working harder? >> yeah, that's a, that's my question. .. >> by that i mean they have workers who don't dictate the decisions. i am interested in germany as a unified it labor lawyer and am interested in it because going over the whole planet earth i say this country has the most worker control of in the economy in the world. that is very little relatively, but it is way ahead of anybody

else. that fact has helped influence the way capitol gets developed. it also hurt germany for a long time because people did not want to invest in germany because they did not like codetermination, workers on the board, dealing with counselors. the second thing that is fascinating is that they have a center left and even center-right party at least in terms of mercantilism. the country should not be in debt. the country should sell more or at least be able to earn its own way in the world and that it does matter whether you are exporting in some sort of effective way. in the u.s. we have two parties from republicans and democrats that just seem not to care about that. the combination of this worker control and the class that is concerned that the country pay its way in the world, i think it makes all the difference. those are two of the things.

>> why did you pick on germany? was in sweden good enough for you? >> the problem with season and 25 sweden and denmark is they are kind of city states. germany is this big ramshackle kind of place. 82 million people. it is big. the thing about germany that interested me, ric what, as a writer and i use that term loosely. relief feel i am just occasionally. is it is such a great subject. the biggest exporter. in some ways the most successful. the most wonderful democratic stakeholder capitalism, and nobody writes about it. very hard core left and they're right about sweden or denmark. the worker control is not as great. everyone else wants to write about france. so, you know, the french social democracy, germany is just boring.

nobody cares, nobody is interested. it is as ronald reagan said, one of the two things he said that i really agreed with. pick out an area where you have no competition. you have no competition. the field is clear. that is the reason i picked it. >> well, how is german social democracy so different from french? what is tony's argument as they compared to yours? >> well, tony's book is wonderful. you should buy his before mine or you were born -- "were you born on the wrong continent?." he is much more interested in defending state ownership and public ownership. the germans have less of that partly because after world war

to the americans and british and french decided they did not want a strong german state. and germany is not -- was never unified to begin with. the popes have always battled. they do not have a strong central government faugh. what has been interesting about their version of social democracy is that this figure out a way to empower people. that is the real dividend. it is not just this chicken that is in every pot, it is the opportunity to serve the plot. you know, i have these visions which i try to describe in the book about being on the mountaintop where they have these big union conference is bringing in people. people in this room. the unionists would you up on to this mountaintop. you get to the seminar. it is like the kennedy school for new people in congress, how

to negotiate to make these trades, exercise your power. these are just ordinary working germans who have been brought into the political process and told, you are responsible for other people. you are -- you have power. fleshing people in and out so that at any given time in this country there are all these people who have run for office and held it and made decisions about when people will go home to work, who gets fired into doesn't. so important in the welfare state to give people a sense that they are responsible. >> you know, oscar wilde says the trouble with socialism is too many meetings. it sells like this is an awfully demanding system for workers. when people run for works councils to the -- how did they do it? to the run on party lines to back to the campaign? can they be reelected? >> there are term limits, and people do it all the time.

you know, one of the interesting things that people in management, people who like me, have gone to universities, and some of my friends in germany who were lawyers casually mentioned that when he was in his twenties he was on the works council. he ran, got elected. he is in management. has his union card. it is a lot better than the union summit, which is what our equivalent is here. what i liked about it and what i think is so wonderful about is that here in this country you have a high-school graduate of the corporate board of the major corporate -- corp. happens a lot.

every example which i given the book, but global bank that was just starting up. i asked a young banker about codetermination. he said, well, i'll show you how it works, the guy who brought us the plans, he is on the corporate board. he is very funny. the other thing i think about is they cannot hold meetings in english. this guy only speaks german. everybody has to go at the pace of a gardener. that's wonderful. very democratic. >> that would be a hard crowd to explain derivatives to. >> i suppose it would be. at the it is probably somebody who might have a very good intuitive sense of who would make a good boss. >> it would be an advantage to have somebody there saying a don't know what you're talking about.

>> i knew nothing about energy. i was in the energy department. of was the most valuable person there. what is natural gas. that was such a profound question. is it going to survive? what is the trend line for the german model? is it heading down, up? >> i think it is heading up. at the moment, of course, it is enormously painful and stressful for the germans to be optimistic. at the end, the labor of ministry said that codetermination is their biggest export. when i got into this with

interested me, i describe this thing as a laundromat. major cold, battling it out over the treaty and the social charter provision. corporations operating have to control workers about basic decisions. of course john major was against it. the center right guy was baffling for it. it would make a huge difference for the fate of the german model if they could not impose this model of the rest of your. that is, all of the capitol would go to the anglo-american side where they could run wild and do whatever they want. i thought that the reason and still think the reason germany got into trouble in the late 1990's and early part of this decade is, an economist who supports the aversion is that investment did not go there. it went to new york, london, the casinos, or the activities of our respective models.

germany was relatively starved of outside investment because those shareholders and capitalist did not like a determinations. they did not like that. the financial times, the economists, the did not like it. there were interested in bringing it down. that is kind of why germany got into trouble. now it has turned a proved its worth. the balance is shifting. i hope that it survives. >> how broad is the political consensus? what do the various parties think? are they kind of the tea party? are they completely against codetermination? how did they feel about it? >> my brother was saying the fdp. he said to me you think you are

so right wing. compared to the united states, even they are on the left. there are no friend of, determination and there are plenty of people in germany during the time that i was writing. remember, germany felt that they were fighting. they were not putting the money. the u.k. was getting ahead. there were plenty of people calling for change. one of the great things about agenda 2010 and whether it was right or wrong, and this is what the person said, the great thing about the cutbacks and the pensions and the scaling back of the welfare state of germany that was put into place is that it shut everybody up.

it removed this clamor for changing the german model. his point was, we kept codetermination. we kept the system during a time when it was in peril. we scale back, but we did it to save things. the system is in place and stronger than ever. i think it is going to be -- i think the european and german model in particular, even though everybody is ready to write it off at any moment as they have ever since i got out of college in 1971. i think at least for the next few years it is in pretty good shape. so what is the -- you, like me, are obsessed with process and political structure and the impact that it has on where there is a struggle against a

filibuster. even getting rid of the senate. am surprised that there is none more in this book about how the german political structure, the relationship between this economic model, this industrial model and the political model. >> there is a little bit about it. i have written so much. i am depleted on the subject. i have made this point in of the things that i have written. it is in this book. post 1945 constitution that was adopted really reflected the new deal. they put into their constitution what the new deal could not. it was too hard to amend. right to health care, education, all of these things that ought

to be, including right to privacy. they had that, and it keeps the system from going off the rail so that, you know, you can talk to a scaling back the welfare state, but there is a constitutional limit because people have a constitutional right. that is really important. your of the thing that is important is that they have, you know, one person and one vote. i don't want to go into all of my tirades about the american system and the senate and the way it blocks any kind of change, but now why is that so important to america americans, and many people on the left are against it because they say that the tea party will get in and take away a marriage. that is a concern. it shouldn't be the major

concern. what they mess is that the changes that the left put san when the left gets into power and has the majority are irreversible. if you bring back the right to unionize you are just going to foot the whole character in the country in a way that is a better safeguard the having some filibuster system to shoot down proposals you don't like and have people more and more alienated. the way that you provide -- and i believe in the bill of rights. i am a good liberal. i argued to process. i feel it is extremely important. but the ultimate protection of the liberty of the people and progressive values is majority rule. to get these moments when you have a real socialist government or a new deal government that makes these irreversible changes like extending social security, extending medicare, it if we

went to single payer we would never go back. if we brought in the right to organize it would change the united states forever. extending the tax cuts for the rich, you know, i don't want to extend the tax cuts. if it happened that is reversible. that is why we should have majority rule. they have proportional representation which has its bad side because it gives popped -- power to the neo-nazi group in sweden. that is very disturbing. on the other hand you get real joy -- voices on the left like in germany. i am not a links person, but i'm glad it is there to give a hard time. i'm glad that the green party is there to give a different take and the kind of germany.

>> no pr. and, of course, they can have minority governments that have majority powers. that is an accountability as much a factor here as majority rule? in other words by government can enact its program and then it can be judged on the program. the people can get rid of the government, but we don't seem to be able to rid of the government possibly because we have to be of the. they have a government. >> by m4 bicameral legislature. i believe there has to the one-person, one-vote. it is a good thing. i believe in court. >> how did the rights it in

force? is there a court that hands down decisions that then the elected branch -- >> a very activist court. in some ways more of the -- more so than here in the u.s. is this law going to hurt or help the family? they have to look at that under the constitution. it education free or not free? if that is the case, it goes to court. there are all sorts of constitutional checks. and these constitutional checks, the social rights, i did not write about this, but i referred to it vaguely. i could have written another 400 pages. we made the right decision to keep it the length that it was. it is tempting to write another 300 words. so many fascinating aspects. one of the things that is part

of the constitution that is not formally part of the constitution, but is really important is this labor model. i mean, the fact that people are -- there is the formal constitution and this extended constitution. really i am more interested in this book, the extended one, the co determine board. i really think that the accountability of parties to the electorate is important. it is not as important as pulling people in and making them responsible for their decisions themselves and learning in some ways the trade-off. one of the things that is bad about the american system is that because none of us have any kind of power we end up being

very irresponsible. we say irresponsible things. one of the interesting things about germany is the have plenty of irresponsible germans and people who say all sorts of crazy things, but so often you are pulled into the system, at least compared to america. you do have to of make decisions, and these are not just people who are in the elite. the wonderful thing -- you know, in the united states we have 27 percent of our adult population with a bachelor degrees of one kind or another. that means 33 percent -- pardon me, 73 percent of the population is just walking around even with no high school degree oral. you're not aware of their presence. i will tell you, you are aware

of the presence of high-school graduates in german culture. you are just aware of it partly because of the labour structure in public because the unions are important. they get people to act rationally and make trade-offs. that is something that the spd is good at doing. that is just absent here. >> what is the down side? who loses? >> the people who have lost in the system by the growing number of high-school grads who are cut out and do not have decent jobs. for the time being -- in getting this is going to change.

a very male-dominated cultural, but they're trying to do with the french are in terms of child care and family. at the end of the day in which country, france, united states, or germany, is it possible for a woman to rise to the highest position of the land? well, i think that is a temporary thing that is changing very rapidly. what is more disturbing is the people who are out of what they call the system who don't have these high skilled jobs. the question is, well, what to do. there is an easy answer. the answer is to do what we do, which is just have more environmental waste, fraud, cheating, and everything else. especially you look around new york city. you can see the answer. security people.

more crime. the germans really, to pull these people into the system and eliminate unemployment and so forth, it is to have more servants. i don't know that an egalitarian social democracy can survive if it is creating more and more jobs growth, people are serving other people. a kind of personal serving capacity which is something a tried to get into in the book. it is a good thing that they have a little unemployment. >> we have a long way to go before they catch up with us. i want to turn to you out there. please, if you have a question -- i don't know how we handle the microphone. is there a microphone? please, identify yourself and

make your question or comment. >> and we are happy to talk about the u.s. senate at great length appear. >> before you ask that question, i don't know if you know the answer to this one, but the german constitution, the formal constitution, wasn't it kind of written under american auspice? >> well, some germans deny it, but, you know, all of these constitutions were heavily influenced by the un charter for a human-rights which was a franklin roosevelt project. they were heavily influenced by the allies' war aims because there were the occupying parties. it is the new deal.

it is the global new deal. the great thing about germany is it is a project in some respects, and i understand the way. the oldest political party in the world. you walk in. you walk in to the headquarters. one of the first things you see is a picture of karl marx. so they have their own traditions. the charter for a human-rights. the american idealism. it was america that was the social democracy when we were fascist. the imprint of the united states is on the german model. >> the europeans should be kind to your old american grand dad

then. >> your comments, the ten commandments about labor in the west and what we should be doing. one of them had to do with unions. for the u.s. you proposed a civil-rights approach including the right to not join. a lot of your friends are appalled by this notion to rid of wonder if you could tell them how that works in germany. >> well, you don't have to be a union member in germany. it is all volunteer. one of the great things about -- i mean, it is open shop. >> yes. it is open shots. a union person said, is that what you are proposing? yes. that is exactly what sweden and germany has. we look to them. if there are two problems for

cash. well, their is a problem with labor in america. the friend who made this point about voice. either you have to give people a voice in running the organization or you have to give them the exit said that the organization has to a, you know, bid for their loyalty and love letter. there is no real voice. there is no exit. you cannot get out of it. once you are in it, you are in it. you must pay dues whether you like and not, and that is why putting in a union is such an un american act because people are in and can never get out. my proposal is let them out. that we don't have to worry about union democracy because of the really want to hold on to this money they will do whatever

they can to blind people to that organization, including giving them our. the german unions are much more accommodating the only because there work, but because it is a great way of finding people to the labor movement. always thinking of new marketing schemes which is so wonderful. this said around thinking we don't talk about international global justice enough. we could get a lot of union membership's. i think it is wonderful. >> it would have to be part of a grand bargain where it would be legal to organize the union by which i mean it would not be a corporation just following its fiduciary responsibility to blatantly this labetalol and pay whenever it finds that involved?

>> well, that is why i wanted more than the. i want to give people the right. race or sex or gender are handicapped or anything else and allow employers to opt out. people are free to pay the dues are not. we live in an individualistic country. europe has a much more individualistic labor operation and we do. makes no sense. this model, which was fine in 1933. you know, yes. there really was a left in this country. even neocons of today were members of the communist party. that era is gone.

we have to have something much more individual -- individualistic. but it could work. >> anyway, we have got to try something. >> i am lawrence. two things. the relic of the corporations. they take the long term approach and are not thinking about each quarter, every quarter. you know, make us pay as little taxes as possible. the german alick is in the long term. as you said, invest in human capital. >> i should say.

rick mentioned that i was from the midwest. the midwest, as a midwesterners i am especially fascinated by germany. it is not just because we are the rough ones out there. we are part of america that ought to be selling abroad, and are not. so what is it about the german corporation that makes it attractive? i'm not sure. i used to believe the long-term thing, and i still think there is a lot to that. it is probably a cultural thing as much as anyone else. but the bigger problem right now is not that our executives think in the short term. dilute the company's and are not accountable to anybody. they are constantly at war with their own work force.

that is a bigger problem. so many corporations that i have seen in my career as a union lawyer, so many corporations shut down the chicago, moved away from the $26 our jobs to the south. it is the globalization, it is nationalization. they get people for $8 an hour. things are fine. the products a crap. they do not sell abroad. companies can belly up. nobody cares because of this point they have made money off of it. they put it into derivatives and darnell into banking instead of manufacturing. that is the dynamic. it is not just long-term versus short-term. there is a lot. >> in china, engineers. there seems to be not as many

people. why the system works so well. telephone men and women on the board were as it is not people -- people running the companies don't know who is actually on. they are more into making deals and derivatives. the whole financial casino economy. >> it is accountability. we said at the beginning. either the authoritarian capitalist model, you screw up as the ceo, the chinese government takes you out and shoots you. we aren't going to do that here. the danger. it is just hard to imagine. barack obama is going to take people out and shoot them? i don't think so. our shareholder model which has no shareholders because these people are dispersed. i mean, there are some things

where you can nominate an outside director, but it will not make see as accountable. [inaudible question] >> say it again. >> i understand there was an agreement made in germany. >> for which they were heavily criticized in the financial times. there are all sorts of the state causes. but the internet. the responsible thing, and it does change people's outlook. you know, we will try to keep jobs. >> i was just talking about the

political structure. to me the elephant in the room is campaign finance reform. i'm curious if we're going to change anything in terms of authoritarian capitalist. for me it seems like how is it -- i mean, i'm just kind of curious how that translates. is that an issue? the nation's and how much industry controls the government? >> i have to punt on that because i'm not familiar with the campaign finance laws. the amount of money that is in the system. i do know this much. it is one of the many aspects of germany but that did not cover in this book, and i covered quite a few. i do know this. they have a career politician class.

it is all like the united states. there are occasional exceptions. this guy is the defense minister. he has a ton of money. but the politicians don't make a lot of money and are in it for life. you never stop being a politician. you get to the opposition. it is quite different from the u.s. it is not wide open in terms of campaign finance. up until psittacine united came down a would have said that campaign finance is not really the significant issue in the united states. what we saw was that we do not have majority. you can't get things through this and that will have a social democracy because it is so easy to veto anything that comes close to that.

it started with the senate. it went through jim-crow. it is right up through the plutocratic union model that we have today. you can go back to 1789, 1787, and fast for to the present. >> i would be interested in hearing what you have to say about the german education system and how school students and the very young age are separated into college -bound or trade-bound and how this can in that being a fairly racist approach to education. i lived in germany for a long time and treated minority students from turkey or sit assyria, or morocco. it seems as if they were just completely programs to head into

very low paying jobs and there was nothing that they or there families could do to change that. >> well, there are three tracking systems. one is the university. the other is the vocational, and the third is the other. the real problem is who gets an the other. >> at what age? >> those are not permanent decisions. there is some back-and-forth. i can only tell you what people told me. you may have a different experience of it. the tracking in the united states is also rigorous. i am representing right now the chicago teachers union. you want to talk about a tracking system, come on up to chicago and now show you a tracking system. is far more brutal than with the

germans have. there are people who go the other way. maybe this is sort of an urban legend in germany, but i was told by many germans about cases where -- and i was mentioning my good friend, his sister, as an example of someone who leaves the university track and goes to the vocational education track. you could end up as a landscape architect, jeweler to all sorts of things that we have for college graduates. the other thing about the tracking system, you end up in a college job. in the united states you get to college and in that $60,000 in debt and get the job as a nurse or a cop, which is not regarded as a college job. i think that the thing about the german education system is not so much that tracking is worse than it is here, although, i think it is great for the benefit of the middle-class and

upper-middle-class and professional class. is that any different from anywhere else? what is different about germany and really interesting is how little education there is. about 27 percent of college graduates. what is it -- what is it in germany? 15%. the associate degrees really have under invested in education. very bad. they probably spends too much money bailing out the you. they have not put enough in to their schools. what is interesting about it is that they are the most competitive highways just developed country in the world today. here is barack obama came up there saying, how are we going to be competitive? well, let's look at the model of the country that is most competitive. whatever the secret, it in

education. they are not doing it. that tells you something about the goal of education and making the country competitive. it tells you something about the democratic party's his only strategy for raising people up is education. there are all sorts of reasons to push education. i'm all in favor of it. but don't want anyone to think i am against this were getting high skilled training. shoveling more and more people into college and piling up debt is not going to make as did a set of dead as a better country. >> i'm sorry. i would like to add that i did not see the turkish students ending up taking part in any meaningful part in society.

>> well, you know, it is an anecdotal bang. i asked, if you walk around a city like berlin the probably seen more entrepreneurs who are turkish than german. when the marched and describe that in the book on may day i left. i thought the german would be all right. it is really -- i hope this is not me. that's awful. i thought i turned off. this is like what happens in court. i describe that quite a bit in the book. it is berlin. it is not west germany. i could have been back in south chicago. there were not african-americans. the range of skin color of the people who were working. i hate to say about south

chicago or berlin, but the number of people with type outserts, you know, killing off to have a beer, it was so much like the steel workers that i knew back in the 70's and 80's that i just burst out laughing. you know, again, i would say it is more true about berlin and other places, but there are at the end of the day two things that really struck me about the immigration system, and you could, you know, talk about how difficult it is, and it is difficult. number one, there are probably more foreign-born persons in germany than the united states. second, what really i think it's fascinating is that the youth labor mobility. if we had people coming in from

other countries the way they did i just think that the -- i can't seem to turn the soft. if we had people coming in from other countries the way germans and other europeans did, you know, there would be enormous social tension. i mean, they are serious in italy. they don't seem to be as nearly as serious in germany. one of the reasons i've picked germany is because i really, as i mentioned, of all the places things in germany are least

difficult and stressful. the final thing i decided, this poll that the financial times did, they did surveys of countries, america, germany, france, england. the question was -- i just can't get it off. now it's off. the percentage of people who say immigrants have made things worse, highest in britain. i forget where the other countries fall. the united states is somewhere in the middle of the pack in germany is below the nine states. not much, but it is below. there are plenty of people who made things worse, but relative to the united states and

certainly it is not the worst country. >> one or two more questions. >> i understand that your book. >> since 1997. >> says. >> big conflicts in asia for the future which model will have a better chance to survive china, india, the americans, are germans? >> well, i have given my opinion. i think that -- i don't know the answer to that. i think that the united states has reached the point where their shareholder model that we have which is not really a shareholder model anymore does not work. something has to replace it

really make him up with something new on our own, but between the alternatives of an authoritarian and state : model it makes more sense to get tested called a model. the european model. i mean, look at our problems right now. we are in a recovery. more unemployment than ever. we have companies that have money stashed away. they downsized. we have alternatives which has just made a guarantee that workers will not lose their jobs. democratic society ought to be opting for a corporate model. if the alternatives in the end and the corporate model is broken and the alternatives are east asia or central europe,

china or germany, how can we not be pushing for the german model? the other thing that is really important that i have not and did not talk about enough, if i can go back and write this book again i would make a much bigger point about this. the whole notion of consumption. germans don't consume enough. the importance of not consuming in the years ahead, of developing an economy that is not going to waste into the earth because we are going to have limits, the interest in germany about not just the stick called a form of capitalism. the germans have not felt these problems. environmental constraint,

corporate accountability are just way ahead of where we are. they are traveling with the problems of globalization. the answer gile question is that in some way i just believed out of more kind of human optimism that codetermination in some form or another will become an export, even if it crosses the atlantic. >> rethink or reeducate the political thinking. illustrate the concept in a more

social orientation. >> well, you will never change individualism. we will always be individualistic. yes. and i think the democratic party has to change. the two things that they have to do is realize how important it is to stop telling their base which is largely high school graduates that they have no future just because they are high-school graduates and figure out some way to give them the future. adopt the kind of responsibility that the political class has in germany for making sure that the country is not running a huge deficit, a trade deficit, not a budget deficit. be a little more mercantile list and of little less blase about whatever happens. >> strike down the filibuster. >> strike down the filibuster. >> question. >> one more. >> it strikes me that what you

are talking about in your traveling model is more cultural and values centered than any other political consideration or anything like that. that is just what is coming through. the other thing i want to ask is out of germany was having a big problem because the population doesn't spend money. it was that not a problem? >> that is regarded as a problem. >> it seems to be tied up in the whole model that you are talking about. >> it is. yes. your question is -- your question, as i understand it, is the corporate model is based on these cultural things. >> i wrote the book for just the opposite reason. i think that the law changed the culture. you know, germany is a great example of that. for example, look at communism

in east germany. they took the prussian character. everything -- west germans look upon east germans as a bunch of slackers the don't want to work in this and that. the pressure is used to terrify them. i really think that the whole point of what i was writing about, americans coming in after world war ii and putting in large systems and putting workers on the board and all these new deal values change the culture tremendously. the fact that we lost unions and the new deal laws changed the culture here tremendously. it's cultural, but you can change the culture with a set of laws. at think that is really one of the fascinating brings about

germany. they're so prosperous without this excess consumption which drives everything. we can't keep chewing up the countryside engaging in the kind of waste and fraud and environmental the we have. the must be another model. the fact that they don't consume "and "as a good thing, why should they super size itself and blow itself up instead of doing what the germans are doing which is sold to the developing country, the chinese, brazilians. let them have a stake. they sit in front of the tv. the west has to figure out a way to consume less and maintain its economic standards in a way that brings up the standards of other

people. that is one of the aspects of this german model, selling to the chinese, the brazilians, the developing country. germany would be doing even better if the globe were doing better. if they had more money to buy german goods. that is the kind of model that we should be looking at, one that talks about restraint. it is one of the things that interested me about the book. >> there seems to be a good place to leave the discussion to the wind table. [applauding] i would like to -- [applauding] of would like to thank thomas geoghegan and hendrik hertzberg for being with us tonight. thank you for coming. >> thomas geoghegan is a practicing attorney and the author of several books including which side are you on and see you in court. to find out more visit this website.

>> former governor of virginia, george allen, former senator, mr. george allen. "what washington can learn from the world of sports." >> a great deal. and i learned a lot growing up on the sidelines of the training camps. the overarching thing that washington can learn from the world of sports is that in sports their religion, ethnicity does not matter. what matters is can you help the team when? it is a meritocracy. everyone have an equal opportunity. that guaranteed equal result an opportunity which is what our country was built on. you would never see the way washington operates, redistributing from the winner's to those who are not. if it were up to washington that would take one of the six super bowl trophies of the steelers and say, oh, these poor detroit lions, they have never made it testable, let's give them a trophy. you have to earn it in sports.

there is accountability. personal responsibility. measurement to be you know who is winning and losing. there is also a competitiveness. you're always looking at how you can make your team better. as for team america, we need to be looking at what our economic policies, tax policies, energy, education, which are mostly state and not federal, but what can we do to make sure that everyone has that opportunity to compete and succeed. i have a chapter in the book to read you never punt on first down. well, we have been punting as a country since the 1970's. those sports teams, america actually is number one when it comes to energy and resources based our plentiful oil and gas resources. the leaders in washington look at these resources as a curse to

read any other country would consider them a blessing. we need to unleash our resources and the resources of our creative people rather they to continue to get dirt thrown by hostile dictators to oligarchies call and cartels. ♪ >> is the competition getting fiercer? >> is sure has been. that is decided by the people. the fans get to vote. every two years, for years, or maybe six years. the fans were not happy with what was going on in washington. who has been cheering about anything coming out of washington the last several years other than strasbourg who has his picture with the national baseball team. people love their college, school, and proteins. we want to change. they see what is going on, whether it is that or the lack of jobs.

whether it is bailouts under president bush or this health care monstrosity or stimulus spending that does not create jobs or counterproductive energy policy. the voters, the people, the fans, the ticket holders, so to speak, the owners of the government that we want to change, and they made that change in the election. now those who have been elected, the number one thing that they need to do is keep their promises, keep their promises that they made to the people. that will at least start getting your country back in the right direction. >> do you miss being in the arena? >> from time to time. we have been very active last year and helping our congressional candidates. southwest virginia. at the beach. southwest, the south side. northern virginia. we are involved.

many people have encouraged me to get back into it, and i will consider that. right now i am using this book trying to find a fresher, unique way of sharing ideas that make good sense, that will make sure that team america is in a better position to be outstanding so that everyone has an opportunity to keep their american dream. >> the after word is by former congressman j.c. watts. >> last year he played with the redskins. my brother and i call him my older brother deacon. my sister even named her second child after begin. jc, my oldest, our oldest favorite speaker. it is very nice. a lot of good stories and there. ron reagan, the one who actually