't expect any impact on the kind of progress we are committed to making on our end, beginning to normalize relations with cuba. when president obama made an announcement almost two years ago, this was rooted in the president's conclusion that a policy of isolation that the united states had pursued for more than five decades had failed to bring about the improved human rights climate that every american would like to see in cuba. ther five decades of trying
same policy of isolation, without seeing many results, the president thought it was time to try something different. what we have seen his greater cuba and moneyt to family members. it also enhances the ability of the united states government to maintain an embassy where u.s. officials can effectively engage with government officials. those are all benefits that are enjoyed by americans. they also facilitate the ties that we believe will be more
effective. after five decades of not seeing any results the president said it was time to see something different. we haven't seen all of the results we would like to see. it continues to be strongly supported by an overwhelming when they arebans asked about their opinion of this change in our policy. it is something very warmly welcomed by the cuban people. >> what about on their end with his passing? do you anticipate they would be more receptive to making some of
the changes the u.s. is calling for as far as opening up the private sector? >> time will tell. obviously we welcome a hastening of the times of changes -- of the kinds of changes we would like to see. counterparty cuban speak to any plans. >> how does the presidency -- how will history be viewed in the president's mind? think he is obviously a towering figure who had a profound impact on the history of not just his country but the western hemisphere. there certainly is no
whitewashing. the kinds of activities that he ordered and that his government presided over goes against the country,es that this that our country has long defended. i think the question for the president is in terms of making policy, are we going to be rooted in that or are we going to look to the future. it doesn't mean we can let the past interfere with their ability to make progress. i think some of the changes is that progress is possible. that has been the focus of the policy direction over
the last several years. there certainly will be ample opportunity for historians to take stock. and what it has meant for the people in his country. >> would you comment on president-elect's claims of voter fraud. any truth whatsoever to what he is saying? kevin, i would defer to the president is elected's team for commentary on his tweets. is anink what i can say objective fact, there has been no evidence produced to substantiate a claim like that.
but for a reaction and explanation i would refer you to the president elect. >> a little more on cuba, can you tell us anything about what in an officiale delegation going to castro's funeral? if there is a delegation we will announce that publicly in the same way we have other official delegations. >> you mentioned how you became whitewashed -- how you came to whitewash some of castro's actions. some lawmakers did criticize the president's statement but did not directly mention human rights abuses. in the statement, can you kind
of talk about the response to that and why was that decision made may not more directly? >> those critics of the statement are also critics of and have been scrambling to try to justify their loyalty to an obviously failed policy of isolation that didn't bring about any results for the cuban people or the americans. i think the present statement thanks for itself. it makes clear the president's desire to look toward the future. look out for the interest of the american people. that is what he is focused on.
to issue some sort of blistering statement and engage in some kind of mutual recrimination that are tied to the past, it doesn't advance freedom or democracy. it doesn't expand economic opportunity or cultural opportunities for the american people. doesn't further remove the cuban issue as an impediment in our relationship throughout the rest -- throughout the western hemisphere. the president made the observation that when he was in them -- in latin america last , the strength and health of -- they are asp strong as they have ever been.
to reach out to engage countries in the hemisphere. tribunal -- also attribute will to the fact -- attributable to the fact that cuba -- itstates and actually was an irritant between the united states and other countries in the western hemisphere. the consequence of that was there wasn't as much of a about the human rights conditions in cuba. there was an extensive discussion about the isolation policy. there has been much more scrutiny. way the cuban government treats the cuban people. it has allowed the united states to marshall international
opinion. in a way that has increased pressure on the cuban government. think this was on all vivid leader where the cuban faced a direct probing question about the treatment of citizens in cuba. i think this is all part of a strategy that is strongly ,upported by the cuban people yielded importance for the american people. i know many of the president's critics like to suggest somehow the united states has made a bunch of concessions to the cuban government.
members who are living in cuba, it is not a concession. a u.s. id contractor that was detained in cuba. open not a concession to an embassy in cuba. it makes it easier for americans to visit cuba. it allows american cruise operators to stop in cuba. it is not a concession to allow american hotel operators to find licensing agreements with resorts in cuba. a concession to give american cultural interests the opportunity to do more business. i think it is difficult for critics of this policy to make any sort of coherent andence-based argument
somehow the united states has been disadvantaged by this policy. those are all benefits. moving forward only stance to enhance the benefits for the cuban and american people. >> there was an attack on ohio state this morning. >> the president was briefed by his top homeland security adviser. the president has to be updated on the investigation. local law enforcement officials have indicated that the in columbus is no longer active, that the site was secured. sustained local authorities.
deferring to local law enforcement to disclose information about what occurred there. there is still a lot of information to review and collect. obviously this is a difficult situation and our thoughts and prayers go out to them. >> he talked previously about continuing to stay in touch with the administration. the official offers occasional advice and i wonder if that continues to be true. that may be offers criticism. >> i have acknowledged there are senior u.s. officials.
and his areas of expertise. --an't really speak obviously maintaining any sort of advisory role. it is a lot different than being state.ed to secretary of is a lot ofthere speculation about who the president-elect will choose to serve in his administration. i spent the better part of the last two years avoiding commentary.
on rumors who may serve in the obama administration. >> just as a guiding principle, the administration believes they had severe classification issues . think every president is going to have to decide for themselves what kind of person can best serve them in the country. thatdent obama took responsibility very seriously and assembled a team he is quite proud of to serve him in the country and the president spoke at some length about how proud he is that there hasn't been a major personal scandal in this administration. the kind of people he has chosen to serve in high profile administrations. so with thene country focused on the best interest.
i think we will understandably be measured against that high standard. eventually they will have to decide on their own who can best serve the country and them. >> [indiscernible] speak to any advice the president offered to the president-elect. this, last time we did -- promising they will find funding for flynn. the summits to -- that seems to somewhat stall out. i couldyou and negotiate a bill more ably than
congress could -- josh: are you taking my lines? if -- it is going to be a redline for the president. >> obviously the president feels quite passionately for the need of congress to fill their rightful role. they have been dealing with the contamination of their water supply. this is a significant problem and this administration has significant -- has mobilized significant resources. it is going to require congressional resources to address the longer-term infrastructure challenge that exists. there were promises made by republicans and the congress is expected to keep that promise.
>> president obama and donald youp had a discussion -- were telling him you don't want to discuss this. can you describe the nature of the call? do you want to talk about nominations and what it may be on, talking about international relations? you add, embellish, rule out anything? josh: i can confirm that the president did have a telephone conversation with the president elect on saturday. when the president elect was in
the oval office, 36 hours after the election results were tabulated the president-elect forcated the desire president obama's counsel repeatedly. president obama made clear he was ready to offer that advice because of his underlying enduring commitment. scenario inesee a -- what i'm going to do is protect the ability of the president elect to seek the advice of the sitting president. i won't be of a to get into the content of the call. would confirm that the call did take place, even if i'm not willing to promise to announce when future calls will have been
placed. my understanding is the .resident-elect has reached out i can confirm for you it is not. i will be in a position to detail all of the conversation. >> can you give us an idea of how often this has happened? >> there are a handful of times. i think i said all i'm going to say. >> can you add -- josh: i will spare you.
>> there's no way to add what we were talking about with cuba? >> on just not going to get into the content of their conversation. >> no content, but how about a tone. were you in the room? josh: i was not. >> can you say anything about the tone and the mood of these conversations aside from the content? going to protect the ability of the president elect to consult with the president of the united states. to the extent i'm willing to characterize it, that is what i will do. the president indicated publicly he intended to seek out the advice and counsel of the sitting president of the united states and that is something he has done a couple of times. threatened top terminate the deal with cubans if cuba is unwilling to make a better deal for the cuban
people, the cuban american people, and the u.s. as a whole. worried is the president that he will terminate this deal? let thel president-elect speak to whatever plans they may have in store once he takes office. decent amount of time already making a strong case about the way the american people and cuban people have benefited from the decision president obama has made with the cuban government to begin normalizing relationships between our two countries. that normalize nation policy has brought about significant changes, including agreements to shipsdocuments -- cruise to dock in cuba. there have been licensing agreements that have been signed by one u.s. hotel company to begin operating in facilities in
cuba. that would be a difficult thing to go -- to unwind. in part because there are up to 110 daily flights that are -- scheduledoccur to take off and land in cuba on a daily basis in the coming months. today the very first flight in several decades took off from the united states and landed in havana. i don't know why people purchase tickets -- there will now be daily flights. unwinding that is not just as easy as the stroke of a pen because there are consequences for doing that. there will be an economic impact in the united states and cuba for unraveling that policy. those that are the harshest
critics of the president's part of theirt concern is for the plight of the cuban people. more than 90% of the cuban people support this policy. when americans travel to cuba, in some cases they are staying in properties that advertise on airbnb. some 50,000 americans in the last 18 or 19 months have availed themselves this opportunity. they're spending $250 on average. to say nothing of the cap drivers and restaurant doors that benefit from increased travel. would dealll of that a significant economic blow to those u.s. citizens. i think it is hard for critics
of this policy to reconcile their opposition to this policy and their claim to desire to advance the interests of the cuban people. away does not achieve the goal that they claim to have in mind. >> what about distance from the opposition in cuba, have they benefited from this policy change? a meeting them got with the president of the united states when he traveled to cuba in march. anythinghey done tangible in the human rights that you can tell us about? of this policys want to say their desires to lift up the cause of the cuban people, i don't know what better way you can do that than to invite them to the u.s. embassy
and have an in person meeting to talk about their efforts to fight for freedom and liberty of the cuban nation. i will refer you to the cuban government to discuss what kinds of steps they have taken. to better protect and acknowledge the human rights that we may have political disagreements with the government. i can tell you is the policy we have pursued in terms of policymaking have succeeded in giving more attention and shining a spotlight on the cause of those cubans that are putting themselves at great risk to fight for the liberty of the cuban people. the president satisfied with what the cuban government has done with human rights and is doing now? josh: there is no doubt we would like to see the cuban government do more.
we certainly have enjoyed more benefits than was enjoyed in the previous policy that was in place for 50 years and didn't bring about the kinds of benefits or progress we would like to see. i think it is hard for critics of this policy to make the case that they are looking out for the interest of the cuban people because they were not advanced by a policy of isolation that has affected the u.s. relationship with cuba but affected our relationship with countries throughout the western hemisphere. >> is your evidence that the cuban people and not the cuban government has benefited from this? is there really hard evidence somehow the behavior of the government is changing, not just in terms of its treatment of dissidents but the critics of this policy say there is no evidence, critics say that the government is the one who is
benefiting. >> we can certainly provide you some additional evidence. those cuban citizens that do , evenn the industry are benefiting from the enhanced economic activity between cuban citizens and american citizens visiting cuba. they are enjoying more economic activity. we can follow-up with some more specific data. what is clear is there is a growing entrepreneurial sector inside of cuba that is benefiting from greater engagement with the united states. that is a benefit and by the cuban people directly.
>> i know you can't talk about specifics, but maybe you will change your mind. what benefit does the president see coming from these hands full of conversations? is there something specific? i know the idea of a smooth transition. there anything produced by these conversations that the president say was a positive development? >> i'm just not one to be able to go into the details of the conversation. i think what i can say in general is president obama has been doing for eight years now. these are the kinds of challenges that are difficult to assess.
>> what are some of these challenges he has been able to eliminate? i can't get into the details of their conversation. the president has talked a lot since the election. institutional responsibilities. those institutional responsibilities were focused on a smooth transition. the president -- and of course whether or not the president endorse the incoming president. clearly she did not -- clearly he did not. the institutional responsibilities of the united
states ahead of his own feelings. state officials also have an institutional responsibility. the election law in each state varies. recountlates to win a can occur. how a recount can be -- should be conducted. and the president's expectation the state local administrators would allow the country to the country to fulfill their basic institutional responsibilities. whatast we're seeing election officials are doing. the white house certainly isn't.
>> he would have to check with them about that. as i said before it is just an objective fact that there were no evidence marshaled. >> i hear you sing the law needs to be followed. the green party and the clinton campaign would be involved in suing this -- president's expectation is everyone will fulfill their institutional responsibilities. certainly election very clearors have a set of rules and responsibilities that they should follow. the president's expectations is that's what they should do. >> i want to ask you about something senator rubio said about the passing of fidel castro. he said he was a ruthless tens of and imprisoned thousands. does the white house believe fidel castro was a murderer? the: there is no denying
kind of violence that occurred in cuba under the castro machine. only the history of what transpired in cuba while mr. castro was leading the country. >> i meant in the statement in particular, he wasn't benign. i thought he was careful. and i think there are a number of all who think he could have been much more direct and is ager and saying this person who killed his citizens, who led the destruction of their economy and it was argued took of lives and livelihoods tens of thousands of his countrymen. and yet the statement the president issue did not broach that such -- did not broach that
subject. no attempt oneen the part of this administration in the aftermath of fidel castro's death to obscure or whitewash the history of the under the regime when fidel castro was leading that country. what we have saw to to avoid, what i know we have socks to avoid is this downward spiral of mutual recriminations between the united states and cuba. it is not whitewashing the past but acknowledging the past and focusing on the future, what we can do to advance the shared interests of our two countries and the people who live in our two countries. the most effective way to do that is to move past that painful history.
that's when normalizing relations, enhancing economic there is moree opportunity for the american people, but there is also more opportunity and freedom for the cuban people. hopefully in the future politically. made -- have made a powerful statement to say this is what evil looks like? while we don't condone the past and while we are not acknowledging this person beyond anything what he is and was, we do have a hopeful view of the future. it looks like we talked a bit about the future. seemed to be celebrated in a number of circles. presidents why the felt so strongly and not really drill down on the fact that this person killed so many.
and i think should be seen as that person. >> we have a lot of the same kinds of questions in the context of the president's visit. i think the answer is just the same. there is no denying what happened in the past. there is a desire to advance the interests of the cuban people and the american people by focusing on the future. and the president put into place the policy that has deep and and strengthen the people and economic ties and way that we think will have positive long-term benefits for the cuban people. of 90% why upwards actually support this policy and greatere the engagement. they welcomed the increased remittances that were provided. they welcomed the increase in by american citizens to cuba. is a lot to offer. and the cuban people benefit
from that kind of greater engagement. that is why the president pursued this policy and it hasn't even been in place for two years. the president believes it is showing more promise than the failed policy that was in place for nearly six decades. harbor day coming up, the 77th anniversary of that day. thehere any reason why president wouldn't consider it important that he be there, be in hawaii to mark the occasion, in particular given his trip in the previous months to japan. >> i am confident president will mark that anniversary. obviously there is a generation of americans whose lives were transformed by that date i will live in infamy. the history of our country and world was changed by that day.
on that day thousands of american lives were lost. these were some of the bravest americans are country had to offer, who volunteered to serve our country in the united states and navy. i'm confident the president will mark that day. it obviously is consistent with the way he has marked previous anniversaries. the president two years ago visited normandy, the site of d-day. it was the site of the u.s. invasion with our allies that liberated a continent. it has been also the site of remarkable sacrifice by the greatest generations of americans. the president has visited the site of the uss arizona memorial on a previous visit to hawaii.
i'm confident the president will mark this data. >> what is the timetable like for something like that? that something that will have in january 19, some thing that will happen out the way -- happen on the way out the door? josh: we spoke about this back in august. the president indicated there is a process in place to evaluate clemency petitions. the president has granted clemency to hundreds of americans who saw a commutation of their sentence. this is part of what the president believes to chip away in some of the injustice in the criminal justice system. it is not a substitute for more wide ranging criminal justice
reform. when it comes to pardons, they will be carefully considered in the context of the same kind of process, and they will be announced when the president has made a decision. >> i just want to follow-up on a question you got about cuba. so easy to is not change the cuban policy. besides the economic impact already happening, why is it not so easy? reporting has been done that it is pretty easy. is it just the economic impact or something else you are referring to? >> let's take the example of flights. be 100 10 daily scheduled commercial flights
between the united states and cuba. a variety of u.s. airlines have invested significant money and to facilitate those flights. up --mericans have signed there are large companies in the united states, cruise operators and hotel operators that have invested significant sums of money investing in infrastructure and doing other work to do business down in cuba. of that is just much more complicated. the american people clearly like the opportunity that they have now to more easily travel to cuba. they like the opportunities that they have now, bringing cuban cigars and from home for personal enjoyment.
based on the strong support that exists on the island nation of cuba for this policy, it is hard to explain why you would roll it -- act. -- roll it back. cuban people don't agree rolling it back is in their best interest. they will obviously have an opportunity to make his case to the american people. i left out another good example, which is part of this normalization was making it cuban-americans to send money home to their family members and cuba. telling cuban-americans.
they are the basis of your political support, that they can't send money to their family members who desperately need it, that they can't send money to their family members who are, in toe cases, using that money start a business and engage in the type of entrepreneurship we are open to on the island nation of cuba? i think it is hard to explain or anyone would pursue that. the incoming president will have this.portunity to make decision -- make this decision.
the complications are large. it has not just been implemented by the u.s. government, it has been implemented by the american people and u.s. businesses. and there are significant agricultural interests. the opportunity to expand their operations in cuba. it is maybe hard to explain. >> what you hear from analysts is a change in trajectory coming from the new administration and congress. >> re: talk talking about cuban policy or more in general?
>> the cuban policy. do you cast doubt on -- josh: for all the reasons i have laid out, the prospects of scrapping the deal are rather remote. it would be extraordinarily complicated and costly to do so. it is also difficult to explain when you claim you have the people in mind, but the majority support the policy. all of that is very difficult to reconcile. this goes to something the president talked about quite a bit, which is there is a difference between making doing theents and work of governing as the president described it. i think this is as good an example as any.
>> we saw somebody who is pretty hard-line anti-castro. those are the initial people making that transition. her you still feel pretty confident there is not going to be that much change or a change in trajectory as some analysts are seeing it? >> i don't think i'm going to be in a position of predicting the future. simple as oneas tweet might make it seem. that is just an objective fact the you consider how american people and u.s. businesses have implemented this a way that has provided significant benefits to the american people and the cuban people.
relationship in latin america is as strong as it has been in generations. would be undone by the reinstitution of a policy that has failed after having been in place for more than five decades. diplomaticnificant this is among- the many significant challenges that the incoming administration will have to carefully consider. >> why would you be vague on the number of conversations? protectse i'm going to the ability of the president and the president elect and engage in confidential caused cetacean -- confidential consultation.
i think that is simply it. the president elect indicated that he is -- that is something he has done on a number of occasions. something president obama did without going president bush? i'm not aware that occurred. i can't do tell all the conversations that occurred between president-elect obama and president george w. bush, but i'm not aware of the kinds of conversations that occurred in the country. is this president obama helping out somebody he says was unfit for office not long ago and says all kinds of things on the campaign trail? given they have had these conversations, is the president more confident in the ability of donald trump to run the country? can tell you the
president is committed to living up to the responsibility he has as president of the united states to put the interest of the country ahead of his own political preferences. his opponent and campaigned aggressively for the opponent. within 36 hours president-elect trump was sitting next to president obama in a meeting that lasted 90 minutes. he hoped to have many conversations with president obama. despite their strong political differences. they will give the incoming president the best opportunity
to succeed. these lengthyof u.n.rsations take place, the administration stood by the things president obama has said on the campaign trail. after those conversations, do you still stand by those? >> are not aware that the president's assessment has changed, but the election is over and the presidents focus is on the constitutional abilities he has as president of the united states to preside over this mood -- smooth transfer, even though the president didn't support him politically. >> many people feel that the election is not over, as there are recount efforts. some are calling it far-fetched and frivolous. during the campaign the president expressed his integrity of the the electoral system and his