second round, tiger prime position to win his first major of the year. the al could have a new wildcard leader. why the sox could be spectators, if the playoffs started right now. in gang green's preseason opener, rookie mark sanchez makes forward progress in the quarterback battle. and michael vick tells the public why he deserves a second chance. espnews, now.

>> we want to welcome you inside the espnews studios, i'm anish shroff. he's kevin consor. tigers had five wins since coming back from knee surgery this season. but so far the major has alluded him. >> has alluded him. and he said after his round one major championship, set up to bait you into making mistakes. then he added, but when i'm playing well, i don't make mistakes. tiger opening the day with a one shot lead. jockey back and forth with padraig harrington. battle for the lead. ninth hole, this is tiger's approach on the par 4, ninth. 29 of 36 regulations for tiger.

he would set up a chance for birdie. and padraig harrington, hitting his approach on the ninth. just a bit better than tiger. both players had birdie opportunities. woods, the birdie putt. oh, that close. he shoots a 35 on the front nine. unhappy. makes the turn at 6 under. harrington for his birdie. rolls around and in. and he shoots a 35. make aing the turn at 5 under. on the back nine, harrington coming unraveled. tee shot on 13. it's going to find the green side bunker. harrington with 11, 12, and 13 to drop to two under. tiger used that window to begin to pull away. playing the 362 yard par 4, 14th. he's requesting to try to drive it on the green. and guess what? this one ends up on the back

fringe. we remind you, a 362 yard par 4. he would bird hey from there to move to 6 under. next up, the par 5, 15th. this is harrington's second shot, from the fairway bunker. up over a bunker, on to the green. paddy said afterwards, tiger told me he'd pay to see someone do that. so i asked him for 50s. shoots a 73. finishes 3 under through two rounds. tiger on 15. third shot chipping from off the green to within a foot. he would tap in. birdie. moves to 7 under. three shots on 15, birdie putt. and the would bogie 18, shoot 70 for his second round. phil mickelson trying to make a late run putting with the eagles on the 7th hole on the front

nine. he started on the back nine. makes it, shoots a 74. second straight day. sits at plus 4. 11 shots back of tiger woods. who is the story. four-shot lead over five players, lee westwood, ian poulter five off of missing the cut. sergio garcia, cutting through some tough conditions. part of the story friday for tiger woods. >> the win was up -- wind was up today. it was pretty blustery. it was changing directions from here and there. it was affecting putts. had you to play the wind on putts. we had to stay very patient. and hopefully you could take advantage of opportunities if you ever got any. and, you know, just had to kind of grind it out. in order to have or win a major championship, you can't be

playing poorly. and all the times i've been in this position, i have been playing well, and i'm playing well now. so it's just a matter of continuing what i'm doing this week. and i'm very pleased today especially in this wind. with some of the shots i hit today, i'm very, very pleased about that. tiger holds at least his share of the lead after two rounds, and guess what, he's never lost. 8 for 8. he's 32-6 all time when holding ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ >> i am supposed to be joined here by my brothers. [laughter] vice president by then, governor patrick we want to thank all of you for coming here today to honor and celebrate the life of our

mother. over the past few days my mother has been called everything from a st., to a pioneer, a trailblazer and a true original through a civil rights advocate of legendary proportion to a force of the human nature who more than held our own in a family of highly competitive and high it cheating men. she was in the a transformative figure but to her five children mark, bobby, and any and all of us she was simply mommy. she was our hero and a scary smart and not afraid to show a she was tough but compassionate comment driven but also funny, the competitive but also apathetic. restless and patience. curious she liked to hang with the guys but all per he rose

except for her brother jack were women. she has been who was totally devoted to her in every sense. a man who marveled at everything she said and everything that she did. he did not mind if per her was a mess or she walked around in a wet bathing suits if she beat him in tennis or challenged his ideas he let her rip and war and loved everything about her. after the five kids who adored her and loved to be with our and you have the ultimate role model. mummy with all of our best friends and it was not honor for all of us to be her children and a special privilege for me, to be heard daughter. that is not to say it is always easy because she was not exactly like any other mother. as a young girl i did not actually know how to process her appearance because most

mothers were dressed up. she wore men's pants, smoked cuban cigars and played tackle football. [laughter] she would come to pick us up at school in her blue convertible her hair was flying in the wind with pencils or pens in it, the car was filled with the boys and their friends and and will should have on a kashmir sweater with notes pinned to which reminder what she needed to do when she got home. [laughter] and then that would be covering a bathing suits to be dust and water polo game. of nablus to say i would try to run for cover. mummy when she was not trying to woo beat each of us in a game of tennis or on the football field you could find her at mass with our father praying were working and i mean really working she was

determined to change the world with intellectual disabilities and she did. you had no choice but to join her and her mission. it took all of us from our backyard to every state in this nation and it just as many countries around the world. our mother never rested, and never stopped, she was momentum on wheels focused on a relentless and she got the job done. today when i close my mind and we think about our mother ribisi her class being her hands and cheering us on everything that we did. i see her encouraging me to be my brothers in tennis. i see her moving my books from the back of a bookstore to the front of the bookstore. [laughter] when a manager would say she could not do that she would say go back behind a desk

where he belonged and me quiet. [laughter] i would hear her at 15 she sent me to africa to live with of family and i called to complain there was no running water, notes wireless and i was sleeping with five men she said i don't want to hear it one more thing added you get your job done and do not come back until you are finished. i heard i do not want to hear one more yet our per a lot. my people into the aureole locker room. i see her laughing, bring thomas sailing, loving each and every one of the us and while she cancels me raising me in a man's world there was no doubt in her mind i could compete and they should compete and i could win she was a trailblazer she showed

up as servers life -- as ourself and that takes courage sheet to a diversity and turn into an advantage inspired by the rejection faced by her sister and mother and other mothers of special children she turned that into her life focus and passion and mission her own brand of what i call maternal feminism. she believed 100% in the power and gift could change a language, tempo and character of this world. her heroes were the virgin mary, mother teresa, her own mother, her sister rosemary, all of whom and her eyes had already done that and she would always challenge each of us to do the same you will, you must. you can work if she were here today and speaking here she would paladin this podium she what

ask each of you what you have done today to better the world. she would tell you stories about her special friends and what they have accomplished and she would ask each and every one of you to join her in making this world a more tolerant, adjust, and compassionate place. she would end by talking about her own family, how grateful she was two her parents and her brothers and sisters, all of she absolutely adored. she would tell you how proud she was a sergeant then she would tell you how proud she was of each of us and she would tell you about each thing each of busted then ask your money for all four of my brothers. [laughter] to run a nonprofit per hour on behalf of that save the children, best buddies, a special olympics. then she would remind all of

view that you had not done enough and you would be this church in offer. mummy was a towering figure. i am sure everybody in this church has a story about her that would make you laugh or cry you roll your eyes are per audacity and brilliance. she was it the real deal, a woman who did everything within us buyer to. she had a great husband, a great family, a deep faith in god. and she combines that with been a fearless warrior for the boys less. i am so thrilled as are my brothers people all over the world are hearing about her this week in editorials and on television because they knew to hear stories about individuals like mummy i'm especially glad young women are hearing about her because she was a woman that did not

choose and when they were often told to be this or that, this kind of woman talk this way or have one opinion but mummy was not like that she did not use bella all the different parts of her go out and that is what made her a unique. she did not allow herself to be tamed or contain the she was hurt her authentic self the very woman who made grown men at quaking in their boots was the very same moment that spend quality time with each and every one of us making us feel loved, and making us believe in ourselves. she spent quality time with each of the grandchildren building sandcastles looking for leprechauns or mermaids she did not choose between being strong or soft more complex or simple. as the story goes out this week i believe she will become a new torchbearer for berman

of our time sending a new message as i said you do not have to be a certain way that you can have a full complete spiritual life that is about others and family it teaches us that women are complex and can live out every single aspect of that complexity. in closing in the last few years of her life i found hurt to be more on inspiring bid in her 85 years. she who never sat still was forced to confront stillness and it was hard for her. but she never complained and she never asked for pity. she thought and she fought write-up until the last breath. we all learned so much from her by listening to a per, watching her.

and this past year i learned from her as well as she saw fined she gave me permission to do the same as she sat still she taught me how important that is. she taught us that real strength can also be found in real vulnerability and it is okay and even important to lean on those who love you. if you told me a few years ago at the end of my mother's life, she and i would sit in a room and it just be i would say you were crazy if you told me at the age of 52 i would finally get up the nerve to crawl into bed with my mother and told her and tell her i love her i would tell you i was nothing in the fight would write poetry with third you would know that i lost my mind that all of those things happened as she learned to let

bell and at the end of perlite she was strong and political tired and tireless in the term and and also ready to surrender to god. she did all and she loved us all. to be honest i think it is impossible for each of us to think about our life without mummy. it is interesting as we talked a month us each of us as an only child we felt as though our mother was our best friend. we talked to her every day and sometimes more than once and of course, i think if i said to my mother which i often did i cannot go on without you i do not know how to live without you she says you are fine i raised do i don't want to hear one more it yip your brothers will be nice to you. [laughter]

so we will all get up and get going but i want to leave you with this little palm that my mother and i rode together in a hospital room and boston iran into her several times she liked it it has no name but i thought she would like me to share it with you. thank you mummy for giving me the breath of life. thank you for giving me a plush over and over again. thank you for doing your best. here we are, you and me, and now it issued meeting their breath of life. now it is do meeting of the pledge. you get it from me let me do it for you. your love has brought me to my knees i cannot read or think without you. i am lost without you. here we are you and me the

crowds are gone, this guy is clear. you are the star in my sky9 and the music in my heart. do you hear it? listen. listen. mummy, you are the trumpets of my life. amen. [applause] [applause]

>> and the spirit of what we have just shared on the sheets that have been passed out to you, have been is filled with eunice and it will be led by this wonderful irish group. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ [applause] >> with all the stains that

have margin before us and will go ahead of us comment we trust in bonn and ed -- god if we have prayed toward eunice we have come for the final farewell in this church. and there is always a sadness but we take comfort in the hope that we shall see you this again and enjoy your friendship and although this congregation will disburse to the four corners of europe the mercy of god will accompany us and let us pray the inspiration of eunice will do the same until we last of the heavenly kingdom therefore we wait in joyful hope as a final sign of affection eunice's

coffin is a prayer rising to that heavens and the hope and promise that one day we too will rise with eunice on the last day. we have seen the word for my boss fell, led jesus remember when you come into your kingdom, jesus remember her when you come into your came down. let us sing that together. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ >> into your hands father of mercy we commend our sister eunice and the sure and certain hope that together with all who have died in christ, which she will rise with him on the last day. we give you thanks for the blessings which you bestowed upon eunice in this life. they are signs to us of your goodness and of our fellowship with the saints in a crisis. merciful lowered turned toward us and listen to our prayers'

open the gates of paradise to your servant and help us to remain to comfort one another the assurances are safe and until we meet again christ and are with you and with our sister forever, we ask this through christ hour lord. >> amen the. >> and a piece let's us take our sister to her place the breast. ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

[inaudible conversations] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [applause]

[inaudible conversations]

>> a study by the cato institute says restricting immigration could cost $80 billion per year while a temporary visa program would increase income by twice that amount. authors of the study share their findings that this one hour e event on capitol hill. >> good afternoon. thank you for coming to today's cato institute capitol

hill briefing. is the microphone on? are we live? let's get this fixed. the button broke welcome to today's capitol hill briefing i am the manager of government affairs with the cato institute we will hear primarily about the restriction or legalization of measuring the economic benefits of economic reform which should happen one of three handouts and one of the others it is as immigrants moved in it emigrants move of that is what mr. griswold will talk about and if you are familiar with the handbook it is a great resource to be one to get to the perspective of kato institute scholars with policy makers to health care, education, a

trade, energy policy and everything in between. so the first speaker today is daniel griswold center of trade policy studies at cato since joining in 1997 he has authored or co-authored major studies on globalization, a trade, including the upcoming book mad about trade while main street america is to embrace globalization i brought half a dozen copies with me you can order on the amazon at about $15 if you are on the hill i could give you a copy i want to read a couple of quick exurbs from the foreword written by the former trade representative the cut is it the and it is too modest to do shameless self-promotion i will do with. >> this should re-read by all americans mr. griswold says

trade pirogues anxiety more than gratitude that is unfortunate because of foreign investment and with the expansion of trade we will likely still be a third world country today. he confronts protectionism and demolishes the support of argument protection as has relied on see no phobia to carry their agenda. he wears on his sleeve genuine compassion and empathy for the often forgotten consumer and as he so effectively emphasizes protectionism is another tax on working families paid unknowingly. it is a great book full of good arguments that are not super academic but complaining kuwaitis the to understand and easy to understand a great benefits of trade. mr. griswold has offered a number of articles from major newspapers and he appears regularly on a wide variety of

media outlets he testified before house and senate committees on a range of immigration issues and a note to any congressional staff he would be more than happy to do so again. before joining qaeda oh he was the editorial editor of the colorado springs gazette and a congressional press secretary he has a bachelor's degree in journalism from the university of wisconsin nablus and in a master's degree in the politics of the london school of economics >> [applause] >> thank you very much. the center for trade policy studies has been an advocate of comprehensive immigration reform for quite some time. and 2002 we've published a study called that willing workers that makes the key to successful reform is a

workable temporary worker program we believe that today at the root of illegal immigration is a basic story of supply and demand under times the normal growth hour economy creates hundreds of those days thousands of net jobs every year for those sectors with relatively low skill, retell, hospitality's hospitality, cleaning, a construction, landscaping, for preparation and at the same time the pool of native-born americans that fill those jobs without a high-school diploma continues to shrink in the last decade the number of americans without a high-school diploma has dropped by 3 million that will drop another two or 3 million in the next decade yet our immigration system has no channel for a peaceful hard-working immigrant from mexico and build these jobs and as a result we have

chronic illegal immigration in the united states. that key to work is to expand the legal channel to create opportunities to enter the country. critics complain the 1986 immigration reform and control act failed because it was not enforced properly. that is not true it had no preparation for the flow of future workers into the u.s. economy. and the reform effort this congress undertakes cannot make this a mistake as the 1986 law or we'll have the same failure and frustration. another campaign to of critics of reform is allowing low-skilled workers into the country will slow the under class and will cost taxpayers

more money. the two k no studies that were highlighted today that speak directly to the misplaced apprehension in the first is of free trade bulletin that buy-out third title as emigrants move then american's move up. what i found in the early 1990's through 2007 the u.s. underclass by a number of measures was shrinking those born in poverty, struggling in adult life without a high-school diploma actually we're shrinking and buy every measure that that includes african-americans and during a time of fairly robust low-skilled immigration into the united states legal comment and illegal then he'll of the underclass did change and become more hispanic, more

in madrid and more functional and by that i mean low-skilled immigrants are much more likely to work and much less likely to commit crime ban native born of low-skilled workers. in that case things in part to the immigration contrast gain to 15 years ago the under class standing on a street corner today they are probably waiting for a job, not a drug dealer. . .

immigration policy. i heard dr. dickson give a presentation several months ago and asked him if he could apply his model to the current immigration debate and it came through spectacularly i think. the study for the cato institute finds that the traces the congress and the president will make on immigration reform in the months ahead will have a huge economic impact on u.s. households. the key finding is that the difference in income for u.s. households between restricting immigration on the one hand and legalizing it and accommodating on it on the other is a quarter of a trillion dollars. kurt, last time i checked that is still real money even here in washington. well, let me turn it over to

professor dixon. he is the surge on distinguished professor at monash university. he is known on equilibrium modeling and he and dr. brimmer literally wrote the book on this subject. a in 2003 he was awarded the distinguished fellow ship of the economic society of australia and completed his ph.d. at harvard university in 1972. please welcome dr. peter dixon. [applause] >> thank you, dan and thank you to cato for giving me the opportunity to present the results to you today. now, economists can't possibly speak for more than a few seconds without needing charts

and so and so but we are going to have to have a powerpoint. have we got a powerpoint? is anything happening? oh, okay. can these people see, too? [inaudible conversations] >> we will post this on line, too. >> okay. all right, so if you want to see if he will have to change to the other side of the room i think. okay, now, in 2005 there were about seven wind 4 million unauthorized workers in the american u.s. work force, and under business as usual

assumptions, that will grow to about 12.4 million by the year 2019. so, this poses some policy issues. what should be done about it? so, we use our economic model to look at three possibilities. the first is tighter border security. we will restrict supply, build higher. the second is tighter internal enforcement. and the third possibility is some form of legalization, some sort of guest worker program and we are going to get those three possibilities. so, we start with tighter border security. and the experiment we've run and our model so we can move on --

told me the slides that coordinate -- i can see it here, yes. as you can see -- that's it. there you can see the business as usual line, that's the top line that's showing the number is growing for 7.4 to 12.4 over the next ten years or so. and then as our experiment, which is to cut supply suit that in fact know them members of unauthorized workers grow only to i think that's about 8.4 million so that means that we have cut the supply in the year 2009 -- 2019 to about 8%. and we have done that by building a defense higher, and the way we visualize the effect we have made it so that potential a legal immigrant

thinks in terms of an extra $5,000 for a border crossing. so a border crossing is a dangerous thing to do. it costs money. you have to give money to smugglers, it might be successful, you might see it back home. it is a significant risk something really bad will happen to you. okay, so we build the fence higher in a way that is equivalent to potentially lethal some thinking in terms of it costing an extra $5,000 for crossing. so now what is the effect of all of that? well, this policy means that and 2009 -- 2019 there are 3.55 million less illegals working in the u.s.. now that is about 2.1% of the employment of the base case

employment in the year 2019. so, and employment in the u.s. with this policy is going to be about 2.1% lower. than it otherwise would have been. so, your first guess is that the economy would be 2.1% smaller. but the model says no, that is all the right answer. the economy is going to be 1.6% smaller. and then you think well, why is it that there is only going to be 1.6% smaller? well, you recognize that the reduction in the labour force a reduction in low-paid, low-skilled work so you haven't really got 2.1% reduction in the effective labour force. in fact, when you think about it a bit further and realize that the productivity of the workers that you are excluding is only

about half that of the average productivity of illegal workers, you wonder why the economy shrinks by as much as 1.6. why do the economies shrank by more like 1%? because you have really excluded about 1% of the effective work -- the effective quantity of labor. so, it was at 1.6. well, the answer to that question turns out to be a rather important. it's the so called occupation mix effect. you see, when you exclude those low-skilled workers, what happens -- what happens -- what happens to the u.s. workers? the illegal workers? well, what they see is vacancies opening up at the low end of the labor market. so you exclude people who were going to work at the low end of

the labor market so vacancy opens up there but simultaneously vacancies clothes off at the top and now why is that? you're going to have a smaller economy so you are going to need less civil war service. you are going to need less schoolteachers, less doctors. you are going to need less police officers and so on. you are going to need less of all occupations. but vacancies are opening up at the bottom where you have excluded the illegal and a prince. they are closed off at the top. well you haven't excluded any illegal immigrant. so new entrance to the work force find themselves with lesser opportunities. so the young people entering the work force settle on a job as a security, private security officer rather than police officer. the young graduate who wanted to be an economist which would have

to be the highest calling of course the young crotch with wanting to be an economist finds there are no jobs for economists. and unsettles to become a member of congress, still some lesser occupation. [laughter] see you get the idea. excluding people from the bottom causes a shuffling affect down. and that is why the economy shrinks by the 1.6 rather than the 1% because the excluding of these low-skilled migrants deskills when the population. so it destroys .6% of labor. now, moving right along. so what does all of this mean for the standard of living of

u.s. households? well, by 2019 under the policy of the tighter border security, another policy that reduces the number of illegals by 3.55 million by 2019, under that policy, the standard of living or the income gmp, whatever, of a legal u.s. households has been reduced wi-fi 5%. if you like it in dollars that is about $80 billion. now there are six reasons, there are six of facts, and they are colin kofi occupation mix of fact, that's number two that i outlined. okay, that americans will have on average lower skilled and lower-paid jobs and that is the negative .31.

then there is this capital fact. you remember the economy was smaller. so there would be less capital in the united states than there otherwise would have been. all right. now, your country like mine is basically if you have less capital you will have less foreign owned capital so what is the problem? well, the problem is that foreigners pay lots of taxes when they invest in this country, so having less foreign owned capital and less capital here means that you collect less tax revenue from foreigners. so that is that modest .24. how about employment of legal americans? well, your first guess is that nothing happens to the employment of illegal americans but the second guess is something slightly that happens. and that is because you have remember we have been shuffled

americans to lower skilled jobs and lower skilled jobs have higher rates of unemployment. so, by changing the occupational makes americans we have not only reduced their average wages, which of course they have got lesser jobs, but we have also increased their unemployment rates and that is the fourth effect. another effect, which goes the other way, and is the effect to the most spoken of in the political debate is that it will save some money. so the illegal immigrants, the use some public sector resources. the use some primary education, medical care, the roads and so on. and so, having less of them will save the american taxpayer some money, and that is a plus for reducing the number. and that is the .17.

the sixth effect is the, this is an economist site here. an advantage of having a smaller economy is that you will get a better deal in the world markets. so, if you have a slightly smaller economy you will push down the price of oil and peabody and less oil and you will reduce the price of oil. if you have a smaller economy you will be exporting less so you get a somewhat better price for the american varieties of cars and holidays and so on, so forth. so the so-called terms of trade effect is an advantage of having a smaller economy. now, the first effect, now this is for the people who have both done economics but no one, and remember it. which might be a nobody. it is demand and supply, right?

now, what happens is that we have restricted the supply of low-skilled migrant laborers come as we have moved the supply curve to the left. so, in simple terms, we have increased the price of those that remain. all right, so in that diagram, the wage rate of the remaining low-skilled illegal immigrants has gone up by 9% because there is less supply of them and that is a cost to the legal residents of the united states. so putting all those things to gather, there they are. the six effects that add up to negative 80 billion, or negative 8.55. now, we could do it all again and this time we will bear down on the employers. so the first policy was to restrict supply, the second policy is to make it more

costly, more dangerous for businesses to employ illegal people. now it turns out the effects of that policy are more or less the same. there are some -- the six effects again, and there are some little variations for instance the occupation mix effect isn't quite as bad that recently the occupation mix effect isn't quite as bad is one of the things firms will do if there is more regulation is they will employ more of lawyers, more highly skilled people to mitigate the problems of the regulations. so, there's a little bit of a game of occupation but overall, there is not much to choose between shifting the supply curve out or in, shifting the supply curve in which was

building the cents higher, or shifting the demand curve. the effect of roughly the same, and there it is. there we are, shifting the demand curve -- shifting the demand curve by making it more costly for employers to use illegal labor. now, let's try it the other way around. okay? let's have a guest worker program in which employers who want to use low-skilled immigrant labor and can obtain this sleeper. let me make the case, there is a nation there, organizers. the employers can get a visa. we will talk about whether the visa should cost money or not. we can have a visa tax if we like.

but the employers can bring and low-skilled immigrant labor legally. so what will that do to the supply of these workers? well, the supply curve will move out. the workers no longer have to worry about -- they no longer have to worry about smugglers' fees, they no longer have to worry about being captured on the border, they no longer have to worry about starving to death when they are crossing the rio granda goes wrong or whatever. the supply curve, more of them will be willing to come at the going wage rates. so, if we did that, the simplest case is we'd reduce the cost of a border crossing by $5,000 rather than increase the cost of border crossing by $5,000. so, if we do that, we get results that are basically the opposite of those that we have seen already.

the direct effect, that was the demand supply diagram, the direct effect is that the wages of the illegals, the wages that are paid in america, the wages go down. there is an advantage to american employees. more of them come. that increases the occupation mix of fact. that affects of the occupational ladder instead of down, they are pushed of the occupational ladder. so, we have a positive occupational mix of fact. okay. the economy is bigger so we have a bigger capital effect. there's more foreign capital here. so, remember the foreigners don't get the full benefit of their investments here. the full benefit of the investment is with the extra capital in this country can produce. the foreigners take away some of

that but they may leave behind quite a lot of it in the form of taxes. the occupational mix for american workers will be improved by having -- by having the foreign guest workers here, filling of the low-paid jobs. so the occupational mix of fact will mean that unemployment rates for america will actually fall. and then of course having more guest workers here will have public expenditure that is non-negative rather than positive, and having the economy bigger will have a negative effect on the prices that americans pay for imports and the prices that they receive for their exports, so the six effects are just the same as before except with opposite

sides. now, now instead of the cost to american households of 80 billion, this program is showing a benefit to american households of 80 billion. but that's not all. you see, if you had a legalization program, if you had guest workers, then two things would happen: one thing that would happen would be that the guest workers would be more substitute will, there would be more like american workers. and they would have higher productivity. illegal workers are actually quite the word workers. they have quite low productivity. they are quite unreliable. and the reasons for that are fairly obvious. they are always looking over their shoulder, employers can't

invest in them, they can't train them and so on. so, illegal workers are of low productivity workers and they are not particularly reliable workers. now, and our next simulation that you can see on the chart, we introduced the idea that guest workers would have higher productivity than the illegals the replaced. of the illegals have productivity that is probably 30, 30% less than native-born workers. they get paid a lot less and the reason they get paid a lot less is there were felt less so they have lower wages reflecting lower productivity. but what happens -- what happens if legalizing then increases their productivity such that

half of the cap goes? half of the capitol and productivity out legal workers and the illegal workers, half of the productivity gap disappears? well, let's magnify the games from a guest worker program. it magnifies the gains because each guest worker is now bringing more flavor with him or her. you can think of a person comes with a certain amount of productivity, certain ability to produce effective leader. now, with a guest worker program, each person brings more labor with them. so you get a bigger increase in supply. you get a bigger occupation mix, you get a bigger capital of fact and so on. all right, so all of the affect thank you are magnified. but the one fact that isn't magnified quite so much as the

negative effect on public expenditure. each person is coming and bringing more labor but they are not bringing more train on the public purse. they are still using the same amount of hospital care and schooling and roads and so on. so the negative effect doesn't blow out as much of the good effects. so, under that -- under those circumstances, the, the benefit is grown from something like about 80 billion to more like 160 billion a year and that is permanent, forever and ever, 160 billion a year for u.s. households. now we can go on. there are little nuances. what if to many, and you don't want as many as one to complex that is fine. he could control the numbers not by building fences or prosecuting employers. you control the number by visa

tax. so the next column, column number six shows the effects of a program which restricts the number of guest workers to that 12.4 billion, which was the same as the number of illegals in 2019. so, we are going to restrict the number of guest workers to that 12.4 million in 2019. and we can do that by a visa tax. now, why does it work? well, imagine an like this. in the present situation the illegal is worth in the workplace 70. okay? so, the american employer, pays

70. the illegal would be willing to come here for 60 except for the smugglers fees and all the cost of the illegal crossing. so, the illegal needs to be paid 70 and that is what they are without the moment. but they would be willing to come here for 70. that was for 60, they would be willing to come for 60 if they didn't have all the hassle of getting here. so that opens up the immediate prospect of everybody being happier with the illegal only being paid 60. so there is a prospect for having a visa tax. it was so cost the american employer 70, but instead of the smaller getting ten, the u.s. government gets ten.

that's quite a good deal. imagine that instead of that, the illegal worker, now the guest worker, has an increase in productivity and is now worth 80. they are still willing to come here for 60. but they are worth 80 so that opens up the prospect for the visa tax to be 20. so that opens up the prospect for u.s. households by their government to benefit from eliminating the smugglers fees from the increased productivity that a legal worker with have relative to an illegal worker. so now to wrap all of this up, here are our conclusions: so tighter border security, welfare reduced for u.s. households.

why? well, you want to get rid of them all, so at least higher wages for the ones who remain. that's less scarce. and remember the negative occupation mix effect. tighter border security means americans after a while, i am not seeing anyone in this room is one to change occupations, but new entrants to the work force, unemployed people will find their opportunities are opened up at the lower end of the workforce and closed off at the top end. so that was occupation mix effect. tighter internal of force and. well, basically instead of -- instead of the illegals having higher wages as they do with tighter border security, instead of scarcity if you like from

having these people scarcer in the economy, what really happens then is that the scarcity value if you like it all used up and lawyers and accountants and legal will enforce the office and all that sort of thing and you still of course of the negative occupation mix of fact. the legalization of the other hand produces welfare game for u.s. households. it converts the cost of an illegal crossing it converts that into a gain and there's also the benefit from a high productivity of the low-skilled migrant workers. we calculate that you could keep to the 12.4 million by 2019.

you could keep to that with all these benefits with a visa tax worth about 40% of the cost of employment. so the cost of in planning and migrant would be let's say 100, then you -- now, guest worker, the guest worker would get 70 and the u.s. government would get 30. actually it turns out that tax is too high. he should have more than 12.4 million, and there are taxes more like about 14%. but the key point to good policies legalization, some sort of legal system rather than the legal system so the difference between 40 and the 14 and 30% these attacks from the welfare point of view of u.s. households is not very great. and as dan said at the beginning, it's quite a big issue. you are talking about benefits to u.s. households from good

policy of 160 billion a year versus cost to u.s. households of that policy with 80 billion a year, put those two things together and as dan said, that's a difference of 240 billion, which is a quarter of petroleum, which is real money. okay, i think i have finished. thank you very much. [applause] >> all right, at this point you're going to move into a discussion period. for those of you not able to see the powerpoint we are going to post that on the event page that presumably most of you signed up through to register for this event. and if not you can go in the archive section of the cato web site and will be there for you. so, at this point i will take questions. if you could keep them direct and brief so that we can get to as many as possible that would be great.

manama, in the black. >> [inaudible] why have two quick questions. he made a point and i would like to know where you got your figures because it always hurts the opposite illegal workers have higher productivity than american workers. that's the first and then the second one is if they are coming here legally and they are basically the same people how do you determine their productivity is going to be higher just because they are legal if they are the same people? >> could someone repeat the question? >> well i could repeat the question if you like. can you hear me? the question was how do i know that illegals have low productivity relative to legal workers in the same occupation, and the second question is the same sort of question really. how do i know that converting them to be legal would increase

their productivity. okay, my reason for their productivity being lowest their wages. economic pherae suggests that people will be employed up to the point where their wage is equal to their productivity. i mean, if wages were higher than the productivity, well then they will get fired. if wages are lower than their productivity, well then you want more of them? said the main evidence for the idea that the productivity is low is that systematically low wages relative to legal residents. now, the other question as well, why do i think that the wages would go up? well, that is speculative and that is why i give you -- i gave

you the option that i gave a simulation with how productivity rising and then with the productivity rising i think the productivity would rise because i think that would become more reliable workers and they've become workers in which employers could invest, give them training and so on. so that's -- >> but i just make -- let me just add to that quickly. in my 200 to study, willing workers, i looked at some evidence that the government found from, you know, we had what was an amnesty in the 1980's. we legalized 2.7 million people who had been here illegally. they went back a few years later and looked at with the work force record was of those workers and they found that the empirical evidence completely supported what peter is saying. they invested more in their jobs and their language skills because they were more secure as workers. and their wagers to almost immediate bump upward of several percentage points after being stagnant for a number of years.

so the empirical evidence is very much in line with what dr. dixon said. >> all right. >> yes, sir. >> [inaudible] but two factors i always hear -- >> that doesn't feed into the amplification system so if you could speak up. >> the two factors i hear why people object to immigrants is number one, they are going to use up all of our medical emergency rooms and they are not going to have health insurance and other words, to that their children are going to flood the school systems and essentially they are not paying anything for their tuition. it seems to me that two things could be done. why not require them to get entrance into the country that they have to buy health insurance? just some kind of a fairly minimal amount rather than

paying a coyote they could buy health insurance. that could be a requirement. and if they are going to have children here, why not make them pay some kind of tuition even to a public school? >> thank you petraeus >> you can see in those figures that having more of them here was a negative. so we have tried to take into account what resources to use up in the medical system and what resources they use up in the school system. and that seems to be the thing that gets most in but the date on the issue but you can see it is a fairly minor affect what to to all those good things i talked about. >> [inaudible] >> okay, well -- if you had a guest worker program you could

actually designed it so that they didn't bring their children that would be a possibility. it's a tough deal. we are talking about a deal whereby the united states makes a deal to have various jobs done by foreigners but everybody wins. united states households win and the foreigners willingly come. now, they came on a fairly short temporary visas. they come here and er and a lot more money than they get at home and it might well work that they leave their families at home. dan? >> just a comment on that. when we commissioned the study we did not tell dr. dixon or dr. rear -- dr. rimmer. we were curious with the

results. it confirms what the critics say about immigration reform. it is going to cost of as taxpayers -- the government will have to spend more on schools and medical care. but that cost is overwhelmed by the economy for y benefit. this is the headline finding of the study. when you with these other effects dr. dixon and dr. rimmer looked at. so, i did that as a key point to take away. it can be the government can do things to restrict access to the welfare state by immigrants and my strong preference is let's wall off the welfare state and of the country. that should be the approach. there's limitations to that the supreme court has ruled you can't bar children of illegals from a public school. you can't turn them away from emergency rooms. but i think those costs tend to be exaggerated and they are more than offset by the economy wide benefits that dr. dixon has talked about. >> [inaudible]

>> we want to get to as many people as possible. >> why don't you come up afterwards and we will be happy to -- >> the gentleman in the back over there. >> [inaudible] -- when you have legal immigrants here, even as, you know, i think this not being -- the united states not being the buyer, cannot expel them after some years, immigrants coming under a guest program will look at this as a path to citizenship. so, in the long run, given that they are making less than the average american but, even after their bombed in productivity that you mentioned, that their legalization, does that imply a lower immediate income for average income for americans? having more guest workers and the united states? and number two is, you know, there is an optimal -- socially

optimal point of the united states government to impose a fee such tax. how high can this tax be without reach channeling these guest workers to the coyotes and was your approximation of the revenue that could be raised by posing such a visa tax without -- at the optimal level? >> okay, so the first part of that is the path to citizenship. it has to be made completely clear this is on a path to citizenship. this is a way in which the u.s. gets a job done. it's like the trade. you are importing labor to do a particular job and then go away again. so it has nothing to do -- it is not meant to be a path to citizenship that should be made absolutely clear. if you had such a program in

place for prospects to be in place illegally would actually be rather -- be reduced. if employers had a perfectly reasonable legal way of getting this type of labor, that would destroy the demand for the illegal people. simultaneously with all of this he can have your enforcement programs my guess is that the american public with a tough program on employers to although there was a perfectly sensible and legal channel for them to get this start to labor chose to employ illegal people. so it's not a path to citizenship and i think it would -- the people who came on the program i think would find it

very difficult to get a job after the legal period was over because they have been in competition with legal workers. to get the point. all right, now on the revenue side our rough calculations suggest that about 40% of the costs of employee -- employees and the guest workers could be siphoned off by the u.s. government. now, whether that would give much incentive to a legal employment or not, well, i think i gave the answer before. i think the answer is no. okay, the 30% would not be enough i think to make it worth the while of employers to take

on illegal workers when they have a perfectly reasonable access to legal workers. dan? >> if i could just jump in, one of the pro first consequences of the current enforcement only policy is we have made it more likely once illegals come into the country that they will stay. it is so costly and dangerous to cross the border once they are here they don't dare go back and pos of those costs and risks again so they stay. half the illegals have been here for five years or more. if we adopted a system of expanded legal entry the would be able to go home for christmas , they would be able to stay in touch with their family and have less incentive to bring their spouses and their children over. from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s when it was technically illegal for them to be here but we didn't do much about it we had a very strong circular pattern of illegal immigration from mexico in fact our research at cato shows 80%

of them eventually went back home, and i think adopting a legalization program with some kind of fee for the visas of what restore that circular circularity. you know, most mexicans prefer to live in mexico. they want to go back. that is where their families, their culture. they come here to solve the short-term problems. we make it virtually impossible for them to do that legally, and i think what we need to do is create that legal channel. come here and work for three or six years, benefit the u.s. economy, benefit themselves and their families and then the large majority based on past experience will go home. they don't come here to seek citizenship typically. they come here for economic reasons. >> the leedy -- >> could you address two issues. one, the cyclical nature of this heated debate in the u.s.. we've seen this before with other waves of immigrants.

and never to, given how on civil the health reform debate is becoming through the town hall and all of that, do you foresee that same environment happening when the immigration reform debate finally gets rolling next year? thank you. >> i will leave number 22 dan. number one, on the cyclical aspect, one of the things about a guest worker program is that it really cushions u.s. employment from the ups and downs of the cycle. so, for instance now in the depth of this recession that we are in, you wouldn't expect employers to what many of these people. but then in the boom you would expect them to want more. so, in fact, a good guest worker

program smith's out the ups and downs in employment for the legal residents of the united states, but i will leave the political -- >> just to emphasize the point, by all accounts, the number of illegal immigrants in the u.s. has actually gone down in the last couple of years, which, yes the immigration debate needs a good dose of civility. you know, i tell people when the trade debate -- people's emotions are even higher. i think both parties, the democrats and republicans have factions within their constituencies that need to be faced down if we are going to succeed at immigration reform. the republicans have to stand up and transcend a minority

nativist element that just seems to oppose immigrants generally, and as you mentioned that is a common future of american history. 100 years ago it was that the italians and poles and irish. this is a standard fare. we tend to love the past generations of immigrants and have all the questions about the current generation, never stopping to consider that the u.s. continues to absorb immigrants i think in a generally successful -- successfully. the democrats, however, i think are facing opposition among organized labor, and organized labor kind of gave up their absolute opposition a few years ago but they continue to oppose guest worker programs and temporary worker programs. i think this is a critical mistake on the part of organized labor. if you take one message away from the presentation today, it

is that a workable robust guest worker program is essential to the success of immigration reform and to the extent that the nativists on the right and organized labor on the left suppose that i think they both have to be marginalized in this debate if immigration reform is going to succeed and we are going to finally solve this problem of illegal immigration. >> okey this is when to be the last question. >> president obama seems to sidestep the issue of legalizing immigrants. this year because he said his plate is full of issues and debates on health care. could you comment on this and during the campaign -- [inaudible] rell if targeting advice to

president obama, and he hasn't called me about this. [laughter] i would say put aside health care reform and concentrate on immigration reform. polls show two-thirds of americans are satisfied with their health care. i don't think we have a health care crisis in this country. sure the system needs to be changed. we have plenty of ideas, go to cato.org and you can see how we can improve the system. with a legal immigration we have a status quo that very few people are satisfied with. the congress can do something concrete about that will reduce illegal immigration and enhance the economy and enhance border security. i think -- i don't think an immigration reform should be shunted off any longer than possible for these other matters. senator schumer very much to his credit has said he wants to make this a priority of his committee in-store with hearings. i think there is enough republicans to work on this issue. senator mccain, congressman john flake of arizona and

others, senator koschel it took a very constructive approach last time around. there's enough republicans and democrats i think to deliver clear majorities in both chambers and president who said he wants to get this done. there's no excuse this time. the single biggest obstacle to immigration reform i think was the house leadership last time around who i think made a tactical and strategic mistake to demonize illegal immigrants. i think it was part of the reason they paid at the polls. they are no longer able to stop. the democrats are in charge and me to deliver on this and i believe there are republicans willing to work with them that could get this done and 2009 if they wanted to. >> well, we do have to wrap up now. thank you for coming. i think this was informative. we are going to stick around for a little bit if you have questions that didn't get answered and please join me in thanking the speakers.

[applause] [inaudible conversations] berkhout is c-span funded? >> the u.s. government. >> private benefactors. >> i don't know. i think some of it is government raised. >> it's not a public. >> probably donations. >> i want to say from me, my tax dollars. >> always c-span funded? america's cable companies

created c-span as a public service, a private business initiative, the government mandate, no government money. at today's state department briefing topics included secretary clinton's african trip, negotiations to persuade north korea to return to the six-party talks and military aid from the republican georgia to afghanistan. spokesman pete jay crowley speaks with reporters for about 20 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> a hardee group for a friday in august in washington, d.c.. in fact i am told all i am of violating the letter and spirit of the no briefings on friday by the department of state, so i promise next week we will not have a friday briefing [laughter] but, you know, we can dedicate this briefing to miller and make

it the less filling. but highly tasty. good afternoon and welcome to the part of state. i think first of all, to the colleagues here in the room you will see statements by secretary clinton wishing the government, the pakistan and india a happy birthday, had the independent state. -- independence day. the secretary is airborne coming back to washington, d.c. after her compelling trip to africa. she met this morning before departing with prime minister jose mavis but obviously the trip represents the commitment the of all administration and the secretary to the partnership with africa. obviously a great deal of discussion over the past 12 days about reform on the continent,

the lipitor, judicial police, constitutional, but stability and in the different parts of africa to somalia the united states interest both in promoting trade between africa and the united states but also promoting trade among the states of africa, a great deal of discussion paid to the outstanding pepfar efforts in the continent both in terms of combating hiv/aids but also malaria and the trip to omar where she focused on the crimes of gender based violence and very direct conversations with a number of countries about the imperative of good government, good governance and transparency in the continent. we have a statement today of the government of georgia will contribute georgian military brigade to afghanistan from service under u.s. command in

the international security assistance force or isaf some marines will be a writing beginning on august 15th to implement a training program that will commence on september 1st to prepare that georgian battalion for surface and afghanistan. and i think that you were just served the notice that tomorrow at 11:59 p.m. is the deadline for those who wish to of tanned media credentials for the pittsburgh summit. with that, i will take your questions. yes? >> to follow up to the question asked yesterday, the u.s. commission for leaders freedom has put in the of the watch list, and in the death has officially done this as a great deal from the u.s. cis. secretary clinton was their last month on the ground. what is her sense about this freedom in india?

>> i think that obviously we talk at the department of state about many universal principles. we have talked about in in a variety of contexts. but certainly, freedom of expression and religious freedom we think are hallmarks of stable progressive societies in the 21st century. it is obviously important to us. i can't say to what degree it came up during the secretary's conversations last month but clearly this is an area which we think it obviously is across the globe a source of potential stability. and we believe that those societies that practice significant tolerance will be those that advanced most significantly in the coming years. >> following yesterday's question [inaudible]

press doing equipment such as a helicopter. and if so, will the u.s. supply and what is the mechanism? >> well, the taiwan authorities have requested additional assistance, and we are currently considering our best to assist taiwan's with its urgent humanitarian needs what form that takes i think it is too early to tell. obviously we will look at what i want feels it means. we will compare what we are able to provide with what might be flowing from other countries in the region, and obviously what is important here is a timetable. but we can provide an an urgent timetable that allows taiwan to begin to alleviate the impact of the typhoon. >> [inaudible] would that be available? >> we understand that taiwan is

seeking additional assistance and we are evaluating how to best help them. yes? >> could you give some information on -- [inaudible] appropriations committee yesterday? >> no, we can't, as is perhaps not unusual. the group in question has provided the report to the media before the state department. we have not seen it yet. >> [inaudible] the issue of the base, the bases. are we getting closer now to the completion of an agreement? >> i wouldn't predict -- we are in discussions with the government of colombia on a bilateral agreement to promote u.s. colombian cooperation against the counternarcotics, a transnational crime, terrorism. you know, what we are discussing would provide access to colombian military facilities in order to undertake a mutually agreed upon activities.

you know, if we are successful in this. it would be similar to the agreements we have in many of your close friends around the world. but those discussions are ongoing. >> but given the reactions of other south american countries including brazil, do you think it is a good move? >> i think this is strictly a bilateral issue, but obviously, you know, we and colombia will continue to have discussions with other countries in the regions, but it is, it is strictly a bilateral agreement, and it would allow us to function within colombia to help with, you know, colombia's needs in terms of security. charlie? >> is their anything new on -- can you bring us up-to-date on what efforts the u.s. is making? >> [inaudible]

>> obviously we continue to talk to the scottish authorities about this particular case. secretary clinton in the past day talked to justice minister kenny mccaskill and expressed the united states strong view that all the mohammed should serve out the entire sentence in scotland for his part in the bombing of the 103 flight. ..

>> of helping to address the concerns the united states has but also other countries in the region about the north korea but obviously we will continue to listen to the secretary general of his idea how to move forward. we have a common interest in bringing stability to north asia and a common interest in seeing north korea abide by its obligation and eventually take action to a denuclearized korean peninsula. >> the foreign minister said

today they always keep the doors open to negotiation with the u.s. should there be a new dialogue between the two countries? >> we have indicated we are open to dialogue with north korea. but we want to see them come back to the six-party process. with them that there can be bilateral discussions not only with the u.s. but other countries as well but we continue to believe the six-party process is the most effective way to deal with the issues that we have with north korea and we share with russia, china, south korea, japan and we encourage north korea as we have continually over the past few months to come back to the

six-party process the. >> you said clinton called the scottish justice minister? >> obviously the issue of this particular case falls within the purview of scottish and authorities and he is the scottish justice ministers to make their assays story from shorter-range missiles in me done with co-operation with ayn rand and north korea they were both there for the test and cooperated in developing that missile. can you talk a rut corporation be to read and iran, north korea, a series of missiles. >> there have been some indications of cooperation there is a relationship between syria and iran it is a concern to us and others in

the region. that is one of the reasons we have open dialogue with syria and also between north korea that we have the same concerns. this is the reason we have resume the dialogue and hopefully to return an ambassador to have a comprehensive discussion. >> considering there have been it multiple instances of u.s. citizens being detained abroad how does that affect u.s. diplomacy? >> we cannot stress enough it is unwise for american citizens to wander across borders into possible countries. >> retaking any preventative means? >> as three said we encourage

americans to travel but they have to be prudent when they travel. hi think as a general matter, it is important to note come individual cases like this should be handled as a legal issue, a humanitarian issue, in some cases come a case of a couple of countries that have been in the news recently, the we have a significant issues and we have made it clear with a country like north korea, i ran, we wanted to address the concerns we have about those countries with the concerns they may have with u.s. policy. but in terms of holding a mirror ken's hostage to those discussions, we think that is completed the it and opprobrious. >> had the missing russian

cargo ship last seen two weeks ago after being attacked by pirates in the english channel a double hundred miles off of cape horn did this come up with officials? >> i do not know. >> it is in to this is sending conflicting signals to people? >> i think the senator arrived in the bird but today embassy officials are and will participate in his officials may teams brasses to precisely what he is doing, what he will talk to i will refer you to the senator's office he is not carrying a specific message from the administration this is his own schedule and i will refer you to him as iraq does

and is sending conflicting signal at one time you're not trying to engage but now here you are your trying to engage? >> surveys senator webb a distinguished senator from a couple of relevant communities we encourage members of congress to travel the world, interact with various government officials but this agenda is his own. >> can i go back to north korea? it at yesterday's special breathing the ambassador said the station continues until they take irreversible steps to deal with the denuclearization. so that status it is that many steps. >> it does not have to be. >> what should number three did do to stop the steps the u.s. government has been taking? if nuclear was to stop the

measure today what specific action to they need to take? >> north korea signed on to an agreement in in 2005 a and committed itself to end its nuclear program. we would like to see north korea return to the six-party talks and to begin to take irreversible steps consistent with the agreement in 2005 and move aggressively toward a denuclearization. this can be a complex process but does not necessarily have to be a link the one it requires a political commitment by north korea to meet its obligations and to join in a dialogue and eventually agreement with others in the region who have

concerns about north korea and its provocative behavior and its track record as a global proliferation risk. there is no mystery as to what we expect north korea to do. we're just waiting to see if it will follow the path that the international community has laid out for it. in the meantime we're willing to engage north korea we're willing to talk but we will continue to use sanctions to enforce the u.n. security council resolution and to have north korea pay a significant price. >> can i go back to lockerbie scotland? in addition is there any contact with london? >> we spoke to the united kingdom government about this as well but all to believe the

decision is left with the scottish authorities but we made our views clear not only to scotland, uk but also libya. >> will it create tensions between washington and london? >> web site it ahead of ourselves we made it clear. had given the tragedy that affected the united states, the united kingdom, obviously our interest is this just this and that the commitment that we made to the families to not only find a perpetrator of this terrorism act and bring him to justice, working with the united kingdom and stolid and was brought to trial, a fair trial, convicted, serving

his time and we think he should stay in jail. thank you.

>> on friday "washington journal" we spoke with fred kaplan about his book "1959" the year everything changed". this is 40 minutes. >> host: we want to welcome fred kaplan the book is it "1959" the year everything changed" you begin the book with the summary saying everything was changing and everyone knew it when the world as we now know it began to take form. >> guest: a few examples

1959 was the year of the microchip, birth control pill, space exploration, first nonstop coast-to-coast travel and court cases of bn named obscenity, and many federal and state court cases overturning laws of segregation. it was the year with new types of pop art, abstract art, independent films, jazz, comedy, everything we associate with life today you can trace to developments going on at the end of the 1950's. >> host: what led to putting this book together? >> guest: several years ago it occurred to me a lot of my favorite groundbreaking movies, books, all bums came out in 1959 i began to wonder it is a coincidence are part the brave broader power i

began to look into it then i suddenly realized first of all, a lot of very interesting things are going on the you can say that about a lot of years but they were converging in a single direction that formed a pivotal point* in american history to say the country was going in one direction then began to shift a am going to another. one excerpt from the book fred kaplan the new path was carved by the end third graduation those two group with the press should and four and felt satisfied with the piece that followed then spurred to revolt by the dissidents up against the promised hope and a probable fears. >> guest: everyboby seems to think the world changed in the

1960's and it is the baby boomers of which i am won by the way but i discovered a lot of what we associate with the late '60s started in the fifties and in the instigators was not the baby boom but that generation in the referred to so it is a different side of what we have known as the greatest generation the people who came up to form the united states and the world and a more anti-establishment sense that we're used to hearing about. >> host: you point* out the seeds of the kennedy campaign started in 1959. >> it was a coincidence oh parallel the emergence of another outsider

>> the period we're going through write now have a lot of parallels to the late fifties. jack kennedy , now catholics are such the integrated part of american society it is forgotten what a radical thing it was when kennedy ran for president as a catholic there were people fearful the pope would run the united states is the kind of tones with the debate about health care but kennedy was the youngest man running for president and succeeded dwight eisenhower who was the oldest man kennedy embodied the enchantment with the new and the young and people thought he was too

young, to inexperience but he turned that around and realized at that time it had its advantages and i think obama used the same idea but it is also what is going on larger in the late fifties there was a sense the world was shrinking with jet travel, rockets, i cbn obliterating each other in 20 minutes and we were a part of the world but today you have capital movements in a flash of a second to change the way we live there is a greater consciousness that the world is shrinking. there was a breakdown of the barriers between public and private spectacle and spectator pushed it to the nth degree with youtube and twitter practically has been obliterated.

there is an enchantment looking at madmen there are three movies in production, a lot of folks out that talk about change the year everything change, i did not planets but it is because we realize that right now we're on the verge of some new era of unknown opportunity and peril as jack kennedy put it there is a consciousness a sense we're on the verge we do not know where we're going and we can learn a lot how to conduct ourselves or not from what we went through the late fifties. >> host: the book is called "1959" fred kaplan spent 20 years as a reporter for "the boston globe" and now we're joined on the phone from jim it is in it california it. >> caller: i agree for taking my call.

talking about through 73 the [inaudible] i read in a world the news magazine in that 73 that gasoline would be a zero per $2 per gallon so imagine that today. >> but it also has been up at $5 it has been up and down. i don't understand the question. my book goes a lot more with the price of gas but it is true one thing that happened been at 1959 there was a and international auto show where the name toyota and dodd said reintroduced it was the year for its three and new hope for the automobile was

shunted -- shut down because nobody wanted the thing it was the year international trade began with automobile the year when the trades what we saw over the next two decades how it can no longer shape the marketplace that is where that began. >> host: we will show our television audience about the excerpt. >> caller: i have not read your book but i was bored in 1959. >> i am a conservative and and when i look back at that generation i don't see much that came out that was good for america may be a few good children's books i saw a generation that called police officers to maintain law and

order from berkeley kids that were too scared to go to war they called them big size of them call people that wanted to get on to their knees and honored god in jesus freaks. >> this is a 1959? >> i am talking about the hippie generation. >> you have not read the book but one thing that i do go win two in the last chapter but a lot of the trends that start in the late 1950's did take a dark direction when you open the barriers to a more free society freedom is a double edged sword you can go a lot of different ways so for example, there was progress in free speech and of the same time this opened the door two but pornography which nobody could defense. a lot of new examples with free expression but as you say some of this was corrosive to

society. i don't know if for example, if you have a wife or daughter in the workplace but i don't think that could have come about to the degree it did without the birth control pill which allows women to enter into the workplace without being saddled by a family that as soon as they got out of college if they did but a college the integrated neighborhood would not happen without certain court cases from 1959 per your right to. when you open a society in is open to a lot of things and that is one of the lessons that i hope to come out of this book that some of these freedoms were exploited a and taken down 80 genera path. >> host: does your book cover the issue around the beginning of the bf now more? >> guest: absolutely it actually started in 1959 in

the war as we know it the first american soldiers were killed in july 1959 that was the year ho chi minh and the north vietnamese communist party decided explicitly to wage a military campaign to unify the north and south to which they declared the united states was now the colonial occupier and the enemy just as they consider the french to be so before. that is the other instances where things converged at the end of the decade. >> host: rightabout nasa and astronauts you say that nasa public relations specialist came up with the word astronauts. >> remember from greek mythology, i think it is a fascinating. speaking earlier, it is so money back then it it was an adventure and people were

excited. talking about 1969 was the year that we landed on the moon but 1959 with the mercury astronauts were chosen that nasa was made an agency with electronic assets -- access and this is how the book begins when the first rocket breaks free of the earth's gravitational pull and begins to revolve around the sun like a planet that was january 2nd. "time" magazine next week declared this was a turning point* in a multi-billion year in the solar system that a creature of the sun a ball from to the point* where he could break free of the planet's gravitational pull. it is about people and movement and technology converging from all walks of

life that break free from the gravitational pull in which they were aloft before. >> freedom or communism will dominate the future in the eyes of the world first in space means first. second in space is second in everything is. >> they came from vice president johnson to president kennedy. when kennedy first came into office he was not that thrilled with space and he even thought about eliminating nasa but then the russians put a man into space. but then a lot of developments and technology and culture and elsewhere was driven by the cold war competition between the united states and soviet union then it was a test of our world leadership. when the kennedy talks about

the new frontier we had run out of the old frontier he was talking about outer space. that is really how the space program as a reno began. >> host: "1959" the year everything changed" fred kaplan is joining us. >> caller: this is one of those years or air as i believe called when the industrial military complex started that it wanted to expand or just go away at it started to expand and it learned it could do the small contained it geographically contained over a long time sustained war and it started doing that. but we had presidents that could contain at all the way through jimmy carter and that is when the big complex god involved and figured it could manipulate the environment

into wanting a stronger military. so they went after him in his worst time and destroy the actual statement then we got reagan who started to run everything to the big business but that is an interesting year. >> guest: i think your personifying the industrial military complex, but in 1960 with eisenhower farewell address you want by the ravages in his original draft of call the at industrial military congressional complex because he realized the political support for some of the weapons systems. and he was the supreme allied commander during world war ii said he knew where he was coming from. think the role of america -- military in american society has not handout and a lot of ways in

that regard i do not see 1959 as a bold turning point*. >> host: why were the french smart enough to be the vietnam? >> guest: they did not the they were kicked out. the battle of 1954 they had 10,000 soldiers surrounded by 50,000 vietcong. they asked the united states 42 tactical nuclear weapons and eisenhower turned them down he did not regard vietnam as that's important. there were not very smart they had even more people killed than we did. >> host: welcome to "washington journal". go ahead. >> caller: this since june ratio and a social understanding of was born and 1985.

a lot of the baby boomers ideals spawned at that time. we went to the a legal war with iraq is the same as vietnam the ideals of the democrats and republicans are the same and for all of the baby boomers i thank you for what you have done for this country but your time is over. it is the 21st century and a lot of the stuff is hurting the country all of the blue dogs are democrats. >> guest: okay. point* taken. >> host: dancing in the streets of gm, ford, chrysler, motown to new-line january 1959 very border bought the house that started motown records started

in august the silver beatles across the atlantic heard that and other tunes and changed the orientation from buddy holly two a jazz in fused rhythm-and-blues black in a few stand sexual music and the rest is history and it provided the soundtrack for the much more urban sensual decade of the six days. and culture does strange things. it probably lubricated a lot of the racial integration into, broke it is hard to be a racist when you slowdowns to smokey robinson. >> literally a house at west grand boulevard. >> he lived upstairs and put the business offices on the ground floor and a studio in the apartment which used to be

becker rides. his ambition was the straight jazz musicians and call themselves the fall of brothers they stayed in the studio all day then went out after hours to hear the improvisation and then you hear it in the music that change pop culture. >> host: it are we seeing what we saw in the auto industry? >> board put a lot of hype in this new cared day open-ended 10,000 into new dealerships to deal with the huge demand but it turns out there was a postwar boom but then a recession began that was a more premium car, a bigger car, people did not have the money they were looking for smaller cars it was also the year they started to build

compact and also the first indication that detroit could not determine the market and a more than the united states government could determine what was going on in the rest of the world. you can look back to that date as foretelling is a lot of things about the limits of superpower and the supermarket power. >> host: we have the republican in line good morning. >> caller: your book sounds fascinating. for a little aside which is totally unimportant do you know, second citi? there was 89 bair broke fred kaplan bair i was born in 35 my voted and we had to be 21. i voted for him not because he was democrat but the pressure

against catholics was so great i felt that if i 18 that. i am sorry i did vote for him later. the my point* is it was so powerful that people do not realize it. another observation in the 77 i did not know what it was but the time i was divorced with no money to the cheapest thing on the market and that car never stopped and i have been buying japanese cars ever since because the only thing smaller was the volts way again bug broke it is interesting. >> host: who is jack st. claire kill be? >> he invented the integrated circuit single-handedly the microchip he was not even a physicist he got a job at texas instruments in the

spring of 1958 that summer everybody went on a two week vacation he had not been in the company long enough to take a vacation so he sat in the lab by himself transistors word the end of the line if you wanted faster electrical functions or more of them you have to get a another layer of capacitors and wire them together by hand this was getting increasingly elaborate and expensive we could not do with it a more so he can do with the idea to put the functions on one can talk to a slap the became the microchip that practically everything in the studio everybody watching everything runs on a microchip from the digital display to your all arm clock, microwave oven, a calculator, a satellite communications, television

nothing could have have been it with the reduction of this laptop computer in 1950 a 1/2 to have computers the size of this room to do with this laptop can perform and still could not do anything so this one man was introduced at the radio and turned -- into your trade show not everybody saw the implication and as yet. that is maybe of all the things in that but, that and the birth control pill are the two things that created the modern world most universally as we know it today was there a topic he wanted to get into the book but had to be left out? >> guest: i regret to some of them and i figured out subsequently how i could have worked the man but i did not get in "twilight zone" or the barbie doll but those are my

too great to regrets maybe if there is a revised edition that would get them and. >> host: good morning you are with the author of "1959". >> caller: i hope you can help me through this situation as it regards to health care your book is about the time everything change reappraising a saturation where change these to take place and we have so many people who are resistant to a situation and where everybody would be included into a health-care plan and the united states it seems like the upper middle class has their insurance but they do not want people to come into the mix because it would take away their pre-eminence in society by letting other people into a situation where we could be on a more equal basis. maybe i have the wrong idea?

>> guest: changes always resistant this book is called the year everything changed" but not everybody was in favor kennedy represented a new vibrant thien but he just barely got 50% of the boat. one thing that is different now is you have all of these cable channels in 1950 only half adipate television by the end it is three-quarters then they just begin to build a transistor radio for less than $20 it is just the beginning of a culture where everybody who was watching and listening to the same thing. >> host: and he also points out the 19 -- remote-control came back and 1959. >> guest: another thing that i missed. i am sorry.

>> caller: can you hear me? in 1959 in san diego linebacker ron bair 880 flew to miami in about three and a half hours and return to the same day for the first transcontinental jet flight. about that time howard hughes was president of twa and he tied up all of those flights without paying any money for them but then the big shift came from a powerful senator from washington who got the money for boeing to become the predominant producer of jet travel aircraft. >> guest: i don't know about that. there was a flight to in january nonstop from new york to los angeles boeing seven '07 were bought by pan am flying across the country or from baltimore to paris.

it was a huge thing. it was extremely expensive but tickets were sold out through the summer starting in january so i do not think it was as tied up as you are suggesting. >> host: good morning on the democrat line. >> caller: good morning. i appreciate c-span and what it does for the american in this it is then it is one of the greatest rights we have is that we have a freedom of speech regardless to convey valuable information into one another. and the bank you for coming on board with us the 19 to tell us what you thought was the most important thing and a 1959. you open an area of for future resents and we have seen a lot

of changes to an improvement with the black race over the years i graduated high school in it 66 and started teaching and a franklin tenn. during the '70s i saw how equal rights generally improved over the years than i started to celebrate with most american of black history month in the classroom and realized that we did a great injustice for the black people and they were right because there was a lot of injustice going on in the '60s and martin luther king

brought that out and it was right but today we have a reverse discrimination and we have black history month by yet i wonder somewhere down the line may be the american and hispanic month. >> guest: what would be wrong with that? >> caller: there would not but then we have the other nationalities. there's a lot of immigration going on write now. >> guest: in 1959 the year when the u.s. civil-rights commission released its first report a commission only formed two years earlier that detailed a 650 page report based on hearings conducted throughout the south detailing the level of discrimination in housing, schools and in the voting booth and that report have long been forgotten that

led to a lot of the court cases filed in the '60s overturning segregation law. it took awhile for all of it to play out but in 1954 there was board of education but not much happened until the report and also the activism of martin luther king but also becoming national figures of small, some of the changes that took place, the beginning, the pivot occurred some of the results and implications did not play out for several more years. >> host: and the book "1959" the year everything changed" you can leave been get more information and by a logging on to fred kaplan .info.

>> caller: good morning. of the a2 say a few things in regard to the birth control pill however oh print opportunities for women but i want to talk about. >> host: we are getting static and the backs of real move on. >> caller: good morning i am surprised by god and. they do. i was born in 1964 that seems that 64 it you remember that

you are alive and it seems like it was such the idyllic time for me a hint things were simpler i can walk down the street and my little dress with my transistor radio and all of those things that you spoke about the i am wondering is that time before things got complicated or did it seem like such the ideal time for me because i was a child? >> everybody has idyllic memories from their childhood. that was before we lost our innocence. the end of the fifties was not a terribly in the second time. there were fears of nuclear war, it was believed falsely that the soviets were way ahead of us in missiles and people were digging bomb shelters in their backyard there were serious discussions between theologians and catholic magazines of it was

ethically permissible if your neighbor tried to break into your fallout shelter in a nuclear war ap were black or a woman or a jewish outside of new york city or others, these were not terribly innocent times for you. we do have a tendency to romanticize our childhood but in fact, come it in its own way it was as genetic and full of terror as any other time. >> host: a and you point* out to the rise of power through fidel castro and you have a photograph of famine in new york at the bronx zoo. >> guest: he took power new europe -- new year's day 1959 but people don't remember at the time he was greeted as practically a savior here is a revolutionary it neither

communist nor capitalist maybe he can chart out a third way or break free of the deadlock of the cold war he came to the united states march 1959 and agreed to as a hero and spoke in front of 30,000 people and was quite fluent in english and spoke to people on the streets and would go to the washington mall. everybody would say hi fidel but it took a few months before whether it was his true colors or his associates were revealed plus we decided any the government that would prevent american corporations to do business as they had it would be fought so the romance did not last long but what that romance indicated was a desire to break free of that deadlock of the cold war which

ran for another two decades. >> caller: good morning. i am a listener of the show i watch every day and i really enjoy this it has been a better segment i have seen in a long time i am 64 years old may be because it is my age. i know what would happen for me. the title of your book is the year everything changed" i guess it was 1957 i was interested in astronomy and looking at the stars and noticed after sputnik was put up in october and other people were looking up, not just me i was looking for sputnik and others were. lot of memories come back and i am really enjoying this. that was my comment. >> guest: you are right about sputnik but from the american point* of view 59 is the year that we began to go

out there into space as well launching it satellites matching the russians then passing them with the astronaut program also looking up in space it was the year went to businesses roped searching for extraterrestrial intelligence in "nature" magazine that talked very seriously in mathematical terms i you would contact them what frequency astronomers should listen to and that is what started the seki program but it has pretend in the rise said -- mri's en of all of us. >> caller: this segment does not make sense to me but i notice making up 1% of the population there is always

three jewish people it is a shame. >> it is a shame. >> host: outside the manhattan nightclub the impact he had on the music. >> guest: miles davis came out with an album and 1959 actually 50 years ago this money and called kind of blew he revolutionize the way jazz was played he was standing at with midtown manhattan celebrities and people every night he escorted a white woman won a cop told him to move along and he said day work here and pointed to the marquee and that is my name and the detective bought with some it was happening and came over and bashed him on the head with a billy club and it

took five stitches then they car did him away to jail, miles davis for creating a disturbance broke "the new york times" story was about this long and took the police planted year and the point* that i make it introduces i had a chapter about my ails davis it introduces the chapter on race relations and it shows year was really one of the most famous people in the american arts at the top of his game, rich and famous movie star coming in to see him but yet to not in the deep south the right outside the club he was playing in manhattan but to a couple of cops he was another uppity black eye or of the negro. >> host: miami beach good morning. >> caller: what i want to explain is the fact, i know

where i am coming from. in late 59 and early 60s or the latter part of 69 with miami, miami beach, at the jewish were prospering the blacks had no problem but it was the southern white mail that interfered with the progress under the eisenhower mentality that was basically a military type of mentality. >> host: what is your question? >> caller: although you mention 1959 although the other caller mentioned about 57 that was leading into 59.

so you are on target but why would there be a problem with the race relationships between the jewish and the black during that era? >> guest: between the jews and blacks that is an interesting point* in that area as you probably know a lot of margin to 13 this topic risers especially in the dole advisers word you wish there was a natural alliance between northern shoes and southern blacks many of the white people who came down for the freedom riots a little later were jewish. the black you wish attention as another buck but at that time, i am certainly not suggesting that was a problem. maybe you are responding to an earlier caller who seem to have problems with so many jews on television to seven it

the word creative energy of can you explain that? >> guest: i think in 1959, there was this idea that we could be blasting off of the planets, we would cross new horizons and that created an appetite for new forms of expression i am not saying that miles davis saw the rocket and said i will play a different but i am saying when he did start to play in a different way there were more people that were receptive to that. oilmen of 70 laws were overthrown add to start read books you could not be before i am not talking about pornography but 2 million people bought a copy of one

book in 1959 because it was the forbidden fruit that had fallen from the mine and easily available so this pent-up market for new things, the desire to experiment and be more respective and then galvanized the generation to go further. that is the creative energy i am talking about. >> host: "1959" the year everything changed" he also writes for "slate".com. thank you for being with us.

>> christopher buckley the author of thank you for smoking a little green man and the supreme court ship in this program he talks about his work and his father billion f. buckley. >> host: christopher buckley of all of your books which is your favorite? >> guest: that is a tricky question broke my stock answer to that is the next one. i write mostly comic novels maybe seven or eight this book

" losing mum & pup" is a memoir probably the only one i will rights because i do not have very much to say maybe i go out on thin ice but i don't think i will write a better book than this one but it is in part because it is so singular in nature and in part because it is about two extraordinary people who provided me with some pretty amazing material. >> host: what was their right to write this book? >> guy sat down one day shortly after i buried my father last year i woke up in the morning with no intention of writing a book and started to write a book and wrote it and 40 days. that was accidental there is

no biblical allusion and intended but when i looked up the calendar after i finished it i saw 40 days had elapsed. i work harder my riding high rewrite and rewrite this road to itself by ditto lot of writing after but it pretty much poured out. >> host: were you surprised at what poured out? >> guest: yes. i think the first sentence of the book read something like i am not sure how this book will turn now to and indeed i was surprised at how the book turned out. >> host: that is exactly what it says. >> guest: the height of quote king oneself. it is a story. it is a story of the year of losing my parents who were quite incredible people.

there are a lot of flashbacks and it about growing up with them. i ask myself when i got to the end of the book why did you write this book? it is the typical reason of pepfar says, i had been out of town word as my dad would have said but honestly i think i wrote it as a way to spend some more time with him before finally putting him to risk at -- to rest as one does and a way to spend time with them when they were in their prime there were some passages from when they were at their best and some passages which i describe they were at their most