believe tomorrow afternoon, and then working on through the week to get done, but this really is an example of the senate coming together to agree to get things done. people of different backgrounds, different ideas, different regions of the country. this is an opportunity for us to show that the senate can work together, which is what we're doing right now 0en a bipartisan basis -- on a bipartisan basis and be able to move forward phon a very, very important piece of legislation. this bill is a jobs bill. this bill represents 16 million people in the country who work because of agriculture in some way. we've had a lot of jobs bills in front of us, mr. president. i am a not sure there's been -- i'm not sure there's been one that affects 16 million jobs, like this one does. we also have an opportunity in this bill to come together and

clearly state that we're serious about deficit reduction. we're the only authorizing committee that's come forward in a bipartisan way with a bill that cuts the spending within our jurisdiction -- $23 billion in deficit reduction. $23 billion. we've gone through every part of this bill. we have literally analyzed every page and determined that there were some programs that were duplications or not effective or didn't make any sense anymore, and we ended up with about 100 different programs and authorizations that we eliminated from those items under usda jurisdiction. appeared so this really is a reform -- and so this really is a reform bill. and i know the presiding officer was a real champion of reform and is a champion of agriculture, and we work

together on certainly the fruits and vegetables and organic farming and local food systems and a whole range of things that are reflected and improved upon in this bill, and i think, mr. president, you for your leadership, continued leadership on those issues. but this really is an opportunity to come together around deficit reduction, around reform, to focus on jobs, to give our farmers and our ranchers predictability in terms of knowing what will happen as we go forward as they make business decisions for themselves. it is a huge opportunity around conservation. i think most people wouldn't realize on first blush that the farm bill is actually the largest investment we as americans make in land and water conservation, air quality related to working lands. you know, 7% of our lands are privately held lands in some way

-- farmers or others, landholders -- and the conservation title affects how we work with them to be able to conserve our land and our water and address air quality issues. and we've had huge successes there, huge successes. so this is a real opportunity to build on that. i know certainly for regions across the country -- my own great lakes region -- it's critical, working with our farmers who have a number of different environmental issues to address on behalf of all of us. this gives us an opportunity to partner with them torque deal with soil erosion -- partner with them, to deal with soil erosion in the great lakes and deal with open spaces, protecting wildlife habitat and wetlands, open spaces, creating a new easement program which will address urban sprawl so that we're protecting our lands. i'm very proud of what we've

done in conservation. we've actually taken it from 23 different programs down to 13, divided it into four different topics, a lot of flexibility, locally led with communities, farmers, ranchers working with the local communities. we've saved money by what we have done, but at the same time we're actually strengthening conservation, which is why we have, i think it's 643 different conservation and environmental groups that are supporting what we're doing in terms of our approach on conservation. so i'm very pleased with that. and, you know, the rural development provisions of this bill affect every community outside of our urban areas. the majority of michigan receives support through financing for water and sewer projects, small businesses, housing, working with local law enforcement and police and firefighters, local mayors and

city council people, counties, all across michigan and all across the country, certainly in oregon where rural development funding and support for quality of life and jobs in rural communities is very much a part of this bill. so we think of the bill in terms of production agriculture. obviously critical. i don't know any business that has more risk than a farmer or a rancher -- nobody. and so we all have a stake and we have the safest, we have the most affordable, dependable food supply in the world, and we want to make sure that no farmer loses their farm because of a few days of bad weather or something beyond their control. so what we do in production agriculture is very important. but we also have a broad role together with rural communities, with ranchers, with farmers to support our land, to support our water, our habitat, our air, and we do that through conservation.

we have rural development. we have an energy title that allows us to take what we do the by-products from agriculture, whether that be food or animal waste or biomass from forests or corn or wheat or soybean oil or whatever it is, to be able to create jobs through bio-based processes, bio-based manufacturing, advanced biofuels going beyond corn to other advanced cellulosic biofiles. so we are creating jobs in a multiplmultimulti-- in multiple. that's also a very big and very important part of this bill. and for the people in my state

who have been hit very hard in the last number of years, it's important that i would be there. they've paid taxes all their lives, they supported their neighbors, they've ben there for our -- they've been there for other peoplement and know if they need some temporary help, we need to make sure it's there for them as well. that's very important part of this bill also. in addition, we see a whole range of efforts around local food systems that also create jobs, farmers markets, a children's school being able to get fresh fruits and vegetables. more of our schools being able to purchase locally, things that we can do to support families to put healthy food on the table for their children or make sure it is available in school. very important efforts going on there. and we make sure that all of agriculture is included, including our local food systems. and that's a very important part of the bill.

so this is a large effort. we do it every five years. it takes a tremendous amount of work. every region of the country has a different view, has different crops that they grow, has different perspectives, so it is a lot of hard work bring it all ---to-a lot of hard work to bring it all together. but this evening we have been able to come together on a path to final passage, agreeing to a list of amendments, and this is a democracy, mr. president. i don't agree -- i don't support all of those amendments. i know other colleagues do not as well, and we'll talk about them. we'll debate, we'll vote. that's the senate at its best. that's what we're doing here by agreeing to a process, a list of amendments from every part of the country, and members on both sides that have very strongly held beliefs. and we respect that. we respect their right to be

able to debate those amendments and i also want to thank the patience of those whose amendments will not be brought up, were not in the unanimous consent agreement. we had, i think, about 300 amendments when we started. we knew that was not possible to be able to have a vote on every one of those. and so colleagues' willingness -- and so colleagues' willingness to work with us i am very grateful for. this is another step in the process. we have put together a bill that we reported out of committee on a strong bipartisan vote, and now we've brought it to the floor with a very large majority, very grateful that 90 out of 100 of our colleagues came together to say, yes, we should debate, we should discuss, we should work on this

agricultural reform, food and jobs act. now with the agreement we have, members are saying, yes, we should go forward and work on these amendments and have a final vote. and this democratic process, mr. president, that's all we can ask for is that people of good will who are willing to come together and have the opportunity to debate and have the opportunity to vote. that's what it's about. and i'm grateful that colleagues were willing to work with us to be able to achieve that. so i think -- i know that we are waiting for final wrap-up comments, mr. president. i think at this moment i will yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: .

quorum call: ms. sten: mr. president, i woul ask -- thpridg cer: the ti theuoru call.an.. stabenow: t the esidinofficeit objection. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. i would ask unanimous consent that on tuesday, june 19, at a time to be determined by the majority leader after consultation with the republican leader, the republican leader or

his designee be recognized to move to proceed to the consideration of s. res. 37, joint resolution disapproving a rule promulgated by the administrator of the environmental protection agency relating to the emissions standards for certain steam generating units. that there be up to four hours of debate on the motion to proceed with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. further, that two hours of debate equally divided occur on tuesday, june 19, and the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed at 10:30 a.m. wednesday, june 20, for the remaining two hours of debate. that at 12:30 p.m. on wednesday, the senate proceed to vote on the adoption of the motion to proceed. that if a motion is successful, then the time for debate with respect to the joint resolution be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. that upon the use or yielding back of time, the joint

resolution be read a third time, the senate proceed to vote on passage of the joint resolution. finally, all other provisions of the statute governing consideration of the joint resolution remain in effect. the presiding officer: is there an objection? hearing none, so ordered. ms. stabenow: thank you. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: notwithstanding the adoption of s. res. 488 and the preamble thereto, i ask unanimous consent that a snowe amendment to the preamble that is at the desk be agreed to. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: i ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged of further consideration and the senate now proceed to s. res. 470. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 470, designating july 28, 2012, as

national day of the cowboy. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed. ms. stabenow: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to s. res. 495 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 495, designating the period beginning on june 17, 2012, and ending on june 23, 2012, as polycystic kidney disease awareness week, and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. ms. stabenow: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid

upon the table with no intervening action or debate and any related statements be placed in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: now, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, the senate adjourn until 10:00 a.m. on tuesday, june 19. that following the prayer and the pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning business be deemed expired and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. that the majority leader be recognized and that following the leader remarks, the next two hours be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the republicans controlling the final half. further, that the senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 to allow for weekly caucus meetings, and that finally that at 2:15 p.m., the senate resume consideration of s. 3240, the farm bill.

the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: this evening, we reached an agreement for consideration of amendments to the farm bill. there will be several roll call votes beginning at 2:15 tomorrow in relation to the amendments to the farm bill. we will also begin consideration of s.j. res. 37, a joint resolution of disapproval regarding boiler mact. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.

in the intellectual property on the internet and efforts to improve cybersecurity with robert holliman president and ceo of the business software alliance. >> this week on the communicators, a look at the software industry and we are pleased to have joining us robert yy holleyman president

and ceo of the software alliance to talk about his industry and legislative issues that it faces. mr. holleyman, if you would, start by giving us a brief overview of the software industry in the united states. >> sure. the business software alliance represents over 70 companies who are the world's leading innovators around software. we are a trade association based here in the washington, d.c. because the u.s. has had a unique role in building the global software market which is about $300 billion a year now. we have their team for an offices because the fastest-growing markets for software or in the global market, and win software companies look to those opportunities, they are really asking us to get the right public policy place that allows those companies to grow internationally. >> how many people are employed by the software industry in the united states?

>> the software industry has over a million people who are both directly and indirectly deployed. estimated as much as 60 cents of every dollar spent on software and round the world comes back to u.s. based companies. this is a remarkable leader both in terms of technology innovation in the globe but also the era of the u.s. has been quite successful for software and a high degree of success that we should be proud of in this country. >> finally what are some of the companies represented by the business software alliance? >> deer innovative companies like apple, adobe, microsoft, intel, companies at the heart of using software as a tool to facilitate for consumers and businesses for productivity and also great entertainment as well.

>> mr. holleyman, does that include the software industry does that include applications? >> it does. the software is everything. it runs from the pc to the main frame to the mobile device to the application. if your question is the right one software today than ever before because we carry these devices are around with lots of cool applications that allow us to do all sorts of things that software enabled. >> we invited you to talk about the regular native issues that your industry faces and joining us as well is jennifer martinez, reporter for politico. >> thanks for having me. one thing i want to ask about is the report that was released recently where it found that nearly $63.4 billion worth of software was pirated in 2011 and that is up from 59 billion from the prior year. why is that happening and what

can government do about it? >> that is a great question, jennifer. that report is a hallmark report that shows what's happening on the broad market's in terms of software utilization including a lot of theft of software to read it is 63 billion-dollar value part of the software last year, and 42% of all the software the was put into use last year. what we find is two things are happening. there's piracy all over the bold including the united states. although the united states is the list of every country in the world of 19%. but the fastest-growing markets for sales of new personal computers are outside the u.s. with countries and brazil, india, china great examples and that is for the first time in china surpassed the united states as the largest new market

for the sale of legal computers but china has a high rate nearly 80% coming and so that growth market pcs coupled with the high air piracy in those markets as what is driving the global value of piracy. >> what can the government do about that especially china since it is such a big offender of the ip rights. is their anything more the administration can do? i know that the vice president has gone to china and talked about it in economic talks with anything the administration or congress can do legislatively? >> that's a great question. this has become a national priority not just for the software industry but more broadly. and that is because software is a tool of production. every business is using software in some form or fashion to

enhance productivity. as we talk about software privacy we are not necessarily talking about something of the internet although that may be. we are not talking about counterfeit copy although that is a problem. what we are talking about is when businesses in every sector is using software as a part of their production and when we find the markets like china, most businesses are not using legal software but they are getting the productivity benefits. so it hurts businesses in mainstream america who by and large are using the software for those licenses. that's why we have seen not only the vice president raise this the president obama has personally raised this with president hu jintao on multiple locations to be we have seen bipartisan leadership in congress weighing in on this issue because absolutely it hurts the software industry and it hurts the competitiveness across america and hurts

american jobs. >> mr. holleyman, a couple months ago you wrote a piece for the mercury news about specific examples of how china is abusing the ip rights and this to the cote bsa in particular. >> that is a great example of the court ordered action we have obtained with china with some cooperation for the chinese authorities and allowed us to dillinger and enterprise and inspect their career to determine whether or not the software is being used. in fact we found pirated software being used within a company and as a part of the next step what happened is that the company after the law enforcement authorities were allowed in the became very belligerent. essentially almost forcibly assured until law enforcement authorities. the next day unfortunately the

chinese women who is a lawyer was asked by the ceo of the company to meet with her to talk about a possible resolution of the case and she was attacked in the facility. that is an example of the fact that there was some initial -- there was initial support by the government in china to bring an action, the culture of this respect for the property rights in this respect to the rule of law was so extreme that we saw that type of activity which candidly could have a chilling effect on the ability of people to try to force. the woman that is our attorneys out of the hospital and doing much better. we are working on that case and hopefully we will get a resolution but it's an example of the type of products we face now from the hard-core counterfeiters but otherwise the

whole business operations in a country where the rules of law is flawed without the belief that there will be anything. >> have you see improvements, strict regulations, strict enforcement from the chinese government? are you seeing the same flawed and of bill all? >> that is a great question. we are seeing some signs of progress. as a result of the commitment that china has made to the united states government, the government itself is taking actions to make sure the chinese government uses only legal software not completed but progress is being made. it is to look at the state-owned enterprises which comprise such a huge part of the chinese economy. and there who china has committed to the united states they will take steps to ensure that state-owned enterprises and other enterprises use only

licensed legal software. the commitments are firm, but we haven't yet seen proof in terms of increased legitimate sales by the u.s. based companies to believe that those promises have yet been resolved. >> jennifer? >> the question so after it doesn't seem like much is going to get done in congress but the election coming up so post election are you hoping antipiracy the decision comes up and that effort failed earlier this year where there were the two bills looking to crack down on the sites or people just abroad from the american ip. are you hoping that gets picked up again next year? >> that discussion is a very important one come and bsa is at the intersection of both the industry that suffers from a substantial piracy problem.

it's the largest in this industry but also the industry that is the heart of innovation and so we very much believe there always has to be a balance between appropriate tools that allow the actions to be taken to prevent and stop piracy but ensuring that it allows both the innovative technology to flourish and innovative uses of technology. so we are looking forward to being part of the discussion. i think the important part of that discussion, however, is looking to the future to do in ways that software will be distributed and the ways in which content will be distributed and that is why our efforts around the development of the cloud computing are really at the heart of what speed is focusing on and those are issues that we are talking about for the and the lead to development in the fall. >> one thing i wanted to follow-up on is bsa had supported pipa and first

released i think you had sent out a statement when sopa was released that commended the judiciary chairman lamar smith for his efforts in crafting that bill, but did it go all the way out and support the bill? although some people have interpreted that statement to be a statement of support and then you publish a blog posting but there still needs to be some balance including in that bill to be done and what were your concerns with sopa? >> well, we always believe we have to balance the intellectual property protection which is the underpinning for the innovation that happened the use of the internet that is critical to users come to businesses and new

innovative companies and encourage the committee to get the balance right and what ultimately determined that this was not the year to pass any legislation so we are going to be part of that discussion going forward. but if we support even legislation in the future, not saying we will or won't it has to get the balance right and we want to be at the table talking about that balance. we think a reasonable approach can be done that allows us to tackle the problem of piracy but injuring the kind of innovation that we are all for. >> mr. holleyman, were you surprised by the outcry over sopa and pipa? >> i was not surprised that the servicing had become and how word with this technology that we've developed with a whole host of issues lonely this issue

but we see this and other governments and other countries' citizens are in power. what we have to understand is there has to be a balanced so the voices need to be heard and i am confident that in this process going forward we will see an even better understanding of technology issues but he will have not only companies that have individual users coming forward with their ideas because that is where we depend on the elected officials and others. >> you are watching the communicators, c-span's weekly look at technology policy and folks behind it. joining this week is robert holleyman president and ceo of the business alliance and jennifer martinez of politico. next question. >> is their anything specifically about sopa anything

about that bill where you thought that it went too far when the congress returns to this issue of tackling piracy, issues to keep in mind? >> well, look, i think the important lesson from that discussion is getting this wilentz record innovation but the important lesson also is what does this mean globally? we see several nations that are havens for piracy. that is something that is not in the u.s. industry interest. it's not in the u.s. economic interest and it's not in the interest of the users for that to happen. i'm also looking at the series of barriers that the countries are erecting right now that the u.s.-based technology companies see in the global market not only by the piracy of the type

of berry years that we are saying that promoted local products and innovation that block foreign competitors and to the barriers around standards that the country said that include china again or trying to erect that look to domestic standards what we will internationally set standards through a series around cloud computing that would require the data centers and country by country which picks up the economic efficiency of the cloud computing or that mimics the ability across the borders, so we are in an incredibly important area for the future growth of the software industry and the future of american companies to be successful. things like sopa and pipa matter but they are only one element for with the u.s. does and need to take a look at what is happening internationally and we have to break down barriers

where we see them exist and find the balance that arises innovation. >> mr. holleyman, when it comes to cloud computing is the future of the software industry and where does cybersecurity and cybersecurity legislation play a role in the cloud computing industry? estimates innovation in the computing industry an estimated to be 73 billion-dollar fell you and really cloud computing what it means if you hear a lot about simply put it just means that software can be delivered as a service, and it can be delivered efficiently and in some cases less expensively in ways that enables individual consumers, small businesses and others to gain the advantages of that software. as a huge growth of interest and

economic activity in the u.s. software industry. it's critical for that to be successful, yet we have the type of security protections when the data is stored not among the personal computer but when it is stored in a cloud hence the name. you have to make sure it is secure but you also have to make sure that it can flow between borders because in the seamless world of the internet as a means of distribution, the economic efficiency occurs not just in a city or state or country, but when you bring all of this together to have that kind of confidence that you need for the businesses and consumers to use the clout, you have to make sure the data is secure and have tools to deal with the threat of civil security. >> is your industry and support of the cedras security legislation that is currently being promoted by majority leader reid and senators collins

and lieberman? >> we are absolutely in support of the effort by the majority leader to bring up cybersecurity legislation on the senate floor after the for the july recess. as you know, the house has already enacted to adopt three cybersecurity related bills. the ball is in the court of the senate. they're certainly are discussions that are continuing about what form that final legislation would take and we encourage those discussions to find an acceptable compromise middle ground to occur, but we do think it's important for the senate to act and for the president to be able to find a balanced cybersecurity bill. >> say in a perfect world the senate did bring up senator lieberman's bill and it did pass and get some signed into law. would you be supportive of that? >> we all know that the

lieberman collins bill is likely if it is approved by the senate to be modified further in the conference with the house. and we do believe that there is a balanced approach to cybersecurity in the collections one, making sure that if the federal system scott more secure and federal agencies are storing data, when they are connected to the internet as they are, that they have not just security on paper but they have continual monitoring process so that the data is secure. second, we need more research and development around cybersecurity in the nature of the threats. every one that looks at that believes we cannot have enough trained professionals to work in the area of cybersecurity. and finally coming you need a balanced approach to information that allows cybersecurity threat

information to be shared between the private sector and the government and vice versa. so that we can track problems as they emerge and we can launch the forces to attack any more secure niche in. those are bedrock principles that will be discussed including how you deal with critical infrastructure. it's too early to tell how they can be resolved but we think they will be resolved and we think it's important that we get a bill this year and that they will be signed into law. >> right now on that subject of the critical infrastructure, senator john kyl, senator whitehouse, barbara mikulski are trying to work on this compromise effort to bring the two sides together on what is the best way to secure the critical infrastructure power plants telecommunications networks. so, those drafts circulated as

what that compromise looks like at this point it is early but a kind of lay out the framework of where they are going and the u.s. chamber of commerce said they didn't like what they saw. other trade groups in the industry also raised some concerns about it. what are your thoughts on that? >> we are applauding the efforts by those senators to try to find a balanced approach to how you deal with the critical infrastructure in this country and ensuring that it is protected against the cyber threats we know exist. has to be balanced. you have to make sure that it is not overly regulatory. you have to make sure there are great protections and make sure that the industry technologies can be deployed. that out when i am sure will change. i can't support that provision

because we have to see what it looks like but we absolutely support the process the senators are working on to try to find a workable balanced solution around the critical infrastructure. >> robert holleyman, one other aspect of the cedras security which you are sharing that raises the issue of privacy, and people have a real concern about cloud computing and sharing information by private sources and the government. how do you address those concerns? >> we are very big believers that you need the projections in any mall to ensure that private information by individual businesses is kept private. at the same time, we know that there is carefully defined in the relatively narrow set of information around cyber threats where more information sharing

is essential for us to both identify and provide those threats from occurring. and there we believe the house bill made a lot in trying to address the privacy issues by putting the protections in place and ensure there can be sharing of information between the private sector and the government, but it has to be limited, the cyber threat information and also initial projections. getting the balance right is critical, but it's also critical to people to share that information because if we cannot do that, then everyone is at risk and i think we recognize that can be done. >> real quick going back to the compromise proposal tissues the chamber of commerce and iti had with that is that eight was heavy-handed and it seemed like a what regulate a bunch of

industries including the i.t. cos. did you see those red flags when you saw the framework? >> we welcome the additional discussion the senators are trying to drive. i'm sure since the first out line it's changed even further. we keep talking about balance. i look at the critical infrastructure as an important thing to address. few people candidly care about what happens as a nation to the threats to an individual computer that i have on my desk or home but when those things become amalgamated, things like the electric grid and other things people care about, so i think it is appropriate to find a way to identify what is critical infrastructure, to identify the kind of new innovative industry led technologies that kept that that will be valuable for us as a nation to feel more secure, but

that has to be done without a heavy hand by government when a day's appropriate and for that to be part of the discussion. >> when it was being considered in the house and ultimately passed and it's clear that the majority of the house did support that bill there were protests from a lot of the groups that rose up during sopa and pipa trying to mimic that effort by tweeting online or turning to social media to get their voice of and there had been a feeling of supporters of that bill but the protest could possibly have the railed which ultimately didn't, but now that concern is rising again. now that the senate is getting ready to act is that a concern for you or are you afraid those concerns about privacy could possibly impact the senate from moving forward on the bill?

>> i am all for citizens being empowered to raise the issues directly. we created the software technology that enables that to happen and that is a great thing. it calls them for the congress to figure out what the right balance is. but i'm confident that people who are weighing in also want to make sure we have the tools to deal with the very real and escalating cyber threats that access to -- execs and recognize people are trying to tackle that problem i think the congress would be able to reach a balance. but it's important that it be done this year and we have seen an escalating number of threats. the u.s. has a position of global leadership that we have to have evidence. and simply waiting for another 12 months or 18 months fighting is too risky so i think we can get the balanced approach that we need and i am encouraged by the efforts and we clearly want

this bill and this issue to be brought back up by the for the july recess. >> and unfortunately we are out of time. we've been talking with robert holleyman, president and ceo for the business software alliance, bsa.org is website, and jennifer martinez from politico has been our guest. >> thank you.

republican presidential

candidate mitt romney was in james adel wisconsin on the fourth day of a bus tour at six states. he was joined by governor scott walker and paul ryan for this half hour event. [inaudible conversations] [cheering]

>> although i don't think the governor it's great to be back and moderate and be back in janesville as paul ryan knows for me this is always a big city. i grew up in a small town so we used to come over here on the big lights on friday night we are coming over. it's always good to be back in janesville, but i am honored to be here today. as i said the man i hope is the next president 45th president of the united states. when i grew up we were proud of our leaders particularly those with the experience to lead when we think about governor mitt romney has the experience that so many levels. he is the experience as a businessman who helped start out and reform so many companies many of which are household names. he then went on a decade ago as

an executive to take an olympics that literally was on the verge of an absolute disaster not only for the olympics that the country. it would have been a natural disaster. he turned around and made it a source of tremendous pride. [applause] and as the governor something i'm affection for because i know the buck stops with you, and in his case as governor we took a state that inherited a whole lot of debt, turned around and still found a way to cut taxes time and time again to get his economy going. wouldn't it be nice to have a president who felt like that? [applause] but most importantly, the day after yesterday, he's a father. he and ann has five grown sons and grandchildren which i think

is one of those important jobs out there. we know how important it is, so he has the experience to lead and that's important because now more than ever for those grand kids and our kids and grandkids in the state across this country we need someone to stand up and leave and turn this country around. [applause] we know how important it is when you can make a change when it comes to leadership. think about it. less than two years ago the 44th governor of wisconsin was still on office and at that point our time was in the three years prior to that had lost more than 100,000 jobs. unemployment rate at the peak was 9%. our state had a budget deficit of $3.6 billion. one of the biggest ever and we were in trouble. we need a change in the state come elected a new governor and because of the changes because of the republican governor,

republican legislature we were able to transform things so much we have a budget surplus. [applause] we've got a budget surplus for the first time ever. we set money aside in the consecutive years for the rainy day fund and most importantly, there's been more than 41,000 new jobs created in the private sector and the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since 2008. [applause] we were able to show here in wisconsin that you can turn things around. we turn things around in wisconsin. it's time to elect a leader that can turn things around for america. [applause] >> we need a leader that is clear that jobs first and believes in america most importantly we need a leader that unlike the president understands that success and a

government isn't measured by how many people are dependent on the government. we need a leader that understands just the opposite is true. success in the government is how many fewer people are dependent on government because the private sector puts those people back to work. [applause] we need a leader that believes in more freedom and more prosperity. a leader that believes in america and believes our best days are yet to come. we need a leader and that governor is mitt romney. let's give him a warm wisconsin welcome. [applause] thank you. what a welcome. i would ask you to sit down the there are not any chairs.

>> there's a group outside that's even larger than the group out here. so let's ask them can we hear you outside? [cheering] what a kick off in james bill. what an honor it is to be here. thank you. just what we needed this morning. thank you for bringing so many friends. i tell you i think president obama just put this in his column. he assumed from the very beginning when you know what, we are going to win wisconsin and get the white house [cheering]

it has a lot to do with what has happened over the last three and a half years. people in this country are having a hard time to read these are challenging times in america and because of this record, his campaign is having a hard time deciding what to talk about. because they would like to talk about the economy coming and they would like to talk about his record. but they know the last time the campaign slogan was hope and change. this time they are going with the hope to change the subject. but we are not going to let them do that. we are going to talk about the economy and jobs and getting back to work. [applause] after he was elected and with all the promises that he made, he went on the today show and he said if i can't turn the economy around in three years i will be looking at a long-term proposition and we are here to collect. [applause] so for the last several months he's been trying out this idea that everything is going just

fine. remember he said the private sector is doing fine and than 23 million americans that are a lot of work or stop looking for work or are seriously underemployed committee began to speak up and people have lost their homes began to shoot out and people in the incomes in america go down, you know the median income in america has dropped by 10% in the last four years even as gasoline prices have doubled in the prices of the things we buy and gone up. he recognized he couldn't go without any more because there's no way we are going to let him turn a one-term proposition into an eight year proposition. it's time to replace barack obama. [applause] he tries to tell people that his policy is working. it's taking longer than we all had been told he's a very

eloquent person that is able to describe these policies and in great detail and in some respects tell you night is day and a day's night but people know better. by the way if you have a question about that, if you wonder whether obamacare and dodd-frank and massive budget deficits and his energy policy, if you think those things might make things better, why just got a business person, talk to dannel or business people in the community. whether they make things or they sell things or distributing this ask them how the president's policies made it easier for you to grow and i know what you're going to say because i saw a survey done the other day done by the chamber of commerce they asked 1500 small businesses what is obamacare doing? three-quarters of them said made it less likely for them to hire people is your priority is jobs you have to get rid of obamacare and i will. [cheering]

obamacare hasn't helped create jobs. how about dodd-frank i met with some business folks this morning talking about their business. one of them talked about the fact that you can't make a business successful by shrinking the employees year after year. he wants to grow the business but you know when you grow a business there are two ways to be able to do it to finance it. you have to have the money to pay the people and build the facility to grow so where do you get that money from the profits you are able to invest and getting a loan he goes to the banks and they won't make loans. one of the reasons you are not making loans to small businesses these days is because of dodd-frank and overregulation of washington they are making it harder for the banks to make loans and put people back to work and then have the others was if you can't get the loan i could invest the profits we get.

i hear a laugh from over here. these small businesses the president wants to take more of the profit of taxes. do you realize most small businesses are taxed not as corporations but as individuals? don't be the corporate tax the the individual tax rate and he wants to take that rate from 35% to 45%. you think about that means to an entrepreneur a person starting a business or trying to expand. they noticed your lucky enough to make a profit in it isn't easy your right if you're lucky enough to make a profit the the government wants just not 35% 40% making it harder for you to grow. my priority is putting americans back to work. that is job number one. [applause] >> we gave a big if long speech last week. you have seen -- you didn't see

it. anyone see the whole thing? in the affordable care act not many people have done it. it was 52 or 53 or 54 minutes, something like that and he laid out his plans i guess and one of the things he said i agree with. he said everyone in america deserves a fair shot, and i agree. people ought to know that -- [applause] if they are willing to work hard, they've got an education, the have the right kind of values, take personal responsibility and have the blessings of family people in this country ought to know they have a fair shot at being successful and fulfilling their dreams were getting a good job and providing for their family. but let me ask you a couple of questions. do you think when the president spent trillions of dollars more than we take in and pass those debts on to the next generation that those kids, those people of the next generation are they going to get a fair shot?

how about when the president takes your tax money and uses it to investor. to guarantee loans for businesses that have been to be owned by his campaign contributors, people like solyndra. does that give you and other entrepreneurs in america a fair shot? how about when the kids in washington, d.c. who had scholarships to be able to go to the schools of their choice, these inner-city schools so kids standing d in-line been to charter schools. did that give those kids a fair shot? >> i am convinced if you look at the american people today who would say they are having a hard time. they are not getting a fair shot. how about the soldiers coming back from conflict expected to come back and get a job and instead they are in an unemployment line does that give them a fair shot? how about the people all over this country expected by working

hard, and over the last years by making tough choices? they are tired of being tired. yet this president tells them i will solve this. are they getting a fair shot? if there has ever been a president who hasn't been able to provide the american people a fair shot, it's this president and that is why we are going to replace him by someone will go to work to get us working again. [applause] how are you going to do that? first of all, i'm going to make that my number one job. i'm going to go into office and not push it aside to the congress and say to nancy pelosi and harry reid, they want the leaders at the point any way but -- [laughter] i'm not going to push it over to them and say take care of the economy while we get to go do the things i wanted to like obamacare and dodd-frank and

cap-and-trade and cart track. when going to do is focus my attention on getting americans back to work. that's going to be job number one. let me tell you some of the things i'm going to do to do that. there's a long list that has to be done. if there's one button that you have to press to put everyone to work with good jobs and rising incomes, while any one would figure out how to press it. but there's a lot of things you have to do to get the economy strong. let me tell you things i would do right away number 1i would to get in touch of our energy resources, the coal and gas and oil. [applause] and if i have to build myself i have to get the pipeline down here from canada. [applause] there's been an extraordinary blessing for this country the

energy resources we have. we are an energy rich nation. someone her learn how to do something unusual we don't natural into the earth going vertically and tapping into the oil or gas to depue we go vertically and the horizontal week. we can tap into all sorts of pockets around the way and than by forcing liquid can force the gas of the oil out so now we have over 100 years of natural gas supply and low price is i wanted to get rid of that. why? because i know if we take it that of the energy resources, we are going to have manufacturers like this growth and others come back to america because manufacturing uses energy in homes use energy. i saw an article the other day on the "washington post" and they said that this is by a guy named david ignatius the study decided said that america could be the number one energy producing nation in the world within ten years to date on what the energy here because i want those jobs there. we are going to bring employment back up in america. [applause]

there something else i'm going to do i'm going to get rid of this huge overhang there is this cloud that's hanging over small business today u.s. cars and why they are uncomfortable hiring more people right now they will talk about one piece of legislation that gives them heartburn they just don't know what is coming. someone said we won't know what is going to do until we actually pass eight. remember that line by nancy pelosi? i am going to do something the will give a dose of certainty and repeal obamacare. [applause] and then there's something else. when people think about taking their life savings and investing to start a small business or some corporation wants to build

a factory here, one of the things they think about is whether america is going to hit a ball down the road because the path we are on spending a trillion dollars more every year than we take and is leading us to greece. i want to make sure that no one ever wonders about that. the understand a dollar will be worth something down the road and we will have a strong and stable foundation. so to do that, i'm going to finally get america on track to have a balanced budget. [applause] discounts. this makes a difference in the lives of our citizens that are without work or better underemployment. a lot of people are having hard times these days. i go back to the president said. the was water dropping down from the ceiling. it's so hot in here the building is sweating. [applause]

[laughter] look, there are people around this country having a hard time. some of the folks i spoke with this morning to describe the fact they are working at jobs we talked about i want to you who it was but someone mentioned this house had been working in the military for almost 40 years worked in our military and doing very well comes back to to work in the workforce and is now only able to work in a job requires heavy lifting, literally heavy lifting making $8.50 an hour. a huge reduction in compensation for their family. both the mother and father in that circumstance. look, people are having a hard time to read those unemployment numbers understate the difficulty happening in this country. i wish the president would get out and talk to people. he would understand how out of touch he was when he said private sector is doing fine. it's not. it needs help and i'm going to get. [applause]

what i am talking about doing is getting help for the people that needed the most right now in this country but it's also getting help for the next generation for our kids. the desert to the future is bright. you deserve to know that your kids will initially a better future even then we have enjoyed and that is going to happen again in america and there's something else i would mention that is the cause of liberty and freedom because america's strength is so essentials to that. i was in great britain a number of months ago and got the chance to meet tony blair and david cameron and other members and one of them said to me if you are lucky enough to be elected president of the united states, you will have a chance to visit other countries and go to their capitals coming and he will undoubtedly have rehearsed for you all the mistakes they think america is making. he said that as you hear that, don't ever forget this, please. the one thing we all fear the most is a weekend america.

american strength, military strength, economic strength, strength in our homes. american strength is the best ally that peace has ever known. [applause] [cheering] i was actually in san diego memorial day speaking about our military strength and saw the number of the veterans in the various war and also saw a number of our armed forces today. as you know it is a navy base marine base as well in san diego, and i got the chance to introduce some of the veterans. one of the people we introduced was a man who was the lookout on the uss on the day of the attack on pearl harbor. he said he was on that the outpost and he saw the pilot coming in with his eyes locked

on the eyes of the pilot on the aircraft coming in and dropping on the ships. it would take so many lives. he was injured in the attack. but he went on to serve for 43 years in the u.s. navy. i have him stand and he was recognized. but there are not as many world war ii veterans around us there used to be. and they can't stand quite as tall were street as they used to. the torch that they've been holding for the world and for us they can't hold quite as high. it's our turn to seize the torch. the torch of freedom, liberty, opportunity. and hope. it's not americas torch. but it's america's duty and honor to hold that for the world. this is a critical time for america. our ability to hold that torch high and to have a list brightly so the world can see it and us buyer for the freedom that we enjoy depends on strength here at home in our homes, and our

economy and in turn in our military. we need to get america stronger again with great jobs. i'm going to do that by balancing the budget getting rid of obamacare making sure we open new markets for american goods getting the energy policy to work for us, not just other folks that get hundreds of billions of dollars. i have to make sure there's a playing field between labor and management. we have to have good schools again. it's on excusable. i want to train the workers for the jobs of today and tomorrow. we have to get america working again. the people of america struggling today depend on it and our kids are hoping that we will do it. we will do it. it's right to happen in wisconsin. tell me when the presidency and keep america the shining city on the hill. thank you. [applause] ♪

.. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

now a look at the progressive movement and this year's elections. the campaign for america's future is hosting a three-day event again with a panel that included former white house special advisor van jones. this is a little less than an hour and a half. >> robert borosage, codirector of the campaign for america's future. [applause] >> can we get everyone to come in in a sitdown. were going to get started almost immediately. for sohtz welcome are two back to it the guess. [applause] you all know van jones, melissa harris-perry. [applause] my name is robert borosage and i'm here to greet you and welcome you to this take back the american dream summit.

this will be an amazing few days. you are activists and leaders from across the country and across the progressive movement. over 1000 strong by registration. we offer a stunning lineup of speakers and strategy sessions that await you. we will highlight the organizing that is being done to try to elect progressives who will fight for the 99%. we will share strategies and critical issues in this election, and we will give our major focus to the independent progressive movement we are building to try to take back the american dream. the days will be intense because the stakes are high. now i'm old enough in an election season to know that every election, people say well this election is the most important of our lifetime. but i think the stakes he stays our something more than one

election. we are i suggest to you at the beginning of what will be a fierce struggle, already is, about what comes after a 30 year failed experiment of a conservative era. an era that has left us with extreme inequality, a declining middle class, rising poverty, the worst recession since the great depression, and an economy that doesn't work for working people, even when it is growing. americans clearly are casting for change. we saw the elections in 06 an extraordinary election in 08 and they look for someone that could help transform america. we saw the reaction and the frustration in 2010. the uprising of the tea party and of occupy wall street, the assault on worker rights and women's rights in the in the end the right to vote and the mobilization to counter that, and now we see brazen

billionaires, the koch brothers, adelman, the super pacs, looking to consolidate complete control at all levels of government. in this situation we have to be perfectly clear. we are not going to allow mitt romney, thmodern-day robber and -- robber barons and their tea party to take over in washington d.c.. [applause] but we can't stop there. if we are going to build a foundation for shared prosperity, we can't accept mass unemployment as the new normal. we can't accept declining wages and increasing insecurity as inevitable. we are not signing onto a grand bargain, partisan or bipartisan or trans-partisan that uses the current crisis to savage the vulnerable and the elderly. if we are going to build a new

start for this economy, to save the american dream, we have to build an independent progressive movement, one that is prepared to take on big money politics, confront the entrenched interests and endanger our future and rebuild american dream. i want to say a few words about each of these. it's now four year cents wall street access blue up this economy. 9 million jobs lost, the typical family lost a staggering 40% of their wealth, mostly in the declining value of homes. and a recovery from that kind of collapse would have been long and difficult, but this was made even more difficult by two major factors. first there was no healthy economy to return to. working families have been losing ground for decades over the busheir's most americans suffer declining incomes and rising insecurity, even when the

economy was growing. we were hemorrhaging manufacturing jobs and running up record trade deficits. finance was capturing 40% of corporate profits while inflating the housing bubble. we waged two wars on a national credit card. we were in denial about global warming. there was no place to recover to, but in addition to that, any reforms face fierce resistance. we all know about republican obstruction. from day one they set out to her sue mitchell mcconnell the lead of the senate called the single most important thing we want to achieve quote and unquote and that was ensuring that barack obama would be a one-term president. but when obama pushed even modest reforms vital to our future on finance reform and on health care, and recovery and new energy, far more suppressive than republican obstruction was the power of entrenched corporate interests that mobilized legions of lobbyists

to protect their privileges and their subsidies. even when democrats and juries in geordie's and both houses of congress, corporate lobbies, succeeded in delaying, diluting and in some cases defeating reform. now the economy is said to be in recovery, but it is the old economy that is coming back. the top 1% capture fully 93% of the income growth in 2010. that doesn't leave a lot for the rest of us. we are back to casino finance, with the too big to fail banks thanks bigger and more concentrated for -- than ever and making big bets as jpmorgan just showed us in losing $3,000,000.1 reckless trading scheme. we are back to deficits over 1.5 billion we face a struggle of what comes next. now, america is learning about mitt romney, but he is not a

mystery. he is quite inevitably of, by and for the 1%. the big money decided to be safe they had better pick one of their own. his agenda is a clear commitment to double down on the policy that got us in the whole hole we are in. it would give millionaires an average 25% tax cut on top of the bush tax cuts. he calls for eliminating taxes on corporate profits earned abroad during the entire world into an offshore tax haven. he wants to deregulate wall street and reopened the casino economy that will up the economy. he would repeal health care reform and medicare as we know it, stop medicaid and throw 34 million people out of health care protection. he would give subsidies to big oil, deny the threat posed by global warning -- warming, wants less for schools.

this guy is building a summer home with elevators for his cars and he says obama is out of touch. he says attacks are a 15% on income and one year of $20 million, a lower rate than his chauffeur. but, that is the tax return he chose to show us. imagine what is in the ones that he keeps secret. no wonder he says talking about inequality is the politics of envy and should only be done in quote quiet rooms. are you kidding me? we are not going to let the brazen billionaires collect this guy president. [applause] he is not offering remedies. he is offering potions that are simply poison for the middle class and the american dream. so we are going to work to reelect the president and to take back the house.

but that is not enough. we have a bigger battle for america's future. conservative columnist david brooks said that republicans are extreme, because they are fearful that the welfare state state is unaffordable and now threatens our future. but we agree. we can't go back to the old past. but they have got the dictums wrong and the culprits wrong. it's not the poor who rigged the rules and pocketed aliens in subsidies and privileges. is not the elderly who blew up the economy. it's not the young who paid for the revolving door of lobbyists and officials. if you want to build sustainable growth that works for working people it's not enough to put obama in the white house and nancy pelosi and the speaker's chair. we have to take on crummy capitalism, the entrenched interests, the big money, the corrupt politicians in both parties.

[applause] look at the sources of our current debt. half of our deficit comes from the economic collapse that came when wall street will up the economy. next comes the bush tax cuts and tax loopholes that have millionaires paying lower in taxes than their secretaries and big corporations pay no taxes at all in some cases and then the continued costs of the bloated military and the two wars. turned to the scary long-term projections you have all seen maps of that make it look like america is going broke. these are entirely the question of soaring health care health care costs and unaffordable health care system deformed by powerful health insurance, hospital and drug companies, complexes that hike costs so that americans pay twice per capita than other citizens in other industrial countries paid

for worse health care results. to revive the american dream, we have to take on the powerful their profits with these arrangements, not the vulnerable or there victims. so, this is not a question for one president, one election, one at the stray shin. we are about to head into what they call the grand bargain, i think. right after the election we hit a fiscal train wreck, purely made by the politicians in washington and it's being used as an excuse, an excuse to cut a grand bargain. shared sacrifice is necessary we are told. it's time to put our books in order. let's do a big trade. let's trade cuts in social security and in the care for tax reform that lowers rates, closes loopholes and gives us more

revenue. this ought to be known instead of a grand bargain as the big heist. [applause] but to be clear about what it means, what it means is that we accept mass unemployment as normal, because we are going to turn the balancing our budgets rather than focus on creating jobs. it means that middle-class americans and the vulnerable will get stuck with much of the bill for the best that wall street created, and worse in some ways, it ignores largely the causes of the plate we face, the wealthy will still not pay their fair share of taxes, wall street will still be free to blow up the economy, the insurance and drug companies will still drive up health care costs, we will still not have our long-term budgets under control. so we have to organize now, to oppose the big heist and demand

the real deal. and the pieces of this are simple. we need good jobs now and good jobs first before return to austerity. [applause] and we have got to focus on what drives our deficits, the big money interests that now are deforming our government. [applause] this won't be easy. we have to build an independent capacity to elect people as champions and hold them accountable. we will talk about that in this conference. we need to make big money toxic in this election even as we over -- work to overturn citizens united, to get money out of politics. [applause] we need to have direct action, non-violent confrontations, demonstrations that expose and challenge the interests standing in the way. [applause] this a safer bidding task. it's it is the great challenge of democracy and the

rapaciousness of big money and big power. we have been in this situation before. at the end of the 19th century, the robber barons robber barons consolidated oligopolies and major industries. politicians were routinely bought or rented. labor unions were outlawed, but populist movements, progressive reformers, labor uprisings, challenge the supremacy of that unassailable power. it took decades of struggle, but eventually that people's movement one. the extremes of inequality were reduced, the brazen corruption corruption -- and what made america special, exceptional, the broad middle class was built. and now we are back to that same kind of inequality, that same kind of robber baron money politics and once more, the test

is posed. can we in the and the many overcome the power of the few? and what is exciting as we have seen the first drinks in wisconsin and ohio and occupy wall street which spread across the country like wildfire. [applause] we must continue to build, serious about taking power, serious about rebuilding the country, understanding we will suffer setbacks. fierce in opposition to the modern robber baron politics, not satisfied with the defense of what is. sure we will try to work to defeat romney in the right and we will push to take back the house but we will keep on building an independent movement to take back the american dream. that is her subject this week, that is our task for the years to come. we know it isn't going to be easy. we know it can be done. si se puede, "yes we can."

[applause] now i am delighted to introduce melissa harris-perry. she is a modern wonder woman. she is a -- dr. perry is a professor of political science at tulane university. she is the author of sister citizen, shame stereotypes and black women in america. she is regular columnist for the "nation magazine" and she is the host of her own show on "msnbc," that airs on saturday and sunday mornings. she is the proud author of a young daughter and once a month or so she gets a little sleep. [laughter] is a delight to introduce you to melissa harris-perry. [applause]

>> good morning. it's the start of what is going to be an ideologically diverse day for me today. i'm going to run off the stage when i'm done with my address because i'm heading off to chicago where i will join the bush family for a conversation about volunteerism in america. [laughter] that will be fun. by the end of the day i will have no idea what is going on in the world, but i'm very happy to start the day with you and particularly because what i find to be my value-added within the public sphere is not as an activist or an organizer per se. i am married to an activist and organizer so it's very clear to me which one of us does real work and which one of us talks about the real work that needs to get done in the world. and so that is probably not my

comparative advantage. i hope today to do a little bit of what i think i comparative advantage is, which is to try to understand we wear we are and how we got here. so appreciative of the framework of thinking about this in the historical context, the kind of robber baron moment and i want to really take a much shorter historical context, really just the past decade. and rather than focusing primarily on what the elites have been up to, to think a little bit about how, where we are now has been made possible by the choices that we as ordinary citizens in america have made. because we were not fully disempowered in these moments. we made many choices. so i want to start with a moment that is september 11, 2001. because i believe that the era we are in now begins on september 11, 2001. the election of george w. bush in 2000, whatever we think about

it, is an election that ultimately was a choice of the american people about -- okay, that is not okay. okay, that was all fine. i thought we were in a hundred "the hunger games" or something. i thought we had to duck or something. i'm not getting. i was really wondering what kinds of things m. be sending. september 11, 2001, my sense is we -- when george w. bush was handed the american presidency by the united states, that decision was made in part because we understood ourselves to be in a time of peace internationally of domestic, economic growth and george w. bush for whatever failings are successes he had, does seem like

a guy that would kind of keep the party going. so if you are thinking you are coming out of the clinton era and things are good economically and we are teased internationally, that it does not seem that ought to make the choice of electing a kinder, gentler conservative, right? we have to go back to 2000 to remember where we were in that moment. we did not know then that just a few months into the first year of george w. bush's presidency that there would no longer be the good times, no longer be at time of economic expansion and no longer be a time of relative international peace but instead that the new era would begin when the americans finally came into where many of our trading partners, political partners and allies have been for decades which is the age of contemporary terrorism. americans of course responded in typically american ways to that

entrée into something that many people in the rest of the world had already experience. we began with begin with the kind of nationalist fervor that was justified as a reasonable patriotism. i like to point out that we clearly must have been having post-traumatic stress disorder, because for about a year after september 11, there were african-american men walking around the city of new york with nypd hats on. that can only be explained as a ptsd response. [applause] i know, i will just let you sit with that for a moment. but the other thing that happened in that moment, i don't want to miss this, a new version of what american needs and that is a racial enemy. americans in part identify who we are and who deserves what through our notions of whiteness and off the racial enemies that are the nonwhites. in this moment, the new racial

enemies became not so much reagan's welfare queen who was imaginary, but instead this imagined other that is somehow muslim or arab or sikh or something else. lee became willing to stomach a kind of horrific racial violence in the name of national security. is something that we have been willing to stomach as a people over and over again in our history. the patriot act was not an act of a republican president acting alone. the patriot act was a bipartisan decision by both parties. it was not bought and paid for by corporations. it was bought and paid for by our fear. as much as we have our eyes on the citizens united decision, we have to remember that it was our

collective -- maybe not the people in this room but our collective banks that gave permission to democrats in the house to rally behind republicans in the white house under the banner of nationalist patriotic security with the goal of both reducing our domestic civil liberties and giving us and entrance into what is at this moment and everlasting report. we made those choices. [applause] so that was september 11, 2001. an interesting thing happens a few years later by that the democrats need to run a presidential candidate, and democrats are really very bad at one thing. actually a couple of things, but one thing in particular in one of the things we are very very bad it is trying to think about what kind of democrat republicans will vote for.

this is our predictive ability thing. is really the only reason we ended up with candidate obama, because we ran an open seat race so we really didn't know who we were running again so we got all free with our actual preferences and ended up with hillary clinton and barack obama as her final two. we never would have made those choices had we been running against the incumbent. we undoubtedly would have picked john edwards. let's just be honest about that. [laughter] we chose what we thought would be that good moderate candidate, one that would get republican votes and that of course was john kerry who showed up in 2004. showed up at the dnc, saluted and said reporting for duty. we did not in the fall of 2004 launch as the democratic party an attempt to push back against the war effort. quite the opposite, democrats decided to run a soldier under the banner of the idea that he could do even better as a war

machine. so what changed that? what changed it? august 29, 2005. august 29, 2005 was the day that the levee failed in the city of new orleans in the aftermath of hurricane katrina. maybe not that day because on that day and on the five subsequent days immediately after the levees failed in the city flooded we behave just as we did in immediate post-9/11 moment. we got scared of our racial enemies. [applause] the governor of louisiana, a democrat, the mayor of the city of new orleans, a black democrat, jointly decided to suspend search-and-rescue efforts in order to focus on law and order. until, until the national media recognized there were people,

not people actually, women, elderly and children starving and dying in the city center. it wasn't until the images of african-american women, the elderly and children who were dehydrating in the heat of a new orleans august finally turned the language away from the kind of law and order language and into what the economist called the shaming of america. i don't know if you remember this but as i'm looking at the image right now that if i would have got myself together the image of the powerpoint, the image of the economist magazine, an african-american woman is on the cover. she's wearing a new orleans t-shirt and it says, the shaming of america. i'd like you to cause and ask yourself how many black women have appeared on the cover of the economist magazine? and i don't know her name. i live in new orleans. i studied katrina and i don't

know her name and yet there are very few black women whoever have appeared. she may be condi, maybe and yet the notion that there was still a collect shaming that happened in a country that fancies itself a place where women and children are first. hurricane katrina actually shames us into an antiwar stance and here is how it goes. from september 11, 2001 and tell about september 4 i'm going to give it, of 2005, we are trying to participate in the nationalist patriotic fervor against the imagined racial enemy that is those others over there that are activating terrorism against us right until the levees failed. we realized we realize we have allowed our own citizens to drown, to die and to dehydrate on camera, and we go, oh, if you

can't get water to an american city for a week how can you prosecute a foreign war? and the democratic party feels a little drop down the spine. all these media folks who live in new york city who realize that this is how we respond to disasters -- and for the first time we start hearing an active antiwar message, not from the people, but from the people that have been resonated through a left party. this of course is how in 2006, democrats win back the house. they win the house in 2006 because for the first first time they articulated actual paradigm difference to the republican party for the first time in five years, and of course we remember the response to the antiwar message that won the midterm elections in 2006. do you guys remember what happen? the surge. the response to the american

people saying, we want out of the war is that the white house send more soldiers into the war. it is exactly the opposite of what happens in 2010, when by taking over the house, the republican party decides it has a mandate from the american people to turn back what they had just done in 2008. this white house in 2006 told us, we don't care what just happened in the midterms. we are running this war effort and we let them. except that, of course we know what happened then, right after that. the young guy, he was a state senator in illinois, he had managed to make it into the u.s. senate really only because the republican party in illinois was in such shambles that they are decisions for a candidate to run against him was alan keyes and on a wednesday, i can probably

be alan keyes for almost any race. this is not to say -- is anything short of exceptional but the ease with which he walked into the u.s. senate had everything to do with the failure of the illinois republican party. thanks julie, we appreciate that. in the immediate aftermath of hurricane katrina, a the national figure that emerges is barack obama on one hand, hillary clinton on the other and a sense among the american people that we had just done and what we had been doing since 2001 was not the fact of who we were. though we were capable of something else. i loved the 2008 campaign. it was great fun. it was, it just was, that 2008 campaign, great fun. v. obama for america campaign was so brilliant. it was great fun because of the

freelancing that one on. remember the freelancing that went on? hear barack obama doesn't -- goes and does this amazing thing in new hampshire. he loses and then gives a victory speech. this takes real gumption, right? he loses in new hampshire in and he is like screw it, stands up and gives "yes we can." it's an amazing moment. wow that is hot. and then we walk away until a week later and what happens? will.i.am remake says "yes we can." when you think about why "yes we can" matters, it's not because of barack obama giving it, as great as it was. is because well i am remixed it and you posted on your facebook wall and then you sent it around and then you e-mail that and that then it became viral. the excitement of the 2008 campaign with the way in which freelancing at technology and ordinary people decided that what we have been doing since

september 11, 2001 was the longer the best of who we were and how the 2008 campaign might provide an opportunity for us to indicate the best of who we were, the exceptionalism that we defined as what made is exceptional, and willingness to think about either a black woman or at lat guy, that is cool. the response from the right was a kind of anxiety about what that meant. a willingness to pull us back into what we had been doing for the years before, so that one's president obama is elected, the language is that he is a secret muslim. of course he is a secret muslim because remember, september 11, 2001, our new racial enemy becomes the muslims. you know of course you can't be a secret muslim. it can be a secret christian. christian all you have to do is

say i love you and you can be a christian and you can do that secretly but there are certain practices you have to do so you cannot secretly be one. that is not how it works. you would notice them praying five times a day. [applause] but along without anxiety around this kind of secret outsider and i will go very quickly here i promise, was also the revival of the anti-immigrant panic. we are as much on the left to blame for failing to recognize and stem this at the moment that it occurs. do you remember the joe wilson moment? president obama speaking and he stands up and says "you lie." the left freaks out. a black man speaking, a white guy from a confederate states says "you lie." that looks like ordinary -- president obama when he was speaking in that moment was

talking about the health care reform bill he said, when this passes don't worry, illegals will not be allowed to partake in the health care reform that we are passing. joe wilson stood up and said "you lie." the president was in that moment drawing a bright line, a boundary between the citizens and noncitizens on this issue of a fundamental human right, health care reform before -- joe wilson stands up and says "you lie" so the terrain is multiple levels. yes there is probably some of that old-fashioned jim crow racism but there's also this immigration panic. noticed that this weekend the president was interrupted by a journalist in the rose garden, that interruption gave what he was talking about, immigration immigration -- that laying on of anxiety is about this new fear, this old fear and mix together with

american racism but then of course there is plenty of old-fashioned american racism going on still among us as people come again not talking about the elite but the chute to kill law. they took trayvon martin's life. or the same shoot to kill laws that were enacted in the days immediately following hurricane katrina that are based in our same great fear that emerged immediately post-september 11. this kind of vilification of hotties that we assume to be criminal. laid on top of all of that though, the war on women, war and moment that i'd i've notice was occurring for the first -- i wasn't sure it was coming but i started seeing it when president obama nominated sonia sotomayor to the supreme court. if you can take yourself back and remember the gauntlet that

she was forced to walk through the senate confirmation hearings. just for fun, for kicks and giggles this afternoon, watch the jamie dimon testimony right next to the sonia sotomayor confirmation hearing. just watch them. [applause] right after sonia sotomayor was put through what i like to call elizabeth expert moment. remember elizabeth expert is a teenage girl who was forced to walk the gauntlet in little rock with the screaming, yelling faces behind her, somewhat like what i saw when i was watching sonia sotomayor. right after that, we then had the vilification of shirley sherrod. now, i want to point out here, on this one i'm not making a critique of the administration or making a critique of the naacp. an organization that i think has been doing extraordinary and exceptional work, especially

recently but who in that moment when shirley sherrod was first presented to the american people by andrew bright arc as a racist -- breitbart, as a racist, the naacp initially, although they came around but initially saying she should be ashamed of herself for her comments. now that had to have happened because they just didn't know who shirley sherrod was. and you see that is fine if you didn't know who shirley sherrod was and maybe if i didn't know but i did but if you ever watched "eyes on the prize" which i'm sure anyone in the naacp did then they named sherrod in the state of georgia should've rung a bell for you because charles sherrod is -- while king was taking care of atlanta. but that willingness to see a rural black woman from georgia as inherently expendable, and then of course post 2010 the

full assault on women through the personhood amendment, through the fight between colman and planned parenthood and through putting contraception and on the agenda in the 21st century. i'm sorry, it's horrible but really you have to laugh. like, seriously? we are were talking about the pill in 2012. the outlawing of abortion that never actually occurred. telling sandra fluke that she has to basically defend against being a slot in order to speak to the mac in people is that we are in egypt and she has to submit to a virginity test in order to be in the public sphere. olmo -- oh yeah and by the way the 2010 gop year of the woman is the first year we lost ground in the u.s. house of representatives and the senate in terms of women's representation in more than 30 years. we did that. and when i say we, i just mean the american people in the broadest sense.

that are fear, our anxiety, ruling this to frame others whether they are unruly women, illegal immigrants, lazy black lacy black people, terrorists muslims, our willingness to not see ourselves in them but see them as the other, make possible all of these policy moments and this is the last thing i will say and that i will run from this building. there is no reason to lose hope. we are just not a perfect people. we are just not. we are kind of like an adolescent country. remember adolescents? my daughter is almost 11. i had forgotten. adolescents is hard. you used to randomly feel bad and get afraid and wonder about the security of childhood that you once had and particularly for a country that became so dominant, so quickly, that

became so wealthy in the context of such inequality, that understood itself as standing on the shining hill. we are in our adolescents and we are making a bit of a mess of it. [applause] that said, there is no reason to lose hope. the fear that is activated the past decade cannot be countered with more fear of what is coming. is there money in the political system? yes. is the supreme court friendly? nope. are there folks willing to actually damage the very core of our democratic decibels in order to win short-term gains? yes.

maybe it is coming for people who were slaves and mormons. white people were mormons and black people were slaves. everybody was basically after them. the mormons got ejected and had to push hand carts across the american west and black folks got to play for a couple of centuries. i don't no, i guess stroke of those that worry me in the sense of gang struggle itself. what i do know is that by his late grandmother who was sold on a street the street corner in richmond virginia believed in god. now i'm not asking you to believe in god. i'm asking you to think about this. this is a woman who never knew anything but slavery for herself, never knew anything but slavery for everyone she had ever been related to. never expected anything but slavery for all the people who she was related to in the future. there was no empirical evidence that any being cared about it.

there is no empirical evidence that there was a loving god that had any power. if there was a loving god, he was pretty pitiful, or if he was powerful he didn't -- about her. on not asking you to believe or accept any supreme being. i'm asking you to think about the space that is associated with the hope that that is not in the empirical reality that you see around you this moment that says we can still be part of something that is bigger than ourselves in something that we cannot necessarily see at this moment, but simply requires us not to be afraid of each other, because it is our fear of each other. [applause] it is our fear of each other that make sense exceptionally easy to divide so i promise i'm leaving. i will to say this, i really am going to talk to the bush is

now. it's not because i'm afraid of them. i am angry with them and i often disagree but i'm not afraid of any person with whom we are struggling. we can get to another place. there is no reason to lose hope. [applause] melissa harris-perry. she is literally running to make the airplane. alright, we are going to leave you with one final speaker this morning. you all know van jones i assume. [applause] he is a public schoolboy, grew up to be a graduate of yale law school. i like to tease him and tell them him that he rose above it.

he is the co-founder of the ella baker center for human rights, co-founder of color for change, co-founder of green for all. we joined him in launching his new venture, rebuild the american dream come extraordinary innovative effort to restore good jobs and economic opportunity and to build the movement necessary to make that happen. he has neither a master great for small fortune, he has not held an elected public office and yet "time" magazine has named him one of the world's 100 most influential people. give it up for van jones. [applause] >> good morning. melissa's got it bad. give it up for melissa

harris-perry. [applause] i will tell you what, i love getting up when i can and seeing her on television. she does not just speak that way without much clarity, that much insight, that much courage to us. she gets a chance to speak that way to the whole of the american people on saturdays and sundays, and i think that is a part of what i want to talk about today, the voice that has been missing. the voice that has been missing. rodney king passed away over this weekend, and it's hard for me to imagine that it's been 20 years since he became a household word, a household name on the planet earth. just a regular brother, with a

lot of regular brother problems and regular brother issues, put in a situation unfortunately that is all too common. the only difference was it was caught on camera. we know what happened with the verdict and we know what happened with the uprisings but we sometimes don't think about what it must have been like for him to get pushed out in front of the television cameras, no speech in hand, no pollsters, with the whole world watching and have to speak from his true heart. a lot of things about his life that you could easily dismiss and in discount and four but in those moments who you really are comes through. and he just said five words. and they are the same five words i think melissa tries to bring us back around to, can we all get along?

a prayer of plea for some kind of sanity to emerge on the catastrophe that was unfolding all around him. for some kind of wisdom, some kind of higher purpose to somehow be pulled from the mess, to be pulled from the wreckage of america. can we all get along? he went on with his life and he did good things and they do bad things and he did things he regret it, and he passed away. but i think his question still resounds, can we all get along? we have this extraordinary moment now as we look at what november and the month beyond. who are we as a country? in this mess? in this catastrophe. are we going to turn to each

other? or are we going to turn on each other? that is the great moment, but great question that the world is now looking at us and saying and i appreciate dr. perry for pointing out that it's not just about the corporations but about us here in this room. we have a responsibility. some people felt four years ago we were too emotional. we made decisions to emotionally and we got a little bit doped up on hopey stuff. and we just got to hope he and we got too emotional and we weren't thinking clearly, so we had a reaction against that and now it seems that i am watching as this moment of testing for america emerges this year. i'm seeing the people who fought the hardest in the decade that

dr. perry just talked about. now fighting the least. i am seeing a movement that was built up over that decade, that stood up against bush and stood up against cheney, that stood up against war, the stood up for the people who were suffering in katrina, who saw african-american mothers and grandmothers on rooftops, and whose hearts were broken to see people drowning, to see an american city drowning and who stood up at that time when there was nothing in washington d.c. that would answer the call and who insisted we go in a better way. i am watching that movement that rocked the back of karl rove's stranglehold on our congress, who elected the first african-american president. i am watching that movement that aspired -- inspired the world, the shock the world, that stunned the world, and the moment of maximum peril now, sit

down. there are people in this country who are drowning on dry land. they are drowning economically on dry land. they need a movement that is willing to stand with them and yet, and yet, there is this reluctance. we saw in wisconsin what happens when we put our minimum against our opponents maximum. the people in wisconsin fought beautifully and bravely, but help was not on the way. they had to fight against 13 billionaires, not just a few of the coke druthers. like the koch basketball team, a whole squadron of billionaires only one of whom lived in wisconsin. our opponents to their maximum.

most of us did our minimum, and we saw what happened. so there is a question now that falls upon this conference. are we going to let the tea party govern america? is that the kind of movement that we are? can we not find some lessons from 2008 eight and 2010 that would let us move forward together? smarter, tougher, wiser but more determined and more committed than innocent people whether they be the rodney king's of today or trayvon victimized bi-racial violence won't have to fight alone and both of us across the country who are suffering economically will not need further harmed by the