is also our responsibility. our entire nation will benefit from long-awaited steps that will bolster the ability of indian nations to a more fully the minister governments, build up our communities and lead the essential social and economic needs of our people. ..

over 200 years of supreme court decisions have consistently held that indian tribes retained the inherent sovereignty the government our people and land. the sovereignty is a 5-dollar word for ordinary everyday facts just like every other government indian tribes have the authority to make and enforce their own laws for the safety and welfare of their communities. in addition, tribal governments are dedicated to protecting our unique indian cultures and ways of life. just as states and foreign countries have a unique

relationship with washington so do tribal nations. the fundamental bond is the same. tribal governments represent and are accountable to the citizens who elect them. sovereignty has practical and tangible benefits from the indians and the united states as a whole. it is the self determined path to economic growth and addressing chronic unemployment, education, crime and so many of the problems our citizens face in their daily lives. it contributes to the cultural diversity of the united states and promotes places that perspectives, that helps solve many of the nation's challenges. i am pleased to report the administration and congress have taken important steps to recognize our sovereignty and proper authority of governments. as they say in washington we are taking our rightful place of the table and seeing progress. last december proposed

settlement of the bill versus salazar suit was finally made to remedy the federal government's failure to account for indian trust funds. in november the national congress of american indians opened in the sea of trouble mentions. for the first time since the settlement, our nations have a permanent home in washington, d.c. where we can more effectively assert our sovereign status and facilitate a much stronger nation to nation relationship with federal government. this historic open seat in the open, with the annual white house travel nations conference. it is an understatement to say that this was a historic day for indian country. i want to again thank present barack obama for living up to his campaign promises to hold this meeting, and i think the members of the administration for their commitment to addressing the most pressing issues. at the meeting we saw the first

of many action steps that need to be taken. president obama's directive to every cabinet agency to provide him with a detailed plan to improve tribal consultation. since that meeting we've been working with federal agencies to strengthen the nation to nation relationship because we understand sovereignty isn't a one-way street. we, as participants and fellow players in american civic life indian nations have a record of achievement for example in spite of severe disparities and from the and the indian health programs tribes have developed pioneering practices for telemedicine and for the treatment of diabetes and has created a groundbreaking program to deliver dental care to promote areas, a program that could serve as a model for the rest of the country. though because of our distinct spiritual relationships with land indian people are

disproportionately impacted by climate change and environmental degradation. we are innovators in the field of natural resource management and offer a more traditional knowledge to the locks up climate solution change. our environmental stewardship has led to the achievements such as the red lake yy recovery the largest freshwater fish species recovery in modern-day america. when indian nations in washington engage in true partnership we succeed. under the american recovery reinvestment act indian nations have deliver health care in the age of the arctic circle expanded the fishing economy in the sound for diving and technology, created as many as 300 jobs on the reservation by restoring the transportation infrastructure for timber and much more. the recovery act is a good example of congress partnership with indian tribes.

through early engagement tribes were able to recommend provisions that would yield the highest job creation and infrastructure building opportunities for the communities. these solutions were seriously taken up by congress and tribes received more than $3 billion in direct funding as well as new opportunities and economic development financing. ncaa is producing a report with case studies and analysis of job creation and other economic benefits that federal investments have brought to our communities. the bottom line is when tribes govern themselves in much the same way as states and communities do the benefits accrue not only to indian countries but to all americans. and again country was also included from the beginning in drafting a national health care reform legislation to insure whatever reforms are passed will enhance and protect indian health care systems.

congressional leadership has recognized when the national policies with significant impact of tribes are considered indian countries must be a table. we are welcome -- [applause] thank you. we are welcomed into the policy process early and it makes a big difference. we are able to propose solutions that work best for the unique circumstances of the indian country rather than try to adapt policies that did not take our needs into consideration and never work. we wholeheartedly thank the leadership for working with indian country to develop policies that strengthen troubled communities and our ability to contribute to the economy and vitality of america. the fy 2011 andean country budget request that we are releasing today provides an agenda for an additional work that we can partner together to

achieve. through this great change and the resulting progress we will direct new strength toward the chronic problems for people face. i want to bring your attention to one of the most a courageous underreported crises in indian country. day after day we hear about america's unemployment crisis particularly after the jobless rate has skyrocketed about 10%. i agree it is a crisis. i know that because on indian reservations and in alaskan native villages unemployment is above 50%. that is not just due to this recession, the indian unemployment rate on reservations has been at or about 50% for decades. in some parts of indian countries it is even worse. in 2005 when the national unemployment rate was only 5%

figure with indian affairs reported reservation unemployment in the states of arizona, utah and nevada at 63%. and the northern rockies 67%. in the northern plains 77%. put simply on employment is an economic crisis that has afflicted our communities for generations. for most americans, going up to 10% unemployment has become a crisis of historic proportions. for indians coming down to 10% would be a recovery of historic proportions. imagine men and women who have tried and failed to find work year after year imagine wanting something better for your children knowing that the dropout rate for high school is higher among native communities than any other minority groups in the country imagine the place

you live has the lowest college graduation rate in the united states. what encouragement does a child have to study and prepare for meaningful work when their parents can't find a job for years? woodring sure hope fernald? that is what 50% unemployment rate means in indian country. the effect is like dominoes falling. in the in country suffer from higher rates of substance abuse, domestic violence, suicide and teen birth than the rest of the country. higher rate of mental health is used, a greater concentration of conditions such as diabetes and obesity are in rates well above the national average. our needs are just like yours.

we want a normal daily life and with meaningful opportunities. yet for decades tribal peoples have been denied these opportunities. the experience daily circumstances that most americans would never tolerate. the jobs bill is an important vehicle to address the sevier and amy degette on employment problem in the in country. we applaud the efforts of congressional leadership and carefully considering the needs of indian country in solution with greatest impact on communities. our people are suffering, but our spirit is not broken. we have in the word century -- [applause] we have endured sentries of neglect and abuse yet remain steadfast in our journey toward

self-reliance. sovereignty is the path to solutions. sovereignty matched by the resources we need. we are very appreciative that we have a place at the table with this administration and we intend to use it to create jobs and improve the quality-of-life for our people. respect for sovereignty leads to cooperation which is what we seek in this growing government to government relationship. the tribes have been around for a long time and we have heard a lot of promises and we've been to a lot of meetings. now is the time to convert good intentions into immediate action. in this spirit -- [applause] >> thank you. there are seven things that could be accomplished for indian nations right now. they are not everything but they are a good start. these actions will create jobs,

expand health care, improved education, address crime and more. all it requires is action by the of the penetration and i call on the administration to act on these matters in the next 12 months. first, take action to restore tribal land and allow us to use our land as we see fit. the vast majority of indian reservations are heavily affected by land loss and the most significant obstacle indian tribes face and restoring of consolidating land is simply an action and the late at the department of interior. many tribes have had planned to trust applications pending for over a decade and the vast majority are on the reservation and are not controversial in any way. restoration of the tribal land base is critical to build economic development. but even the land we have are often underutilized.

their development is often undermined by texas at bureaucratic hurdles. tribal land come to an over 10% of the nation's traditional and clean energy resources. the potential on the blackfeet reservation in montana is estimated to be up to 54 million megawatts per year. that is enough energy if developed and supported by adequate transmission and other infrastructure to heat and light of to 5 million homes. indian tribes have nearly a quarter of onshore oil and gas reserves and one-third and low-sulfur coal, get production from tribal land represents less than 5% or current onshore oil and gas and coal production. why is this? and tribes want to do something with their land especially economic development we have to

go through as many as seven times the number of federal approval process sees as similar land outside reservation boundaries. approvals on tribal land track on a bitterly for years placing tribal economic initiatives as severe if not fatal competitive disadvantages. no one can run a business that way. the of the penetration could fix that by reforming the federal trust system for land of the bureau of affairs. this would streamline and passed the the path of jobs, new business and economic growth. second -- [applause] thank you. second is to address law enforcement. there's already some movement on this with attorney-general holder's recent announcement of reforms. but that is not everything. the interior department needs to address its policing role in indian country. especially given the

disproportionately high rates of drug trafficking, domestic violence and sexual assault that occur on indian land. our reservations have become a target and a haven for drug trafficking. the problem is a failure of coordination and lack of funding. the administration has the power to fix both of those. third is guaranteed equal treatment under the law by granting travel government the same treatment as state and local governments on tax and finance matters. compared to the tribal governments state and local governments get preferential treatment on tax-exempt bonds, pension plans, benefits and other financial instruments. indian nations deserve the same financial of advantages. we need this tribal governments can attract businesses and create jobs which is what governments are supposed to do. fourth is an investment in our children so they may grow into

healthy youth and become the next generation of tribal leaders, community members and business leaders. our youth are a valuable resource however too often the investment made in india and use is at the back and win intervention services are needed. they address only the symptoms of poverty and lack of opportunity and fail to harness the inherent potential of our children and teenagers. young people have the capacity for creating and leading positive community change. we need a support for a used littleness initiative that addresses their needs for safety, education, health care and job school development with coordination across the systems and the departments which the services are delivered. fifth is to ensure effective distribution of funds to the tribal government. at the moment where the administration and congress have raised collaboration with tribal

governments to a historic and promising new level now is not the time to shrink back from investments that can transform our communities. in the nations of the primary role of administering health care, education, law enforcement, transportation and many other services for our citizens. making the promise of government to government a reality will require ongoing funding for tribal governments as well as actions by the administration to both minimize the administrative burden and maximize tribal ability to compete in discretionary programs. specific solutions could include exempting funding for tribal government services from a discretionary spending freezes and recisions and eliminating match requirements dedicating set aside funding for specifically tribal support

government programs and in sure selection criteria and performance measures are appropriate for tribal governments. we applauded the administration's acknowledgement that effective investments like the recovery act must be measured with reliable data. tribal leaders are eager to see the federal government support more robust data collection. at times the example is the need for the the part of labor and the census bureau to collect more accurate and timely native unemployment data so we can better understand the impact of the crisis and recovery. six is interagency coordination to improve tribal infrastructure many americans take their infrastructure such as roads, schools, water, telecommunications for granted. but it is an ongoing struggle in indian country. for example, 12% of tribal homes

lack access to safe drinking water or basic sanitation. compared to less than 1% nationwide. we can plan has trouble governors but we need a federal commitment across common programs to work on an inter agency basis and collaborate with tribes has been demonstrated by the interagency task force on modern infrastructure. such efforts have already proven effective. for example public law 102477 create a program that allows tribes to combine funds for the 12th related unemployment training programs within three federal agencies. heels tangible results as streamlining programs, reduces the administrative burdens and increases efficient use of funds for dramatically underfunded programs. time and money are focused on

implementing solutions. finally we need the administration to support a legislative fix for last year charity decision by the supreme court. this touches a lot of issues but especially the ability of tribal governments to carry out land development. we need clear and fair rules on our legal status and ability to pursue contracts and loans so we can carry out economic development. these seven actions will have a real and immediate effect on improving life in indian communities. at this time next year i hope to report on seven nuclear successes. i will close with three points. first come to be sovereign is to exercise the right to govern and

protect the health safety and welfare of travel citizens. we see a growing government to government relationship with washington. we come as participants, contributors and fellow players and into the competitors and leaders. sovereignty is indeed a net plus for america. second, self-determination is a path to economic revitalization and cultural diversity to overcome employment by declining education, crime and other challenges. finally, we ask the administration to address seven nuclear in part in matters as a way of to further strengthen the nation to nation relationship and improved life in indian country. as we continue to exercise of sovereignty in the nation's will receive the respective loan deserve and we can engage in to a government to government relationship that will transform

lives in indian communities. that is our most basic goal and will benefit native people and all americans for generations to come. thank you. [applause] [applause] thank you, pres. keel. at this point we are open for any questions, so if anybody has any questions we would be glad to entertain them if you could please state your name and who you represent we would appreciate that. yes blacks

>> john oklahoma and i wanted to check our research shows tribes can be generating 100 to $500 billion in energy and that the new lines with smart grid would make remote areas a way to be the power urban areas and that indeed that makes the missing link on the economics for green and energy that obama is looking for. the same areas to clear those lines could also be used for telecommunications which would then set aside in terms of being able to be the new landowners. where do we stand and what can we do to accomplish that? >> thank you for that question. there are many tribes that are already engaged in energy development. many tribes have their own tribal utility authorities that are working in conjunction with the federal government and in

many ways to improve that coordination but i think the energy bill will clarify a lot of that and i'm going to ask jackie to comment on the specifics of that bill. >> thank you for being here today. as you know, energy is important. new economic opportunity in indian country. we've been working currently with senate committee on indian affairs and senator dorgan's staff to put together an energy bill proposal that is yet to be introduced. but in that energy bill proposal we are dealing with not only access to the transmission lines but also dealing with economic and financial tools we need to be able to create the kind of incentives that make energy development feasible and in the in country so we are looking very forward to the bill being introduced early in the session and we are looking hard and strong for good bipartisan support.

other questions? >> jamestown washington state. what does in cia advocate with the department justice to advance the public safety interest of the community's? >> thank you, chairman alan. on a number of fronts we've been working with department of justice. department of justice stepped up to be a player. several years ago we had a report that came to congress and around the members of amnesty report that cannot be extreme numbers of women against violence and we got a great coalition which is the co-chair, addressing the women against violence in indian country but it's not just about that is what president keel talked about in the speech about the gang violence that is affecting the communities and the drug dealers that have come because of the

fact that we don't have as many will enforce that officers as we had. the way that indian public safety is delivered in indian country, we rely upon a good corporate relationship between the department of interior and department of justice and we need both of them stepping to the table and collaborating together. the administration has announced there is more indian police officers and police officers going to in the in country. the have plans for putting together the training that is needed around sexual violence, drug enforcement and those will be good steps. but also what we need from the part of justice and i think that under the current leadership in the department of justice they are looking for how to streamline the process for grant making for tribes so that we can build up the detention centers that we need in the communities, the holding places, the prevention tools and resources but also the needed money to

address strengthening the tribal court system. we are looking for congress to support, help to part of justice and department of interior bypassing the tribal law and order act. a bill that is pending in both the house and the senate is critical for dealing with a jurisdictional challenge in indian country and we look forward to the bipartisan support getting the bill moving this year, too. >> other questions? yes. >> you mentioned mr. keel some of the success with recovery and reinvestment act. are you basically saying the stimulus package is truly working for indian country? and i have a follow-up. >> absolutely.

the tribes we were able to access recovery dollars allow tribes to retain those individuals who ordinarily might not have been able to stay employed so it allows tribes to access funding for those specific purposes but also in best in the future. a lot of those dollars have not been allocated the they have not been spent yet. the tribes are still, they withdrew a grand process to receive those dollars and they are just now getting those fundings said it is we take some time to look and see what the true measures are in terms of success there is no way they can be used in a negative way because they do allow tribes to use them to revitalize their own economies. >> if i could follow up, there's a good example.

first a lot of the recovery dollars were targeted to the backlog that was in the agency's programs, transportation dollars, health care facility dollars that were needed in andean countries, so those were early, we had them on the drawing board for a long time and so the planning around those were ready to go. but then there were new things and funds that were important in the country. for the first time to be able to deal with tax-exempt bond financing those are the kind of things the will be long-lasting and we will able to make them last, if we be able to have tax-exempt finding beyond just the rf funds and you guys, a follow-up question. >> to that point, when things began of course in the in country was way over here so no matter how far you go the sizable amount you still have an incredible lack wall catching up to do. the president just said that this grant be a reduction in cuts and discretionary spending beyond defense and other

entities. are you concerned since the other shoe is the budget and other money that that funding will be cut therefore could penalize the andean countries when it comes to those? >> absolutely we are concerned. any time the mengin of freezes or recisions are mentioned that always represent a fear in indian country because we've never been funded at an adequate level. in the in country is never received adequate funding for its programs through any administration so when there is a freeze automatically it does raise alarms. however we dealt with those or until the budget is released and that won't be until monday, we don't know what those were representing. we do look forward to working with congress and working for the other staff and congressional staff and friends in congress to make sure that we protect the games we've made.

spec i can talk about the indian country is looking for and looking to in the budget. the andean countries rally around a couple of things very important for us. first of all, the contract support cost which is when the tribes provide service the federal government was responsible for providing the should get paid the same as any other contractor for those services and then our tribal priority allocation, the tipi dollars that allowed to make sure we have the administrative functions necessary for the tribes but there were four areas the tribes have highlighted as priority areas for them and not many to the order, but one of course is education, health care, natural resources including economic development public safety services. those are all real priorities for the tribal leaders and we've been working and urging the administration to help in those areas. we did get great improvement last year particularly in a law enforcement and health care. we are hoping we will be able to

sustain that and we are hoping to be able to work through whatever those freeze requirements may have. but we are also looking as president keel mentioned when the tribes partner with the administration of the programs and the delivery of the programs the self-reliance of the tribes and the value of the tribes bring to the tail and actually help those become more efficient programs and we think my partner and together we can make those dollars be stronger. and in your packet you have a copy of the ncai's budget request but also some information about how the dollars were spent and we believe we are a good federal investment. >> good morning. lance, former chairman of the york. at the beginning of your speech, you brought up the federal

recognition process. we are a tribe that has been waiting 31 years and we just got our preliminary decision december 15th which was a good decision. we are still holding our breath for the final decision, but i would like to know what ncai is going to do to move forward this year to help fix the broken process which i think everyone has admitted over the last 31 years is broken. so i would just like to note what ncai's position is on that and where we are going to go. >> the national congress of american indians is an inclusive organization and represents indian people across the country those tribes that are struggling to retain or regain federal recognition, it is a broken system. it is a system that needs

immediate care. the national congress american indians will continue to advocate on behalf of those tribal governments to get a fair and timely review process. the review process is very difficult and you and i visited in great detail about that so i'm aware of the struggles but i can tell you the national congress of american indians will continue to advocate on behalf of all indian people across the country. >> president martin and then dawn. >> thank you for the comments today. they are very dear to all of us. my name is bill martin with trials of alaska, and during the stimulus package funding we missed out simply because the last minute corporation

structure so we missed out on many opportunities because of that and yet alaska tribes still love the same means. we also lost out on funding simply because we are relentless and don't have the capacity. i hope that ncai will work with the alaska tribes who are 40% of the tribes of the united states. we hope that ncai will work with us in any future stimulus money to be cognizant of the fact reservations don't exist in alaska and that effect should be, should not be in the stimulus package. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for the comment. john? >> there is money that is available for training young people communications especially journalism. i met with arne duncan and he now holds more money than anybody in the history of the

world for education and the thing is when i told him and asked him what is he doing for indian education, he almost tear up when he talked about going to blame here saying that he was really said he didn't know how to be will to help. i said there's a lot of ways ncai has a few ideas about that. so the opportunity to be about place we can help place young people. we had a meeting here at the press club with several of these news reporters, helen thomas was there probably the oldest one sitting in the front but we need to have a native american strong independent and be able to ask all the questions they want to address it in front of the world come in front of the press in front of all the people were issues need to be brought up. there's money available and if any tribe has young people who want to be able to get into reporting and journalism in the

national press club has scholarships and i would ask you contact ncai and get those names because we have positions that are going unfilled. >> thank you. excellent. >> i want to follow-up on education. this year we have been looking forward to the no child left behind reauthorization for the discussion that we need to have within the in countries recommendations and yesterday we were lucky enough to be able to have some conversation with some of the staff from the hill and we were looking forward to having a listening session around education to see what we can do to not only address the current conditions of the rehabilitation needs that our schools are desperately in need of, the new schools out there, the tribal colleges, the expansion programs the need to be able to train the work force for the future but also to be able to get in the in country to think about our place in the world as the world market changes hell are we setting

ourselves to be able to be players in a global market place so we are looking forward to the continued dialogue as we get ready to bring on the discussion of round the reauthorization. other questions? yes. >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> i just wanted to ask it is a twofold question. one is the bill we worked on years ago needs to come back and as we pursue a greater relationship with the digital divide in the infrastructure of technology and cyberspace we become more threatened when we experience wild fires and flood and our sites are exposed and we need to revisit that in terms of having a partnership.

i know the corps of engineers hasn't been the greatest ally so i'm asking if we can champion whether it be pulling together people in the field or using our human cultural resource group to lead that we need to reconnect the dots of protected sites, religion and those concerns that we need to be the leaders and i hoping that you along with the staff, not that you have too much to do, but that he would consider revisiting this. it is a momentous thing to come back to. connecting that with cyberspace is trying to get some tribes who have not gained access to that to gain access to that. >> that is an excellent point, and our historic sacred sites you're absolutely right or extreme importance.

they are dear to all tribal people around the country. i know that there is an effort, the national historic preservation officers, nafo and there are a number of agencies working in conjunction that work with tribes to talk about the issues and there are ongoing efforts across the country to protect those sites but i know that ncai is doing significant work and i'm going to ask jackie to comment on that. >> thank you. first i want to recognize wanda james from the united southern eastern tribes because they were a leader in bringing this issue to the table particularly around the cell phone tells replacement when across the country corporations wanting to place the cell phone towers and strategically at the highest mountain or in certain places that were historically significant to in the in country and throughout this process of

recognizing the value of consultation with tribes and the tribes working with the sec we were able to come up with a process that made sense. it was a process that recognized the expeditious manner the corporations needed to have a solution but still respected the tribes had significant concerns and certain places and also there could be a whole swarm of the applications that could come through and tribes didn't have the capacity or the staffing at home to look through those, all of the reviews necessary. so we were able to come up with a process that allowed tribes to determine what pleases they were concerned about up front the corporations could then look of this inventory and send notices appropriately and there were time frame said. that is the kind of process i think consultation brings to both in the in country and the public sector that wants to invest in and around in the in country and something that helps us protect our sacred sites but

allows economic development to still flourish. other questions? of your questions? yes. >> i would like to ask a second question if you like. ron allen, chairman for the jamestown scholar tried washington state. i neglected to compliment you mr. president. that was an outstanding summary of the state of the indian nations across america and we deeply appreciate that. a second issue you raised the concern of a healthy economy and jobs in indian country and they are hinged closely to financing. what does ncai advocate for the treasury or the federal reserve with regard to enhancing our economies and creating jobs in the communities? >> i think this is one that we are very excited about having a conversation about. for a long time we've been advocating for the same economic

tools that can be very valuable with tax-exempt bond financing that other governments have access to. other governments are able to use financing to put together economic development and in a way tribes are restricted from doing so. so we have been urging conversations not only with congress but also the head of fenestration about addressing those. in addition to that we are asking for things such as and in a plan and tax credit and accelerated depreciation tax credit. those are too good tools for the counter but they are not authorized to go beyond a limited time frame and so they don't bring any value to the table when we are negotiating business deals and trying to pencil out what works so we are asking for an extension of that time frame to ten years to deal to make the tools become real reality but if you look in the in country and access to capital has been a challenge we have

very few financial institutions that are actually located on our reservations or in our communities. most of them financially institutions are of reservation or outside of our committee and so they're in community investments not the same. so we are looking at we've been very supportive for a number of years on the cd fy the community financial institutions because it is a vehicle to create financial institutions in our own communities. but it doesn't bring the kind of capital that we need to be able to get that small business moving, the entrepreneurial community remedying in our areas. we don't have access to that of to $50,000 in our communities to the will to do what we need to do to get some of those moving so we are looking for some expansion. we asked them the financial reforms will that we have the

native american bank and what we would like to have is the ability of that bank to be able to go to other communities, other tribal communities and reservations without having to go through state approval process that's limiting when this is a national indian bank and we worked on the reservations a slight change that language would allow us to expand and branch out so we would have needed bank branches on the tribal reservations and that is another solution. we have a whole list of solutions but that gives you some of the things we've been looking forward to. once again with energy development -- another i want to bring that it's been a problem in development period whether it be energy development and construction is assuredly bonding. it's difficult for tribes to get a shirred bonding the need because we are a tribal government with a tribal institution and not everybody quite understands that.

there's only a few national usher the bonding companies out there but it's still very difficult for them to understand the structure of the tribal government. we are hoping we can get bonding guarantee programs similar to the sba program has and the sba are expanding so it works better in indian country. those are some of the tools we are proposing. other questions? yes. >> this is concerning the tuition waiver at fort lewis college and will nci do to insure the native students can continue to get a free education? >> i'm glad you brought that up. the tuition waiver the college, i will give what i know as the latest information. by the way my children went to fort lewis college and that was a great institution because coming from alaska we have a lot of students who make the trail down to fort lewis. i think we have a caravan of 13

cars my first to my daughter went. i will try to get there. i was a single adult. but we have reached out to find out more about that information. ai understand this is an effort in the state. hi understand that effort has been tabled and it is no longer moving forward and there was an apology about the understanding what how this would penalize indian students from attending a land grant college so i think that issue has been resolved. last question? anyone, last question? jongh? >> one of the past secretaries of energy approached me about the discussion of parking federal money into indian banks so each one of the secretaries has millions of dollars they are putting into minority banks,

native american banks ought to be one of the first ones. the of millions of dollars and now with all these billions of dollars of surplus that could be an extraordinary amount that could be parked there. another purpose $30,000 of guaranteed funds were loans are available immediately with sba stansel is toying with the sba and would be glad to help any of the small businesses like pete has been doing for years. >> i know we are running out of time. i wanted to make one last comment that has to do with education of our young people. our young people today are creative, innovative and eager to go to college to become the next generation of leaders for this country. we are excited to see the young people now coming back from law school, from medical school serving our people, so anything we can do to help in that effort we certainly want to do that. thank you again for being here. >> thank you for listening. [applause]

thank you for listening and being part of the annual state of indian nations address and on behalf of the national congress of american indians we would like to thank again native voice one, calling the public and local radio stations called try or radio stations across the country if you want we have many viewers that are on ncai board. this copy of this webcast will be also posted within one hour on the website. thank you again for those of you covering this event. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

former house speaker newt gingrich spoke in manchester new

hampshire of the conference on grassroots communication and new media. he also talks about health care, immigration and transparency in government. this one hour 15 minute event comes from southard new hampshire university. ♪ >> thank you very much. fred, thank you for your leadership as a citizen and helping organize this and helping bring together people all across new hampshire who are concerned about the future of the state and future of the country, and i'm delighted to have a chance to talk to you about how all the new emerging media gives new opportunities because i think this is one of those amazing american moments.

for 400 years, what has made us different than any other country in the world has not been the quality of the front door of a ability to magically always be right. it's been the ability of the american people to continuously develop a better future, and to do it in ways that would dramatically outside of whenever the experts thought. you know, back in the 1890's if you have had a planning committee transportation problems they might have talked about electric trolley cars, they would have talked about the rail road, they would have talked about the decline of the stagecoach, they would have talked about the new emerging revolution personal transportation which was highlighted in the census of

1890 which was the bicycle and the senses of 1890 pointed out forcible bicycles about teenagers to fly away from parental supervision and the house all sorts of the applications. it probably wouldn't have talked about and i'm known for men of the electric plant in detroit who in his spare time and might was building a race car and 1899 and being a classic entrepreneur he actually build a car that was wider than the doors of his garage. and he had to knock down the wall of his cross to get his car out and because the cars were so rare they would drive it only at night if there were few horses on the street because they didn't want to scare the horses and the first recorded

pedestrian accident was henry ford and a friend of his who actually ran over a pedestrian and the car was so light they got out of the car with the front wheels on the ice chest and the said it would be better if we finish rolling it over to or lifting it up, would you think would be -- and i've always thought because back then they didn't allow lawyers advertise -- [laughter] [applause] ford was able to the 16 years later because of his passion for uniform production of standardized parts. and six years later he invented in 2005 the first mass-produced automobile and every year thereafter for two decades he reduced the price of the car and went down year by year much as for a simple sells phones and television to of gone down in our lifetime. they probably also would not have talked about to totally on

known bicycle mechanics in dayton ohio who were studying how birds flew and who built their own when tunnell and word and formally in competition with a government-run program, the congress had given $50,000 to the smithsonian to invent an airplane and the smithsonian engaged very sophisticated scientist of great knowledge who designed it very have a complex airplane and one of the difference was when the wright brothers -- they did use the government the fund from the national weather service the most continuous uplift in the eastern united states is kittyhawk north carolina where the wind routinely comes in off the ocean and comes up. so they decided they would go from dayton ohio every summer down to kitty hawk and they did it by train and they took lots of extra blood to the co wood and it took something

fundamental because they didn't know how to fly so they started with an assumption, their plan with crash and they would rebuild it and they sometimes fly five or six times per day what to change and they did this for several years. they finally flew for the first time and flew a distance shorter than the wingspan of a boeing 747 downhill in the wind with one brother running alongside the planned making sure the wing didn't hit in a cartwheel and was the first powerfully the history in 1903. bye contrast the smithsonian that $50,000 of government money and sophisticated people and good bureaucracy and planned it carefully decided they would build this very elegant and expensive airplane using the most modern metallurgy and they would launch it with a steam powered catapult again air carrier and they would launch it on a shift in the potomac.

they didn't know how to fly either. [laughter] and of course if you launch the plane over water and it doesn't fly it plans in the water. and when it lands in the water it sinks and when it sinks you can't figure out what went wrong because by the time it finishes sinking it all went wrong so the smithsonian was so angry at the wright brothers for succeeding be treated the wright brothers so badly for several years questioning their claim to have flown and all of that. the wright brothers have are not actually seen by a lot of people until 1907 when they fly round the island of manhattan and about 1 million people see their plan to be its the first time any large group -- until then it was just this is to get press stories -- associated press stories. ..

i knew without fundamental changes in how we are doing things, that they are not going to be in the next successful country in the world. our competitors are not compelled to be as dumb as our political leaders, so our competitors-- we were in china in august and we have the chinese leader asking is why we were doing this big government socialize thing when everybody knows it doesn't work. [laughter] now is a conservative republican being lectured on the chinese about free markets is just infuriating. [laughter] but they were worried because they thought if we couldn't get our work together we would

default on our debt in the would be out all that money, plus of the donkey premarket calfee we won't buy from them and they won't have jobs. you guys can get back to the basics. you can't spend as much. the chinese in beijing talk to me about spending too much. it was very unnerving. and it is by the way not just washington. you get every level of local government, state government. we have adopted a pattern that is too cumbersome, too slow and has to much red tape into much litigation. that is a real challenge and you are not going to get out of that is by winning debates. you have to think for a fundamental replacement. at american solutions, you can go to american solutions.com and you can read a paper called replacement, not reform which really outlines this idea that we have got to replace and the second reason even if we didn't have foreign competitors, the systems we have inherited our decaying. i wrote two novels about world war ii, pearl harbor in days of

infamy and in those novels, we outlined the first few weeks after pearl harbor. it is hard to realize, but victory in world war ii from december 71941 when we were attacked by the japanese to victory over japan in august of 1945 is 44 months. and in three years and eight months we mobilize 15,500,000 in uniform. we complete it to ration-- ocean navy and built a b-17, b20 four nb 29 in bold 15,000 airlines in 1944. weiss weep across north africa, sicily, italy, france, luxembourg, belgium, holland and while simultaneously sweeping across the pacific in 44 months. and recently it took us 23 years

to add a fifth runway to the atlanta airport. we have not been able to agree on rebuilding the world trade center for ten years since 9/11. the president needed stimulus money so badly they had to pass the bill before anybody could read it. they got $787 million entered the federal bureaucracy. and we are learning the hard and painful way that trickle-down bureaucracy is not a very good technique for getting the economy moving. because the bureaucracy does not know how to spend the money. so, we really have to have a generation of really rethinking, rediscovering, redeveloping, experimenting, recognizing some are going to work in summer not going to work and learn from the ones of work. remember in the 1890's there were 400 auto companies in

michigan. henry ford was one of many. and so, i thought this was a very important meeting because by talking about the new emerging social media and talking about the opportunities to communicate, we could begin to talk about how we get not just a handful of smart people at the university or not just a handful smart people that something tank but how do we engage 305 million americans in trying to solve these challenges? now, when i became speaker we recognized the opportunity and the requirement to involve the public and the second day after it became speaker we put the thomas system on line. , many of you have gone to the thomas system? you didn't have to help lobbyist. it didn't have to have an appointment. from anywhere on the planet and

you can access thomas and you can look at official records. what is really truly ironic about the secrecy of the last year is we had designed the system to be open. i was aware of this because the very first year that i arrived in congress i was sworn in in january and april c-span began. i was one of the first people along with bob walker to figure out if you had a television covering the house then you could make a speech on the house floor and there were a lot of people watching the speech even if there was nobody on the house floor. are older colleagues will think we were crazy because who would talk to the house chamber and there was nobody there but we knew there were people all around the country because that would call on us it would write this letters. and our esmat at one point, by 1983, 84-- i was sworn in in 74 and c-span began in april of 79. by 8384 we have enough people watching that our estimate was at any given time we had a quarter million people who were

watching c-span. my colleagues would go wire you going over there and talking to an empty room? i said how far would you travel to talk to 500 people? they said, that is a pretty big crowd. i said, when we are walking across the street in talking to hook 250,000 people. there was a time, there was a group i think in waterloo, iowa, a group of women who were retired to really were fascinated with bob walker in the special orders he would do about waste in government. said they would watch walker in their homes and then called each other and talk about what they had just seen walker talk about in the actually formed a support group for walker. he was the congressman at that time from pennsylvania and invited him to come to waterloo to meet with him and talk with him. they really thought this was a big deal. many of you remember jack kempe with that time was it very dynamic very aggressive protects congressman.

camp came back from a speech he had made in puerto rico in mid winter and he was down there and he said this woman came running up to him and she said congressman camp, congressman camp. like all of us who have been in public life he kind of liked the attention. do you really serve in the house? do you know bob walker? [laughter] so we came back and got t-shirts made up the said i know bob walker. [laughter] now, here's the point. you know the president was actually write in 2008, when on eight different occasions he promised that conference committees would meet on c-span. and this is a totally new standard but it is unfortunate this year they have been kept that promise but he has a chance to go back and hopefully one of the lessons he may have learned from recent events is it will be

good to think about it in here is the attention you got. you can read it, if you read the fascinating book, the powers that be about the media which is a chapter on white sam raeburn did not want television in the capital. rayborn understood that the less information there was, the more power the politician had. the more information there is, the more people are involved then politicians actually constrained because they could only do the things they can defend back home. so there is actually, from the sisson standpoint a desire for greater and greater openness and from a politician who is seeking power standpoint a desire for greater and greater secrecy. and so, that is one of the tensions we have. and i think what you have a chance to do is to help invent an entirely new way of thinking about self-government.

because that is what the social media are going to enable us to do. and that will force enormous change. it will put a premium on patients because remember, it's everybody has to listen to everybody else because after all we are all equal citizens, then all of you who think you already have the answer will wonder why do you were going to answer the stupid people who think they are they have the answer for all of a sudden wondering why they have to listen to you. bayeux noaa peer because of their local community meetings, you know it gets really complicated and sometimes it gets contentious and sometimes people get he did. but that is the process of true self-government and with the social media are going to do is they are beginning to allow us to develop relationships and patterns, which bring us back together in ways we would never have thought possible and they allowed the creation of openness which would frankly be real

constraints on government. one of the ground rules of government in the future will be that everything you spend, unless there is a deep national security reason, everything we spend ought to be listed on line. indie what to know what it is and what to know what it costs. and then the political leaders have to be able to explain it and defend it or not do it. that is a very high standard and it is a very different standard. it means all these governments-- we just did a wonderful interview that american solutions with governor bob mcdonald which we will make available to every candidate in the country of both parties and encourage everybody because mcdonalds is one huge election and he is a very smart, serious thoughtful person who has spent 18 years of public life as a state legislator and attorney general and he is faced with the 4 billion-dollar shortfall in the va budget. he understands the best way to try to solve that is actually to engage the people of virginia

and talking through what do we do now. he has said he has ruled out tax increases because it thinks the number one goal of virginias feature has to be job creation and the things tax increases will kill jobs, so he thinks it is counterproductive to raise taxes in the short run it is going to kill jobs because it will leave people poor and not richard. >> said that you rule out tax increases and you are trying to create jobs than what are our values and how do we reshape the government to live within our means? we ask him, how are you going to go about explaining this to people? because he had, he brought a energy oriented campaign and won with 59% of the vote. he said you know, i find when i talk to people we can all agree on a large general principle that government like families and businesses should live within its means. and if you don't have it in the checkbook, don't write the

check. now then you start making decisions about what to do is you are not going to write a check for gokey starbuck that premise everybody will come to the table and talk about how we are point to solve this. that is a much more open participatory model than a handful of powerful leaders meeting in a backroom with some special-interest groups in deciding who they are going to take care of. it is going to require an immense amount of work can be much more tiring, much more cost to process but it is going to be true all the way down. it is going to be true for school boards, county commissions, city governments, state governments and the federal government so it is a new model for the let me delay benchmarked here for a second. how many of you have his cell phone with a camera? just rager hand. virtually everybody, right? it is still technically possible to have a cell phone methodic camera. [laughter] you have one without a camera? i was going to say you are

somewhere between for gallant sheep but since you volunteered cheap-- [laughter] i went in the other week, i burned out my cell phone. i got too close to some kind of electronic computer and because i am a perennial optimist when into a local cell phone store and how many of you have been in a cell phone store in the last three or four months? you will understand this story perfectly. i go in there and the guy goes to test my phone. he says you have killed that. he said, it can't be fixed. he said what he wants? why am looking around and does anybody here know what the cheap the cell phone cost? $49? no, much cheaper. no, no, the zubrow once cofte three years with the contract. $9.

$9.95. $9.95 and it was a kia but the largest cell phone manufacturer in the world then he said i can't sell it to you. i said why? he said well, it has a black-and-white screen, no camera and only a single ringtone. [laughter] he said, it is a sense arley impaired cell phone. [laughter] and there is not a teenager in the area that would be seen dead carrying itself on like this. i just thought it was amazing. so, okay, so 80% and 90% of you have cell phones with cameras, right? how many of you have some kind of pda, either, not text messaging because we already do that. how many of you have an iphone? this is the starting wage of the

future. my wife has an iphone. hd3 iphone. this is truly amazing, 83 iphone is the 2003 laptop computer. that is the level of computing power. so my wife picks up livestream ng tv on her cell phone. and i'm looking at this stuff thanking-- i remember my and wilma was the first person in our family that had a television. when we get the first tv in our family, a couple of you were nodding yes in some of the younger ones are staring saying, this can be true. with this back in the ice age when they also had al funds? go killey cave bear and watch your first cd. but she had a 13-inch screen black-and-white television, that got, an antenna outside and the

only channel at first-- i was born in pennsylvania, the only channel was channel 8 in lancaster, pennsylvania and at 6:00 in the morning there were bars on the screen and it midnight, they would have the "star spangled banner," the flag and a navy jet would fly across and it would go off the air. i am trying to explain to maggie and robert, you have 800 color channels on their television set. robert ed eve years of age was watching the military channel which is number 243 in atlanta and thibault shows. they have dvds for all the different movies they like. it turns out barbie now comes with 27 movies as well as dolls and so forth. and i'm trying to explain to them the world the black-and-white television with one channel that is only on for 16 hours and then trying to

explain to them because i am old enough to remember the world before we got a tv realism to radio. where gunsmoke was this guy with a really deep voice it turned out to be 5 feet 7 inches and weighed 300 pounds which is why james rns played marshall dylan on television because they couldn't use the guy who played him on the radio. although he had a great voice. i am giving you this background because i want you to know, all of you are in the early stages of a total revolution in communications capability. if you kobach, a few of you remember a movie called? there was a movie called trong. these for the early efforts at computerized movies for you have animation and all sorts of stuff happening and they are fairly clunky. now my one daughter, kathy,

wynton soft avatar on an imax screen. so she has a 3d, six story tall video experience. you compare that to watching who killed roger rabbit. now you think about applying not just for entertainment and not just for amusement so how we talk with ourselves? let me give you an example. if the president, and the governor can do this in the city council can do this, the president could do a town hall meeting on line available to every american simultaneously. and they could allow people to send in questions, to type in questions and an expert system could rank order the topics based on frequency. sallet 8 million people tune the end and 600,000 cent in questions, and the top question

was job creation, and that was asked by 46,000 people, that would come up and he did the president could read it or it could beyond the screen or you could have an announcer read it. you could pick a random citizen but suddenly we are all talking and then you could break the president's answers. i mean this in whoever is the president. you could do the same thing for governors. l.a. at one point tried to convince governor schwartzenegger ear who has a huge structural budget that what he ought to do is teach a course on the budget on line for all of california. and sade to all of california-- [applause] and sade to all of california, this is too big a problem for the politicians to solve. i mean it is very clear the system is broken and i say this is somebody who has been since i was 15 years of age, my dad was

a career soldier and i was station in france and i watched and so world war ii bomb damaged and battlefield damage and became convinced between my freshman and sophomore years in high school that countries can die in the quality of the leadership is important to our survival so i had been to 51 years and balton this process of self government. i think it is extraordinarily important to our ability to survive in this country. if you look at haiti or bay rich lebanon or look at places where the system breaks down it reminds you how important this system of self-government and the rule of law, because without it this whole system could collapse overnight. [applause] but it is really clear to me that the inherited system of the post world war ii era, the lobbyist, special-interest group, paid consultant, campaign models already dead and.

they can't produce the results we need as a country. part of the reason is they narrow everything down. this is true in both parties. u.n. dup with people who spend far too much of their time raising money because the current campaign laws are all fundamentally wrong. we have a very simple campaign law that should say, because they are very first amendment to the bill of rights says we are guaranteed the right of free speech without being regulated by congress and the founding fathers did that deliberately because they didn't want to constrict citizens from criticizing incumbents and of course every incumbent love something like mccain-feingold because they don't want you to have the resources to tell them they are idiots. they want to winstead lecture yuan how little you know and cindy way frank malpede to tell you how little you know. the idea that you might spend money telling them how little they know or the other wrong things are there not delivering

just terrifies them. but the right campaign lot is simple. unamerican should be allowed to get any amount of after-tax income to any candidate as long as they file it every night on the internet and everybody knows who is financing who. you would over 90 katie% of the fund-raising time. wright for congressman and senator spends an amazing percentage of time doing fund-raising. they can raise money from people who want to give the money and very often people want to give the money for a reason. so we have managed to build the complex cumbersome system where the politician is spending their time raising money hoon then hires the consultant to run the campaign that the politician can't run because they are too busy raising money so the consultant is clever and runs a campaign with no relationship to the politician who then finally plans because the managed to pick up their opponent in a series of negative at so you have someone in the office who doesn't know why they ran and they ran for reasons that had no

positive purpose and have absolutely no political capital to spend because the whole thing was negative. and then we turn in say, so fix things. they are going i can't, i have another pac fund-raisers so i can be elected without having to achieve anything. isn't that pretty close to where we are? isn't that what you are experiencing? [applause] malcomite here's how the social media starts to change them. first of all, it were that lamar alexander u.s is that i really like that i think something is all of you can help with and a new hampshire because of your role as first in the nation can play a major role in setting a standard. we ought to have more conversation and less campaign. and the conversation-- [applause] a conversation is us talking to

get there, us sharing information together, us trying have experiments together. a campaign is somebody trying to convince you to vote for them so they can have power. they are not the same thing. the campaign ought to have as a consequence to the conversation a positive meeting and there i want to urge all of you if your interested in this process, there is a wonderful book by harold holzer. to show you how bipartisan i am, harold holzer was bella abzug's press secretary. then he was mario cuomo's secretary. he is now the vice president of the metropolitan museum of art in new york and a brogan scholar. he wrote a book called lincoln a cooper union. lincoln was invited in 1860 to go for the first time to make a major speech at cooper union which is a working man's college at that time in new york city. he spends, think about this

compared to modern politicians, he spends three months researching at the law library and writes a 7200 words beach which takes two hours to deliver. he goes to cooper union, he gives a speech to a packed crowd. he then goes that night because it was a different era and edits the speech at four major newspapers to make sure they got it right. it is reprinted in virtually every northern newspaper, 7200 words and bred by one-third of the north and adult population. he goes to rhode island, and then becomes appear because his son is in the prep school in manchester and he gives a speech once in rhode island, once in manchester and goes home. this is the last speech he gives for the campaign. people say, what is your position? he says, read the speech.

the next speech is his farewell address in springfield the next year. now what is he doing? he is laying out a fundamental way of thinking about two propositions, slavery cannot be allowed to be extended. he is saying, he says we don't have to go to the south to do anything to harm it the witches can't let it be extended beyond where it is in the union cannot be broken. and he explains why any lasik out and explains the founding fathers and around that speech his entire candidacy revolves. and it makes him the nominee. now, look at that some time and ask yourself, when we are in the kind of problems we are in today, when you have the terrorism problem we have, when you have the emerging competition with china and india and over 10% unemployment and the size of the debt structure we have, when you have schools that are not succeeding in teaching kids maybe we need something closer to a lincoln style conversation where we are

actually serious and thoughtful and try to work it out. how could that happen? and it happens first of all with youtube. how many of you have ever looked at youtube? just rager hand. here is a social medium, which all your cell phones and cameras are also videocameras then you could theoretically use your cell phone, film something, put it through your computer and put it on youtube. you just made it feel for free. so you can do what for example and find an example of ways to-- and i am asking for a lot but to take all the various governments in new hampshire from local government to federal government. i will bet some of you would be able to find elise one or two things to them within an hour, an hour-and-a-half maybe. you can now put it-- there is a reporter in west virginia on

corruption who runs an on line blog, and that is his entire outlet. he now has thousands of readers and viewers and basically what he says to people is if you want an example of corruption in west virginia government, send it to me. so he says so-and-so dissent dissent in so-and-so-- all of a sudden he has created a conversation talking about reform of state government in looking at all certain things and don't make any sense. and texas governor perry has put every expenditure on line. [applause] you can see average salary, you can see every travel expense, every contract. when that begins-- texas by the way has one of the least expensive governments in the country per person, had the most job creation of any state and in fact in 2007 created more jobs than 47 other states.

you can't get people who are in texas to look it up because than that don't have a heavily unionized sector and they in fact on have-- the legislature meets only every other year. [applause] you go to sacramento where you have a full-time legislature with a full-time staff and you say to them, the state might be better off the key guys were here very often in the think you are crazy. they say but who would make-- work full time to make the mask? [laughter] so what i want you to think about is, how can you take all the tools available from iphones and ipod's, because people can now do podcasts virtually for free. we are going to put our interview with governor mcdonald up and we are going to let anybody, a 45 minute interview. he is a brilliantly bright guy.

we will say the democrats want to learn and that is fine for libertarians want to learn from this, fine. america's got to be about getting beyond the automatic fight and starting to talk together again, so you can build these kinds of intersections and say to people why do we have a conversation about nick anderson future? why don't we have a conversation about education? what if you actually got kids engaged? what if there was a sight that any drop out in the state could go to where they could explain why they dropped out and they could get engaged in talks about how they would change school so that they will learn. just to begin to surface with these kinds of things. and they think he would suddenly find all sorts of new opportunities for people and you say to me well, people who are really poor can't really engage in all this information. virtually everybody who is poor has a cell phone. go look at the statistics.

in fact that worked, we have the center for health administration and we work with medicaid programs to the cracked how you do preventive medicine on the cell phone. how do re-tataris single person in the state can communicate with them on their terms and their convenience when they want to learn something? and this is this sort of stuff we have got to do more and more of. because it is the only way we are going to succeed. so i would suggest to you, let me give you one other reading assignment. for this you hurley want to dive into large-scale change, i wrote a recent book called real change which is an outline which is the title used before obama promised this change. and the purpose of the book was to say we are going to have to fundamentally rethink organizations and reefing structures because we are not going to be able to get what we want with the current systems. in the process of doing that nancy desmond and aebo the book

which is say gradual book called the art of transformation and it walks you through how to think plan structure and communicate very large scale changeability want to rethink the entire structure of government, rethink the school system. if you want to rethink health care in america, the art of transportation-- transformation is designed to help you learn how to do that because it is complicated. trying to get this deal of change is not an easy, overnight thing. this is a very complicated deal that we are trying to cook as a country in order for children and grandchildren to be safe. the last comment and then what i'm going to do is go to questions and let ewald say anything you want to. where we are today is the beginning of the beginning. all the social networking, all the modern information everything we have seen up until now is just the beginning, like the automobile in 19-- and yet

deacons eve for example was scott brown's campaign he could not have run, he would never have been successful without the internet. he raced over $10 million in last 14 days, $1.3 million in one day over the internet. people around the country who just knew they wanted to send a signal and he seemed like a nice guy and they heard about him on talk radio and saw him on fox news and the next thing he knew they were sending him money. all that came in a way that made his insurgency possible when it would not have been 20 years ago. so i think he actually is a follow-on to president obama. the obama candidacy was only made possible because of that. we hope at american solutions to be able to work with you to develop the next generation of social communication and the generation after and we hope to apply it to things like jobs. the president is coming up here next week to talk about jobs.

i would urge you to look at the hand that we have given you to date the beginning of the american solutions jobs program and we are very direct. we think jobs have to start with small business. we think jobs have to start with the entrepreneurs. we think that there are a series of tax cuts you could put in that would dramatically accelerate the economy. we do not believe triple down bureaucracy works. we do not think what should can create jobs for say so we have outlined and american solutions a series of tax changes we think will lead to a very dramatic job creation and if you are willing to control government spending and you were willing to methodically for example sell all the things the government has acquired in the last couple of years you can pay for the kind of tax cuts we need to incentivize small business entrepreneurs and start up to get back to the most dynamic country in the world. i would urge you to collect that and we are trying to communicate. we have over 30,000 small-business owners at

american solutions. we believe in trying to network people together electronically to develop feder solutions and then to communicate those better solutions electronically and encourage people to educate their political leaders fear this kind of conversation so that wherever they go back, they will run to people and say they are always to solve this and i think overtime we will educate the current generation of leaders or replace them. but i do think the country is going to have an impact. [applause] we have several microphones here, so if you will raise your hand a mic person will come to you. if the microphone people would just walk back and forth while i am talking, we will move with minimum transit time. yes maam. >> how come i'm a public schoolteacher, believe it or not in the arch conservative. [applause]

and i have seen that since the federal government has got involved in education since the '70s we have declined in education. in a nutshell if he can whether some of the solutions that he would propose like getting rid of the department of education or how would you refocus? [applause] >> i would dramatically reempower local school boards which you will find even in states have so much power now taken over by the state legislature and the state department of education. and i would, i would measure every penny spent in the administration at every level against bending the same dollar on teachers. that is my choice is to have 600-- and i would bet he would be shocked if you found every non-classmen person and the new hampshire school system, you would be shocked how much money is spent on non-teaching and i

am old fashion. i believe that 90% of what happens is with the parent, the student in the teacher and therefore you want to put 90% of their resources into the parent, the student and the teacher. [applause] i personally favor a pell grants for k-12. use pell grant rather than a doctor because most liberals like the pell grant program. if pell grant czar fine went to get out of high school why aren't pell grants a good idea for k-12 so parents can take the schools, and then i would-- one final thing, i am adamantly believed that you have to have merit pay so teachers who were good and effective get paid more. [applause] and here candidly i am in agreement with secretary duncan who has said-- the secretary and

president to their credit have taken on the issue of charter schools and have really taken on the teachers' unions and a pretty direct way and said that parents ought to have accountability to know how their child is doing, to know how the school was doing. isi today's ago secretary duncan said that teachers need to be out of the system. if you look at new york city-- to give you one example, new york city has an article in "the new yorker" last august of the rubber room. new york city has what they call a rubber rooms because it takes up to seven years to fire a really bad teacher, said they pay these teachers full salary to sit, and they have been tire rims of teachers who go and sit and tell their finally processed out of the system. new york city is spending $50 million a year on teachers to cannot teach that they cannot fire. i think that is grotesquely wrong. the $50 million ought to go to increase the pay of good teachers and not pay teachers

who can't teach so that would be an example of what we ought to do. [applause] by the way, thank you for teaching. >> speaker gingrich thanks for sharing your time here with us today. we appreciate. a man and internet publisher new hampshire. i need to revise this because you are a former elected officials and i have to web sites right now that i am starting. one is about our current first district representative in congress and another is about her opponent and i'm trying to operate an online 24-hour a day press conference with these two individuals were asked them their questions about the issues in neither of these people have responded. my whole purpose is to try to show to the public into the world and the people here in new hampshire where these individuals stand on these issues. is this the type of thing that you are advocating right now where we are trying to get the conversation going? the first of all i like what you

are doing and my only additional of fis would be to make it easy for other people to come to your web site to post their questions that they wish the congressman are candidates to answer. that allows you to have it very inexpensive 365 days a year communication process precisely the conversation i was talking about earlier. it ought to become a standard around the country. my only advice is to do everything you cannot talk radio and talking to people. like many inventions, it may take awhile to get this concept of the ground but it is a terrific concept and i commend you for it. what is the site called? get some advertising here. >> the one is carol shea porter facts.com. [laughter] and the other one is-- of the time he was the highest profile opponent that he is trying to take over and i would get one other shameless plug, tim

carter's fire pit thought, and that is what i'm doing, what you are saying about folks. >> i imagine if every incumbent 365 days a year was engaged in an ongoing press conference with their citizens, and then the imagine when somebody decided to run for office they got a comparable web site and you could then google first district and you would see the income of and the candidates and all of a sudden people who don't have a lot of money would have access to be able to oppose their views, their ideas and you have a dialogue that is a continuous dialogue not just the 32nd commercial the weekend before the election. >> has, back in the mid-90s i was here in manchester when you spoke with their contract with america which was certainly very successful. it is now time in 2010. are we capable or do you have a congressman who would be capable to reinstitute a similar thing

for the 2010 era? >> that is a good question. i just published an article in newsmax magazine which outlines the concept of a contract this year. and how it could be developed and how it would be different. yesterday i was invited to come down and spent an hour with the house republicans' their meeting in baltimore. i was there brecht the speaker and the president was there luncheon speaker. did any of you see it by the way? i thought the president was very smart in making the entire hour-and-a-half available to the media, so people could watch live the interaction for good did any of you actually watch it? i thought that was good on his part in good on the house republicans' part. poblete irritated nancy pelosi a fair amount. [laughter] because she would prefer to assume there were no house republicans. but, i think when i talk to him

yesterday think there's a strong bias in favor of doing some kind of contract like defense. but here is the one difference. it does want to share with you that goes back to the conversation we are having. when we wrote the contract in 94 it was a different era njn-- joe gaylord was my partner in structuring the entire event. we worked very close with that congressman dick armey and congressman john boehner and his chief of staff who lacks the organize the steps a year. we knew people did not trust politicians and we were operating in a world where the perot voters, the perot voters for what they tea party people are today. there was a sense of angry dfid but he and they wanted to change. we thought we had to be very specific in meeted nevitt platform. we had a contract in the had ten bills. we actually wrote the ten bill

so it was very specific. i would be curious to get your reaction and you can also write in american solution stock, but my instinct is we are better off in this cycle to promise large achievements but commit as a process, not we are going to pass precisely what we are right in august but to say the bill should be introduced in the open. they should have open hearings. it should be marked up in the subcommittee and committee and the open. every member of both party should be allowed to offer amendments. it should come to the house floor or anybody can offer an amendment. the conference meeting between the house and senate should be on c-span so if betty can watch it and you should have both a contract about the product and the contract about the process of openness and transparency by which we get to that product because i don't think we are capable today of writing the perfect bill. we knew in general the direction

on welfare reform and balancing the budget. i think we are in a much more complex environment in making it transparent and accountable and out in the open they be as important as the specific things that we commit to do. so i just offer that as a thought. [applause] >> thank you very much for being here. i want-- i am very nervous. i wanted to thank you. you had done a program on fox a couple of years ago regarding the myth of separation of church and state where you talked about the different, welches tov the founders war against what is going on now by trying to get god at of the culture. i am reading a lot of the constitution and what the founders intentions would be, and it is clear to me that they would be very concerned about

the illegal immigration question and the problem we are going through right now. particularly where it is costing the taxpayers a lot of money. it is also clear to me that they would not approve of an income tax. mr. speaker, how would you-- i apologize-- is there anything you could think of that would start the ball rolling to secure the borders better and get rid of the income tax and thank you very much. >> let me say, thank you first of all for your question. you covered a pretty good bit of ground. we did do a book ultimately called rediscovering got in america which is now in a photographic edition which if any of you are going to go to washington or any of their families are is really a good walking tour of washington that puts you in touch with god in

each of the monuments and shows you how fundamentally false the modern secular view is of the founding fathers and of the country. we also did a movie called for discovering god in america which outlines the same thing. i've been told by people is a very effective tool to get across the origins this country starting with the declaration of independence which says we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights which the schools teach the way they should because then you have to explain what the word creator matt and then the aclu would file a lawsuit because they are so phonetically into the religious. that is the whole song we could go into another day but it is an example of how 90% of the american people believe we are in doubt by our creator and yet we are being dominated by a tiny elite that is the navic in its anti-religious secularism, so there is a fundamental mismatch in the country and that is where this conversation i believe is

going to make this country move dramatically away from the current elites models because the more we talk with each other, the more we realize how many of us there are and how few of their art, the bigger the change will be. the border is a very practical thing and let me very clear and i don't know if this will make some of the matter make you happy. profoundly and deeply in legal immigration. [applause] i believe that we have become the unique nation we are because of our ability to attract talent, to bring together people who want to work and create a better future and people who would fight each other in other parts of the world, form partnerships and companies and work together here in a way that is almost a miracle, so i think you have to start from a respectful sense that we want legal immigration.

we want people who will make it economically better off. we want them to learn to be americans and the second point i would make is we want them to learn to be americans. we want that to come here to be american. [applause] and again this is a conversation we ought to be having with detrick and you will find by the way overwhelmingly americans want english to be the official language of the government. [applause] if you go to american solutions.com you will see a poll that says 59% of latinos want in which to be the official language of government. they understand, they want their children in the world where everybody has a better future and everybody prospers and that is a world where we can communicate, and with all due respect in the northern part of the united states we don't particularly want to follow the canadian in belgium model of becoming a multilingual nation. i very much respect many

languages. german was common and pennsylvania. swedish was common in some parts of the country, battalion has been prominent in some parts of the country but in the long run they have managed to synthesize and bring people together in a remarkable way that has been enormously effective been made as the wealthiest and freest country in the world. to very specific challenges. the first is the border. the border is not in my judgment and illegal immigration problem. the border is a national security problem. [applause] and we have to have methods and techniques of being able to control the border because the fact is you can't assume your opponents are going to get in these airplanes. cqynar later we figure out the trucks work just fine in cars work just fine in makanda sam if someone gets in a nuclear weapon that will put it in a ballistic missile. they may put it in the trunk of

a vehicle. these are serious challenges and to be told the cannot control the border is nonsense. how we ought to control the border and we ought to control a frankly mr. inouye that makes sense. it's somebody that is a zero threat to the united states once to come as a student, a business person or a.rafiq easy, not hard to get a visa. the currently have a system that is easy to sneak into the country illegally but easy to come in legally. the other thing is how do we deal with him clement and i believe, again some of the may not be comfortable with this. i think we inevitably are going to end up with a guest worker program. i think the guest worker program has to be legal. i would out sources to american express, visa or mastercard because i don't think the government can implement it. [applause] and then i would focus on the person who is an undocumented

worker. i would focus on the employers and i would say the employers, the economic penalty for not obeying the law is going to be her in this but that only works if you have a guest worker program said the employer has an easy reliable and legal way of being able to deal with it so i think you raise a good question. on taxes, i am for an option because at the present time it is very hard to replace the income tax and my dear friend john linder and neal bortz of the book out on the fair tax and i'm confident we could have a long discussion on that. i think it is very hard to get to. i think the interim step is to have an optional flat tax we need to keep the current complicated code or you could have a one-page alternative that is extraordinarily simple. you decide which one is better for you. and number of places now have adopted that. [applause] >> good morning.

my name is bob and i am running for congress here in the congressional district agents karels shea porter. my question is this. [applause] >> let me ask you first of all, will you fill out his form? e2 should get together. >> i will, i assure you but one of the things i'm is running on is the whole notion we have got to get the government out of the provision of goods and services, that government is that this and we need to move this to the private sector. this whole concept is known as public-private partnership which is an american invention. something we seem to have forgotten after world war ii. the rest of the world has embraced it to an extraordinary extent. but i am curious as to your perspective as to why america. this notion come and how do we get it back in what d.c. has the impediment of us getting public-private partnership to get the government out of the division of itson services whereby we have much smaller government, lower taxes and much

better services? thank you. >> i think your point is well taken. i believe both inth the maximum degree of getting, as he put it public-private partnerships. i also believe in the maximum degree of localism comes to people who have to live with the consequences of their decisions are involved in making them and both of those they think of very important changes. what you have belfer in large part, since 1932 has been the steady increase of very large bureaucracies in which more and more power went to washington, more in power when to public unions and the vested interest in making things more government. i think we are at the end of that cycle because it simply does not work and it has grown too expensive than the sheer pressure of the world market is going to make this become more competitive but that is why i wanted to come up here and talk to walleck you about how you can use modern media. the fact is you are in a position now where the fishier

pressure of world market competition on the one hand and the enormous expense of government on the other are going to force us into these kinds of ideas, forces into reinventing public-private partnership and forces into empowering citizens rather than bureaucrats in forces to make things more local rather than of run out of washington dc. the question is going to be how rapidly across the country and our 50 states can we fine sisson inventors who can help invent their replacement models that enable us to go through this kind of change but i think your point is extraordinarily well made. >> thank you very much for coming today. itis want to ask one question about the tea party patriots. i have been to a number of these events and basically tea party patriots are for limited government and allowing people to make their own decisions basically and free markets. there is a great deal of

positive energy out there in this movement. how do you you picture forming a coalition, saying it republican, libertarian come a tea party people or whenever to regain trust in government? that is an issue that comes up a tea party functions. people don't really, they start to wonder if there's a difference between either party and the contract with america put out there specifics that people could hold onto as a cool. what would you recommend doing to engage this energy and was what those goolsbee? >> i think that is a very good question. let me say first of all i think the tea party movement overall has been a very positive thing. [applause]

fiscal conservatives although ironically if you look at the amount of money republicans are spending the year they were fired from the majority and then you look at the amount that pelosi and reed have spent in the three years since they took over i'm not sure the voters got the outcome they wanted but they certainly were sending a signal that they felt very deeply in 06 you know eight and now they have discovered that the democrats got the wrong message and thought it was it vote for pickard governor when actually i thought it was a vote for smaller government. people were angry because they thought it was too big, not because they thought it was too small. i encourage the tea party movement and i'm going to be speaking at a tea party defense. i encourage all members of congress to find a tea party on april 15th because it is such a natural thing for people to get together and talk about taxes in a way that is very personal and the seaware secretary geithner. [laughter] in which hazy may not be aware

that that is actually going on. [applause] but, i think that's, i have also urged the tea party movement, if they are in an area where they can't elect a republican in the general election they ought to try to find democrats to run to share their values in districts that are solidly democrat so in the primaries began to get a real representation of an alternative to a big government union dominated left-wing model. ..

what i want you to do their foreign on going to loan you power anymore and that will give you time to come home and think about it and i think frankly there are times in america where

defeating a generation of incumbents is a very useful way to begin to change how people think. [applause] >> i have a radical proposition. i don't know if it may be too radical for everyone in this room but, and clap if you agree, i have a proposition for maybe a contract for america to help fix it. although we follow the constitution, the contract for america. mccann feingold congress shall make no law, they should put a per call at the end of that, but shall make no law abridging freedom of speech and it goes on and on. what do you think about reinvigorating this conversation about the constitution? >> i think it is a terrific thing to get people to look once again about both the declaration of independence and the

constitution. i recently wrote a novel called to try men's souls of which is about washington crossing the delaware on christmas night, 7076 in a snowstorm at a time when the american revolution was on the edge of collapse and we were down to less than one out of every thousand americans. only 2500 men left. one-third of his army didn't have boots and wrapped their feet in burlap bags and on the march, 9-mile march in the snow storm on and i see dirt road they left the trail of blood to of life in the morning and supplies and defeat the german professional army captured 800 germans and the loss of one american and two weeks later because the victory washington had 15,000 volunteers and drove the british out of new jersey and saved the revolution. i tell you the story because washington thought of it as defined intervention.

the snowstorm was so enormous that even though the army was four hours late getting to trenton there were no german guards out because it was inconceivable anybody would march in the snow storm and washington said on a number of occasions they would never have gotten away from brooklyn and cross the river if a huge fall hadn't come at exactly the right moment to protect them from the navy and he said was defined providence. when the british surrender washington's first order calls for a day of thanksgiving to give thanks to the divine providence which gives intervention has made it possible to the american that was the mind-set of the people who wrote the constitution. the constitution was designed to limit the government not to limit the people. the purpose -- [applause]

the purpose of organizations like stewart to i believe is to create a new conversation to rebuild the community to allow us to take back our government and restore it to constitutional rule and limit of those who have power within the bounds of the system hour founding fathers gave and the would mean smaller government, more humble government, government that listens more than a collector's and government that serves more than a commands and that is a fundamental dramatic change from the way government involved every level of this country in the last generation. i have time for one last question. [applause] i believe you get to be the last question unless it is really hard. >> per ackley to my question my biggest concern is i don't see a response from the republican party to the one message people are trying to get across, stop

spending. that's it, it isn't that complicated. and i don't hear some of the echo if you will of the contract with america. but how about abolishing the epa, how about abolishing osha? it's not unique. before the 70's, if somebody was putting polluting the land or whenever you went to court. there was nothing wrong with that. the growth of government is all in the bureaucratic, talk about jobs. you come to a job because between osha and the epa and god knows what, and i don't hear that from the republicans and i think that's why people are arguably upset with the republicans as well as the democrats and all i agree with the open process but somehow the republicans have got to give some reason to vote for them. spearman that is a fair comment.

let me just say -- [applause] -- when i became speaker we had as part of the contract with america the constitutional provision for a balanced budget and we got a constitutional majority in the house, democrats and republicans voted for and we fell one vote short in the senate and is it in the provision that seven years to get to a balanced budget so after goblet and one vote we had a clear majority and the majority with 66 votes in the senate, and we had a meeting one night with congressman dick armey and bob archer and we said all right, what if we just pretend the amendment passed and we go ahead and balance the budget in seven years? and we all looked at each other

which we spend about three hours talking it through it and decided purely as an act of citizenship this wasn't part of the country. we go ahead and balance the budget. [applause] and to the point you made if you look at all the pattern of spending in modern america, during the four years i was the speaker we had the slowest increase in government spending and putting the entitlements since calvin coolidge in the 1920's and we had a very simple -- we actually cut taxes while balancing the budget, the office of the presidents model. frankly if you raise taxes they spend them. and we did the opposite and what we did was very straightforward. i will close this but it is an example of communication. every wednesday night we have dinner with japan or 12 ceos of big companies and say to them we want to balance the federal budget and that is a two or

300 billion-dollar a year change the standard of the biggest company of america this is an enormous undertaking. and i would say in your experience as a manager with is the key to very large shane? the three pools, it's interesting. again and again it came back. the first rule was set very big goals with a very short deadlines. the second rule was delegate like crazy because you need lots and lots of people trying to get it done and the third was don't let any experts in the room because they will tell you what you can't do. now john come to his credit and help with -- have a will be the next, she was a leader of balancing the budget and we did largely what you talked about, we didn't have the kind of majority and this is why i think you have to think about replacements not just reform and not just repealed. what is the right kind of epa to

replace the current mess? we want some kind of occupational safety. maybe the state level, may be a federal overview implemented by the states but we have to invent replacements because and i will tell you flatly on the theodore roosevelt republican i like the idea everywhere i go i can drink water and not worry about whether or not it is clean. that is a function of having a government that says we have to have clean water everywhere in the country so i'm not prepared to say okay i don't mind if we eliminate all the clean water act because after all my grandchildren can sue if i drink of water and die. i don't find that acceptable so we have to find out what are the replacement pieces that are more effective, less expensive, get the job done better and faster and then replace the obsolete bureaucracies. when we did in the 90's we control spending, reforming welfare, reformed medicare, the net effect was by the time we were done we balance the budget

four straight years we paid off $405 billion in federal debt and we did it while we were cutting taxes for the first time in 16 years. i think that kind of management can get it done. >> thank you very, very much. [applause] >> thank you for coming today mr. speaker. you have led us to victory in 1994 and we need your expertise now more than ever. we would like to give you a gift. this is from the family of another great conservative leader from our own former governor l. thompson. >> he was a great leader. mel was a great conservative leader who understood the virtues of limited government

and lower spending and i want to bring out for anybody out there in the tv land this is new hampshire and maple syrup. thank you very much. [applause]

some members of congress attended the annual world economic forum can davos switzerland. they discussed the global implications of the obama administration's legislative agenda in areas such as health care, energy and the environment. this is about one hour. >> -- global perspective all the legislative agenda this year in the united states. as far as i know this is the only panel at davos this specifically focused on legislative agenda in any one country so for all the talk about the change in the world and no doubt it is changing there's still something specifically important about what happens in the united states and what happens in congress and of course when i used to live here in europe and before i draw those the international leisure of the afternoon is to ask me when do i get to vote in american elections and i used to always

tell them that is fine with me i'm happy to have you vote but there's a number of county commissioners around the united states who might have a word or to say. i don't imagine that what happens in that at least you can vote at the end of the panel on the views of the various voices you are about to hear. now the framers of the united states constitution when the invented the u.s. government it really was an invention envisioned the united states congress as the first branch of government, the place where all the issues and the pressures and demands of society will come together and be resolved but were not. it doesn't always work as efficiently as some people might wish it worked but it probably works about the way to imagined and the congress remains the crossroads of the american political system. and i don't know about all of you on this panel and how you feel about your jobs, but what i covered in congress for an english-language newspaper on the east coast of the united states it was one of the most interesting jobs i ever had. we are the real key to a to have

fun and very distinguished to doublet and in my experience very straightforward members of congress and we have a number of vital issues to discuss, regulation of the financial sector, the economy, climate change, healthcare, only an hour and we will try to get through quickly but before we get to any specific issues i want to begin by asking each of you to speak for just a minute or two about the larger question that hangs over the discussion at this panel, really hangs over the entire form in davos and the world in general. tip o'neill former speaker of the house and is leased to say all politics is local by which i think he meant no politics can succeed unless the political leader is deeply cognizant and closely bonded to the needs and demands of the people who gave him his job. but in a world of globalist use can all politics be local? what is an american leader's responsibility and specifically

how do you integrate global pressures and global issues into your own political needs? why don't we start immediately on my left which is a seating chart, not a political statement, with the senator from south carolina lindsey graham. >> in case anybody didn't get that. [laughter] >> every bill in congress is a jobs bill, as your job. i've come from every state south carolina is a beautiful place with plenty of challenges but let me give you an example about the reality the world which we live in is a global economy but if you were a textile worker in south carolina are you got the manufacturing job anywhere in america you're furious that your job is going to be absorbed by the local economy. as a, trying to find ways to translate rational tried policies in a global economy

with people who are facing the downside of the world in which we live i think what i try to do is let folks know the truth as i see that i can to build a wall around south carolina when it comes to the influence of china, india, or just the world economy. but i sure as hell can fight for you and i think the chinese are manipulating their currencies. they might beat us in commodities because they have certain advantages but i think politicians need to translate to people back home the realities of the global economy but not intellectually, emotionally. so what i try to do is talk about the world we live in in real terms but let folks know free trade is part of a global economy but so is fair trade and they seem to trust me with the idea i've got someone up there who understands the world economy as they haven't forgotten about me and the day they believe you forgot about

them is the day you lose your job and that is the way it should be. >> representative ed markey of massachusetts. >> if you take energy as an issue in massachusetts, the reality is that half of the trade deficit of the united states is importing will so people understand that and they understand that as a result we need policies that deal with that issue and energy policy in a state that has no oil or gas or coal goes to creating new jobs in a renewable energy, the efficiency economy from an electric vehicles all of it which can be invented out of mit, harvard, all of our universities the same thing is true in the biotech sector and can go down the line. so a lot of this is positioning

massachusetts in a global economy. the country itself only has 3% of the population for the 21st century. so, massachusetts is a subset of that and we have to decide where we are going to position ourselves in that economy and so to a very large extent it is in this innovation economy, coming up with ideas creating products and selling them across the planet so whether it be all of these new quote energy companies that are coming along the line much less of the telecom companies and internet companies of the 1990's this constant we generation of new ideas is the source of new employment which then leads to higher real-estate rates, higher realistic prices etc. that helps fuel the school system etc. so it is relating

what is that is going on around the world to what it is we need to do in policy-setting that will help the lives of those regular people. >> representative brian speed of washington. >> i think tip o'neill was right i want to put it into context. if you ever forget you are there as a representative to serve the people who elected you you will lose that quickly as lindsey said. at the same time there's a risk and that is one uses global issues in the sense of demagoguery in one direction or another and thereby loses the new ones and the realities and complexities of that and it is tempting i think of times on both sides with one interest group or another to grasp this simple and visible global issue, accentuate that and hope they don't look at all the other issues pressing, and that can easily distort policies of the delicate balances serve your

constituents but try to speak with honesty about the complexity of global issues even if that sometimes is at odds with one or another support or opposition group and even if you take flak for that because you've got the simultaneously care for the people who got you here but also at a much broader level including the national and international level and that is not always easy. >> senator susan collins republican of maine. >> staying connected to your constituents is absolutely essential. this is a very rare weekend for me to not be in maine. i go home virtually every single weekend and in doing so i stay connected to the people who on the chaim honored to serve and represent so for my perspective first obligation is to the people of maine. i'm fortunate however that my constituents cared greatly about

the global implications of public policy and the energy area which it has mentioned particularly resonates with them. for example, we are trying to establish the state of maine as the world leader in the development of deep water offshore wind energy, and people in my state are excited about that and understand very well the global implications because they know that somewhere in the world deep water offshore wind energy is going to take off and why not have it be the state of maine that is the leader. similarly since we are in the midst of to -- two wars, since we have veterans among the population and a high level of those who are serving particularly national guard members, those issues are still

very much on people's minds so i it will see it as an either or choice. but certainly as bryan said anyone who does not understand where one's first obligation lies quickly becomes a former member of congress. >> representative barney frank of massachusetts. >> thank you. i want to challenge the premise of the general approach is how do you avoid being some parochial politician who distorts good to the credit policy because of your constituents? and i think in fact in a number of important issues with mr. to trade the constituents were right in the technocrats were wrong. there's a great british political philosophy and the theory of democracy was one of the arguments for democracy was only the people who knew issues

with a pinched in trade many of us, and i know this is true for we won of south carolina we've been begging the financial establishment and political establishment, begging them for years please do something to alleviate the distress caused by trade. we were told no trade win-win, trade makes everybody better off and it is often between countries but decisions are made within countries and there was a refusal to acknowledge the pain being inflicted on some but there were two effects of trade and overall gain and changing the distribution and for us since we are better off at the high-end stuff, to the lower end people being hurt and the result of them not listening is it is now dead in america. you couldn't get a bill for the contras, you could ten years ago they begun to work with us and believe the eight things. second i will tell you it is a sayre i work the clauses and i trying hard to financial regulation in a coordinated way

but as between the experts, the business community and other economists and my constituents who were suspicious they were right and experts were wrong about what the banks for giving. i've got to tell you to the extent the constituencies in my district thought maybe the start of the stuff was contributing to the high prices they were more right than not and i am going to give -- i will say this. one advantage in the area my greatest legislative responsibility the regulation clearly international cooperation is in our interest in the parochial sense because we want to put in tough rules and we can't have tough rules in one country. london might have been able to put socialism in one country but tough bank regulation in one country and going to happen because we would lose people. the last point where i think the constituency is ready and it may go counter to the received wisdom and that is we hear a lot of people saying america the dollar shouldn't be the reserve

currency of the world. i will set aside. the pentagon should be the reserve military of the world. i am tired of spending hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars for no other country in the world with few exceptions to do militarily. we are in a terrible bind america. we have a deficit to reduce and needs that need to be met, short-term said terms of job stimulation and longer-term and quality-of-life. the only way we can do that is to begin to substantially reduce america's not recommend that worldwide. you can't cut the defense budget and maintain those commitments and i know what is going to happen. i'm going to be told this is isolationism etc. i object that and what to do the economic cooperation but i think a number of americans are skeptical of the extent which we are heavily engaged in protecting everybody from everything even though we can't do it effectively so i would just say the public is not simply a reality that we have to deal with. is often a very good measure would apply to state the

policies are right or wrong. >> which brings treacly to the first issue i would like to grapple with you know davos as many if you've been coming for many years no has been a place where the parties can together to try to solve their differences to make peace. we had mandela and which peres and yasser arafat and today we were treated to the global banking industry and barney frank, chairman frank the deals with these regulatory financial issues tell what you told the bankers this morning and what they told you if weather will be told to make any difference. >> yes and no. those in the financial committee -- one point when you talk about financial institutions largest banks, goldman sachs may decide next week not to be a bank if we make sure to become certain changes but there will be no less -- yy get them out of regulation. so that is a good point. to the extent the large financial institutions tell us we should regulate -- we ignore them. to the extent they exceed the

need for regulation and are ready to work with us to make proposals about how best to do it but will work well. i will give you an example and this is evolving today. the question of banning proprietary trading by banks in this state technical banks which paul volcker talks about. the committee i chaired had given the regulator power to go forward to give a reason for the suggestions being made by the ssa. i spoke with mark of the canadian bank and others. the notion as you get the proprietary trading and also much by a sharp line of either work but by a volume of more or less because there's a certain amount that has to be done to keep things going. so the answer is all i believe the major financial institutions understand the regulation is coming. it is in their interest to give the kind of advice we need so we can do it in the best way and that includes a tough way that smart way and the other good thing is there is i think a strong movement and was hopeful today. the european union, the united

kingdom, japan, canada, the u.s., all the manufacturers work in this finance and economy, working together. i think this has been very helpful in the financial industry understands tough regulation is coming and can be done thoughtfully and it will be done in a way -- there's no overall sovereignty, nobody to impose a big attack but we don't need to have it all the one and there was no sovereignty and post but it will be done in a coordinated manner so that you won't have this regulatory arbitrage, your people in the country will be fees' of the others, actually encouraged on that one and as i sit on that one from me the interest of my local constituents and international reinforce that which is tough regulation from a sufficiently coordinated so it doesn't create those regulatory arbitrage is. >> before we move off of this issue, senator gramm, senator: is there a republican point of view that will become an important factor in this?

>> i introduced the regulatory reform a year ago. i spent five years overseeing of the regulation of banks, insurance and securities of licensing boards and a whole host of various and i do believe we did have a complete failure of regulation. i think part of it was the tools were not in place but i think part of it was the regulators as party in plight did not use tools they did have. i believe the most important regulatory reform that we could implement however would be a board of regulators, council of regulators the would be responsible for identifying system x risk -- systemic risk to the system and regulatory black holes. inevitably, no matter how skilled the reformed legislation

mabey there will be a new and risky product or process that will emerge and we need a regulatory system that is flexible enough room to spot the influence of derivatives that fell through the cracks that were regulated meter as a banking product nor insurance product. >> would you yield for 30 seconds? >> just one quick point. so, because i know what yielding to barney is like. [laughter] >> and she's not even in the house. >> people say the house and the senate don't know each other. >> to pick this up to answer your question, republicans as well as democrats agree the system failed and that we need a regulatory reform whether we will be able to come together in the and i hope so. >> i want to point out the council senator collins called for is in the house bill and

passed the house and the single version -- relating i would say as we also in power the regulators to do the new stuff because not only do women do ev six product in there were people now very smart highly paid people figuring out the next the poll and we did give the regulators we will be enough to be able to do it. >> let me do to pieces of housekeeping. i will be coming to you in the audience for questions as if you have a question try to signal. i believe we have microphones. yes, we have microphones. we will get them to you as we will waste time for you getting the microphone we will continue. housekeeping parliamentary rules are not enough to conceal free to jump in. you guys have to live with each other so you can decide the rules. let me turn to another global issue that is clearly a very timely and in some ways may be raises the same kind of challenges as the financial regulation issues and that is climate change. president obama in his speech to congress wednesday night said

nuclear power and offshore drilling have to be part of an overall climate change the overall energy policy and energy policy designed to reduce carbon emissions. the was seen as a concession on you, senator gramm so that we start with senator markey to say that you've long been an opponent of nuclear power although also a proponent of clean energy and curbing carbon use. is this a concession that has to be made in order to achieve the climate change protocol that will work? >> the bill that passed the house committee waxman-markey bill was endorsed by the energy institute, the nuclear industry of the united states. when you put a cap on carbon, when you are moving towards a low carbon economy, that benefits the nuclear industry. there are no carbon sources of electrical generating capacities. in addition, we also had a green

bank of $75 billion that the nuclear industry could apply for low-interest loans and new nuclear technologies. in addition, as you know, the ban on drilling off the coast line of the united states was lifted two years ago so there is no ban. so in addition to the edison electric institute endorsing the bill, in addition to many of the major industries in america endorsing the bill, the steelworkers, aluminum workers come communications workers and others, we tried to build a coalition that will be able to sustain the question of whether or not we are helping or hurting american industry. over on the senate side, lindsey is leading the effort to construct the collision that can get 60 votes over there and he is doing a brilliant job working with john kerry and senator lieberman to accomplish that

goal so we are actually looking forward to him as the leader completing the legislation over there and he and i have been talking all along and have a couple of good conversations today towards the final completion of legislation. but i don't think that the goals are inconsistent. it's to protect the american economy, because the global leader in new energy technologies, reduce the amount of pollution by two per cent per year over the next 40 years so while backing of imported oil and protecting the public health of the country and i think we agree on the lodge coals. we can sit down and work out the details and accomplished all of it because it cannot happen if we do not have bipartisan support and business support for the legislation so i am looking forward to working with you. >> senator gramm are other pieces falling into place for energy legislation?

>> one i would like to acknowledge susan collins i think a cap-and-dividend bill. she has been involved in a global climate change long before i came along. i've never voted for any legislation yet. [laughter] the reason i jumped in is because i see a wonderful opportunity to note a couple of mobile things. america is running out of time to solve a lot of her problems and 70% of our oil comes from overseas and a lot of it comes from people using the money for that purpose is and that was it needs at home so i'm talking cells carolina and all politics is local. now is an opportunity to bid dependency on foreign oil and nuclear power in my serial the most pronuclear state. we have more nuclear power per capita than any state in the nation. -- >> how come south carolina doesn't like france? >> we love france. come to france and spend money, from france come to south

carolina and spend money. [laughter] but i make a joke of the french expense, and they probably make some that mine, but it's not really -- it makes the point, what percentage of the french power comes from the nuclear industry? 82. surely we can be as bold as the french. [laughter] everybody laughs. i'm here to publicly thank the french government and french nuclear industry for proving to people in south carolina and other places that nuclear power has a responsible place in power production and you really can't replace the coal-fired plants with wind and solar. nuclear is part of the climate change solution and from my point of view if you want to create jobs in america's energy independence and i think you all agree this building of transmission lines, the building of nuclear power plants is redesigning our cars and homes and office buildings to be more

energy efficient. that is where america is right to create jobs that will never go and we have a magic opportunity here to create jobs, become energy independent and his clean up the air. the reason we are talking up the president's speech because it was different. the truth is the nuclear peace in the bill is not going to get 60 votes but i do appreciate what you said today. the president did something that no democrat has done before or any other president quite frankly. he talked about nuclear power, offshore drilling and clean air in that order. that is where america is at. and he said you could disagree with me about some of global warming and everybody on our side pretty much less. i do believe greenhouse gases are contributing to the heating of the earth. how much? i don't know. but he said why don't you join with me to provide the next generation of americans clean

air and pure water it in the process let's create jobs. that to me resonates the president i appreciate what he did. he made our ability to put a bill together much more likely by the state of the union speech and i appreciate what he did. it was a significant change. >> i'm going to come to the audience in a moment but before i do -- >> one brief thought on that. a lot of the discussion has been the lack of passage of the bill that has a cap-and-trade. i'm rather skeptical we are going to pass a cap-and-trade bill through the, chris. i could be wrong to. that doesn't mean however that the u.s. can be seen as an active player in reducing co2. many local communities are already doing a tremendous amount and the state governments are doing things and many businesses are. i say that because i think it's really important that we not

cast cap-and-trade as the scenic that we can't get there if we don't pass it, that there's other alternatives of carbon taxes but there's other non-additional expenditure ways because if somebody were to say the benchmark is by the end of this year heavily passed into law an energy bill that includes a cap-and-trade provision i would take that against any day right now. maybe it and lindsey will surprise me. i hope they will. >> anything else on this subject? >> i'm going to come to the audience but i want to read a question that was sent in as many of you may know the world economic forum associated press and facebook have been working together to try to let people are not the world see what is going on and hear a bit about it and we solicited questions for the panel and one came from derek who is a photographer and as he points out a small businessman in massachusetts.

is that any of your districts? >> i guess so. >> did you vote for? >> the republican -- what bedle did the republicans and democrats not supporting each other plea in the downfall of the economy, why is each party on the focus on their own agendas by the impact it might have on americans? maybe we can start with congressman baird. >> there's no question in my mind there is too much partisan divide. it's been on fortunately exacerbated by the new media, not reduced. i think great shame people are going to their own choice of radio on television and their own choice of internet waters and instead of listening to what the other side does we are listening only to people we agree with and it is a destructive process on top of that to be perfectly blunt both

party leaderships, republicans mastered in the house, they literally looked democrats out of conference committees, the democrats haven't been much better. we have had great partners on the republican side but we are going to have to get past that and say let's start with the points of agreement if we take health care bill or energy bill i think my own perspective and obviously it differs from folks but my own perspective would be rather than crafting very large packages we start with small point and say what do we agree on and then build from there because i think the people want to see as actually get something done and if you take something as important as energy and as important as health care to say we passed it with a one-vote majority or with one vote from the other side when it affects all americans yes you may pass it into the law but do you have the sort of the searle legitimacy of your general public and fueled a thing to have a problem. >> what me ask one further question on this to the question of what will or will not happen

this year the republican victory and the senate race in massachusetts last week made senator gramm and senator collins and 39 colleagues the crucial vote basically on everything got matters in the samet. is that political change both in terms of the vote count in the senate and the impact it's obviously have on political thinking in the united states? does that make it more likely or less likely that there will be things happening in congress this year? >> i tell you the difference between 60 and 59 is enormous. i think the worst thing that could happen to any majority is to have 60 votes because you're responsible for everything. you've got no one to blame but yourself so i am glad scott is coming because he's going to get a chance to start over on health care and get a more rational solution and everybody can tell you what they think about massachusetts election. i think it was just like wow why

never saw that one coming. but now every republican is potentially the 60th vote so the democratic colleagues can say they are not one of you anywhere over there that would help do a b or c so i think will create this sense of opportunity that wasn't there before because democrats are going to be required now more to look for that person or group of people. they were burned by the partisan approach to health care. they are not stupid, they are very smart so they don't want to go down that road and have a partisan cap and a trade fight so i think in the long run it's going to help and from my party point of view, we don't believe we are the party of note and i will believe that, in trying to show you we are all but we better prove it. >> , barney frank? >> it won't make any difference because senator dodd to i think has been one of the most frankly on a fairly criticized political

leaders and has been doing a very good job working with his republican counterparts in the senate and a number of people but senator gregg for example -- there was always quick to be a degree of bye partisanship i think frankly in the house it was more partisan of financial regulation. i think there was a strong core ideological strain in the house of people who said in the senate it has always been more of a negotiated effort, so i do not think this will make any difference. i expect the senate to be putting a bill out in march. there will be differences in the consumers and pushing for more but it will not i think i expect president to be signing a pretty good financial reform package sometime this spring. >> senter collins, the democrats always hoped there would be a good for health care anyway. >> they did. that's true. [laughter] let me make two points however

in response to your question. i have a different take on scott brown than most of my colleagues. i am ecstatic to have another republican from new england in the republican caucus and one who i believe will be a more moderate voice. i believe that is good for the republican party and for new england. i think is good for our country. the second point i want to make is i believe the election of scott brown gives the president permission to reach out more to republicans because he can tell the left he has to now so i naturally optimistic it may allow us to proceed on bills we otherwise would not have.

on health care there is a bipartisan health care bill to be had. there are several provisions in the senate bill that have widespread support. why don't we sit down and enact those provisions? small business tax credits, widespread support and it would help reduce the number of uninsured americans. the purchase of insurance across state lines, small-business pooling, there are many provisions we could come together. i think the biggest mistake that was made with the health care bill is there was an insufficient focus on cost. it is the high cost of health care, the exploding cost of health care that is the biggest problem and had that been the focus of the bill i believe we would have produced better legislation. instead it was an afterthought.

>> congressman markey? >> in energy and a climb of legislation there was never a day when it was a question of 60 votes of democrat. it was always with the lindsey graham, lindsay collins and others. many issues are a logical. many are regional. practical. so you have to decide the question to different categories in terms of how the senate works and financial services, climate and energy. >> people have taken health care as if it were the model of everything that is in a flier. >> it might have been a catalyst in the massachusetts election, but we did not have a debate and the last month about how to regulate wall street or another hundred issues we could go down none of which were raised so i think the end of today we all realize we have to work in a

bipartisan fashion and in answer to your question that came from that gentleman, the reason that we drove the price of a barrel of oil up to $144 a barrel amongst other things was a failure to regulate derivatives or failure to regulate international markets, and secondly that the caucus on a bipartisan basis could not pass laws to increase the fuel economy standards of the vehicles we tried so that we went from 20% imported oil in 1970 up to 60% imported oil as of two years ago so that was bipartisan however. and the same thing was true in terms of the absence of regulation and the financial marketplace. so a lot of the problems there were caused in our economy were related to energy and financial policies but it wasn't because democrats and republicans were

fighting each other it's because some democrats and some republicans had more votes than some democrats and some republicans had to maintain policies on the book and then when you come back as a result to solve the problem it's going to take democrats and republicans in each of these areas to identify the problem and then to put in place the preventative policies that would prevent recurrence in each of those areas. >> that is right but on the health care there are a lot of things attractive. one of them we have is this, some of the things attractive are banning the pre-existing condition rules and the problem there is it is hard to do that because of its more controversial. two issues fell one is on cost control and senator collins is right we ought to do something about cost control the cost control is a classic issue which everybody is in favor of cost control in general and every particular cost control becomes the controversy. if we can pass a bill that says we reduce health care costs by this percentage it would be unanimous. there is a base in a way which we tried to do that that doesn't

become caught verso. the other thing i would have to say on cost is this why i understand cost, i'm going to be mr. upon notes on this. if we hadn't fought the war in iraq which did more harm than good they spend a trillion dollars on that mistaken policy we wouldn't be worrying about other things we are worrying about now including how to pay for health care and until we address the massive over investment in worldwide militare the resources in the united states government to do anything we ought to do. >> let me take one element of the cost control issue and back to the partisanship issue. there were in the house bill and number of cost control measures. among them were things like best practice panels that would tell where the most effective medicine is and where you get a bang for the buck. that can translate it we are going to deny coverage in the name of big government. the idea you provide people in this life counseling so that they can make a decision about

how with their doctor how to deal with in this life decisions became death panels. it became a dishonest partisan exercise not a serious intellectual exercise how we solve the problem. it was symptomatic of the partisanship and not for the good of the country and that was lamentable. >> the worst distortion on the right as brien has said was the death panels. the worst distortion on the left was saying that a single payer system would be freed. there was distortion on both sides. >> the single-payer thing and i am a supporter of its -- [laughter] -- that dropped out, that wasn't a factor of the lead to legislation. but got discarded. the death penalty issue unfortunately that total distortion affected votes. >> if we have time we will return to some of the questions

about how american politics -- who has a microphone? okay. a question right up here. >> mike johnson from the united states with investment management firm. some of the talk here in davos right wing has been on the supreme court decisions that authorizes corporations and other institutions to be able to spend money on the free-speech issues. that looks as if from the calcite it could complicate your job because it means you're going to have to appeal not only for money for your campaigns but you're going to be faced with very big box advertising and taking issue with some of the things you think ought to be done. is their anything if i'm right and if you do believe that is going to complicate your job is

their anything that congress can do to change that supreme court decision or would it require a change in the constitution? >> mr. baird? >> if i could make one change would be this, and all political fund raising buy any individual, provide matching funds to anybody that exceeds a certain limit of signatures. you cannot imagine, just think about it to run in a competitive district which we have done seven times you have to raise $2 million every two years. it works out about $20,000 every single week and to go to the republican headquarters and democratic headquarters you see people who ought to be steady policy and instead they are tied to telephones baking complete strangers sometimes to give them money at it doubly and efficient return on the time investment. it corrupts -- it takes away time, raises questions about whether or not you're voting on principle or for financial reasons and doing away with that would do more to set the foreign

policy street, fiscal policy straight and would be the single best exchange, you have to amend the constitution. >> by the way the supreme court first of all i think is a terrible decision. also by the way critics able of radical activism striking down dozens of state boards. the next time the conservatives as we don't want the courts interfering with the popular will remember this total hypocrisy because they did in the decision was struck down well over 100 years of laws by every jurisdiction in america. second if you listen to the u.s. supreme court free speech exists almost nowhere in the world except the u.s. according to them because they define the right to give money to candidates and contribute as free speech. i don't think that's rational effect some the only time they are for the free speech is when it isn't free because then it means money and censorship elsewhere. finally the change was they

could always, not always but have for some time been able to spend money on their issues. this allows them to give to candidates. that is where the danger is providing to we see democracy done. finally answer, yes there are some things we may be able to do in the folds of the jurisdiction and the committee i chair. we do have jurisdiction over corporations. the supreme court to the contrary god did not create corporations. public policy does. they are not in doubt by the creator with any legal rights. we are the creator and we can eliminate some of the rights if we do a fair way and we are now studying -- we are now studying what can be done consistent with supreme court decision to make them go public, he let shareholders vote. there are ways which the back of the corporation can take effect and i've spoken to speaker pelosi. we will be legislating to try to set rules of the corporation can do given they were bound by the supreme court. >> the perception of this is was good for your team. >> i supported campaign finance

reform and i was disappointed in the decision but i have a little different take about i don't think justice kennedy is a judicial activist. it was the fifth vote. corporations in the eyes of the court have free-speech rights when it comes to political advertising that the court believed mccain-feingold of a fairly restricted. i believe that public policy in america is going to be in for a rude awakening. it's hard enough right now to get democrats and republicans to work together. barney and ausley we disagree on a lot of things. i would say that moveon.org did a great disservice to the country are trying to run joe lieberman out of the didactic part because he dared agreed with president bush on the war. i would dare say things are going to come away soon because i've stepped out trying to find

common ground on the immigration, climate change. and at the end of the day the big problem facing america isn't a lack of funding by other nations with military and barney is right nato needs to contribute more to the military to take some pressure off but our problems, ladies and gentlemen our entitlement spending is. our budget is locked down now with social security and medicare and medicaid bills that are quite frankly unsustainable and you try to solve these problems the power of special-interest groups against whatever solution you put on the table has got exponentially greater. can you imagine writing the united states constitution in today's environment? ben franklin is about to sail out and it's all over the radio and all over the tv. so the power of money on the ability to find consensus on a