she recalls the challenges her administration dealt with as the eighth largest state in the nation faced an economic recession with the deeply did manufacturing sector and multiple infrastructure issues. this is about an hour and ten minutes.

[applause] thank you. >> hello, everyone. the mechanics institute, such a robust crowd. thank you so much for the warm welcome. no, you go. >> what we thought we would do is have a conversation which is in many ways with the book is as the result of many long conversations about what had happened and where we had been. so we will kind of kick things back and forth, saving some time at the end to hear your thoughts and questions about the relevance of the governors story and where america goes next. when people hear jennifer's native state, think about michigan, not native, i knew -- starting already on me. [laughter]

born in canada, raised in california -- but when people here think of michigan, they probably think of detroit primarily come and they think of gm and ford and think of chrysler, and we may well talk about them tonight, but i thought it would be good if you start with a small town that probably nobody has ever heard of called greenville, which was in the middle of michigan, about 8,000 people, because i don't think that if there had not been the story jennifer will tell you about greenville, that there would be a governor's story. to me in my experience, our experience, it was crystallizing to retell the mad about greenville. >> thank you so much. so, michigan, automotive steve, manufacturing state, he elected as governor in 2002 and took office in january, 2003. and if you recall, a 2001-2002, the nation was just emerging

from the recession. george w. bush was president. there was all of this talk about whether he was going to allow a stimulus to happen for the state that could get through, and in fact he did pass the stimulus package. when i took office in january, 2003, the economists were saying that michigan would be able to rise the cycle. the we would be bouncing back along with the rest of the nation because, of course, this was just another cycle we were going through, and when the nation has a cold, michigan catches pneumonia because we were making things people by but very large things like cars. so, at the end of my first year in office, after the economists had said that things were going to bounce back, and i kept waiting and, you know, everybody said this is a really good time to be elected governor because you are coming in in the valley. things are going to emerge and an excellent time to claim credit for all of the resurgence of michigan. so at the end of the first year when the jobs were not bouncing

back, even though the national economy started to recover, i was scratching my head over why this wasn't the case. and i got a call from the head of our michigan economic development corporation, which is our economic development in michigan, and he said the governor, we have a big problem. i said what is it? he said green phill -- this little town in michigan. we carry our maps on the end of our hand, if you are from michigan -- anyone from michigan? look at you all. we know. our map of michigan in greenville is close to lansing in the middle of the state. he said there's a tiny little town called greenville and they are about to lose their enormous refrigerator factory. in fact, greenville had called itself "the refrigerator capital of the world." in this tiny town of 8,000 people at north america's largest refrigerator factory employing 2,700 of the 8,000 who lived in that town which, you

know, all 8,000 people, grandparents and their kids, this is a one company town. the whole town had grown up around refrigerator manufacturing. he said they are going to leave. they're going to move to mexico. and i said no they are not. we are going to go to greenville. we will put whatever incentives we have on the table and we will make them an offer they can't refuse. so, we went to greenville. we were in a room probably about this size in this little town and the mayor was there and the city manager was there and the guy who was responsible for the community college was there and the whole -- the workers were there. the whole town and their representatives showed up to try to prevent electrolux which operated the refrigerator manufacturing from moving to juarez mexico. we put everything we have on the table. everybody empty their pockets, figuratively, of all of their chips and we made a big pile,

and we slid apply across the table to the management of electrolux, and in the pile was zero taxes for 20 years. we offered to build them an entirely new factory. the workers, represented by the uaw, offered $30 million in concessions every single year. they didn't even want us to tell anyone how much they were offering because they were afraid of copycat requests from others who wanted concession. our pilot incentive was worth hundreds of millions of dollars. and the factory management took our list of incentives and went outside the room for 17 minutes and they came back in and they said wow, this is really generous. this is the most generous offer we have ever been presented with. but there is nothing you can do to overcome the fact that we can

pay $1.50 per hour in mexico. there's nothing you can do. so the month the last refrigerator came off the line there was a gathering in the town, and was of the employees, and the employees called the gathering the last supper. it was that a big pavilion called the orchard pavilion. i went to this gathering and walked into the big pavilion and there was a band playing sad music, and people were sitting around eight tables eating out of boxed lunches and sort of saying what are you going to do next? what are you going to do next? was like a big community grieving almost. and i went up to the first table, and i didn't announce i was coming or anything, but i felt like, you know, i just felt so much a part of this community

and felt we had lost this huge thing and i went to the first table and this guy comes up to me and he's got his two daughters and his baseball cap on backwards and he's got tattoos and he says to me "governor --" they were teenagers and he says "wife worked in the factory for 40 years, in 48-years-old. i went from high school and factory. my father worked at this factory. my grandfather worked at this factory, he said all i know is how to make refrigerators. then he put his hand on his chest and he said so, governor, who is ever going to hire me? who is ever going to hire me"? it wasn't just him. it was workers all over the country that are experiencing the ramifications of the

globalization. and it wasn't just greenville either. >> so let me pick up the tail a little bit. what we've tried to do in the story was kind of share how piece by piece this came out. as you heard jennifer had this optimism about how things were going to turn around. we always had a cyclical economy. all of us in america are sort of saying okay where is the upturned and the doubt if you've been watching in the last six weeks it's up and back down and it's up and it's back down, then it's up and back down. but one of the questions we have is when does it come? one of the things we learned is that the recovery actually came and the recession wasn't as real in the first decade as we thought. now, that may sound ridiculous but let me explain. here's why it probably sounds ridiculous. you wouldn't know this but america lost 42,000 factories in

the first decade of the century. 42,000. so, you know, on average 1,000 a state. 1,000 factories shut down. so, what happened we lost 2.5 million jobs a month. american companies that world and national companies that have a presence of someone else. we lost 2.5 million jobs. but the crazy things as we start to look at the numbers and start to see experience after experience like the one she described monday as poignant or nuclear as greenville but experience after experience of jennifer getting notices where a company employs over 5,000 people. >> roughly 50 or more. sam acuff dtv company to lay off 50 or more has to inform their governor by the federal law. so, these were flooding in the desert and played in 08 and 09

when things were terrible. we had a terrible shrinkage. but at the same time those companies grew. 2.9 million jobs abroad. so, there was actually a net growth. think about this. this is the era that we lived in a tremendous efficiency and productivity. of two people doing one job, increasing over time especially white-collar overtime without having to pay for it. pushing your health care costs on to people, all kind of things to get more and more efficient, to use technology in every way possible. and during that time they were still adding jobs. it wasn't your shrinkage, 2.9 million. what jennifer and i sort of notice and like to say is that adam smith, you remember the great capitalist economist talked about the invisible hand, and he said when people make efficient decisions, when they decide to work more to make more, they decide to buy a cheaper product an inexpensive

product, all those decisions create the sort of invisible hand of their money and resources move to the most efficient places. and that's exactly what we have experienced. we have watched as our jobs have migrated elsewhere. and we've lived still within a protected sort of double of our thought process that we are in a closed economy. we are in this economic system and so, for instance, if you give companies more money, or if you give wealthy people more money, they will think qalqilya in test this and make more money? which is great if you're in a closed system but if the most efficient place to spend that money to use that money has a business person is to invest abroad, then we've got a major jobs problem. likewise on the consumer side of consumers to the most prudent thing which is go to wal-mart rather than someone else to get a lower dollar amount where do those dollars go? a big chunk of those dollars flow across the ocean to china.

so we are in the midst of this tremendous situation we are still in the 20th century mind about the economy is like. we will talk more probably about michigan and how our michigan residents were very much -- and i think it is true in california and even in my belly and berkeley students across the bay -- still thinking 20th century mind is about the 20th century problems. >> in fact when this happened with electrolux and i realized this was potentially the harbinger of all of this stuff to come for us, we decided that we in michigan were going to do an analysis on our economy, and we were going to do everything possible to begin to keep jobs in michigan. so despite the global economy. so i listened to the business community and i cut taxes in fact in the back of the book i've got the list the first term the first four and a half years

i cut taxes 99 times. they were large, there were small, targeted, individual, 99 times. in fact by the time i left office michigan had cut by far as a percentage more out of government than any other state in the country. we had to cut just on rall numbers by far more employees, public employees than any state in the country. by the time i left we were 48 in terms of the size of government. our corporate tax burden dropped between 1997 and 2007 more than any state in the country. so you would think the prescriptions of small government and cutting taxes which many people continue to put forward as the solution to the national economy today you would think that if those were in fact the only solution to be able to use that michigan would have had the most robust economy in the nation. and yet, we still have the

highest unemployment rate for the vast majority of the last decade. there was a mismatch. i was not applying solutions to the 21st century problem i was applying 20th century solutions to the 21st century problem. all of the means i do believe you have to be efficient in government and i am not suggesting you want huge bloated government. i think you have to cut where you can to invest where you must but the thing that started to turn us around was the ability to partner with the federal government to make strategic investment in areas where michigan could compete globally one example. so when the recovery act was first adopted, president obama said he wanted there to be a component of that that would allow for america to make electric vehicles and you could only do that if you make the battery of the electric vehicle

care in this country. before 2009 all of the electric vehicle batteries except for 3% were made in asia. so what the president said repeatedly on the campaign trail this you don't want to substitute reliance on foreign oil for the reliance on foreign batteries. let's us in america make the electric vehicle and the guts for that vehicle. so we raised our hand and said look, we have made vehicle 1.0 as the automotive capital of the world. we want to make car 2.0 as well. so, in order to compete for those federal grants, we've teamed up with the private sector and which universities to be able to put together a really compelling stories of a pack of proposals to the federal government, and in august of 2009 in fact joe biden came to michigan to announce all of the winners of that opportunity.

within the space of 18 months, michigan had developed an entire battery cluster in the state because we had done an analysis and we were able-invest with the federal government. that investment is supposed to create 63,000 jobs in michigan by the year 2020. one of the battery company is just tired of their 1,000 births in -- prison and we identified a whole supply chain not just the folks building the batteries but all of the suppliers to the battery companies, too. we knew we had gaps in the supply chains like to japan and i said come to michigan and provide the material for the battery, please come in and i went to the techno semi kim and i said provide the electrolytes for the batteries, supply chain that we are developing and then i went to corita and i said you make of these batteries for these consumer products you're going to build the battery to the electric vehicle in the united states come to michigan

-- >> sounding like howard dean now, be careful. [laughter] >> i was, wasn't i? too we are going to south carolina, we are going to florida. [laughter] >> at any rate, the bottom line is we were able to develop a cluster but we wouldn't have been able to do it on our own. it was only in partnership with the federal government and the universities and the private sector that we were able to do it. so, the trajectory of the learning korea's governor is one that lasted really almost the entire eight years. we tried a lot of stuff to read that time and the only thing that began to work was this ability to invest in our economy, and the proof of that is that in 2010 our unemployment rate dropped six times faster than the national average. the gallup organization said michigan job performance job improvement was the next improved of all the states to begin in august "newsweek" said

michigan was the number one state for job creation opportunity nobody can claim it, but it's finally started to turnaround once we were able to strategically invest in order to bring jobs there. >> why don't you talk for a minute about states and the fact you were competing with the lee barber in mississippi and he was trying to hold the jobs there and you were in mitch daniels back yard or in california which is a favorite place for governors to come. >> governors love to come to california and try to -- here's the issue, no state has the opportunity or the resources to compete against say china or germany. even the state as powerful less california because you have to balance the budget and you've got no resources to be able to do it. but states do compete against

one another all time and in whatever way we can. and the only way we can often compete is by throwing tax incentives that businesses so lowering the businesses and you are moving them around from one state to another every governor we are constantly competing with one another to say i got that one from you guys were lagat that one from the inspectors of the magazine that facilitates this. it's called site selection magazine and they have a governor scott every year to see which governor won the most investments for their state. >> did you win? >> i did several years i'm proud to say accepted as a stupid national strategy. because you were just moving the jobs are around from one state to another. when the real competition is overseeing overseas. what do we do to people to crack the code to keep jobs here when the movement of jobs in the cowal as we have seen so readily flows to the places not just have the cheapest labor.

greenville is an example the of the cheapest labor but also where there's a partnership on behalf of other governments and i will say quick story in this wooded back to you. i was in march in china, and i'm very interested in the opportunity to clean energy can provide in terms of jobs and so we went with a group called securing america's future energy and we met with chinese officials to see what they were giving to be able to attract and they contracted so many solar jobs from california that used to provide a huge number and now it's a very small number because they have been very aggressive. and so the chinese -- one of the meetings the chinese officials me aside and says when do you think the united states is going to get an national energy policy? and i said -- who hooted back there? and so decisive, i don't know. and this is what the chinese official did. he goes like this.

[laughter] he grinned and rubbed his hands together and then he said to me take your time because they see our passivity as their opportunity. we have to recognize that the federal government in this country in terms of energy policy and getting jobs has brought a knife to the gunfight. >> i think that is one of the issues i can't help think we are on the verge of an election cycle and what should we be talking to each other about and what should we be asking the candidates to take stands on and where should they be committed and i think this is one of the most important issues i'm going to steal one of jennifer's story which is a george bush story in his biography he talked about being with hu jintao the president of china and they are talking about their situations in life and pierce, colleagues, just kind of hanging out and chilling so president bush is a kind of conversation starter

says? he says what keeps me awake is creating 25 million jobs a year for people of china. and of course the good gentleman he flicked the question and said president bush, what keeps you awake at night? you remember eight years of president bush, would you think he said? >> [inaudible] saving the world, cutting taxes? no, something else. spread of democracy. but what kept him awake at night? terrorism is what kept him awake after the bad news he got while he was reading to those kindergartners if you ever saw that movie it was quite a scene. but here's the point then. it's are we really focused not just saying we are focused about jobs, but all we focused about creating jobs now in the kind of economy they were in in a global

economy where countries like china, and we won't increase in a lot of what china is, but what we can embrace is really an aggressive desire to generate economic activity that leads to the bottom line. so consider the contrast when we bring these on to tennessee or honda somewhere, you're happy to have the plant to probably give them the land. somebody like jennifer said we can give you this incentive and that incentive and come here, don't go next door to alabama or tennessee. come to us. and the deal is struck. when gm goes to china and says we want to work with you and have a joint venture, build some cars, sell some cars, just like you're asian friends or selling cars to our people would strike a deal. who do you think owns that operation? china. shanghai motors. shanghai motors is owned by the city of shanghai which operates

under pretty strict federal guidelines. do we want that kind of rigidity? probably not. in the long run would help them? maybe, maybe not. is it helping them now where 50% of the return is going to come back to shanghai to think about investment in their school, investment in their roads and infrastructure? that things america thinks we did in the past but don't seem to want to or need to do? so somehow we have got to be thinking about is how are we as intensely competitive as they are and do we want the government sitting on the sideline? this is still a level ideology. but the government on the sideline. let the market to its thing and everything is great. you know, to which you say how was that working for us right now? it's really not. and so we need an american-style, an american mix of capitalism and democracy that works for us but we need a government that's determined and not one that says trust us in time it is all going to work

out. leave it to lehman brothers and the individual investors and the rest and everything will work its way out. clearly that isn't working here and we need to go somewhere else. >> i was moderating a bunch of multinational ceos on the panel earlier this year and the question was what should the role of the government be? for the united states and job creation, and i said to them since he wore in a bunch of countries is very country that does it best? who should we model ourselves after? >> this was john deer, coca-cola, at&t. we are talking about people who are really seeing the globe from a business person said standpoint. >> what they said is singapore does it best. and i said what is it singapore is doing that we might learn from? what singapore is doing is they do an assessment of their economy giving it the identify their strengths and weaknesses.

they identified the clusters they could attract the clusters and sectors that would be global and competitive in singapore. they get those companies. they have specific goals for the foreign direct investment. so they go out, find those companies and bring them into singapore, create a cluster that has suppliers and has customers as well to read than the offer streamlined permitting for businesses to come and open up shop very easily. they get access to capital for businesses who have heavy equipment and technology that are expensive to be able to get them on the ground and in short the offer them a full-fledged partnership, not a top-down the bottom-up partnership the business to say how can we meet you competitive? in the united states, what can we do, what should we be looking out? i think we ought to be going after the foreign direct investment. we ought to be taking advantage of the diversity in the country

singing to the international business is if you want to do business in the united states, high year our people. we ought to be having specific goals. i think embassadors should have goals if they are assigned to countries. how many companies can you bring into the united states to be able to employ our citizens? we shouldn't be afraid of identifying the clusters that work for us. in california you've got silicon valley and all of these ideas are incubated but where are they taken to scale? where is the manufacturing occurring? a lot of it is in china and overseas. i would come to some of come valley and say you have a product we will be able to make it for you in michigan. sycophant texas and mississippi all have california companies doing solar panels. okay i have to ask about solyndra. you are all familiar with solyndra, right?

five ied come is that the highway? eight bayh 80. those beautiful plants on the east side. so what happened? there's a situation of the $500 million of doing exactly what you are saying, guaranteeing the loans, placing an active role, building the new sector. we talk about it in the book. >> it is a tough question. does the united states provide access to capital for industry is that it believes is in its critical national interest. we should be energy independent, should we spawn and invest in new technologies? sometimes when you invest in the new technology win, sometimes you don't win. this particular program had 40 applicants as the projects the win this one project failed it was a big number. but if you placed no bets you lose every time and other countries are placing bets aggressively and if we are not

in the game we will continue to be bystanders to the loss of jobs. that's one solution. i'm not suggesting that should be blown up and used everywhere. but if you have a comprehensive uniquely american economic is a limit strategy that is an assist from the federal government, then i think you can start to have some impact. there is an idea in the book -- >> let me jump in there a little bit because i think one of the things that happens we get into this black or white with the parties and so this government investment in the private sector was crazy. look at solyndra. we've lost all this money. separate the government from the private sector killed build the wall like the one, you know, they are building in israel and the one we want to build in mexico. build a wall and separate business and government. and this is kind of a crazy idea if you ask me in many respects because there are some things we want to invest in.

many times in those cases we have a mix of public and private coming together to do that. i don't know what it's like in california but almost every road built you won't find a state building roads. you will find them creating competition and building work just like somebody put in the private sector letting the market mechanism worked so you get the best dillinger of the roads you can get. so it's not purely one or the other. solyndra is sort of government money that needed to be there at the beginning. the guarantee of a loan otherwise you wouldn't have had that private money. it is somewhat risky but the government does lot of stuff that isn't as risky. one of the things jennifer did in michigan and ensure governor brown is doing here is than you bargained for what you need. so if you are the state but is it that you were looking for? what is your big offering when you were offering grants or some

land or when you are offering a tax credit. if you were the governor weld would you say that you want from those companies? >> jobs. so when did you pay the credit? when do they claim the tax credit on their income tax form? wendi how your people. when they prove that the high your people. so we it is not as the wood is entirely one or the other. it's not as though the government can't think and can't decide what we are interested in investing and and then let the private sector work. find out ways to have both worked. about what we have been sort of hoodwinked to believe is that an all or nothing proposition and the government as a bunch of idiots. is there too much money in the government? of course there is, before they're great people, tons of them who are really trying to do awesome things? absolutely, there are and we have lots of checks and balances. >> we have to have the two points, quickly. the issue about tax policy is really important.

what dan said is when the state's offer tax credits tied to job creation your tax policy is to something you want to get just across-the-board kind of tax cuts without tying it to job creation in the united states you might actually be giving somebody some extra money so they can maximize their shareholder return in the best possible way in a global market and investing it somewhere else. if you don't tie the tax policy to the job creation in the u.s., you could be in effect sort of facilitating the flight of jobs. for us in the global economy that is an important point. last thing because, you know, we wrote this book together even the weight is in my voice but i insisted he be listed as a -- he's been wonderful and all that. so, i would love for you to just say a word about the various

identity crisis. >> you don't have to listen to me because you can be thinking about what questions or comments you want to share with us. what was interesting in the book is jennifer told the story about the man with a ball cap and the tattoo and the kids in front of them who said what am i supposed to do? what was devastating in michigan were those individual stories. i happened to be there on a number of occasions where people cannot to jennifer and asked what do why do we and where grown men are crying or very close to crying and at week's end. there was also true larger scale. so that man had a real identity crisis. he said who's going to hire me? would like to? he said the back to school and we had a wonderful program called no worker left behind the i won't spend a lot of time on but it's about retraining workers and getting these 45 to 15 year old man a chance somewhere. but he had to reinvent himself and we had a state that had to still reinvent itself.

it's gone through the crises and every time our big three have come back in the smaller three. sometimes a tax payer largely owned in the case of gm. think about april or something because you own a company, to make that editorial aside in michigan people could work low-wage high-income jobs they could go to the graduation lines to the employment line the could be up number all you from michigan of that means to read that means you have a cottage in the north of that might be in the west we should say at north on a high school diploma if that. that has to change. >> the interesting thing is we realize writing the book there were two other identity crises involved and we talked about

this somewhat in the book. one was my wife. this is a person who had always exceeded at everything and believed if you are smart enough and get the right people that work hard enough that is going to get you there. those three things. a little bit of talent, real hard work and fight people who can make it happen and who couldn't. there is a great story i won't tell about when barack obama called the moment that was the strange thing if there was another identity crisis which is mine because i really did want to governor story to be my story when i was a young man and i will tell you very briefly that when we were in law school and felt unloved or friend mack was there we were at their session with the priest preparing us for the vowels of matrimony in the first two sessions we talked about all kind of great things you never expect a savitt man who hasn't been in a relationship to know what are

you going to do about money and many kids you want to have, how to people fighting your family? all kind of crazy stuff. in the third session we are sitting across from him and he says to me at the beginning of the session knowing i'm going to go back to michigan where my seven siblings live and all of my hundreds of cousins that were where my dad had been involved in politics and i'm going to be writing one day a governor store and he said to me like he had 35-years-old right off of the central casting a handsome young priest he says what happens in eight to ten years if the party comes to jennifer and they say there's an open senate seat and you are a lawyer and you are smart and attractive and lots of ways and you are a great speaker and by the way it is a good time for a woman he said you should run. how would you feel about that? and if i could have told the truth i would have said well i feel like i got hit by a to life

or right across the forehead but i would probably be jealous and maybe a little bit confused. if she felt called to that i would be 100% behind her and the priest had the wrong office but he had the story completely light and was a prophetic story. what happened in my time and i will keep this very brief as i have an identity crisis as well. i thought i was supposed to walk in the shoes of my beloved and wasn't. and somebody had to take care of these wonderful kids who were six and five and one at that time jennifer was elected attorney general going into first grade seventh grade and migrate when she can governor that became to me and the short story is it was an incredibly great and continues to be an incredibly great experience and like michigan was asleep we are sort of a sleep through enormous change that on going underneath us when 60% of the college degrees are going to women and

women are running more law degrees now, more medical degrees, more female supervisors in the world than the men that we are still sort of a sleep and how are we going to raise our families and make this whole thing work? and so there's another story to be written somewhere that there is a great opportunity for men, not just one income a great opportunity for a fantastic women to jump in and lead and a great opportunity for men to have a very different kind of life than they thought and -- >> when he was growing up he even wanted to be president or pope to the he went to yale, a major in theology, was going to go to the seminary, and eventually we met so that didn't work out. so she didn't become a priest but he did become a saint. [laughter] >> we could go on and on and obviously we have a book signing to do -- >> and microphone being filmed

for c-span so it would be great to be able to hear your voice and so people at home can hear as well. scirica brigety please wait for the microphone. >> thank you very much, both of you. if you are both co-president of the united states what would you do to bring unemployment to 4.5%? thank you. >> a good hypothetical can't happen because i wasn't born in this country, but i do think that a start is with the president is proposing in the jobs and recovery act which was to tie the tax policy in the united states and to invest in the key infrastructure the businesses believe is important. i also think that we do have to have a national economic development strategy. i would like to see the jobs race to the top in the same way that we had an education race to the top if you put a small amount of money out there for the governors to compete on jobs they do an assessment of their

states and they've got a strategy to develop certain sectors that are in need to them , the education rates to the altus $4 billion it cost every single state, 46 of the 50 states to jump through hoops to change the standards in a way they never would have thought possible. the states or cash hungry. if you have just a little bit of a competition among states for a small pot of money on the federal level you would see states changing their permitting, streamlining, develop clusters strategies, you would see them leverage technology, you would see them partner with universities and in sweden it is called the triple helix the partnership and the private sector universities and business in singapore it is called the golden triangle. we don't have a national economic development strategy that is partnering with the state's, states to bend over backwards. >> i will give you one more idea that jennifer suggested already

which is the foreign direct investment, and the transform our thinking about the world from we are going to create all this democracy and we are going to pull these of these countries and be ready for big disputes and deploy hundreds of thousands of people are around the globe to do that and instead think the real i don't want to use the word war but the real competition and the opportunities for positive competition is in the global marketplace. to get in a mission which is to revamp the state's in a way that it becomes more of an economic development tool and we embrace the globe and not fight the globe and we ask how we build a great companies, how we build a great partnerships that meet the world interdependent in a positive way and grow jobs here in the country. >> we have a budget recommendation. >> the goals of the buck to the estimate how many jobs they would create. otherwise we get a new ambassador not based on how much

contributions they've raised for their candidates based on how many jobs they can bring to the country. so there's a bunch of folks in the back. i was thinking that any job -- all jobs that are in manufacturing would have to be done in china, right because we can't compete waste lines and so i feel like we are destined to fail to treat stomach let me give you some help on that. i think that the repetitive motion low-skilled jobs you are right. we have lost a vast majority of them and would be almost impossible for us as a nation to get them back. but advanced manufacturing you better believe we can be competitive in and the have a chance to manufacturing realm

requires high skill and in fact a lot of people say the unions are driving investment overseas, the new union model not least from michigan a fellow named bob cain and she stood before all of them in a veteran of the all in industry and their supporters at a big conference in michigan and said once he was elected this is what you're father's uaw. our goal is to keep jobs in america and we want to partner with management to make that happen. our enemy is not management versus labor that is the conflict. the conflict is us versus the globe and the most efficient process these and most sophisticated level of skills and labor is only 7% of the cost of the vehicle and the vehicle is the most technologically advanced product in the world need to have people who know how to program the robot who know

how to maintain a robotic line. it's not easily transferable. so on advanced manufacturing you better believe the united states can still be competitive but we cannot be competitive if we do nothing. other countries are eagerly jumping over the last boat on the skills as well as on partnering with the private sector. >> i would say we have to of federal policy that partners with strategic sectors that we know are in our nation's interest. i think that having -- be a critical national need to be energy independent for purposes related to the war and our strategic interest overseas and all that. if we are serious about having the critical national need for that and we need to invest and make that happen, period. that has to be something the united states government partners on the need you to provide access to low-cost capital. maybe you deutsch team up and provide and partnership with

private sector financial community to make sure that it is a good business case for those advanced manufacturing. for the skilled, or colleges to be able to feed into it but we aren't even having those conversations about that level of partnership to make a good case. we could do it, that alone on their own when other countries are offering all sorts of partnerships we will not win. some of that and the other than your question gets at is that the irony is that in the old days in the factories you picture the assembly line they were men who were strong who were bending steel literally risking their hand and other body parts and during all kind of incredible police source and college in the 70's akaka and resembled that in many ways it was no easy, it was dirty, it was dangerous, it was redundant

and competitive and it set itself all over again. as boring as boring can be. so the irony is in places like china and mexico it's stolen that old-fashioned manufacturing. but in the process what you're getting is all this intellectual talent and we risk losing the next phase which as jennifer is describing is a much more high level sort of situation. flexible work place where you or i or jennifer mabey engineer or me delete committee work or cfo and we'll talk about the process able to understand how do we make this thing work? the scary thing is what is happening educationally is, you know, you have all read this how many ph.d. is in the engineering degrees are coming out of the universities in india and china that are being whipped, and if we want to look back 30 or 40 years it is not going to be taxes. it won't be what we had a 999

plan but did we invest in the workforce and human capital years in front of us are about this, not about bending -- >> you cannot separate research and development from the manufacturing. so once you lose the manufacturing capacity the engineers will follow. you cannot separate the two and people don't realize they think we will just be a sort of service station and do this sort of design that we want to the manufacturing. engineers have to see what products look like coming off the line pretty soon the research and development centers will move as well unless we get serious. >> two thoughts. one is an education. can't we put more emphasis on the entrepreneurial teaching so they don't have to work for

somebody they could or could themselves? and another comment regarding the first question and this race to the top for jobs for getting companies to come to the state, wouldn't that lead to states asking states offering to be regulated so that the companies would come there? >> i think on the second question you have to have a floor. you cannot -- you are not going to incentivize peter i think you have to have a floor on it. certainly not violating federal environmental protection lot etc. >> they do but you can do stuff like accelerating the permit eliminating the leaders of bureaucracy that are not

necessarily reflected to protecting the national resources of the state say you have to craft in a way to ensure the protections. >> let me jump at the first question and the answer is yes and. so as to pay the legal entrepreneur is we need to teach that. we need to teach people ability to invent and create. this is the world we are in. it is not just about being an entrepreneur. what we have to agree it is an entrepreneurial mindset everywhere so the idea that kids still have a very much have we have denise living with us who's moved to california looking for a job. we know lots of young people and they still have this idea that there is a job out there somewhere so what we wander around and find the perfect job that i fit in and what i am trying to say is no it is not about a company is going to pull out a few weeks what you are going to generate in the company, you have in the sense of the company, school, government that you are going to generate added value and no

matter who you are if you are a janitor -- i don't care who you are these kids have to understand if they don't generate value if they are not adding knowledge and creativity and collaboration and great stuff we are sunk at 57 or less in china and india and we are expecting what? kids coming out of college were expecting $18 an hour. my niece wants to earn 30 or 40,000 which is what she thinks she needs to live here. that's an enormous differential. so how do we justify it? the only way we justify it is incredible knowledge, and i believe on to the terrorism and it is a different kind of leadership. i left class with my leadership students saying okay we are halfway through the year and we are not there we are there with you and i barely innovative but you are still waiting for me to guide you. this is our leadership.

>> they've got 15 years of sitting. some schools have certainly changed. but overwhelmingly this week until somebody tells you what to do. productivity more than anything else, creativity, not that i'm the boss and everybody listens to me, but this environment where people have ideas and are sharing ideas and driving each other along, so yes, yes, yes. >> i'm an engineer and what i've seen is when i've gone to the factories in the last couple of years is i haven't given up on manufacturing in this country, but what i have seen is the machinists all in their 50s and 60s they don't have enough work for the young people come and at some point the economic standards in china and mexico are going to go up. what i am afraid of is we are going to lose that institutional

knowledge. win leggitt ellen tom pennsylvania i look over and i think bethlehem steel factory is now a casino so how do you feel about protectionism are keeping some of those jobs here by america? >> i think we have to be effective in the trade arena. and when i say that i think that first of all we've been a pussycat at the world trade organization rather than a tiger, and we need to have that mind set we've got to create and keep jobs for our people. does that mean we should put up unilateral walls? no but i do think that once other countries assessed tariffs or tax barriers to our products being able to be shipped in that should be a signal that allows us to do the same and to say strongly that we are serious about creating a fair playing field.

i feel we can compete. i really do. i worry about the generation of the 50-year-olds that band of the 50-year-olds and 40-year-olds and, you know, maybe even into the low 60s all that knowledge and those jobs being gone. but i also know that every single day that there are ideas being generated and regenerated to do advanced manufacturing products but we just are not playing at all we are not playing offense or defense and i consider the trade arena to be a place we should place strong defense on behalf of people. >> i've enjoyed it very much. i have two things to say. one is the city would be the best president but unfortunately you can't be. michigan has the highest amount of tech jobs right now because what you did. but another aspect is not

necessarily positive since 1974i don't know if you were born then yet but i was, there was a book out in watergate, global reach come and the professor here probably knows that leave it out in 74. the incredible lack of attitude american manufacturers and the nba and guys like me had about get your check and go home. the youth and then there is a way we can reinvigorate the country to say we are not the best generation anymore. we need to work harder? >> it struck me as sort of ironic as a democrat and we get trapped. for instance republicans are talking about american exceptional as some. unfortunately we are not exceptional in some areas -- we are exceptional in our physical dearth. [laughter] we are exceptionally large people but a lot of the places

that want to be exceptional we've been sliding. it is not a god-given gift and the right of all people should know that. so, this notion that if you criticize the country and say wake up you are somehow unpatriotic it is really repulsive to me and i think it is ironic because it comes at the time certainly in my life we have never -- since world war ii weeks come out of world war ii as the most dominant country on the global militarily and economically we helped rebuild the rest of the world and since that time we are probably at incomes sliding we have, ownerships lighting had come educational levels barely flat relative to the rest of the world's growth. so, it's hard to wake us up and create a crisis people are running around saying the he doesn't believe america is a great country and obama doesn't -- or company. that is a big flip.

so why don't know. most of the time you need a burning platform and i feel like we missed that chance sometimes. i will tell one more story. i know you are begging to get in. infil last presidential campaign, senator mccain and governor mitt romney can to michigan and senator mccain said i wish i could tell you if your jobs are coming back. they are not and governor romney said on going to bring america back. i'm going to bring these jobs back to you. who do you think they voted for? romney. michigan and then he broke and editorial in "the new york times" saying like detroit to go bankrupt. and he still thinks he's going to win and he might. i'm not sure how we wake people look when there is this craziness out there about patting ourselves on the back. >> i think that the occupied wall street is starting to be a

wake-up call. i think it is an unclean the expression of frustration. [applause] that is embedded in the inequality of income and if any of you are tall inclined to look at this, there is a nobel prize-winning economist at stanford who just did an analysis of the united states economy, michael spence, and in that analysis he evaluates what is happened over the past decade and yet started in the 70's but we didn't have to trade agreements we have now, and of course the world wasn't as flat as it is now. so the movement of capital from the trade agreement as well as the technology has made it so easy. so michael spence has said what has happened is astonishing in the united states because we have seen in the past decade the movement of all of these jobs which are manufacturing jobs and the increase in the services jobs the increase in the service is john as he says he's got a

problem because they are not going to pay as much, so it contributes to this growing inequality of wages when you don't have a good paying middle class jobs were tied to things like manufacturing. so when you look at occupy wall street, the frustration people are expressing is we don't have jobs, we have a huge inequality. folks on wall street are being paid hundreds of millions of dollars and 70 cents, and we can't even get a service job that is going to put food on the table. i think that that is the beginning of a wake-up call. >> yes. we went to detroit where we both lived a long time. i worked at the plant was a tie your builder and father was an engineer. we went back we asked for something as simple as the map of detroit.

what mr. you something to read this is very shocking. what you have is a little area of about a 5-mile radius of downtown or half a mile radius of downtown, .5 miles, and one half of a mile. it doesn't even go up to a grand boulevard. on the other side, there is detroit is a tiny spot in a picture of southeast michigan. it's just one of the many suburbs and we were able to get the maps of every single suburb with detail streets but the dent in the suburban map as soon as it hit the state line the streets vanish like nothing had happened. there are still at least 700,000 people living in the city. it's amazing. we went there. i talked with my old neighbors. it's true most of the people are very poor. most are african-american.

i can't help but think this is race related even if it is for economic reasons because it is a form of discrimination. that city you cannot get a street map of it. so, i'd like something to be done about it. and if you could talk to tripoli that is the question .. ..

so much of that is related to the structural changes of the economy of michigan which is the loss of these good-paying jobs. a question over here? >> hi, i have lived in europe in several countries and australia and canada and something that strikes me is the tendency in this country to have, to disregard something if it was not invented here, and germany for example has a curb system of apprenticeships. in france, companies have to pay 1% of the salary base for retraining for workers and i'm wondering, is there any sustained effort to actually look at what other countries are doing and so up we could replicate them here? >> there must be. in fact we, this is a really

great point. germany which is a country that is roughly at our wage level, right? roughly at our level of industrial development and yet they didn't lose the level of manufacturing that the united states has lost. why? a their government is active and keeping manufacturing. they have a direct policy that makes a good business case for them to locate there but they also are very serious about this training pipeline. we talk about it here and i think that we have to be looking at adopting a version for the united states. in our little state of michigan we adopted something called no worker left behind where we went to the federal government and said look, if we have repurposed all of our workforce training money and give those people who are unemployed an opportunity to be retrained for specific areas like an apprenticeship, get certification or in an area of need or in entrepreneurship that we need to have our federal

dollars relative to the 21st century. they allowed us the flexibility to do that. i stood at the state address and i said to michigan the first 100,000 workers to come in the door, we will give you two years of tuition at a community college, $5000 per person up to $10,000 but the catch is, you have to agree to be trained in an area of need. so an area like we were developing or in health care or in something that we know will lead to a job. you cannot go and get a degree in french or political science. those are my degree so i can say that. [laughter] we need no one like me but we do need nurses. we do need entrepreneurs. we do need people in clean energy and as a result of that, and we borrowed a lot of our efforts from what was going on in germany. as a result of that we have not only 100,000 people enrolled, we had 150,000 until the feds

turned off the spigot and the replacement rate was four times higher than the national average. 82% of them found jobs in areas that they trained him in a state that had such a high unemployment rate so i'm just saying our whole workforce training and pipeline related to apprenticeships is very 20th century. >> it's a great question. jennifer talk about germany and she talks about sweden. she mentioned before. in both cases there is especially the scandinavian countries, we have this terrible problem where we have huge unemployment, chronic unemployment that has stayed around 10%, to a percent here in california and italy have extreme over employment where people are just working like they have never worked before. so, why can't we just do a little bit of it? why can't we figure out okay at least are giving people options.

maybe a 5% cut. lets 20 of us take a 5% cut that allows us to have a little bit more time and frees up some money so you can hire people. your question was how do you get -- we could get to 4.5 unemployment if we would make some of those moves, some with national policy for instance on unemployment allow people to get unemployment and take it and get it while they are at work for a wild which would stimulate the employers to bring people on board if they could have a source of revenue so maybe that's a way to leverage. >> hi. i have a comment and to questions. the first comment, hello from saint carlos. >> i graduated from saint carlos high school which no longer exists. oh my god. >> to questions and i will let you decide which is harder. i think the national dialogue around the detroit bailout are

good to me it seems like a big success story, businesses survive and they got rid of business models and the money is getting paid back. but i've believe the national media viewed by everybody is a failure across the country which i wanted to have a reality check and see if that is how you perceive the perception and the second is, i was wondering if you could comment weather was harder to get agreement with the legislature on the budget or harder to get agreement as a couple on the outlines of the book? >> that's a really great question. first, this has been a huge success, the auto recovery effort that all of these auto companies are now making a profit. they have paid back their loans. they are making, i just drove here in my bolt, which is an electric car that plugs into the garage. the cars have been winning all of these awards now. they have been totally retooled. the oldest model is so 20th

century. the new auto industry has been an enormous success thanks to the efforts in intervention of the federal government. >> i have to jump in. this is such a great example i think of government and the private sector because the president, read the book, the president beat the heck out of chrysler and gm and everybody the uaw came out chastised and they made huge concession so what you had was all kinds of movements and all kinds of places. the company went through incredibly deep downsizing and they got rid of ceos. it was really deep. labour came to the table and it really different things. very different companies there that you had before you. they embraced energy, efficiency in a way that they hadn't been for so to me it was really an extraordinary story. the loss was utterly -- >> if we lost the auto injury industry would would have been e steel industry, the glass

industry the electronics industry the rubber industry, all of these into shays, the collateral damage would have been horrific in and said what you have is a revitalize auto industry, loans paid back and the saving of the manufacturing back on. >> it could have gone into bankruptcy but well, they forced a really furiously fast to bankruptcy and creditors lost and dealers laws. loss. everybody paid and so i want to make one point about the bigger picture which is if we had a choice, jennifer would be in favor of the occupy wall street. i would be in favor and maybe you would be too of a different movement which is a movement for rationality of compromise. this book was easy to write because we love each other and be compromised a lot. >> the legislature on the other hand -- >> that is the point, is that where you get to these intense ideological positions, we will not compromise. i don't know if you all watch the first republican debate. there were 10 of them up there and they said to them okay, this

was right when the debt ceiling was being raised in the government almost shut down and we lost our credit rating, drop for the first time ever in the moderator from fox tv "fox news" said to the candidates if you had a deal right now for the 1.8 trillion or whatever that has to be resolved, if you had it right now, did you see this question? ten-part cut, one part tax revenue increase, would you take the deal? every single one of them, one of of them hesitated for a second that everyone of them said they would not take the deal. so i'm in favor of a party, new party of radical compromise because what happened with the big three when everybody gave a little bit. i believe that is where we need to be in this country. right now we are in a place where you know, the party on the left, and you heard jennifer. i wanted to say it remind them reminded me or democrat. i have the smallest government in the country and i cut more

out of government than anybody. my tax rates are lower than anyone's. this is a democrat so folks, we are moving. we understand there's a market out there we need to create jobs. we are moving but on the other side, there is no movement. >> the bottom line is because i know we want to close up, is that everything is happening to the country right now happen to michigan first. i am not kidding you and that goes for politically because the question was a good political question. we have a whole chapter on that as well as economically and so we really are very grateful to the mechanics institute for hosting this and for giving us an opportunity to share. >> and the league of women voters. >> and the league of women voters. >> and all of you who are here. >> nobody fell over so that's great. thank you also very much. thank you. [applause]

>> but i have one more question i want jennifer to comment on, her upcoming tv show which is going to continue on political conversations number one first with the book. i hope everyone will come up and purchased a book and have it signed but you can also be in a further conversation as the election continue so please -- >> so i was invited by al gore to do a tv show following keith olbermann on current tv so starting in january, it will be doing a tv show focused on the election, a political junkie like me i'm interested in the politics and policy so it will be called the war room, the war rooms of political campaigns and candidates and so i hope you tune in. >> we have 6:00 here. >> 6:00 to 7:00. thank you very much. [applause]

>> to find out more visit the author's web site, jennifer granholm.com. here's a short author interview from c-span's campaign 2012 bus as it travels the country. >> you worked in different communities with several professors to talk with people about democracy. tell us about how you decided to do your research and why? >> we were trying to understand the relationship between globalization and democracy. the end of the 20th century in the united states is a period of really dramatic change, dramatic political economic social and environmental changes that really change people's lives in a lot of ways so what we wanted to understand was what did that mean to local democracy? what is that mean to everybody's difference to participate and to making it better? and so, the seven of us chose

five different communities in north carolina that have experienced globalization differently. there were two communities that we chose that are what talk with county and durham county, north carolina that we characterized as landscapes of consumption. that is, those are the kinds of communities that the economy is dominated by the consumption of something whether medical services or educational services or the m. byram and itself, our tourism economy is vital. it can also be communities that are dominated by a fire and there is an an anthem of fire which refers to finance, insurance and real estate. those are all based on consumption. we also chose to communities that were characterized as landscapes of production and those are economies that are dominated by manufacturing,

agriculture, resource-based economies and things like that and those were halifax county in eastern north carolina and chatham county in north carolina and then the third economic landscape that we looked at was of the landscape of the state and these are communities, maybe state capitols or maybe communities that host a military base and the fortunes of those communities are really determined by a much broader economic, a broader political decisions made either in the state capitol or in washington d.c. or something like that. so by looking at these five different communities, with these three very different kinds of economic bases, we got to see how people's lives are impacted differently, the broad global economic changes that lead to the century. >> you talked about people about political participation and a lot of people have talked about voting so what were you looking

for and what does democratic political participation consist of? >> we are sociocultural anthropologist and we are interested in talking to people about what they do rather than giving too much emphasis on something like voting and saying well you know floating is up or down, rather than thinking about what people are or are not doing as many other pundits and scholars have done. we went out to talk with people, to sit in their living rooms, to participate in civic organizations, to follow along with nonprofit organizations or community groups or neighborhood watch groups. we sat in all these different environments, reading the newspaper, following people around just trying to figure out what are people doing? if they are not participating in bullying leagues anymore what are they doing? if they are not voting anymore are there other creative ways people are working to make their

communities better and indeed we found that in spite of some pretty dramatic obstacles, obstacles of social inequality, obstacles of intense burdens on time that families are working more and more, many families have multiple jobs. they are struggling with things like childcare and in a political system that is becoming more and more confusing to navigate, in spite of all that, we found enormous creativity and people doing really interesting things. >> how did you conduct your research? did you spend a significant amount of time there? how did you decide what you are going to do? >> we had in each of our five communities, we had people there full-time for more than 12 months and with pre-research prior to the 12 months and follow-up research for six months and we followed up over

the years since then but the primary research period was an intense 12 months, working more than 40 hour work weeks. whenever public meetings are taking place, whenever a particular controversy happens, we interview people and in-depth interviews. i remember there were numerous times when a lot of the people you want to interview are busy so you follow them along and say okay if you don't have time for an interview, but you mind if i take this road trip with you? they are driving from place to place and you talk to them along the way to understand how their lives work in the things that are important to them. we meticulously documented public meetings and followed public debates and different things so we got a really sort of on the ground look at the ways that people participate and local governance. >> what did you learn about the ways that the media affects how people think about democracy.

you read a little bit about how they group us into categories with some people being apathetic and some people are angry. does that have an effect on people's participation in? >> it does. it does have an effect on people's participation. i think when we interviewed people about that, we did a number of lifetime participation interviews. and we found certain things that people feel guilty about not participating more than they do. they are sometimes afraid of participating and that adds to the additional feeling of, that there are obstacles to participation but more importantly i think we fundamentally, we have taken our eye off the ball. we are striking out when it comes to understanding american politics and where key decisions are made, how they're made and how people are participating. by focusing on as many, as many pundits do or as many scholars

do or in the media in general, i think that we just, the whole conversation is just off. it just doesn't match up with people's lives. perhaps we are using outdated terms or perhaps we are reflecting on, perhaps we are missing the boat eco-society has changed and our way of understanding has not kept pace. but i think what our book has done has allowed us to see new forms of that nonprofit organizations have become increasingly important to governance at the local and regional and federal level, in people's participation in nonprofit organizations needs to be understood as part of american democracy. we need to look at the ways people are carving out new spaces for themselves rather

than looking back at what people did to participate in local politics 50 years ago and say, you know, this is something participation in this old form is increasing or decreasing. we need to ask the question, well what are people doing today and how does that matter and what are the opportunities and obstacles that exist in the work they are actually doing. >> have you seen that? do you think since you have done your research in your book has come out that we are on the path to getting people more meaningfully involved in political participation? >> yes, but it's mixed. it's mixed because many new opportunities have developed for direct civic engagement and it's really oftentimes can be very meaningful engagement. i like to think about, though we don't necessarily write about this in the book, like to think about the way that so many other aspects of american democracy, voters are often, citizens are

often responding to the actions of others, so if you have, if you are voting responding to the candidates, if you are writing a letter to a political leader and responding to something that happened or if you take up a protest than you are responding to something gets you excited but when you form a nonprofit organization or a community group, it's a uniquely proactive space where you have the capacity to create a mission statement and create a whole organization. to create something that didn't exist before and that's a new space and american democracy that wasn't so relevant in the middle of the 20th century but it's important now. the challenge is that is really comp acadia. when you take an increasingly complicated political system that we have in the united states and you recognize that it takes enormous business acumen

and it takes enormous political literacy, takes an enormous amount of time to be fully engaged in this, then it starts to raise red flags and consider also that many scholars, many people have reported that there is a growing divide between the rich and the poor in the united states. we have a shrinking middle class and this is fairly well-documented, the shift in american demographics environment. but what we have looked at is the way that social and economic inequality that exists in the united states impacts and sort of contributes to a broad political divide and that there is a parallel story to be told alongside this growing trend between the rich and poor. we also have a growing divide in

civic engagement and that is a real threat to democracy. >> you work on a college campus so as a professor, do you see more involvement by students who are in college compared to the people that you are working with the north carolina? are they more involved? do they need to get involved earlier? >> what i see is with students that i see is they are finding new ways to get engaged and they are redefining what it means to be politically active. social media is a part of that. they are sort of the tried and true kinds of activism that we would like to see students involved in, but there a lot of other forms that are emerging too and i think we are just starting to understand what that means. but i work off campus as well. i spend a large chunk of my time working off-campus with people in the regional community and

economic development and environmental issues. i work with a lot of nonprofit organizations, community good groups and government agencies and they see an enormous amount of creativity and also an enormous amount of change in the 10 years or so since i did my primary research in durham north carolina. i have seen some pretty big changes in terms of accountability, in terms of the relationship between the federal government, state government and nonprofit organizations. we have new forms of oversight, new forms of record-keeping, documentation and accountability that are starting to emerge whereas at the end of the 1990s, when we were studying for the book, felt like the wild west. there was this new system emerging. nobody really knew what to do or how accountability was going to

take place. people who were using public resources and defining the public good and working on behalf of the public for not actually public officials. they were volunteers. they were heads of nonprofit organizations but yet they were using public funds and the public didn't necessarily have any oversight. today we have all these measures and indicators and reporting systems that are a bit onerous for a lot of folks, but it does, does provide a little bit more oversight. >> thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. >> the c-span campaign 2012 bus visits communities across the country. to follow the buses travel to visit visit www.c-span.org/bust. >> every week and on american history tv the people and events that document the american story. >> i guess it was 10 or 11:00 in the morning before i stopped and

said, hey, we are at war. then i got scared. >> this guy walks up to me and says, help me coach and i helped him and gotten down in the boat. he died on the way to the island and i found out later who he was. he was my best friend. >> it's just as tough to go out there to the arizona memorial as it was then, the day that i saw it. when i read those names up there, i'm done, and finnish. >> this weekend c-span3 marks the 70th anniversary of the attack on pearl harbor. oral histories, eyewitness accounts of veterans and survivors sunday at 3:00 p.m. eastern. >> on your screen is a well-known historian, stanley weintraub -- weintraub whose most recent book is called pearl

harbor christmas, a world at war, december 1941. mr. weintraub, that was 70 years ago at this time. what was christmas 1941 like in this country? >> christmas 1941 was a very quiet time. people were stunned by what had happened with pearl harbor and this was the first christmas after the event. i wrote about the aftermath worldwide, what it was like around the country, what it was like around the world. it was still a time when people would like their christmas trees. there was an official blackout that nobody paid attention. rationing hadn't begun yet, so the seriousness of the war hadn't really sunk in. >> what was washington like at that time? were they gearing up? >> washington was gearing up

blood and a very strange way. there weren't really enough antiaircraft guns available in washington although we never did have an air raid, but there were mock aircraft guns up on the roofs of buildings, so people would feel that they were being protected. it was a strange christmas. >> had a draft started? >> the draft that started in 1940 before the war began, and president roosevelt had a very difficult time in october of 1941, renewing the draft. because there were so many isolationists in the country. the draft passed by one vote does general marshall, the chief of staff, came to congress and pleaded with them. he said it's essential that we be prepared and they were prepared by one vote. >> stanley weintraub, what was president roosevelt's christmas like? >> president roosevelt d