you don't see myspace and the winklevoss twins all laying on the side of the road not having, not having achieved success. >> in "unintended consequences," former bain capital partner edward kennard looks at the free market economy, the causes of the 2008 recession and explains how lower tax rates leads to investment and economic growth. saturday night at 10 eastern, part of booktv this weekend on c-span2. >> afl-cio president richard trumka says the supreme court's citizens united decision has allowed the labor movement to extend it voter outreach efforts to nonunion households for the first time. mr. trumka said the union has set a goal of recruiting over 400,000 volunteers focusing on a door-to-door effort rather than tv ads. he spoke at a breakfast hosted by the christian science monitor. this is an hour.

>> our guest today are richard trumka, president of the afl-cio o, and the group's political director. mr. rum ca grew up in the -- trumka grew up in the pennsylvania coal fields and followed his father, frank, and grandfather into the mines. he worked his way through penn state university and entered -- earned a law degree from villanova university. in 1982 at age 33, he was elected president of the united mine workers of america, the youngest in its history to hold that position. he served three terms as president and brought the umwa into the afl-cio. in 995 he ran to be secretary/treasurer of the afl-cio and became the youngest person to hold that position where he served for 15 years. mr. trumka was elected president of the afl-cio in september 2009. the afl-cio's political team since 1997, an expert in

sophisticated voter mobilization models, he became deputy political director in 2005 and director in june of last year. before coming to the afl-cio, he was associate director of citizen action where he managed congressional, state and local campaigns. so much for biography, now on to the process portion of our program. as always, we're on the record here. please, no live blogging or tweeting. in short, no filing while the breakfast is underway. there is no embargo when the session ends, except that c-span has agreed to wait two hours before airing the tape of this breakfast. with the goal of maintaining the breakfast reputation for civility, if you would hike to ask a question, please, do the traditional thing and send me a subtle, nonthreatening signal. i will happily call on one and all. we'll start off by offering our guests the opportunity to make some brief opening comments, and then we'll move to questions from around the table. and with that, mr. trumka, the floor is yours. >> well, thank you.

i don't know if everybody can hear me, i was having a little trouble hearing you, quite frankly, linda. it seems like i was saying to linda, just seems like we were here last year at this time, and another year has gone speeding by. they seem to go by a little quicker each year, so, hopefully, we can make year more meaningful than perhaps the last year. i'm going to be very brief. i just want to say a few words, and then we'll open it up for the conversation and questions that you might have. you know, for the last 30 years, the economy has really been moving away from working people and towards those at the very top. and that has taken a big toll on not only workers in this country, but on the middle class in this country as well. and that's why this particular election that we're facing right now is so important for us. because it is the difference between two competing visions.

and we're about to have at least a debate over which one of those divisions -- or visions, i'm sorry, is best for the country. and we're excited that we've joined together with a number of progressive groups to endorse and to advocate a thing called prosperity economics. you'll find it in the green packets that were passed around. it was done by jacob hacker and nate, and they put this thing together with a number of progressive groups talking to them. and it really is, it offers from our perspective a light at the end of a long economic tunnel. so we're excited about that because we're going to have this debate. we were excited that in ohio we were able to have a debate over collective bargaining. and that we can move forward and talk about really what's been hollowing out the country and

where we go from here. and our political program this year is going to be different than it's been in the past. it'll be more geared towards the rank and file, but unlike in the past when we would start building our program eight or nine months before the election, this time we have a permanent program that'll stay in place. after the election day, we'll continue to reach out, we'll continue to mobilize, we'll also continue to bring people in and educate them. it'll also allow us to do something that we couldn't do before. we were prohibited by law from talking to nongroup onmembers. -- nonunion members. now, because of some of the new tools that are out there, we'll be talking to nonunion members and reaching out to them and mobilizing them. we are in the process of training over 400,000 volunteers. we already have over 300,000 are already on the line. we're also doing about between 5

and 6,000 pole monitors so we can monitor the poll on election day and leading up to election day to make sure that even's vote gets counted. and all of this will get a real kickoff on august 25th when we'll start our first national day of walks. so that in 27 states on that day. and then it'll expand out to 50 states, but on the 25th of august and thereafter we'll be in 20 states, and we'll be knocking on doors and encouraging participation out there while mitt romney is being nominated at their convention. so it's going to be an exciting time. we're about to kick off the real exciting part of all of this, and we're ready for it. >> great. well, thanks very much. >> you bet. >> see, i will kick it off with a softball question as dave cook likes to say, and then anybody who wants to jump in just wave at me, and i'll make a list.

if, if you could walk into the oval office and give president obama one piece of campaign advice about winning over white, working class men -- which is a tough demographic for him -- what would it be, what would you say? >> >> keep talking about jobs, jobs and more jobs. and if you look at our program, i'll go through this with you because this is the union difference in the last heck. election. you talk about white men, obama lost white men in the last election by 16 points. but he won white union men by 18 points. that's a 34-point spread. he lost white women by 7%, but he won white union women by 47%. that's a 54% swing. he lost weekly churchgoers by 50%, but he increased -- he won weekly churchgoers that are union members by 1%.

the same thing goes on for gun owners and veterans and 65 and older. there's a tremendous union advantage from our program because we keep teaching them about economics and who is actually providing a program that will help them, workers and their children and their family in our communities. so my advice to him would be keep talking about jobs, jobs and more jobs, and ultimately, i think, you win. and division of an economy that works for everybody -- and the vision of an economy that works for everybody, because this is two competing visions right here. you have mitt's vision that is more of the same. if you look at his 85-page economic program, it boils down to two things; give us more tax cuts and remove regulations, and we'll create jobs. >> mike, do you have -- okay. all right. anybody -- is melanie troutman here by any chance? >> [inaudible] >> yes. melanie put in for a question

last friday, so sorry to catch you -- >> actually -- good morning. >> hi, melanie. how are you? >> i wanted to ask about pensions -- >> about what? >> pensions? because, you know, last year we had, there was a big debate about collective bargaining. it seems to me that the debate might move to pensions this year because of state budgets. are you expecting that? and how do you expect to continue to defend pension programs for your members? >> i don't think we're going to defend pension programs. why should we? the american way is that we should be providing quality, secure retirement for everybody, and that's something that everybody should have. here's what's happened over the last couple of years. ity the far right -- i think the far right has been successful in turning around the normal american way of doing things. used to be we would say you don't have a pension, i do. what do we have to do to get you one? now they've been successful in some instances in trying to turn around and saying you have a

pension, i don't, why shouldn't we take yours away? we shouldn't be taking people's pension away. that's bad economics, it's bad policy, and it's a bad example. the rest of the world doesn't do that. the rest of the world has figured out how to provide secure pensions for their family. we can too. we're a more prosperous country. all we need to do is give that political will, and i think it can, should and will happen. >> [inaudible] >> of course we will be. >> and so how will you respond to that? >> well, they're not about pensions, actually, they're about trying to weaken the labor movement, they're about a number of things. now, are are state and local entities that are hurting? yes, there are. because they don't have the tack revenue, or they've had massive layoffs or jobs that have been lost. and do we work with them? yes, we do work with them whenever there's a legitimate problem. but take wisconsin. wisconsin starts off with a surplus.

a major tax break to corporate america, i now have a deficit, and i have to take your pension. he really didn't have to take anybody's pension, he chose to take somebody's pension. >> all right. >> but do i expect continued attack on the pension plans? of course i do. >> kevin, sorry. catching you mid bite. >> a little bit more policy -- first off, thanks for doing this, guys. um, how do you -- we know how -- [inaudible] you know, possible president romney. what do you think a second term for president obama -- [inaudible] a good possibility too? people think it's going to be a close election, and president obama will probably come out -- [inaudible] that's kind of the general sense right now. but it'll be close. how does the afl-cio feel about the second term, and i was just

wondering if you guys had thoughts about -- thought about about -- [inaudible] so kind of two questions. what is the -- >> bunch of questions. [laughter] >> what is a second term for, you know, what does a second obama term mean for the labor movement, and, i mean, what do you think will be some of the pluses, i mean, some of the conflicts and then also how do you feel politically right now about where things go in congress, which house goes where? >> well, first of all, maybe in the future everybody could say their name. i do know the first two. >> yeah, sorry. >> but give your name and what entity you're from or who you represent. knew you two guy. first of all, i do think that president obama will win a re-election. i think it'll be a close race, and i think it'll be a close race because of the massive amounts of money and resources

that'll get pounded into this election. second of all, i think that in some instances because of a little bit of good luck the senate will remain in democratic hands. and i think that the democrats in the house will pick up seats primarily because of the obstructionism that we've seen so far and the lack of a program. they, the republicans haven't shown any program whatsoever about job creation. they've voted hundreds of times on other things, on reproduction control and things like that, but they've not advocated or given any kind of program for a jobs program. so i think heir going to lose some ground -- they're going to lose some ground this time around. what happens in the second term, i think some of it's determined by what happens in the election. if i'm accurate and the democrats hold on to the senate and they maybe pick up a seat or pick up some house seats, then i think the republicans are going

to have a choice. they're going to have to offer some solutions and come up with some job creation stuff and get off of the fighting over things that used to be nonpartisan, the surface transportation act, the faa act, the clean water act. we never used to fight over all of those things because those things are necessary for the u.s. government, for our economy to go forward. now we fight over everything that is sort of foolish, and while it sort of reminds me of nero fiddling while rome burns. we're not creating jobs, but we'll fight over things and deny things that would create jobs. so the second term will be some of the same. we'll have to continue to fight. we'll advocate. we will organize around the hacker report with the whole progressive community supporting it so that the progressive community will be behind that. the hacker report, if you look at it, says we ought to be investing a minimum of $250

billion a year in infrastructure to pick up for the deficit. that'll have some job creation effect, it'll also make us more effective and efficient as a nation, more competitive as a nation, we'll organize around that. we're organizing around that in this election. >> so my only follow up, and and i thank you, again, for dealing with all these questions, but my only follow up is i think it's fair to say kind of from that that you think democrats will pick up seats in the house but maybe not gain control of it? in that remains to be seen. that's a possibility. i wouldn't rule that out. >> okay. >> but i'm not going to bet the ranch on that as well this time. >> okay. >> you know, it's where we're, we'll see what happens. >> the senate will remain democratic then? >> i think so, yeah. >> are you concerned -- >> sure. >> i'm sorry, go ahead. >> i was just going to add on the house that except for the extraordinary amount of money going into the house from outside groups that this would be another wave election for the

democrats, that if you look at any of the normal indicators before citizens united such as gallup's question about whether you think most representatives deserve to be reelected, in wave years -- '94, 2006, '8 and '10 -- about 50-60% of folks said that most members of congress should not be reelected. right now it's at 76%. the, when -- the republican approval for congressional approval is at an all time low. yet that has to be put up against the fact that when you look 2008 to 2012, democratic house between the candidates and the superpacs that have spent have $100 million less than they did in 2008, and the republicans

have $100 million more. i think it's pretty clear in poll after poll that the public is completely dissatisfied with the republican obstructionism in the house, and it's going to be a the test as to whether or not that much money can keep the house republican. >> david grant from the christian science monitor. >> crossroads here at the table, whenever somebody says you guys are going to raise all money, they say, well, the labor unions are going to come through and blue us out of the water. o will you -- blow us out of the water. so will you address that sort of paradigm they set up? we're just doing, you know, we're going to be even steven at the end of this maybe. can you sort of compare what you do and maybe take on that concept that labor and american cross roads are doing the same thing?

>> first of all, we get outspent significantly. but what we do is we tush out people at the -- turn out people at the grassroots level, something they can't do. and now we're going to be able to reach out to nonunion workers and talk to them so that it used to be that we would go and do a door knock, and there would be 500 houses in a small community, if 100 of them were union, we had to skip 400 houses. now we're going to be able to go to those900 houses, talk to them about the issues, reply to them, get information the to them back about the issues that they find important or they deem important. we're also going to be doing a couple other things differently. we're going to energize our volunteer system a whole lot more actively than we have in the past. last year we had -- last election, last cycle we had about 300,000 volunteers on the ground, this time we were shooting for four, and we think we'll actually exceed four because we got three so quickly,

we were able to get to 325 very quickly so we're able to move beyond that. you won't see us doing all the ads, the anonymous ads or the ads for feel-good america or the other front groups that they put out there. they'll be doing the airwaves, we'll be doing the ground waves, and we'll see what happens. >> the okay. i find what they say about that in making the comparison either laughable or galling. what they're basically saying is that, one, organization that supports business, that has a couple of hundred donors should be treated equivalently with the labor movement which has, you know, 15 million members. and conveniently ignore the fact that there's, you know, americans for prosperity, all of the different business group on top of that as though there should be some equivalent si

between one group on the right and the entire labor movement. which is just preposterous. and if you go to the center for responsible politics or anybody independent that looks at this, you see the margin of spending by those groups combined dwarf what we spend. and it's just disingenuous. >> okay. end of the table, can you introduce yourself? >> [inaudible] um, mr. trumka, you were -- thanks for doing this. you were talking earlier about the president's union advantage. i was hoping you could, um, talk a bit about president obama as a candidate specifically for unions and union members as opposed to working people broadly. um, i think when you talk to a lot of labor leaders these days,

there is some disenchancement with the president. -- disenchantment with the president. some feel he hasn't done everything he can to go to bat for organized labor. i'm wondering whether you sense in the rank and file and within labor leaders maybe an enthusiasm problem with the president, and if you feel like you can make a strong case that he's done everything he can for the labor movement. >> as he done everything he can for the labor movement, that's a simple answer. no one has ever done, no president has ever done that. has he done a lot for the labor movement? absolutely, he has. has he done a lot for working people? absolutely, he has. let's just take the simple guy that goes to work every day whether you're in a mine, an auto factory, or you go to a school as a yang to have or anybody -- janitor or anybody. under eight years of george bush, the mine safety health administration was nonexistent. it was a cadaver.

they starved it of resources and turnedded it from an enforcement agency into a consulting theme for companies. so you had more people being injured, less people coming home from work that didn't have a health disease. now you have workers being protected. this guy has fought for jobs. look at the last guy. the last guy came in, bush came in, he had an economy that was blowing off the charts. it was growing, a giant surplus. he leaves office eight years later with fewer jobs than when he came into office. so every american worker, every american was worse off. our pension funds have been ravaged, lost money because of the deregulation that he'd given, he'd done the people, and this president has created four, three and a half, four million jobs in the worst recession that we've seen since the great depression. with an obstructionist house and

republican senate that has tried to stop everything he's tried to do. so he's worked hard. has he done everything? of course he hasn't done everything. he worked hard to get us the health care bill. we've tried for 60 years to get health care for every citizen in this country. every other civilized nation has figured out how to do it. they provide health care for their citizens. he finally got that done despite the obstructionism. that we've seen on the other side. so are there pockets of workers out there that say he should have done more? of course there are. but whenever you compare them, and when we compare them like what mitt romney intends to do and what barack obama intends to do when it comes to working people, there's no contest. president obama is more for working people than mitt romney. mitt romney is for the very rich. he doesn't identify with us. he doesn't understand what we go through every day. he doesn't understand the decisions that we have to make.

he doesn't understand it's tough to send kids to school. you shouldn't be slashing aid to colleges or pell grants or things of that sort. he should be increasing them for the good of the country. >> could you give us your name? >> i'm sean higgins with the washington examiner. president trumka, i was curious exactly how much money, if you know, was spent in the wisconsin recall election. >> with what? >> in the wisconsin recall -- >> how much did we spend? >> yeah. >> the afl-cio? >> yeah. >> probably less than 500,000, right? >> do you believe it was all well spent? >> i'm sorry? >> do you believe it was all well spent? >> do i? >> yeah. >> absolutely. we took back control of the senate so that he can't, scott walker can't do some of the nonsensical, foolish things that he tried to do. he can't continue to make war on his employees. now he's going to have to try to create jobs because we're going to have jobs proposals put up in

front of him, and he'll either support them, or he won't support them. >> can i -- i want to ask you, if the president, could the up and being more engaged inwing that race, in the recall? could he have made a difference? >> you know, that was debated back and forth on the ground. we really did -- people don't believe this, a lot of people don't believe this, but people on the ground were really making the calls in that recall decision. if, you know, if we had been controlling things in a different way, who knows, we might have made some different decisions. might not have, but we might have. had they decided they wanted to keep it about what was happening there, and they didn't want it to become a national issue. so i think he probably honored that. he was supportive, but he wasn't intrusive. >> so you're not disappointed that he didn't go out there? >> no. i don't think the people on the ground were disappointed either. i think he responded as the people on the ground really thought was best. >> all right. johnny? >> thank you. johnny --

[inaudible] can i bring you back to the -- >> i'm sorry. >> johnny diamond from the british broadcasting corporation. can i bring you back to what is described as the attack on the labor movement? we just discussed wisconsin. can you tell me why you think you lost the sort of overall argument from wisconsin even if you -- >> the overall what? >> overall argument in wisconsin, as in the recall of scott walker. um, and also, can you just give me a little more detail as to how you think you're going to fight back on pensions? there is, as you know, a sustained effort on public sector pensions around the country, and many big cities are struggling under debt, so how are you going to persuade people that what many site as comfortable are justifiable compared to their private sector counterparts? >> let me go back to the first part of the question. when you look at what happened in wisconsin, wisconsin the election degenerated into an election between scott walker and -- [inaudible] take ohio. in ohio it was a clean decision

or discussion or vote over collective bargaining. should workers have collective bargaining, or should they not in and it was 60 plus percent of the ohio population said all workers, public and private, should have an election. i think if that election had gone through that same way, we would win, we would have won in wisconsin just like anywhere else. it degenerated into a discussion between walker and barrett. maybe degenerated isn't, isn't a proper word, but that's where it went to. and you had millions of dollars of ads slashing barrett, you had millions of dollars of ads shaying what a -- saying what a great person walker was. and then in the end you had even our own membership, probably of those -- 75% voted against walker. and of the 25% that didn't, another 40% of those said that they weren't going to vote against him because they didn't think recalls should be used for

policy decisions. so that trailed off a little bit at the end. the primary thing, though, that was -- it was an election between people, between barrett and walker. it wasn't about collective bargaining. if it had been, i think we'd have won. and i think the stuff with the pension, i think people are getting tired of that. i think, you know, you go to talk to people in the little town that i grew up in, and you say to them, hey, we better take away those guys' pension over there. what does that do for me? i still don't have a pension. now it's just they don't have a pension too. now neither one of us has a pension, and who spends the money in the community, what happens to the economy? i think you're seeing economist after economist, look at the hacker report, shared prosperity. it talks about the importance of pensions and going forward in a strong social security, strong medicare and medicaid. because the economy can't survive without that. i think that it's run the course

them being able to divide us, and we're giving them, continually giving them facts, and it's starting to take hold. and we're going to have a debate, hopefully, around this shared prosperity. so it's either going to be shared prosperity or austerity principles. and we'll let the american public decide. i think they'll go with shared prosperity because that's the better avenue for everybody. >> okay, john? >> michael -- [inaudible] from the weekly standard. i want to ask a slightly different question about president obama. what in the last four years has president obama done for organized labor? >> what has he done for organized labor? i'm going to answer it the same exact way that i answered that. it's not just what he's done for -- >> [inaudible] >> it's what he's done for workers. okay. he helped us get a health care bill, he stood up for social security and medicaid, he has helped us with occupational health and safety.

he has a policy right now that is geared towards bringing manufacturing back to the country. punishing those -- i shouldn't say punishing, stop rewarding those who are taking jobs offshore, bringing jobs in. he's enforced the trade acts like nobody else has. he's saved detroit from bankruptcy. so that we're now hiring people in ohio, in michigan, in indiana, in illinois and kentucky. they're being hired and other places as well, they're being hired because he saved the auto industry. all of those things to our benefit. ..

to be encouraging that unlike what we see right now from the republican party where they are trying to discourage people from participating in democracy. fighting that is inexcusable. >> sean with washington times. >> i'm having trouble hearing you for some reason. >> how much do you expect to spend on the election this year? >> it will probably be the same

area accept for superpac to spend talking to nonunion workers than we did union workers. if you want a figure i'm not going to give it to you because that will be the story. that's all you ever write is how much we are spending. we are going to have over 400,000 activists out there trying to get votes knocking on doors and making phone calls. that's where we are going to shine. >> [inaudible] >> we oppose citizens united and think it is corrosive to assist them, but since it's there we will use a small part of it. we have a superpac called workers' voice and we will be able to talk to the non-union workers because fell wall prevents us from using money that talks to nonunion workers so we will be able to talk to those workers. yet. >> bloomberg news. i have a question about the

investment in the united states -- >> about what? >> foreign direct investment in the united states. a chinese company plans to buy a majority stake in and also battery maker 8123 which has gotten some support from the u.s. government, government grant. and this follows the news last week about seniors interested in buying canadian assets. i'm wondering as we think about bringing jobs, creating jobs in the u.s., what are your thoughts on the chinese investment in the u.s.? , should there be and how much scrubbing of the deals should we have? >> i think it all depends because i think foreign investment here can be a good thing or it can be a bad thing. i will give you a couple examples. a number of years ago, five, six

years ago under george bush we used to make rare earth magnets into places. one in indiana and one in illinois. the guidance systems of smart bond airplane missiles and things of that sort. the chinese came in and got an exemption from the bush administration. they bought in to both of those invested in both of those planes. everybody said that's good. six months later they closed the plant down and moved into china after the loom all the technology and the know-how. there was bad. that for national security and bad for what we are doing. if they are only investing in battery making so they can gain the know how to transfer it back to china, so that they can ultimately then decide to use a bunch of things that violate the international trade rules to gain the market like they did with windmills and other renewables, that would be a bad thing and we should monitor

that. we shouldn't allow those types of things to continue to train us of the resources we've had. we've lost 50,000 plants in this country since 2000. 50,000 not only the manufacturing process but with them also went to the r&d because they are indeed followed the manufacturing process. that's bad. take a boeing. china says we will buy boeing planes. you want us to buy boeing planes you have to make the tail assembly in china. before long they are looking at the engineers and the engineers aren't working on the assembly's, they are working on other projects. that's bad. we shouldn't allow that to happen. other countries don't do that. why we allow that to happen is beyond me. i think we should look at our own best interest, and i think

we have not asked this question but i will throw it out. a guided this tremendous study and set 15 years ago the interest of corporate america and the interest of the country for coincided. they thought about what was best for their community stakeholders come states and the country and made decisions along the line. somewhere sense that period of time the interest of corporate america particularly multinational has diverged from the interest of the country so they will do what is in their best interest and the body intensely in spend billions of dollars to elect politicians will do what is in their best interest regardless whether it is in the best interest of the country. our biggest challenge as a country is to try to realign those interests said the interests on corporate america and in the country coincide so we can both when. >> the chinese deals work more

closely than investment from other countries? >> only to this extent. i would say normally know. we should look at all foreign investments in the same line. but look at this extent we have such a massive deficit with china and they have violated of the trading rules a significantly we should be paying close attention and try to get them to comply with no international norms and trade law. the president took the case up on steel pipes. we won in front of the wto. we put several thousand workers back to work creating steel pipe because they didn't have to compete against illegal subsidies and other ways of cheating that chinese have. the same thing happened with rubber tires, the same thing happened with a number of auto parts. so, we should be enforcing our laws and because they are the biggest deficit, they should get

special treatment and not any more special scrutiny than we should be given to anybody else can you talk about the two political conventions coming up and the presence of the afl-cio who are the republicans might want to honor -- [inaudible] >> they are a pretty feisty group down there. intensively than anyplace else. at the conventions at this time

are unlike conventions in the past, everything is already pretty much decided. but i feel there's a little anticlimactic for everybody i think there'll be great, there will be issues how will be talked about, there will be plots the will be decided you need to look at those things. the platforms of both countries, both parties speak volumes about who they are and what they are. we are going to have labor day festivities. i looked yesterday about ten hours of single space sheets of all of the labor festivities around the country. there will be some stuff in north carolina, charlotte there will be some stuff elsewhere. the president will be rare for the president is going to be. one of the state's near mabey to the celebration. we will be participating.

this saturday of course we have the second bill of rights. we have a signing in philadelphia. we've asked the democratic chairman and the republican chairman the second labor bill of rights to the labor philip crites i will quote them to you in one second here and see if they will sign them. if they will they will be great and if they don't, then they don't and we will know who is with us and who isn't with us. they may only charge 50 bucks a that's a different issue. >> they are the right to full employment, the right to full participation in the process and the right to a voice, the referee called the education and

the right to secure a healthy future. i don't know how you could oppose but we will see who signs them and who doesn't sign them and then we will organize them. >> you're not the way to go round like grover norquist are you? >> some people may. that isn't our intention. it's part of the bigger thing of having the debate over the american middle class workers and the shared prosperity and the green package. it's part of that continuation of the intentions of that so that we can continue to have the the date. if you say i won't sign that from the fair question is why. what is it that you oppose? i would assume mitt romney will say i oppose the voice at work, the right to a voice at work and i would say okay, that's your decision to make that. opposing the right to full employment and the living wage

opposes? nobody. so it's going to be fun. it's great to be part of the debate of the bigger issue getting people to talk about forcing them to say the policy work they don't work are there any you will be recognizing as pro labor? clich we have endorsed several. you asked if there were fewer. there were absolutely fewer and the stronger the tea party gets the less likely there will be more candidates because they have people but -- orrin hatch was too liberal in their eyes and i don't remember anybody ever describing orrin hatch as liberal there were fewer and fewer. olympia snowe of the ones the were able to do bipartisan stuff

if that is the party that they want to dhaka to be tough for them to say for the american future as joe lobiondo, we endorsed him and continue to endorse him don't think he's going to run again this time so the more moderate ones are filing off. the viciousness of politics is driving the best and brightest away from politics. why do this? so the best and brightest aren't going into politics like to use to and that is a loss for the country as far as i'm concerned. >> have you asked president obama to sign off on it?

>> we sent a letter to the head of the democratic national committee and the republican national committee. we send them a letter by the way so that no one could say we did it to favor one or the other. we sent it off to them. we sent word to the president we wanted him to sign at and i have no reason to believe he won't sign it. all of those things are in his policy any way. >> on the presidential elections what does the campaign need to be doing better and what are they doing well that has surprised you? >> i think the president is making the case right now that

we should be making that this is about two different types of economies, and i think mitt romney has made some -- everybody calls them gaps but i consider them gaffs. my wife drives to cadillacs. that's just life. take the tax returns right now. when mitt romney was trying to be vice president, he gave mccain 23 years of tax returns 23 years. mccain saw something that he picked sarah palin. i don't know whether it was returns are not. and then he -- it's not just about transparency, it's about

mitt romney, it's evident him saying i'm special. i don't have to play for the rules come every of the candidate has to give our tax returns. i don't have to. i don't have to play by rules. it's the elite and he's got to break out of that. he is standing with the elite and i don't think the american public the vast majority identified with them. [inaudible] >> i think he's the to keep talking about the economy and i think that's the way that it goes and i think he started that last labor day. you remember we were hearing before last labor day and i said

it was a strategic mistake. he's talking about deficit reduction that's not going to get him reelected and as long as he keeps doing that he is losing ground. i won't say i told you so but the last labor day he started talking about jobs and the economy and creating jobs and a different vision and he hasn't let up since that. i think he stays on that vision and mitt romney has to stay on his vision and i think he loses him and obama wins because i think the american public are tired of the old economy. they see through it. they don't want the economic winners to be able to make the economic policies that are going to continue to stop them and their kids from getting ahead.

collective bargaining is this issue is the forefront of the national conversation. everyone is invested in of a couple years ago expecting to be a major issue in presidential campaign. the president very rarely mentioned collective bargaining. mitt romney to some degree doesn't bring it up all that often on the trail either our use presents gotten less attention in the party candidates on the trail? mitt romney doesn't bring a that he doesn't believe in it and wants to destroy the best of it any way, so of course he's not going to bring that up. the president talks about collective bargaining and a voice at work and the right to union. does he talk about it every day? no. in every speech? probably not. more than he does, but i'm talking about the economy. if we will be able to get a

shared prosperity out when you read that and i hope all of you do and see which one you believe would be better for the country. it is replete with references to collective bargaining. i wonder if there's anybody that mitt romney would put on the republican side as a running mate who would like a fire under organized labor and conversely i'm wondering if it reflects the world of vice president has played in the partnership is a voice for you in the administration she plays a constructive role over the year first term as president he

understands working people. i think it is been a plus and people say they disagree here, i see like that along the way in lockstep they would be bored so i think vice president biden has done a good job he's a good human being and cares about the country and i have a lot of respect for him. i don't know who for his vice president. i can tell you this the fire they live will be to energize our side and not extinguish the energy on our side so it's his call and will be his first major decision and we will see what happens. spearman there is no candidate that you can think?

>> he picked sarah palin. >> did you assess the obama trade policy free trade deals [inaudible] >> first if you look at the architect of the american trade policy, not just obama but the american trade policy under bill clinton, they are now saying that the trade policy in this country hasn't been real good for us. it hasn't been the panoply that people want us to believe. it's been bad. we've lost jobs.

then the president spent a number of years trying to fix the three agreements. do i agree with them? no. i still think they don't go for enough as a trade policy. they still allow -- they are to slanted still that's what i will say. let's look at what he has gone elsewhere. he has enforced the law unlike george bush who never would enforce any kind of trade. trade case after trade case and they've won and winning those cases has put china back at the bay and stop some of the illegal practices they are doing and has put people back to work in this country. trade can be a very, very positive thing. the regime that we saw under the last say 20 years hasn't been the trade policy this country

needs. tpp with the first time the president gets to do one of his own and we will see what happens. it can be a good thing or a very, very bad thing. he and i are very, very close. i disagree with him on things on trade policy but as a human being he is flying and we have a good relationship. >> i want to ask about the 400,000 volunteers the way the new democratic nominee that year he is talking about running. >> it would be totally out to him if he makes that decision i'm not going to race until 2016 i'm more worried about 2012 and what happens in 2013, 2014 and 2015. it will help his chances by what

happens in between. >> 400,000 what states do you focus on? what will they do and do you have a percentage on the amount you hope to move in obama's direction by having such a big group of volunteers do you have a percentage you would like to grow that on? >> first of all, there were 20 some battleground states. there are six of corestates in pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, wisconsin, nevada and florida those are the six corestates. we've had a full-time staff in the states for a couple of

months now, three or four months now and the other places are full-time staff as well. they will do everything. at the plant gates were worksites they will be talking to union and nonunion workers for a change in getting back to the non-union workers they say are important to them. >> is there a certain amount that you hope to move? >> 100%. >> we are going to try to get all of them and see what happens >> going back to health care what do you make of this new priority? dave leyna romney for killing those workers why over the last

couple of days? >> i haven't seen the ad. i have is a synopsis about. i think what he was saying is they took away my job, the interest of sourcing, you know what they do. they commend and they loaded up with debt it was too big for the company so it collapses he lost his health care and said his wife died several months later back then she had a pre-existing condition you couldn't anywhere else president will change that as well where at least preexisting conditions you can

still get health care. does this seem to be more and more - in the boundaries? >> that is a by-product of citizens united. it is corrosive to the space process. whenever your company and three or $4 billion they won't even tell you in some cases who's doing them. i think we ought to change the system but you have a supreme court right now that the cleaves with free speech. somehow i don't believe that when jefferson and adams and ben franklin were together they would draft in the constitution one of them said you know you have a thousand dollars out there so you get a thousand

dollars in free speech but i have $10,000. i don't think it was part of the original equation but this supreme court says money is with free-speech accept when it comes to unions because they have said time and time again that you can let the free speech of a you can't let the free speech of corporations so we will be testing some of those in the near future in the citizens united decision. >> one last question. >> assuming president obama does get a second term what do you think the prospect of a second term on the keystone pipeline project is? assuming president a woman gets a second term what do you think the prospects are of the exfil

pipeline project? >> i don't think it's just keystone, it's about job creation. if he gets a second term it's about job creation we are going to be able to do more of that. you will see stuff in the report if we can invest to under $50 billion in infrastructure job creation along the way and you will see things correctly to get upset about like the industry. a lot of people try to say either or. it's either you do the project were you destroy the environment. i think there's a way to do things both ways you can do things without destroying the environment and we should be looking at them doing things in a very sustainable way doing it the right way we are going to see more job creation under barack obama and mitt romney

it's going to go right back to where we were the regulating everything. more tax cuts for the rich and letting it trickled down. it got us into the mess that we currently find ourselves. thank you.

the library of congress has a new exhibit it's called books that shaped america. 88 books were selected by the library for their influence on america and american culture. here is a brief interview about the exhibit and how you can join in on an on-line chat about the libraries list and what books using should be included. >> we call that books that shaped american as opposed to the other words we considered like changed america because we think that books slow the have an impact on american society. so many books have had such a profound influence on american culture and society and indeed the very essence of what america is to read their earliest book

is then frankland's book on electricity that kind of sparked or saved the american revolution it's part of american culture. many of them identified who we were becoming more the aspirations we had designation and the experiences we had uniquely as americans. we also thought it was important to look at the nonfiction books that either were self held for barriers of certain kinds. we look for many books that are innovative that kind of showed america as an innovative country that used books and stories to inspire going into the frontier and that could be literally or intellectual.

i do not envy the drowsy republican party. they squelched the date, we will willhite. they deny differences and we would miss them. the choices are not just between two different personalities or between two political parties there between two different visions of the future, to fundamentally different ways of government their government of pessimism, fewer and limits or i was hope, confidence and growth.

this year to watch the republican and democratic national conventions live on c-span starting monday august august 27th. live now to the atlantic council here in washington, d.c. today for a discussion on nds's economy. do we hear from an economic adviser to the indian government speakers addressed the economic slowdown in india and china, india limits on investment and how corruption is holding that nation's economy backend is the director of the atlantic council's south asia center. >> good morning everyone. on behalf of my colleagues at

the center i would like to welcome all of you and thank you for coming despite the weather. we are delighted to host today to speak on nds's economy and unusual past and an uncertain future. perhaps it is not as uncertain as the title suggests and may be able to spend some time helping us understand that. but i can't think of a better person to do this and delight of the crystal ball, and also as a former colleague at the imf arvind is a fellow at the peterson institute for economics and the center for global development. he is the author of a book called eclipse living in the shadow of transformation. china's economic nomination. he also wrote understanding the

economic transformation in 2008. i should note foreign policy named him one of the top 100 global thinkers in 2011 they nominated him as one of the top 35 masters of the mine it's a very heavy burden that shows he's bearing extremely well. he's been an assistant director of the research department of the international monetary fund and he's also worked on the creative negotiations and started at harvard university kennedy school of government and johns hopkins school for international studies and he contributes to the financial times and other groups and of course he's educated in india

st. stephen's college taking his master's and ph.d. from oxford. i think with that background we expect nothing but the best. i'm going to request arvind to speak for 20, 25 minutes and then we will have a conversation with him and i would request the conversation is on the record to switch them off. we are delighted to work in the c-span audience because this event is going out live so we don't want any undue interruptions we should be able to begin and end on time and in an orderly manner. welcome coming into the floor is yours. [applause]

thank you for that very kind and generous introduction. it's a pleasure to be here at the atlantic council. august is not the most heavily trafficked month that comes with talks and the events in d.c.. i'm delighted to be here. i expect some of the interest now is because of the blackout that we saw a couple of weeks ago and i will kind of talk about that in passing as well. let me get since i only have 20, 25 minutes let me just get straight -- this is a qaeda economist -- kind of economist.

it will be economics with some political economy background. i've called this uncertain future. i realize the interest is more what is happening now and what's likely to happen in the near and medium term, but i do want to stress to see certain continuity and in some sense the uncertainty of the challenges that come from india's unusual economic past. so self-promotion that's my recent china book and in some sense the more i talk about india there is this input kind of contrast with china which i will elude time for time and i have a book on both countries but i do want to emphasize there's an interesting contrast. i want to spend the first half

talking about what i call the unusual economic model which i call the precautious india model and what i mean by precautious is that india has been doing things it isn't meant to be doing at this stage of its development. it's doing things countries normally do which are much more advanced in terms of development and there's a plus side to it but there's also a kind of drag that comes from this which is going to inform my assessment of the challenges going forward. then we can talk about the near-term macrochallenge fi and there's the big picture on what i call the everything challenge. there is a lot going on. normally when i present something on india, i begin by exercising something that i think people overlook. this is a graph that shows india's gdp per capita and there have been three phases in the economic growth and development.

the first week of the hindu rate of growth which grew at about 3% per year for 30 years after dependence which is about 1.8% per capita. because of the rate of growth because they are not more obsessed with a year after and therefore that is what supposedly hinduism teaches. of course that is complete nonsense because beginning in 1918 the economy turned around. i want to emphasize this because many people think the growth actually took off in india after 1991. it's true that the reforms took off after 1991 but growth actually took off from 1979 to 1980. so india had 30 years of economic growth so the contrast between india and china is not that it began in 98 and 91x that

china did everything twice that india did so for 22 years we had about five and a half, 6% growth. then between 2002 to 2008, 2009 and even 2011 we had a rapid take-off for the growth rate and that is what i think created this bus the last seven or eight years and one could argue that now which i'm going to flee to iran now the question is on our free in the fourth phase that looks the third phase will quicken aberration because of all it's been doing to actually slightly slower the growth rates over the medium term so by way of background precocious and yet everyone knows and talks about but if you plot democracy

against development, india is a massive outcry air on the right side and china is a massive outcry here on the wrong side given the level of per capita gdp is the modernization hypophysis given the level of gdp the never deserved to be a democracy but it has been for many years and it's one of the achievements and the interesting thing of course is that china is right at the bottom and all the states to the right of china, so they are and not fire and india was claimed as an achievement but this is something that needs to be highlighted in terms of how precocious india has been in its political development but the point i want to emphasize next is in terms of economics that has been unusual is that it's been a skilled model of development. if they have an abundant label

supply. instead it is intensively used with skilled labor and that creates a number of complications to read a number of manifestations those more services and manufacturing. there's much more skilled based manufacturing than most countries at comparable stages of development. here's a chart i want to show. i wish i could show you its broadly on the same scale and you can see where manufacturing is we below that in china and you see the services so this is one example of the precocious phenomena and what i find more

unusual is the most striking aspect is the fact that india exports skilled fbi to be true f dion internationally. it's meant to be rich countries produce skills, technologies, entrepreneurs and finance into the labour and resources in the veterans the pattern of specialization is determined but india has been defined and look at this chart for they are not free to exploit fdi but india exports much more fdi as a share of its gdp than china. not really is that the case the chinese a lot of it is resource based to africa so i call a pretty normal because it is downhill it goes from rich countries to poor countries.

it's what i call upheld. it goes from a poor country. a lot of it goes to the advanced countries which isn't meant to happen, and it goes in highly specialized skill intensive sectors so this wasn't meant to happen in the way we talk about the world economy but this is what is happening this is very unusual. they have a comparative advantage deutsch it in some of the missions like skill, entrepreneur should and so on. these are aspects of glycol precociousness. other data mix with it is different or not so different i don't want to spend a lot of time on that but i'm sure people will be interested unlike china we have the demand model of development but that's not particularly precocious. some poor countries do that and

some rich countries do that but it's different from china and also in terms of integration india is better than in china growing very rapidly and india found out the financial crisis that could cut to match was much more integrated on trade and finance than other countries but they believe that lacks. on the social indicators it's not that on inequality. for its level of development and the debt is much less unequal than china. it's about power and life expectancy. it's good on some, not go on others and good on others but these are gender characteristics of a precocious india and we will come back to this later. i think the two major long-term

challenges at the moment india's macroeconomically very vulnerable. it has the highest post persistently high inflation. it's been at, but were close to double digits for two years or more. its position is becoming more vulnerable, and has high fiscal deficits. these are the decorative and vulnerabilities of you have been reading in the press for the last i would say six or eight months because it has been under pressure and the second challenge which is a slowdown in growth, and i'm going to talk about that in a different context. inflation is very high. the interesting thing about india its aggregate a

consolidated states have the federal level about 8% of gdp which is very high level of fiscal deficit and the point i would need on the fiscal deficit it was a tragedy almost a policy catastrophe when india is growing -- i'm terribly sorry. the catastrophe was i think in the rapid growth in gross was three high, interest rates were low and we didn't consolidate sufficiently that was a major policy on the fiscal side. now i want to go through the

growth challenge puts the most interesting picture that in some ways one could argue in the last quarter's growth is equipped to six, six half% so the big question is what's going wrong how do we respond to that and one could make the argument in fact as the 89% of the years where the subornation and in some ways didn't deserve given all the things india hasn't done because here is something important to remember if you look at any measure of policy reform, any measure of policy reform for india and china i deliver in absolute terms are changes across terms india and china glad. the countries that did the most policy reforms are those in africa and latin america yet

much more rapidly than all these countries. i want to be careful here. the magnitude of the reform and how controlled and closed their economies are no comparison between china and india and of these countries so that's why media india didn't deserve to grow so much in the first place but a growing so rapidly in the first place and the fact that we have high inflation could actually be the supply capacity is not keeping pace with demand. i would argue and this is why i've spent a bit of time on the model one could make the case this is because india's precocious model is unsustainable we have developed based on skill labor which is very scarce. india has a lot of skilled labor

is just not true it is in dollar terms about 14 or 15% for ten to 15 years and we have a completely dysfunctional system of education which does not elicit the supply that the economy needs. the factor that we use intensively is running into capacity. but we have abundantly we don't use because of the labor law which were never used and there is little chance going forward we would be able to use it and scarce social capital we call them public institutions, corruption, whenever, that is getting eroded progressively. the big government problem with india which is an important development that is being undermined to corruption and criminality and what is happening is that has become the

local corruption and nds we have a situation if you to the factors of production from the development perspective with the year using intensively running out of that what we don't use intensively we have abundant amounts of fat are becoming sources of corruption people have been using a lot you look at our losses in india which is a kind of metaphor or proxy for not just what is wrong with the power sector and india but governments more broadly this was a transition distribution loss as a percentage of output and india this is on the blog as well. india is about five to six times as inefficient and corrupt or weekly governed in china or brazil or south africa so this

is the kind of metaphor for the problems in india. the way i like to put it is the challenge one can summarize it in kind of terms of teams. we have fiscal populism, the notion over the last five or ten years that we need to give away freebies in the form of subsidies we have oil subsidies, food subsidies, power subsidies and in the last seven or eight years that the format also instituted a guarantee scheme so the notion that fiscal is an electoral votes when india has a lot of cold and that is a big problem that is contributing to the macroeconomics of allegis. but the night and what is also happening from the growth point of view we've moved from one of the great states you may not have heard of.

he said he just did not like the model but i think now some of those things have come down. in a piece of the road by said kind of fishy sisley deacons -- facetiously it is a big source of corruption, the biggest scandal ever had in. the land has become a source of corruption. the allocation of land is a big source of corruption and that comes in the way for a symbol of extracting code with power and infrastructure and growth and then of course we have the subterranean where we cannot get access because the binding rights are a disaster. in the media in terms fiscal

populism is a serious impediment to growth. but then you wake up and say there is the other side to india as well and i can make the case how can you keep india down the will grow eight or 9% of the last 20 or 30 years and what are the counter arguments? i think one of them is that india is very, very poor. it is out 8% of u.s. capitol gdp so the scope for capturing the frontier is just enormous. you have to do very little to actually be able to grow rapidly and may be india crossed the threshold of having them at the minimum and you have a big market and so on and maybe we will have a rapid growth going forward everyone talks about the dissident which is a source of dynamism in terms of labour force and then i think what is happening in india is there have

been no reforms the indian economy has been doing well because of what i call the growth dynamic because some have managed to grow for justine, 20 years and it's becoming a very attractive place and my favorite example is if you look at elementary schools in india on average about 15% of time teachers don't show up in public elementary schools in india but was has happened in the last ten years is because of growth the demand for education has risen so rapidly that even in these areas private schools have come up all the best solution necessarily but in fact in those districts and states the public and judicial systems the most dysfunctional and private schools in india that is the response to growth itself.

there's been independent reforms but growth against reform and i think what this the promise for india is to fold. it's a combination of the dynamic between the states to retake power for a simple. some states are doing real well and that creates the demonstration effect and capital will move in a way that puts pressure on the other states within india but it's not just that there's a dynamic of competition but that is increasingly combined with i would call the most heartening phenomena is that politics of the state level is responding to economic governance and delivery and so in the long run if politics, democratic politics could reword good economic governance that is india's hope.

indians are very wistfully about we wish we could have chinese centralized decision making authority. i see that is nonsense because i believe in the rule that you could add to the political system. they will never have the chinese political system but if truth of democracy itself can come these problems in the last election cycles you see more and more broadly good governance being rewarded at the state level and there are many examples we can go into. all that translates into is the fact the private sector is doing well, skilled labor scarce supply would of course you get this response of skills media and skilled labor to the dividend would combine even in

terms of governance if you find this responsive politics maybe some of this can be partially overcome we have a vibrant civil society in a nds of this kind of the positive spin-off on the medium term challenge. i believe in the pessimistic view in india or this thing we can talk about that in the discussion with me speak about the longterm challenges. i diluted to this so far. i think there is a race between and i don't know which one is going to win. i can tell you why economic and government institutions, political institutions are in substantial and disturbing ways but i can also give you examples of regeneration for happening

and the democratic response of politics. .. that is common to many countries around the world and i know, it's true that this is getting inequalities accentuating this but that's not interesting because many countries have that and we can talk about the inequality problem but if you look at the other axes, language, think india has by

enlarged over come this problem so that is -- for india. horrendous axes of discord, historically etc., but i would make the case that amongst these, at least india is finding a way of overcoming this, because it's simple. electoral you know politics and numbers mean that cost have acquired political power. but you know they have also found you now economic opportunity. they have found just a lot of subsidies and so on, but they have found a way of overcoming partially all the baggage that was put upon them by the hideous historical hierarchy of india of cast. most famously they acquired political power and also -- goes to just the number has worked in

their favor. and while i don't mean at all to suggest that the cast problem is over, all i am saying is the level is rising. i think the two axes of discord we haven't solved is religion and what i would call you know the geography and the tribal problem. if you look at indicators, i think they can do -- i think the economically, i think the backward caste are seeing improvements of the standards of opportunity and so on. we don't see that to the same extent in india and i think that is an axis that i think is a potential source of problem always in india and finally i think the big one we have not cracked is the tribal problem. i call it a kind of geography ask is because most of these people live in a heavy forested

forested -- [inaudible] kind of abandon the eastern india where they are basically tribal and they are not processed in the market economy and of course it is it is a hotbed of insurrection in india. a source of security because people realized that the indian state does not run in this part of india so 25% of india at the end state does not run and you know these people are marginalized out of the system and therefore always a source of problem for india. now, i think there is, there is -- the security angle, the whole south asia angle. i'm not an expert and we can come back to that of the big a big long-term challenges resources especially land and especially water which is becoming scarce and scarcer and so there's a whole geopolitical

angle on china with this with the climate change angle. i think water is going to be a real source so let me end by saying that you know, you could wake up on any one day and put on the optimistic had about india or the pessimistic had about india and i usually end talks on india with my favorite quote from a great book called the hindus and she says you know, so i think india is like a sanskrit world. effectively a sanskrit world means the opposite of john roberts said anything and it's opposite is true about india so everything in its opposite is also true about india. sanskrit represents -- sexual so i think that in some ways is what i think about india, that it is both itself and not itself. thank you very much. [applause]

>> thank you very much, arvind. as advertised and as promised i knew you would deliver on on a wide-ranging talk and i'm sure there are going to be tons of questions that i am sure you will have answers to. i was just reminded after your last few comments about whether the glass is half-full or half-empty, of the way a dear friend of ours who used to be ambassador in pakistan for the united kingdom, the high commissioner once described that he was talking about pakistan when we were discussing the future of the country and he said it's not a question of whether the glass is half-full or half-empty. the question and he has an

engineering background, the question is whether the glass is too big so i'm wondering whether the glass in india is growing too fast to keep up with? one of the points that you mentioned at the beginning was the fact that india has relied on domestic growth model rather than a growth model which is what international organizations have been purveying to the world particularly in the developing world for decades, and i am wondering what you see as the one or t. -- one or two key elements in that? will there need to be a greater infrastructure investment? will there need to be an opening up to direct investment in the economy and what are the prospects of these? >> so, you know, india has shown that you know the country can grow rapidly without being a

manufacturing export model. i think a big difference between india and these other countries as i said is that we have used labor and we have not done manufacturing exports as much but by and large it's not based on foreign direct investment and not based on heavy reliance on foreign models. now, i think that this model is attainable. i think going forward it's not the case that we now suddenly need lots of foreign direct investment and so on but i think, let's take infrastructure as a good example and take power in particular. it bothers me that routinely people say oh india needs $500 billion in foreign resources for infrastructure, in resources for the infrastructure receptor in most and most of it has to come from abroad. i don't agree with that because for one thing china has shown

that all this infrastructure is in the public sector and it's not based on foreign savings. china has more investment in manufacturing but the infrastructure is basically domestic. now the reason i get a little irritated with that is because you know, what plays into this conventional washington consensus view that we need more globalization and more foreign investment, when in fact the problem that restructure and especially india is simply a governance problem. i mean, let me make it very very simple. you know people don't pay for power in india. that is the bottom line. yes people can be paying more private investment domestic and foreign would be rushing in and at the moment when foreign foreign investment comes and they need guarantees because people don't pay and our ports are very badly run. we had the whole enron problem and the whole thing blew up because all all of the problems

so i think it's basically domestic governance and a political problem where the whole, the notion that every politician of any stripe routinely the first thing he will promise when he gets elected is free or subsidized power and the conundrum is this. why is it that people buy this? the history of this promise of free and subsidized power is a history of no power or interrupted power. vaidya politics not change and as i said the one thing i see now is more and more states like -- to some extent as they start delivering power with payment people then say well, it's a much better model and in fact one of the really interesting experiments now is there are two -- farmers have the choice of two sources of power.

cheap power, no guarantees on reliability, more expensive power guaranteed and we should see. i think it looks like more and more offer that option succumbing back to your question i don't think it's globalization and inadequate localization that is holding back growth, infrastructure. i think it's fundamentally a political governance issue. the solutions to which our tied to -- [inaudible] >> a lot of people say that india has an insatiable appetite for energy and it will need every ounce of energy that can get. particularly in the near to medium term. if india is unable to make the shift in governance that you're suggesting, is there a possibility of taking a regional approach, having a very different set of relationships regarding water with its neighbors, all around, not just

in the west and not just to the north but to the east as well? >> i think that, i think that is an excellent point because i do think that on energy and power, i think apart from whatever india it needs to do domestically just to give you an example, the fact that power subsidy and india has meant that the water table has basically dropped tremendously and i do think that a reasonable solution solution -- pakistan, china and all the countries there i think it has to have a regional solution for two reasons. one of course is that china controls the water table and increasingly it controls the water table and waters becoming scarce so i think that has to be and then the other element of course is that many of these in

pakistan you know have a big potential in hydra-based power which i think india should use and substitute for his own coal-based so that climate the climate change problem and the security problem and for the water problem i think we need a much more regional, regionally corporative solution. >> thank you. we'd like to open it up to the audience and i request you to be patient. i will recognize you as i see you and if i miss you, please be patient with me. please wait for the microphone, identify yourself and then ask your question. >> thank you, daisy schaffer from brookings. i wanted actually to extend the first question that shuja asked about the appropriate model for india's future economic growth. you suggest that they india model may not be sustainable.

i think reading between the lines of your presentation you also suggest that the conventional model where you start with agriculture and then graduate to textiles may not be adequate for a country of india's size although textile certainly have been an important sector. are we looking at a time when india is going to need to experiment with different approaches, or perhaps more fundamentally followed the logic of what works in an economy where the private sector has already begun doing more and use that to drive india's future development while concentrating on things like governance and education? >> so i think, i would separate your question into two parts. one is you know, the sort of private sector versus the

government led model of growth. more the skill base versus unskilled-based and is is to analytically different questions and both very important and good questions. let me take the latter won first. my view is that india has adopted this unusual precautions model for a number of historical policy choices. would it be desirable to go back and use labor more intensively? i think undoubtedly it would be because they think you know, that is where the needs are and so on. is it going to happen? i don't think it's going to happen because you know, the pattern of specialization is like the titanic. it's not easy to change. to give you an example routinely now if you go to manufactures in india you will find that the

situation where they are thinking of substituting -- for unskilled labor and there are several examples of that. much of that will accommodate unskilled labor. i just don't think it's a matter of history and the persistence that is going to happen. the sad, unfortunate tragedy of that is we are going to persist with a skill base bottle of development and hopefully india's skill level will catch up but the consequence is that a number of wonder tube cohorts of unskilled labor will not benefit from the opportunity of growth. that is just a sad and inevitable -- somite please would be of course we should include -- improve our labor laws of unskilled labor but given a choice i would focus much more on getting skills,

improving our higher system of education because that is where the demand is going to be going forward. so that is on the economic analytics of this. on the other private sector versus market-based model, the government-based model, just by -- my controversial take on this. i think people forget that growth requires a healthy public sector which performs all these basic functions and in a dynamic private sector. india has achieved or is in the process of achieving it in the process is very dynamic. the problem is the public sector is a drag on india. the reason i feel pessimistic is because i have seen in the long run history, the history of economic development teaches us that it's much easier to create a private sector than it is to create and maintain an efficient

public sector that delivers the basics, the basics of maintaining law and order, the basics of maintaining property rights, the basics of stabilizing the economy and basics of legitimizing the economy by transfers etc., etc.. these are all demanding attributes but very important attributes. western europe and the denham took a long time to achieve that and that is somewhere in the basis of prosperity. i also say there is -- in mumbai as there is in california. that is not the problem. there are markets for -- you name it but we don't want to have the basic infrastructure that government provides law and order. so i think that is eroding in india and it's much more difficult to reverse.

so that that is released in. the private sector will do very well in india. i'm not worried about the private sector at all. as it will do well around the world but the basic provisions that the private sector has to provide in india going forward or chris fee it's interesting in india and pakistan when i talk to -- the one thing that they say those countries say whatever they have achieved they have achieved in spite of government not because of government. they want the government to step out of the way. >> but you know, you see, to be totally candid i find that a little bit self-serving because they rely on lawful -- with the government does and does not provide. if the government does not provide law and order -- so i think that is exactly the

kind of discourse in conversation that i think bothers me about what is happening in much of the region. you say government is the problem. of course government is a problem because government has been overbearing and intrusive but government does tell you that it should do a few things that do it really really well and did india that is not happening. if you look at the traditional system the backlog of cases in the state courts are 20 years. >> thank you. we have a question here. >> thank you. on this issue of governance, which i agree is an issue in india today and tomorrow. >> could you identify yourself? >> i beg your pardon. i am from the american university. wouldn't you say that the discourse within the india today is in fact focusing on these

things. there are a lot of people that i could name that are friends of mine who are, who are recording the provisions of the constitution, who are recalling what was achieved by government in the 1950's in the face of enormous tragedy and challenges. and so as you pointed out in your talk, the demand for good governance is growing, and i agree with you that the whole discourse on private versus public, i mean you have to go back to -- >> so, that is why i think i say there is a race between generation. i think the regeneration is partly because of what you said, that the demand for governance

increases as people become richer and demand more. i think the other reason, the other reason for being hostile about regeneration is that the fact that india is so open and transparent and vibrant, that at least the more egregious problem is all these things come to light. enforcement ever happens in india so i think there is a lot going on and as i said, as more governance -- as i said both are happening in india. >> sorry, i missed the lady in the back. i will get to all the others that i recognize. >> i'm an independent consultant. i wanted to ask two questions. one is, to what extent do you think the export of investment by the high-end indian

companies, a function of push rather than paul? obviously they calculate their relative opportunity in economic terms but to what extent is there a governance issue here? it makes more sense for them and it's more secure and predictable than other venues. investment has been going on since the seventies with some of india's best corporations. the second part of my question which relates to governance is what role do you see for popular anticorruption movements and the transformation of -- the future transformation of india. >> on the export its true and is something that is actually happening to some extent now with china where because of uncertainty about the domestic regime, the notion that capital is fleeing as kind of an

assurance and push, i think it is true for india because the period period over which this actually surged this phenomenon was the period in which india was growing rapidly and foreign capital came flooding into india, so i think until recently, i think now to some extent because of all the uncertainty in india but intel very recently over a 10 year period most period most of it was because indian entrepreneurs and indian management show they were capable of running world-class companies not just domestic league but internationally so i would say that push factor has been relatively muted until recently. and therefore -- on the anticorruption movement, i am not an expert on this and it's certainly above my pay grade, but i think the pattern

is that i think, i mean, the fact that there is so much mobilization i think is unambiguously good. the point is how to get china -- and that has been a problem. the fact that we don't actually see a concrete manifestation of that is a bit discouraging. and you know the fact that people are not reassured that is the way forward so i often say that in india you get episodic accountability. you don't get ongoing accountability and to give you this episodic bout of accountability. i wish it would get translated more into the basic structure in and the way to get more ongoing accountability. >> thank you.

>> good morning. i am a member of the atlantic council. it's very interesting debate. i wish i could have more time with you to discuss it. the question for you is, a question and a comment. global and corporate control and then you mentioned many times the segregation between the workforce. why do we have to concentrate on that because i do not believe a -- [inaudible] so we should go to the transition of and skilled workers to skilled workers. not everybody is going to -- obviously but maybe down the road they would have an interest. another comment and question for you, why can't we create stronger private-public partnerships and those countries including india which is very

critical? thank you. speak you no, i mean i don't wish or mean to in some ways say that you know to make a kind of judgment about skilled is good and unskilled as bad. i just think that the way the modern economy functions in the way that india's shift of the economic state has traveled that the demand of the economy for skill is not that much for unskilled people so the question is how do you address that as a practical question how do you address that? one ways to do what china did which was to actually demand for unskilled labor which is what the country has in abundance. in india this is not the case so the choice is do you make the of state turn around and move

towards unskilled specialization or do you upgrade skills? i think in india's case we have to upgrade skills. the same governance problems we have indian freshdirect sure sector we have in this sector so higher education is not easy. that is the kalimba and this value judgment for skilled and unskilled. on public/private partnerships, it has become one of these things, it has become almost a. i don't really know what it means. what does public/private partnership mean? every economic activity is a public/private partnership. and in the indian case essentially what it has become especially in the infrastructure sector is basically the government saying look we give you land and we look after the

land that we have and the rest is yours. now, if that is the way of going forward i am all for it but in the indian case it is not that essential because the whole allocation of land has become such a source of corruption that sometimes you wonder whether or not it's desirable in the first place or not. so i am also -- whatever that means. i don't know what that means. >> the government keeping his hand on the tiller and the till so maybe that is a way to describe it. ..

was an army and where was there a need for infrastructure development to support the network and it didn't happen. where do you shine the blame where you think the problem occurred looking back at the new york power crisis and we find out that it could have been easily fixed and there were some problems we just never paid attention to it. could you please comment on the blackout in india?

>> i'm not an expert fact on the technical aspects. i don't have much to say by way of -- i only know as much as you know in terms of the a proximate causes which seem to be some states overdrew because of the drought and the fact this year so the demand for power has gone up. they come back here and there are technically and limits on how much each state can draw and public officials and some. i don't know much more about india. the bigger problem as i was saying while we were talking it

was fixed so quickly compared to the problem that we saw its the chronic under supply and governments and that is the problem in india. the answer is [inaudible] [laughter] anyway, you mentioned it was very enlightening for me. how far is india managing because the pressure on the infrastructure can become very

burdensome and gives tremendous difficulty for takeoff below the poverty line and the national security is nothing but a reflection of the economic strength of reconciliation is adopted a softer image won't it be very helpful if there were not resources to improve the equality of life, living conditions and future. thank you. >> let me take these in order. the population pressures the world as we know has a big shift in the conversation on

population. in the 60's and 70's we spoke about population being a problem devotee of family planning, birth control the whole question becomes there's a structure of population actually the source of dynamism. so the focus was shifted from the level of population to the structural population and that is the sense in which people are saying that india has a demographic dividend because it has a young and growing labor force which you could save more and keep competitive and that is what happened in east asia and china and conversely is a burden even though you may have a smaller population but if it is an old population it is a problem i do believe now that

huge source coming from is going to have a younger population it's about potential. it's not what is actually going to happen because the fact that you have the capacity for dynamism doesn't mean that they will have the opportunities the challenge to convert opportunity to capacity and jobs and employment and so on. india is actually very, very different demographically many other states are now in fact heading towards aging it's going to be in the hinterland. behind the interpretation of this which is the most fabulous part of india which is what is

going to generate the biggest increase in the population and the others are going to start aging. the two things i would say india's poverty has come down a lot. it's a very controversial subject. i would say something like the current estimate is about 20 to 25% of india. it's under the poverty line which is about 50% in 1983. it is a substantial reduction, but it is not as big a production given how much india has grown and given comparable experience in china. and the experience of the 90's and in 2000 hasn't been as good as the 80's when poverty came down much more agricultural

based. on this whole defense and development question i think in an ideal world, yes. if all countries could comfort the supply shares everyone is better off but we don't live in the real world and there is a whole question of what is the external environment, what are the biggest security issues in the region, and also can you do this unilaterally or can you do this in concert with other countries. i would certainly be -- the problem with india just to be controversial is the big strategic thinking is now on the defense side is posed by china and the need to kind of keep up with that. so why don't expect indian defense spending to decline over the next few years quite apart from the india pakistan issue

which has its own history and baggage the big question is whether china increasing its defense budget to rival that of the united states and therefore there is going to become little effect on nds of india is going to be at china, so i'm not optimistic about much as i would think i would hope that that is the way all countries would go i don't think india will go in that direction. >> i'm robert from the treasury. i agree that government is important but it's taken a decade long process. we are in the policy business and if you could talk a little bit about what importance you think the episodes of policy change have in spurring growth and retarding growth what is the scope for policies and sustain

growth over a reasonable parker of time. let me be provocative to one often says that when the u.s. even for example the imf, world bank in a united states go to developing countries and say change policy. policy reform, very important what i called the mikey approach, just do it today than when it took about the equivalent reforms well, you've got to understand we are very complicated and the political economy. congress this and congress that. and in a country like india, those are equally true in a country like india. while i am a complete the leader in the need for policy reform,

policy is also an endorsement, pelosi is also an investment and the leah think it happens is democratic politics have to make policy reform popular and positive, and i think to some extent it is happening in some parts of india. so, i take the view that just as it says governments, i think politics ought to put it differently. the degree of the maneuver for the leaders in india to kind of unilaterally from the top down institute is create outsiders might think and that is an understanding that people will have to have about a country like india or even now with china much more top-down centralized.

even china is not subject to increasing public opinion and so on. i think it is a complicated business policy reform or at least it's as complicated and in the acid is in the united states >> there are countries in which the growth slows substantially. it seems to be associated with episodes of policy change, and the question for all of us in this business is how do you get there? how do you get to a period you raise the growth rate and sustain it over time and what are the letters? it may be that the policy is endogenous but if it is in your melody, one's ability to change things

>> there is no doubt in my mind policy reforms are associated across the globe. how many independent levers to they have to pull despair because of what is happening and i think there is a reason for despair or if you could say que could take as more and more states in india, more and more state level leaders start getting reelected because they're doing better delivery that is positive, that is the source for change and the demonstration from that. so there's not only the demonstration effect from that, but india being a common market. so that is i think the indigenous source of optimism in india. not this washington consensus nike reform, change this and change that.

secure pointing to the nexus between political science. i can't listen to you -- i came to listen to you because you point out some very thought-provoking and my questions are based on what he said. the notion of hustlers. i found it quite degrading because what is in india is a riding on today and that same thing would have been called here. it's just a way of looking at it. is it not a form of free generation? and then the second thing that got my attention was you

innovate with gunplay and ridicule the role as the political party. is india not a democracy unlike some of its neighbors and india cannot accept a man in the street making proposing laws, so he has to get into the political system. >> using the term hustler, again i was trying to use it in a completely descriptive cents because many people would use the same term in the nine states after the civil war and the negative side and i think.

ideally they should not have reason to overcome all the obstacles placed by governments or the environment, but given that those exist, people are creative enough to overcome them. i don't mean it in that sense at all. i think that is a good thing. even though it may have some dimensions or aspects and i don't mean to downplay. the knifes thing about india is all power to them. finally come in trying to respond to whether it is going to be effective, that is my comment. a great, we have this, but will the shedding of the spotlight on the problems be used?

yes but it becomes a sustainable useful when it gets educated and to changes and structures and institutions. by the recall that i said come on a place of my hopes in democratic politics in india because that is the only game in town with it is to policy reform or corruption. >> the gentleman that has his hand raised. >> thank you for a very entertaining presentation. on the topic of political -- >> from asian development in washington. on the point of political reforms that bob was raising. my experience would be that you see it happening under the to circumstances, sort of the enlightened leadership of the time opportunities arise because you have growth and therefore you can make changes because of your buddies benefitting in the times of crisis you need to have

a response because the circumstances are such that you need to do something so i think both are perhaps -- i don't know to what extent either of those circumstances are applied to india. two questions for you. one on belabors the we seem to be somewhat pessimistic about the extent to which india to raise the hour demographic dividend. there would seem to be scope for a, the lower level skills to be employed in satisfying the domestic demand. with an uzi that possible and to what extent given the different demographics among the states and interval migration the access labor supply or you don't move that much and therefore it doesn't really happen. the second question is more on the international dimension. you mentioned the regional integration and how they can

benefit from a simple the integration of the electricity grid defense strongly supporting the integration, and in some areas in central asia we have seen success beginning to develop but south asia is one of the reasons where we see slower progress and more difficulty in the region and i would appreciate your views on whether that is also your assessment and if so, what makes this region in terms for the regional integration. >> i would add a third set of circumstances. one is enlightened leadership and as i said for example growth takes off so there is the dynamic as well. on the low-skilled domestic

migration, one of the things i have been struck by between india and china is i've always thought of india has a place because presenting something in london last year when they were in the audience and i was telling them that the fact that one of the unappreciated legacies of the old economics was the fact that once you establish the idea of india a political entity of the national identity what economic benefit of that is that migration becomes a much more politically sustainable proposition.

he was into muslim he more often to the entire muslim much later because i know because wendi is to migrate it was a problem. but i think because the idea of india has been established that is the same problem now and migration as a basis sustaining the growth model in india is part of my thing because as i said one of the ways in which the good experiments travel or get educated is when people moved. we saw that in agriculture but now it's happening more and more what happens is how little migration we've had in india the german factory of migration that

one of the aspects about china but part of that commission is in china because the growth rates were so rapid the prospect of such increases would are a big cost to moving in india that's only happened recently. when you have four or 5% the attraction of living is not increased but when you grow wed 9% the increased standard of living you expect to gain that's why i think it is slow to happen in india but it's happening. i seen the study after study i think there are two reasons. the integrated because the growth more rapidly and most of the trade with each other but there is going to be economic integration and that much policy integration and east asia as well so it is just the fact of rapid growth trade based growth and a lot of it within the

region supported by the sub policy measure happening now slowly. so in south asia you have that rapid growth and external demand resources and the second thing is india and pakistan the division isn't going to preceded it is simply as that. unless we find ways to crack the india pakistan situation in some way or the other that's going to be a problem. >> thank you. two questions. >> what challenge does climate change pos to the indian economy, and how do you see india responding? >> i took the highly diluted to the fact that climate change as a long-term challenge because

the whole water situation in india is what is going to be a vital resource in a scarce resource and the glacier. now, who is in the every spending it isn't responding very well. and number of things, water use come all the fuel subsidies means we use more diesel to generate power as opposed to hydro and other things with the evolution. whether it is the black carbon phenomena and the complication with warming so he is not responding very well and the standard explanation or excuse would be that he was still a

poor country we need energy we can't do all these things at this stage of development. there are also lots of things being done that don't need to be done. my next book is on climate change. we are writing a book on climate change, a new model of cooperation between developing investor countries. i think what is a glimmer of hope is this recognition thus china issue with water and three years ago we just kind of changed course in such a dramatic fashion that it brought home to the policy makers the fact that climate change to have catastrophic consequences. and so, the awareness that india needs to do more on the climate change and a warming. it is gaining more attraction in

india and i think that is going to be the next step. >> if you could keep it short, please. i want to make sure i get every one minute. >> the american legislative exchange council, a private public partnership. >> i'm speaking along the lines we have seen a lack of liberalization or some would say stagnant liberalization in certain markets specifically as the legal market and i wonder can you give your thought on the potential it has for future growth in india is that a drag will that be a long-term drag to you see any progress on that front? >> the first part of your question more related to the fact that india is close to foreign professionals and their india is very protectionist on that level and get a supreme

court case you know that better than i do i think that it is a problem. indy 500 undisclosed, but i feel that there is -- i would be more optimistic on that because in all of these things when a country recognizes the have an interest in exporting its own labor that changes the dynamic and they also have to shift people abroad the regime's internationally and even fpi the pressure on india will be to kind of open at to read a lot of the protection comes from the fact the standard interest but i think the demand for skilled is also going to bring supplies so

that is going to be another change. >> no one stopped the presentation of india -- >> please identify yourself. >> i am an indian journalist. all the questions and also what you said and much of the deed in india is coming back to this whole governance issue. to get the price is right to you need to get the politics right? the question is how. i was wondering whether you might like to speculate whether india's fiscal administrative structure is outdated that is still centralized. do we need something like the finance commission or should we let states like in this country raise their own and make the central much smarter so the the

central government's role i wonder whether you would like to comment on that. >> that is a great question. it's a great question and a great talk because i think it's a wonderful question because it's what i say about india the advantage of having a still flushed the idea is that and you can register it scope because the basic framework is not threatened. so in the states based growth, the whole states during reform experimentation, that is exactly what you said, that you need a bunch more federal economic and tax structure, so i see india eventually as a model for

cooperative federalism whereas the basis for dynamism is actually the decentralization and a very interesting contrast with europe. all of the tendencies are centralized as a way of overcoming this crisis and in india is exactly the opposite and in some ways india is now a bit like where the united states was maybe 70 to a hundred years ago that basically you have the energy being unleashed in a decentralized fashion and in the u.s. unit of the civil war to establish the idea of the united states as a viable political entity and we have the legacy. the idea is not taken for granted. unleash the decentralizing forces which also means the fiscal federalism must be decentralized and my conception

of where india has to go in terms of the economics and politics >> the bottom line is the option going to be to muddle through for five or 6% a year how does that hit the battle against the population or is the option going to be to make those changes in policy investments in infrastructure, education etc. so you can then go back and challenge china triet >> sure. nothing will happen, so no big bank reform, no board reform. as most countries it is going to be a trial and error, muddling through. but if we get to the decentralized form of decision

making experimentation i think on balance one could hope for -- there will always be problems and difficulties but the advantage people forget if you are far away from the frontier does a lot moscow from dynamism and the basic dynamism india will explore for the next 20 or 30 years so we will end up with everything in its opposite is true in india. >> good way to end this. thank you again. [applause] to put this thing together and to make it run so smoothly and think the audience for being an important part of this conversation.

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

i think we have a myth that it's two guys in a dorm room they crack the code and it all falls into place and you end up with facebook. you don't see friendster and myspace and the twins on the side of the road not having achieved success. >> and unintended consequences the grandson and a biography spoke at a forum in tow tulsa oklahoma about race relations. he was introduced by john franklin of the john hope franklin center for reconciliation. [applause]

thank you. indeed we are all standing on the shoulders of those who preceded us. and if i would give equal time for grand mothers and mothers tonight. [applause] to it i began the day today talking with the mayor about the park name for my grandfather. my father was always concerned about the cities of keep of the d.c. franklin park. my grandfather clause a survivor. thank you. in 1968 the park was dedicated in his honor and it's been an issue of recent discussion because the current buildings bills in the 70's are slated to

be dismantled or demolished, and a new plan is in place for different kind of recreation center. i'm going to visit the site and talk with the stuff tomorrow and see if i have proof of these new plans. my grandparents were unable to move here together in 1921 and june of 1921 at the end of the school year because my grandmother was still living with my father and his youngest sister and she was a schoolteacher and as i said, and she could not move here until the end of the school year. my grandfather had moved here earlier in the year to make a place for them, and of course as you know me 31st, june 1st the community they were planning to live was destroyed so it's not

until 1925 the family is reunited, and indeed it wasn't until several weeks after the law yet or massacre as i hear it called now that indeed my grand mother and father and aunt learned that my father survived. so my grandmother was what we referred to as a woman builder. she belonged to the national council of negro women association and she was very active as a clubwoman seeking the of advancement in tulsa. i feel very close to my grandparents and my father because one of the last places i was with my father was in this

hotel. in 2008 he was here for the grant naim of the park and the john conducted a marvelous interview with him. they were here outside of the hotel and i conducted an interview, one of the last interviews with my father right here outside of this building. and as i walked through downtown yesterday, i imagined my father walking with his father to the courthouse discussing the case is that my grandfather would be handling. in the 20's until 1921 when my father went away to college. so we need to know our history. we need to know these layers of generation of history, and we need to tell our children about our past so they can better understand where we are.

now i fever multi generational learning so that we spend the time with children who are not even our own, sharing with them the experience is, our experience is so that they have a basis to continue. i am particularly pleased to see the legacy of my father maintained through the third annual conference of the john hope franklin center and part from a conciliation. [applause] i am pleased to see on the screen when it's not the picture of my father how the number of sponsors has grown over the last three years and i want to thank all the sponsors for contributing to this.

[applause] as we've learned in the discussions and today it's not an easy process and those of you that have heard me before for the symposium know that i view reconciliation not as unique to tulsa richmond or indeed this hemisphere. it's a global concern and it involves all of us wherever we are from and as we visit other parts of the country and other parts of the world we should be in tune with what their issues are and ask the residents what are you challenged by a, what are the issues you confront, which is the passage you are still trying to resolve? lee give a few examples o that. i began to meet this community of people involved in the

reconciliation, not in the united states but in liverpool in england, and the liverpool is the city of richmond and a sister to the city for which many africans have taken. then i started running into those same reconciliation folks here in tulsa because there may be a reconciliation conferences. i'm not aware of them but this is where we gather to discuss these issues and it brings together people who have been there a long time and amount of those of us who are relatively new to the issues and complexities of reconciliation. now last year we discussed in black, white and native reconciliation and i want to remind you black, white and native reconciliation is a hemispheric concern because before any of us who are not native americans came to mexico

or brazil, canada, the united states, the caribbean is, they were native people and then in the arrival of the european and the arrival of africans you have that the dynamic of land and slavery and everywhere so it's not unique to the territory or to the united states, and other countries are also dealing with the complexity of their history. when you are working in a place like the bahamas and studying history all you get first is european history as though there were no people in the problem to begin a and i was working on a project trying to figure out where did the black people come from? when did they get here?

then i come in the middle of a captured to the contractor about the crowns and the colonies and they said there was a slavery moment. it wasn't part of the history. we were not talking about where the people came from and what they did. the mention there was a revolt. since i've seen you last - in nova scotia, first african come to nova scotia in 1605. is that part of canada's known history? people who fought in the war of 1812 on the british side in the american revolution on the british side our promise and given land in nova scotia in the 79 these and 1813 and 1814 so

that's part of the story that we don't know. most of us don't know cannot doesn't in slavery until the end of the british empire in 1834 so there are free people and in sleaved people living together, but we don't get that complete history. i was in brazil again in february and we now have so much data on the arrival in america that we know that directly from africa there are fewer than 500,000 africans brought to what is now the united states whereas a million are brought to jamaica and haiti, million are brought to cuba and close to 6 million to brazil but none of us learned

that none of us learned that. sweet to come as the governor said, many years ago we need to continue to learn and reeducate ourselves. most recently i've been in france on two occasions, in march and earlier this month. in march for the first monument for the memorial in europe or the slave trade european cities became very wealthy to the slave trade more than we know. individual cities and it seems like liverpool and london there are sections of the city that became that were built deutsch to the wealth and the cities are

acknowledging this in the history of the city and the institutions they are building. but what was so fascinating was that the person who posted us, the person that fought for the mayor of the city and said 1,180 ships built into the slave trade to west africa and the caribbean louisiana it is built along the river by the shipbuilders are still there and the descendants of the families still live there and the city is now confronting its past it's probably a

thousand feet long memorial along the river with the names in bedding and a monument of all of the ships built and the names of the destinations and africa. there's a colloquium on slavery in the past. i spoke fair and everyone tony to win the presidential election would become either prime minister of france for minister of foreign affairs. happy to be in france for the election on may 6th. his first trip he said would be to speak with angela merkel and the day he went to visit she

announced indeed the champion of telling the history of the slavery of the city was the main primm minister. so you never know who you meet and what they would become. but this is an important part for us to know and he has since then come to visit president obama so our histories are intertwined and overlapping and we need to know more than our own individual history, our own community history to see how we are linked to the rest of the world. i will conclude before i introduce our eminent speaker with a project i was involved in in 1998 to 2001, and my father had finished sharing the president's initiative with

governor winters and linda chavez-thompson who you heard earlier today and others and archbishop desmond tutu had finished touring the truth and reconciliation commission in south africa. a local abc correspondent in washington approached me and said have your father and archbishop tutu ever met? i said no. wouldn't it be marvelous to have a conversation between the two of them about their lives and about their experiences dealing with the issues of race in their complex countries? i said it would be marvelous. so we asked each of them if they found a time in their extremely

busy calendars, and we brought them to the island and they talked on camera unscripted every day for a week to read was marvelous and was on scripted. we asked if we could bring a second generation into the conversation so they brought seven south africans from different backgrounds, seven americans from different backgrounds who stood by the league's from different backgrounds and they met with each other in the doldrums of the stereotypical images the had of each other's country and with people within the country and we had the opportunity to film the background with people in the united states and in south

africa and when the film was completed and it is aired on pbs in 2001 we then took it to johannesburg and my father always wanted to go to south africa because there were so many parallels between our lives, between our history and the enslavement by the dutch the importation to grow sugar. following the premiere of the film on human rights we walked the streets of durbin and went to where your grandfather was born and where he began his life as the leader to be this with great pleasure that we have

today his grandson. will there is a very excellent biography of our guest speaker and the program i wanted to highlight a few things the are not in the program. you've heard robert krin and turner and they took to the organization to have been involved in this issue of change. but he has been involved in the organization for a number of years and i would like to read for the best part of his biography. associated from 1956 with the initiatives of change formerly known as the rearmament rajmohan gandhi has been engaged for half a century in efforts of trust building, reconciliation and dr. c. and battle against corruption and inequality. these efforts made it across the world have involves writing, speaking, public interventions

and organizing dialogue they built in asia plateau. the 67-acre conference center of the initiatives of change in the mountains of western india. asia plateau has been recognized in the indian subcontinent critical much contribution. during the 75, 77 emergency he was active for space rights personally and through his weekly journal published in bombay for 1964 to 1981. he's worked for pakistan and hindu muslim reconciliation. and since my love and he's tried to address the defined between the west and the world against large to be a non-muslim dialogue in switzerland in 2002 was one such initiative and he was unanimously elected

president of initiatives of change as national term from 2009 to 2010. two other tidbits. one of his books was on his grandfather would one of his earliest books is a portrait of gandhi in a chinese translation and beijing, and we talked about this yesterday he led a team to countries in asia, africa, the middle east to europe and america on a voyage during the first half of 2010. please join me in all coming rajmohan gandhi. [applause] thank you very much indeed.

the good people tulsa associated with franklin center, the leaders of tacoma to the symposium and a wonderful person who generously introduced me to read i have to say the very beginning that i feel scared by the stories of john hope franklin and his parents. i will start with a story would you describe of 1921. i am also conscious of the sorrow in this year in tulsa and i am aware of the result of the late john hope franklin and the

center to transform past pain and shame for healing and hope and pride. i'm not a good and a student of race in america and this is the first time in tulsa and oklahoma and the inside perspective. i think your father would have turned me out if i had tried to offer in inside perspective. i'm going to take you wait outside to this faraway country but not entirely. my career as a historian for whatever it's worth began very late in my life. from the start of wanted to be

ever reconcile our and for years i thought i was working as a reconcile until i realized i was also becoming a historian. i recognized what john hope franklin had so powerful the underlined that memory, the tilt memory come harsh memory, a painful memory was critical to the reconciliation. and i understood that it had to be acknowledged before it could be addressed 1924 my grandmother died while she and my grandfather then in the mid 70's my parents, siblings and i were allowed to visit her shortly before her death. i was 12 when in 1947 india became independent and i was 12 and a half when and new delhi the city that i was going to school my grandfather was killed by a group of hindus was friendlier than necessary. the india that can free in 1947

had been divided into the hindu majority in india and the muslim majority in pakistan. many in pakistan set into the future although i had been moved by my grandfather's extraordinary efforts for him the muslim reconciliation ninian for me it around me in new delhi when i was going up there, i invite the predators. i was 16-years-old in september of 1951. for years after the to the merged the nation's when a young journalist working as a newspaper my father was editing cannot to our apartment located on the floor above the offices. he had with him a piece of paper which he wanted to show my father. i looked at the piece of paper has i let him in.

he had been shot. knowing that mt have meant more to follow, i said to the journalist i hope what follows is news that he is dead. expecting a smile at my clever remarks i was surprised the journalist gave me a frown. embarrassment and shame followed. afterwards i realized along with popular predators a desire had prompted my comment i was after all trying to be a man. 33 years later, the memory of my reaction was reducing a study of the lives of the influential muslim leaders including the man shot in 1951 who helped shape pakistan and india that have grown along with me. thanks to my left and god's grace and also perhaps because of an effort to tell all of those stories, this 1985 book not only remains in print in a

different language in india and pakistan, hindus and muslims both lactic and aided the reconciliation. not after concede to a higher level of degree if you know what is happening in pakistan much remains to be done faugh i also resisted the temptation that appeared likely to the reconciliation which was a good reason that archbishop desmond tutu and his allies coalesced the south african commissioner truth and reconciliation commission to read without truth, reconciliation can serve as a camouflage for continuing injustice, mistrust and fairness of domination. in the 90's i wrote a study of indian history called revenge and reconciliation, which followed the battle over centuries in india between the forces of reconciliation. ..