problems. that is what we have to do as americans and what we have to do to move forward. that is what i will do if i'm fortunate enough to win the republican nomination. >> california's prop eight yesterday, the defense of marriage act today. i would like to get you on the record today about this. is a constitutional or not? >> i think the united states is ready to die. i'm a federalist. i believe that they like the definition of marriage throughout the democratic process. massachusetts is recognized and i am in support of goma. -- doma. people should be afforded the

exact same benefits. moderator: mr. winslow? >> i believe the government is transparent to the people. for that reason, i do not like federalized government where we can avoid it. i think it is a shame that the senate and congress should decide this issue by repealing doma. i support the repeal of it and i believe in the quality of marriage for all people in massachusetts and in the country. >> moderator: mr. gomez? gomez: i think that two people, if they are in love, they should be able to get married. i support doma. i think that should be decided on a state-by-state level. and i'm proud that massachusetts is the same state to legalize gay marriage, including the district of columbia. i hope the supreme court repeals there. moderator: so you would keep

this at the same level. each state has traditionally been able to define marriage. winslow: that is where significant social policies are best to be decided at the state level. i think this goes to the core values of who we are. equality and freedom. we have to work for all of this to be free and equal throughout american society. if i were fortunate enough to attend the vote and those who

can vote in the general elections, i would work to make sure that those principles were handled throughout my time in the senate speak to the people of california spoke. you need to understand what they decided on a state-by-state issue. winslow: in regards to mr. sullivan's position, i support this throughout the country. i want to be clear about that. mr. sullivan wants to have government intrude into the personal lives of people in something that is so personal and i disagree with that.

moderator: mr. gomez, would you like to talk about that? gomez: i think it should be decided on the state level. i am for repealing doma. i'm against any kind of discrimination. moderator: the debate on taxing and cutting our way to a balanced budget focuses upon entitlement programs and things like social security and medicare. what is your prescription for cleaning up the balance sheet? how do we save these programs? winslow: first of all, social security is the most successful msa program in the history of the united states. we have to make sure that we preserve as in the house. for that reason, anything that we do, i will commit that anyone who is already receiving social security, anyone who is 55 years old or older, we have to ensure that that is safe for those people. we also have to make sure that social security is available for future generations and people who are in their 20s or '30s.

and we have to make sure that the system is balanced. i believe that we need to have something similar that congress is capable of helping with. making actuarial decisions. i would put a bipartisan commission to prevent the actuarial fix that make social security solvent again so it is a promise that is kept for all american people. moderator: what is your prescription for social security or medicare, mr. gomez? gomez: i do think that there is a lot of ideals that have been discussed about bipartisan support. unfortunately we have a lack of courage at times to tackle certain things. i would argue that warren buffett has been making a good

point. the age is part of this. we have a lack of courage for people who are on social security and medicare. sullivan: i think it is the duty and responsibility of the senator. i would be willing to stand up and talk about this. it is reasonable and begins to address this enormous debt. the budget was four years in the making. it wasn't worth the wait. he proposed a $3.7 trillion worth of spending.

and it does not make sense. as long as you have these continued deficits growing in this huge debt, social security and medicare will continue to be at risk. gomez: and 26 income and disability fund with it to become insolvent. that was there for every one of those 20 years. you know, the disability fun is going to be insolvent. what have they done about a? that will result in 20 to 25% reduction in all disability payments. that is why washington is it working. we have to get those guys out of their. >> let me clarify one thing. what about testing social security? >> i think that something should be on the table. my concern is that it's not a

welfare program. it's an insurance program. >> certainly wealthy people can make a determination as to whether or not they want to decline the benefits or have a terrible cause. >> okay. let's move on. president obama signed a health care health care bill into law three years ago this month. do you favor repeal of the portable care act? what is wrong with it, what is right with that? gomez: i think the overall theme of obamacare is right. we have more access for affordable quality health care. i think governor romney had the right idea as governor. i would say that in order to

have to formalize with medicare and obamacare, as long as it doesn't raise any factors, that is what should be required. sullivan: the things that we like about health care in our country is the access and the quality that we have received. the thing we don't like about it in our country is the cost. the one problem we didn't like was costs are going up significantly. we are getting this huge tax increase as a result of obamacare. the two things we like best about health care are an asset. fewer and fewer people are going to be excited about entering the health care profession. i think obamacare should be repealed. the fact of the matter is people

have access to the quality of care and they have access to this. reporter: moderator: what is your view, mr. winslow. winslow: obamacare simply laid on several bureaucracies. it is accountable where they will be running roughshod. it is not affordable. it also imposes taxes on a medical device industry, which will cost us jobs in massachusetts. as proposed, something called excel and exempt. the federal government is set to be automatically exempt from obamacare and all of the taxes of obamacare. and next week, the house of representatives propose to reduce the cost of medicare for

all families. i will be testifying it. moderator: moving onto the next one, that his candidate to candidate questions. winslow: all the work you have done, could you describe the budget and the private sector that you have had to manage and the amount of cuts he had to make any budget that you had to manage. gomez: in the private sector and the work that i was doing, we invested in a lot of companies.

>> is a board member, we were responsible for managing that. we want to make sure that the company can grow and be successful. gomez: i have served as a navy pilot and navy s.e.a.l. i've help companies grow and be successful. people want someone who has had the help of companies growing and being successful. companies are not hiring and investing, and we want to know why they are not hiring and investing. wiser too much uncertainty. moderator: okay, mr. gomez now to mr. winslow.

gomez: okay, i'm not here to ask questions of my fellow candidate to tear him down or put him on the spot. but i do have questions for the congressman. moderator: you run against these two fellows first. gomez: i understand, i understand. the budget that just came out of the democratic senate, it has a chilling dollars in tax increases. -- moderator: do you have a question for mr. winslow? gomez: do you think they will have to answer the question about supporting the budget were never balances and a has a trillion dollar tax increase? do you think in today's economic recovery that the right thing to do is raise taxes? winslow: i guarantee you that ed

markey would've voted yes for a chilling dollar tax increase. until they say otherwise, that is my position. the fact of the matter is that vote was 50 to 49 in favor. if i were in the u.s. senate, i would've been the vote that turned at it the other way around, 50 to 49 again to be able to have our taxes spent wisely and well and to get the federal budget under control. speaking on behalf of ed markey and steve lynch is not within my capabilities because i don't understand them. but what i do understand is that we are not going to change washington by some of the same entrenched democratic congressman down in washington. and expecting a different outcome. it is just not going to happen. anyone of us is better than either one of them. i just hope that i am the one that earns i went to the republican primary.

moderator: mr. winslow to mr. sullivan. winslow: it is a drag on our economy with the federal deficit. it is something that will be a drag on future generations. what are three specific things that you would do to reduce the deficit of the united states? >> as we know, the deficit has continued to grow under the obama administration. prior to this administration, there are two years in the history of our nation that the annual deficit accumulated at $400 billion. the budget that the senate just passed at additional deficits and debt. to the tune of about $23 billion. we know that there is tremendous waste in government.

the fact of the matter is as a senator in terms of identifying waste in the federal government. that is what i want to identify. before you will have to reduce spending or did i served in the department of justice and a senior leadership position who are called upon to reduce the budget in several occasions. we did it gladly. it did not affect the mission of the agency. i would not cut any funds that would put any of our men and women in peril. they honestly do a very

important mission and safety and security is critically important moderator: okay, let's go back to another topic. the topic is abortion. the 2012 republican platform says that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life. the republican party supports this to the constitution and endorses legislation to make clear the 14th amendment apply to unborn children. you agree with her own party's positions? mr. sullivan? sullivan: i have been pro-life. my whole life. the only time people were curious about that with me is when i decided to run for public office. i will do what i can to protect life. there are two lives involves.

as a country you have to support women who find themselves in a situation that they think is a crisis. to make the best decision they can make. we also need to be adaptable to streamline the policy. moderator: does that reflect her views? sullivan: i have not read it. the. moderator: it is what it is. do you agree? 's before i think we have to be practical in terms of the solutions. the fact of the matter is the constitutional amendment requires a two thirds vote. it requires a three-quarter vote by the states.

that is the democratic process. moderator: five minutes left. mr. winslow. winslow: i am pro-choice. i support a woman's right to choose. but to me, it is a personal decision. and that reason makes it consistent with my decision of government. the decision to have that is one a person's conscience is questioned. i believe that in the republican party, we have to focus most things that unite us. jobs and the economy, the deficit and the debt. not the few things that divide us. i think many can agree to disagree. if i'm fortunate enough to be in the senate, i will stand in support of a woman's right to choose the. moderator: mr. gomez?

gomez: i am pro-life. i was raised catholic. justice scalia is a very conservative justice and has effectively said this is the law, and i agree with him. however, i do not support late-term abortion. i think you should have parental consent, and this is one of the issues where i think when i talk to the american people, they are not talking about abortion. they are talking about the economy in the $16 trillion in debt and how we are going to fix that and get companies that are not investing in themselves and people and not investing and hiring people. that is what people are worried about right now. the. moderator: we have one more question. north korea and iran are believed to be developing or

have weapons. what is your belief on this? gomez: i think that we have to increase the sanctions and also not lose opportunities like we lost in 2009 when there was a start of an uprising. i think we need to make sure that the iranian people are empowered to take back their country. but ultimately, i believe these issues, that we cannot and will not tolerate. weaponizing nuclear weapons. moderator: mr. gomez? gomez: israel should have the green light to do whatever it needs to defend itself. whether iran has nuclear capabilities, whether or not they have the ability directly protect themselves, if they get to the point where they can

protect their weaponization, then i think that that is a priority for israel to get the greenlight to do what they need to do. >> absolutely. i'm confident that there is a tripwire. a tripwire that is put in place by israel, and it should be. the fact of the matter is they have to make sure that their national interests are secured. we have to make sure that we support them in every measure as well. moderator: ben bernanke's term is up in 2014. does he want another one? gomez: i think that is up to the senate to figure out the. moderator: does he deserve another term? winslow: i would say no. the economy continues to struggle. so i would say no.

i will post why. moderator: gentlemen, thank you very much. that is the first half of our senate primary debate. our thanks to republicans ungentle publicans dan winslow and mr. sullivan and mr. gomez. we will be back with more policy issues to discuss. the senate primary debate. the debate continues in 60 seconds. [applause] >> welcome back to the second half of the senate primary debate. we turn our attention to the two democrats in this race. congressman stephen lynch and congressman edward markey. i will remind you the filibuster

is something you save in this half hour. i will hurt you along. congress is gridlock. the disapproval rating is 80%. why should they think that the two incumbents are the answer and not the problem. let's start with mr. ed markey on this. markey: welcome anyone who knows me knows that i take on the top issues and i get results. i have passed dozens of bills. i want to take my experience over to the united states senate in order to make that institution work better.

we just lost 75 years of experience, and i took on the nra and their attempts to keep chinese assault weapons from coming to the streets of our country. i was successful in passing bipartisan legislation. leaving to attend tens of thousands of new jobs being created here in massachusetts. i am leading the efforts on a clean energy revolution. and i'm running for the united states senate because the tea party republicans in the house are paralyzing our government and we can get these done in paradox for those who are in the house of representatives. lynch: i want to thank you for having us. the question was how do you get people to work together. i think one of the problems that we have in the senate right now that i could help with is you

have, you know, people who can help with the republicans. sometimes the party positions solidify that. i think that people know that my record is i don't work for nancy pelosi and i won't work for harry reid. i have taken positions that have been outside the direction of my party. trying to cross the aisle when i can. there is a difference, however. and i do agree with ed on the point that sometimes, especially the tea party members, we are left with no alternative. moderator: let's move on. health care reform bill was moved into action three years ago this month. explain your vote. you're both looking at the same testimony, the same background

information. how did you come to different conclusions. mr. lynch, we'll start with you. lynch: there were three major flaws with the affordable care act. one was he gave an antitrust exemption that allows them to act in restraint of trade. the second thing that it did was took away the limited amount of competition that we have with a public option which allowed straights to go out and offer a low-cost plan. if ohio taxes upon taxes on health care. so now we have a situation where employers are running away from there with obligations. it was a very flawed bill and we missed a real opportunity to create real health care reform. we want mr. markey?

markey: this was the proudest bill of my career. it ensured that if a person has a pre-existing condition, they cannot be denied health insurance. that every child in america would have health care. if a person became ill, that that family did not become bankrupt. this was a critically important historic bill that we have been fighting for for a generation. every republican in the house of representatives voted no on that bill. ever every republican running for the senate said they would kill obamacare. when that vote came out, you were wrong when you are needed most on that bill. that was the only option that we have. to support president obama and put that bill to place. moderator: do have a rebuttal? moderator:

lynch: here's how was. negotiations with the health care companies and insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies, what they wanted -- what we wanted was affordable health care with good quality health care. with the insurance companies wanted was 31 million new customers. we gave them everything they wanted in that bill. and it was like a hostage situation where we not only paid the ransom, but we let the insurance companies keep them hostages. we are in a tough spot. because now you realize that the medical device tax, more and more people who voted for it are now taking all of these bad sections out of the bill and saying oh, we didn't really like those, but we voted for them. moderator: mr. markey? markey: again, we fought hard as

democrats for health insurance. that bill was the only bill. scott brown was just one seat. so we only had that bill. so women have to pay more than men. the republicans are going to try to repeal that and i want to go to the senate to make sure that they do not repeal that historic piece of legislation based upon massachusetts law. moderator: mr. lynch, would you vote to repeal the portable character? lynch: no, but i would vote to fix it. ..

i've been a consistent supporter of a woman's right to choose. i believe that it wanted should make that decision homeland consultation with her physician, her family and herself. and it's something i believe has to be protect at all costs.

for 30 years that is the position. it just is a core constitutional believe i have there will be weighed must be protected to keep those, above the floor as i night a woman insurance coverage so abortion is would be covered from an insurance company gave, i made sure he voted against that amendment. steve devoted four-day. bought back scrape your position. where are you? >> lynch: i consider myself pro-life. i've heard recently am not pro-of and i'll confess i'm not an expert on church teachings, but i'm an expert on what i believe and don't believe it and i don't believe attacking rosie

wade is a solution. it won't make abortions go away. it will change this setting from a clinical setting to one more dangerous for women. that's why in my time in the house they've taken the floor to defend funding for planned parenthood as they are the ones out there with birth-control counseling, contraceptive counseling to reduce the number of unwanted leave, which is the real goal if we want to reduce the number of abortions in this country. ironically, it seems to be working. it appeared as the last year's survey of the greatest access is the first time in 40 years we've seen a drop in the number of abortions. that's the approach we should be taking. bob back any rebuttal? by future position change?

>> lynch: 30 years ago i came to the conclusion that is the decision a woman has to make for herself in consultation with her physician and her family and it's now been 30 years and that's why planned parenthood has endorsed me. >> lynch: i want to mention one thing. even the stupak amendment had an exception for and. he supported an amendment to overturn roe v. wade. this is acrobatics on this position. >> markey: for 30 years i've been a consistent supporter account to support a planned parenthood in this race 30 years. three years ago steve is voting for the stupak amendment,

denying insurance coverage for it wanted to have this option medically provided to her. >> moderator: in this state come is provided by medicaid, not the federal government. let's move onto the next section and that's candidate to candidate questions. we want to do several rounds. one minute response, quick follow-up in 30 seconds for a response to get dialogue going. mr. lynch, we'll start with you. a question for mr. marquis. >> lynch: recently he supported the wall street bailout because a massive problem for the american people come and destroy trillions of dollars in wealth for a lot of families. it took $787 million in taxpayers who in my district people don't even have a bank account in determining canutillo

street. when the american taxpayers that they against him at the debt limit crisis, you voted not to rescue them. so you bailout wall street and refuse to rescue the american taxpayer. i'm curious how you reconcile those two votes. >> markey: in 2008, we're in a pair of wall street into a casino. regulators turned a blind eye. the economy was collapsing. barney frank, john kerry, barack obama and i agreed we could not allow the banking system to collapse on the hopes and dreams of every family in our country. not just a small number of people. tens of millions of people without bank accounts if those things had collapsed. for me was the decision not to bailout the bankers, but ensure

the financial system did not spend back to the great depression, which is what many economists were predicting would happen if we did not cast their vote. i voted for main street to make sure wall street did not spoil his hopes and dreams that we are now in the 34th consecutive month of an economic recovery because a major economic system did not collapse. >> lynch: the belt is not bailout mainstream. the bill was supposed in theory help mainstream. what happens is the bank's outer banks full of cash and no debt increase funding. you can take credit for something that never happened. the bailout was certain i something that has to this ensure these banks for baker and bigger and bigger.

>> markey: i voted against glass-steagall. i did not want them to get bigger and bigger and bigger. i had to do something on the author me and say trading act. i'm the author of the laws that would've controlled derivatives and credit default swaps. newt gingrich blocked me from putting those on the books. ordinary families had to be protect in because if the banks went under, just like the 1930s, there would have been a financial calamity they would have not recover from for a generation. we had a decision to make on the sequestering 2011. in the bill, we knew there could

be to come and cut to the national institute of health, to pell grants, to investment in clean energy technologies. i voted no on the sequestered. you voted yes. could you tell us why. >> lynch: absolutely. we were up for doubt that -- debt limit so we have her $15 trillion in debt. if we had not voted to increase the debt limit, which mr. markey did. the interest increase on the 16.3 trillion at the time would have been subject to a much higher interest rate. we would've dug ourselves deeper

and deeper right away. what did that compromise did was allow us 18 months to come up with a plan that created a super committee two with a scalpel go through the budget and figure out which areas to code. the super committee was never able to do that, but the idea was we would have a disaster right away or give ourselves the team are months to come up with a plan. >> markey: the sequestered companies to the loss of 60,000 jobs in massachusetts this year and then is the first in nine years of easter crony and cuts in programs at the heart of the massachusetts innovation economy plan. we're quintet, education, health care. then they had come in a hit us hard and they're going to air economic growth are going to hit

us where our smells, which is this future oriented economy, which is going to be seriously harmed. >> lynch: is contrary to what she did because he put such a tremendous tax on medical advice manufacturers that the district are looking not expanding in ireland because the taxes he put in are so high they become confiscatory. that's become a real problem as well. >> lynch: in addition to bailing out the wall street banks come a loss voted for nafta at the shipped hundreds of thousands of jobs to mexico. and most recently decided against the local fishermen and it just seems the pattern that

happens in the telecommunications industry, we are siding with the big guys against the little guys. our local fishermen are small businesses, too. so the only member of the delegation that did not support pushing back on the cash limits put in a matter of business allowing these big multinational corporations to control the whole food source in our fishing areas. what's up with that? >> markey: i was on the floor with john tierney six weeks ago trying to get an amendment on the floor to bring disaster relief of post-hurricanes in the two of the fishermen in massachusetts. i didn't see you out there during that debate, during the effort to have a debate on the house floor. i believe we have to have a plan for fishing industry based upon

conversations at the local industry. but just to tell you, telecommunications i broke down those monopolies. breaking down monopolies in 1896 that at least $1 trillion worth of private-sector capital that is created thousand jobs. you know google, ebay, amazon, hulu, facebook and twitter, but thousands of companies in massachusetts whose names we don't know that art in new innovation economy and i'm proud of taking on monopolies because that was our ability to be the engine of innovation growth for massachusetts and for country. >> moderator: i want to make sure you get to question each. mr. markey has had only one.

>> lynch: data what disaster relief. they just want to fish. i want everybody to open up your cable bill and take a peek inside. do you think you're being treated fairly by the telecommunications industry? >> markey: when i passed my build the 1990s, people did not pad their pockets to make sure they had their mobile device with them, that they had a smartphone, all these new information technologies and not revolution is 17 years. i'm proud of that. >> moderator: i want to make sure you bigger question. >> markey: steve, you are a real champion for the va. i am concerned what could happen to veterans coming back from iraq and afghanistan. could you tell us how you feel that the solution has to be to make sure the care is fair for

them? >> lynch: thank you. that's up fine question and your gentleman for asking that. when i first came into office, one of the first receptions was there. ted kennedy was very. he said congratulations. you've been assigned to the veterans affairs committee. that's the good news. the bad news is they want to close all three hospitals down. one of jamaica and the one of brompton. i'm happy to say help of not only add markey and senator kennedy at the time we wrote to push back and they're all being expanded. both are missing right now to your point is forgetting a lot of her sons and home after

three, four, five tours of duty and were missing something. we are not correctly diagnosing ptsd and in some cases the tbi, germanic or injury. that is a crisis on the horizon we haven't dealt with yet in the answer is we need more funding, better diagnosis and better focus coming home. >> markey: we fought two wars. we did not pay for those two wars. we just put it on the coffin i was wrong. the first words we did not pay for. the one thing we should obligate ourselves to paying for is the care for these veterans, for their retirement, for their health care, for the rehabilitation and employment that we should not shortchange any one of these veterans and

honors steve for his work in that area. >> moderator: i want to talk about the economy. unemployment is easy. real estate coming back. stocks are at. those are all good signs. working and retired folks who savings accounts have an effect subsidize this recovery because of low interest rates. is it time to take their foot off the gas pedal, but interest rates inch up if it affects the peace of the recovery? mr. lynch. >> lynch: had like to believe all that, but that's not the case in communities of color. if you go to fall river, if you go to brompton, massachusetts, last week i did a walk-through in dudley square construction there. i need to see more folks in the

neighborhood, where people of color on those jobs. if you look at the unemployment rate across our state, the recovery may be reaching wall street. it may be reaching state street, but it's not reaching blue hill ave. we had an opening of my headquarters, campaign headquarters and i've been meeting with like ministers over the past few. the unemployment is exceedingly high in those neighborhoods. i think we need to keep working at this because the recovery is not here. we need to keep rates low to give those families that chance to catch up. >> lynch: we still have many in this country, 44 million americans live in poverty.

that's $22,000 for a family of four. 16 million children live in those families. so we cannot raise interest rates at this point in time. 27% of african-americans live in poverty today. 27% of hispanics live in poverty today. sequestration is going to actually serve as a brake upon economic recovery. it's going to cut economic growth. so we need low interest rates to service the unit go to sequestration for us we are going to see catastrophic economic conditions unfold in our country. >> moderator: we are down to three minutes. yes or no question. chairman bernanke is up in 2014. has he had another term? >> markey: in my opinion, yes.

>> lynch: he's been chairman during one of our most calamitous. , none of his making necessarily, but he does deserve and is an expert on recessions and depressions -- >> moderator: i said yes or no. >> lynch: yes. >> moderator: i want one foreign-policy question. iran cannot be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons. are there any circumstances, any tripwire under which we support american military action against either one. mr. marquis. >> markey: had think if that attack south korea, where the military obligation and the president has made that very clear. with regard to the iranian nuclear program, i'm comforted to know john kerry who is going

to be a great secretary of state is orchestrating the effort to put together the coalition that was the tightest possible sanctions humanly possible on the arabian economy. we have to avoid iran having a nuclear weapon at all costs. >> lynch: i would tend to agree on the iran situation. i was in south korea recently visiting the dmv. it's an unstable government we are dealing with now and they're very young predict the ball. we have to have a good coalition with the russians and the japanese and chinese primarily to basically make sure that part of the world is stabilized. >> moderator: that is going to do it. the half-hour flew by. thanks to congressman markey and a

>> lynch. [applause] and dan winslow and gabriel gomez and our first half-hour. five weeks to go until the primary, april 30th. for the boston media consortium, thanks for joining us. [applause]

>> mr. secretary, we are going to put them down as undecided. [laughter] >> mr. chairman, as they listen to those comments, it struck me what a wonderful thing free speech is. >> of his beard donald rumsfeld was making justifications for attacking iraq. what she didn't hear her questions that we got a chance to ask him, which is how much money as halliburton going to make? how many u.s. soldiers will be killed in this war? how many iraqi civilians will die from this adventure? the lakers answered by somebody like donald rumsfeld.

>> down, former washington d.c. public school system chance lawyer michelle rhee recounts her career with your thoughts on education reform. from hudson is to tune in new york city, this is 45 minutes. [applause]s. >> michelle, thank you for joining us. i may have had a couple busy days from last evening jonhere stewart, to this evening piers morgan and we are delighted to have our wonderfuli old frontier befr c-span filming this event,

that many people can benefit from a lot of what michelle has his say. to get thin just to kickstart this this eveu come up with that fascinating interesting book evening did the name come from? >> so, i think the genesis of the name is an interesting one and that when i first got to d.c. it was the lowest-performing and most dysfunctidysfuncti onal school district in the entire nation and that was the pretty widely known truth. so i started doing things that i thought were obvious in that kind of state. i just started closing low-performing schools moving out and affected employees, cutting the central office bureaucracy in half and as i was taking all of these steps and measures people started saying well she is a firebrand. she is a radical. she is so controversial and i thought, really?

after thinking about it for a while i just said you know what? it's bringing some common sense to a dysfunctional system makes me a radical than i'm okay with that. so that is sort of the embracing that concept was the idea for the name of the book. >> some people call you anti- teacher however there are many teachers out there that really like you. which is it do you think? teachers love you or hate you or is there any in between? >> i think it depends on the teacher you are talking to. you know, i think the whole notion that i am anti-teacher is an incredibly odd one to me and i write about this in the book. i come from teachers. my grandfather was an educator and my grandmother -- my grandmother was a kindergarten teacher in four of my aunts and my best friend. i grew up around teachers and having this incredible respect for the difficult job they have every day and i'm still

surrounded by teachers to this day. i think it is because i have such respect for teachers and hold them in such regard that i have a tremendous belief for what they can do. and the power that they have. i refuse to believe what many folks say which is kids are coming from difficult situations in poverty and there's nothing that the school can do. i profoundly that notion. i believe that when children are in the classroom with truly effective teachers even despite the fact that they may face a lot of obstacles, those kids can achieve at the highest level so we should aspire to nothing short as a nation in making sure that every single kid gets in a classroom with a highly effective teacher every day. it is no less than we would want for our own children so it's nothing different than we should want for nation's kids. >> united states spends the most per-capita per student.

why are america's children ranks 25 out of 30th in developed nations in math, 17th in science and 14th in reading? speier know when i share those statistics with people they cringe a little bit and when i share the fact that we are 25th in math and some of the countries that are ahead of us are hungary and slovenia. and i think of americans, we don't expect to be behind slovenia or hungary. when i started students first someone showed me a scatter plot of all of the developed nations in the country and on one axis before academic achievement levels and on the other axis was the amount of money that country spent per child on their public the public education system. we were in the cochran -- quadrant that you don't want to be in which you spend a lot of money and have poor results and the only other country that was in that spot was langsam --

luxembourg. i have no idea what they're doing in luxembourg but apparently it's not good. the problem with this notion is that for decades now people have been pushing this idea that what we need in order to fix the system is more money, more money, more money but when i got to d.c. i knew first-hand that was not the case. we were spending more money per kid in d.c. than any other jurisdiction in the entire nation and the other results, go school districts right across the river in newark new jersey spending $22,000 per kid and get kids are operating on grade levels in a single digits so the idea that we have to put more money and in a broken system and expect a different result is -- who i think what we have got to do is have a great deal of transparency around where our dollars are going so that we can stop spending money on things that have absolutely no impact

on the kids. when i was in d.c. we had a budget for the schools of $1 billion a year. and of that $1 billion, 403 million of it was given to the schools which means the majority of the money was going into the bureaucracy, this loaded bureaucracy and that is not where you're going to have an impact. money is going to have an impact when it's in the schools in and in the classrooms and not when it being up by the school district itself. until we bring some light to that and until we shine a light on what kind of return on investment are we getting for different programs and different expenditures i think we will continue to live in this world where we are spending more money per kid but not just getting a result. >> in your book you talk about student vouchers. can you tell us about the change in your thinking on this intricate concept? >> this topic of vouchers gets

people really riled up. if you want to have a debate does bring up the word voucher and people have strong opinions. you know i am a democrat and i have in my entire life since i was in second grade. i asked my dad the difference between democrats and republicans in the said democrats feel more about people have less and republicans care more about money and i said then i'm a democrat. when i got to d.c. i had very clear views about what education reform should look like and what it should look like and where it drew bright line was around vouchers. we think vouchers are bad because you are taking money away from the schools that get the most anomaly helping some kids. when i arrived in washington we had a publicly funded voucher program. and people, it was about

reauthorizing and people wanted me to weigh in on it. people said you are the top education official, what do you think? they pretty much knew what i thought that i didn't want to jump to any conclusions i started to meet with people, families throughout the city. the discussions that i had absolutely changed my mind. i was meeting with parents throughout the city, mostly low income single moms and these moms have done everything you would want a mother to do. they research their neighborhood schools and figured out that only 10% of the kids at that school were on grade level and my kid has a 90% chance of failure if i go there, it's not good enough for my kid and then they would do the next best thing. they would apply to these lottery processes that we have set up to win one of the spots in a good school on the other side of town and inevitably they would lose because there were thousands of people applying and only had four spots available.

they would say okay now what am i supposed to do? when i was looking eye to i do with these mothers and they knew that i could not offer them a spot in a high-performing school that i thought was good enough for my own kids i said who am i to stop this money which was a 75,000-dollar voucher which by the way was less than we are spending in the district and going to catholic school where they could get a great education. i came out of favor of the program and people went crazy. what are you doing? and i would always say to people look, my job is not to protect and preserve a district that has been doing a disservice to children. my job is to make sure that every kid in the city gets a grade education. it can be a private school or a charter school. as long as kids are getting a great education i don't care. so i tried to bring a lot of my

democratic friends along with me on this issue and i was talking to a public schoolteacher the other day. i laid the whole argument out and she looked at me and she goes yeah, you know, not buying it. i said did you watch the movie "waiting for superman"? she said yes one of my best friends was in it. do you remember the scene when little bianca is looking out the window and she is crying because she can't go to school because her mom has fallen behind on the tuition rates? what did you think about that? she said it was heartbreaking. it was an injustice. she said i wanted to write the check myself. i said that would be a voucher. [laughter] the problem that people have as they see things like vouchers and they say the republican thing in the democratic thing. if we stop looking at things in terms of partisan politics and

started making public policy based on the decisions we make for our own kids and i think we would have neither republican senatorial democratic agenda. >> you put a lot of that on teachers improving student performance. what do you say to the critics who say teachers have no control over things such as home life, poverty level? >> they are absolutely right. we have kids who come to school every day facing enormous challenges. nobody puts him to bed the night before and nobody fed them breakfast before they came to school. maybe the electricity got turned off at their house and they couldn't do their homework. when you are facing these challenges does it make it harder to learn and therefore harder to teach some kids? absolutely, 100%. the canopy and excuse for why

kids aren't achieving? no way. this is what i think is the thing we have to understand in this country right now. the u.s. ranks for the bottom internationally on social mobility which means if you are a child who is born into poverty in this country, the likelihood that you will ever escape poverty is high. that in my mind goes against every single ideal that we hold as american. that is not the way our country is supposed to work. this is the greatest country in the world because if you work hard and do the right thing you can live the american dream. but children growing up in america today the likelihood you go to a -- school is 50% which means you won't get the skills and knowledge you need to go on and get a college degree and a high-paying job. that is just criminal in my mind. we can't allow poverty in my

mind to be the determining factor of the kids chances in life outcomes. we absolutely can't do it. >> what about the problem of teaching to task? >> this is a very good question and i see both sides of it because as of mom last year when my daughter was in the fourth grade, in the middle of april she was coming home and i was saying where's your homework? she said we don't have homework anymore because the test is over. i thought oh my gosh. what kind of message the son sending to the kids and the parents you're sitting there asking their kids questions and their kids are saying the test is over so we don't have homework anymore. there is this over emphasis that i think it's maddening that on the other side of that i talk to a parent in compton not too long ago who was extraordinarily frustrated because she had a little girl, a daughter who also

got straight a's. she was excited because she applied for her daughter to go to mattson middle school and was told later on that her daughter did not qualify for the lottery because she didn't have the academic skills she needed. her mom said what are you talking about? she got all a's kindergarten through eighth grade. they said a sir one thing but she took the test and she doesn't know reading comprehension and we can show you all the data. this mom felt so betrayed. she trusted the system and she thought when her kid was coming home with good grades if that meant something. she said why wasn't anyone telling me and showing me the data that actually compared her to her peers that she could not compete? so while we don't want an overactive system we also have to have accountability. the challenge i think that faces the nation is how can we strike the right balance, where we have

accountability and we know what their kids are able to do and yet there is not such an emphasis on the test that people think that's the end-all be-all. >> in "waiting for superman" you are first for more money for teachers -- [inaudible] >> that is what i was asking. during the movie if you saw the incredulous look on my face. this was the situation when it was being filmed. we had presented a plan to the union where we said we want to give highly effective teachers the opportunity to make basically double the amount of money that they were in the old system. if they are willing to give us tenure and seniority protection and etc.. but it's a choice. if you wanted to stay in the

hold system you can but if you want to go on the new system, they will make a whole lot more money. the union said no and i couldn't believe it. it was interesting because the guy who was the president of the teachers union at the time has had a come to jesus and now he's an education reformer. what he tells me now is do you know why i didn't -- because i didn't want that policy in place. now i'm getting all these e-mails from teachers saying we wanted so he he said i knew i was going to lose the vote if i didn't so i didn't put it out. eventually we got the contracts in place and this is the interesting thing about it. people were very skeptical about what kind of impact this would have. if you pay teachers a lot more money based on the results etc. and there was a study that just came out a few weeks ago that studied several urban districts

across the country and what it showed was most of these districts, they retain their highly effective teachers and their ineffective teachers in exactly the same way. there was no differentiation whatsoever and the one outlier for the study was washington d.c. where they kept 88% of their highly effective teachers and only about 4300 of their effective teachers and i said that means what we are doing is starting to work because the great teachers are feeling more valued and they know that they are being recognized and awarded for their work. >> michelle america's most precious capital is there children so wide does this merit pay apply to teachers and why aren't low-performing teachers removed? >> you know, it's a tough thing to understand why this goes on.

it defies all concepts. see everybody in the audience and most people in the audience, merit evaluation as a way of life. whichever way you cut it is so important dealing with children and so much resistance to merit evaluation. >> i can tell you have having run a school district for three and half years that much of the education in the community is allergic to the idea of accountability. people want to say well we aren't accountable because of this reason or that reason or another reason and it's extraordinarily problematic. i don't know cusack awy but let me tell you how i think we have got to change this. i now live in california which is one of the most difficult states to get anything done as

far as education reform. there was an episode that happened in a school in l.a. where they found a teacher who was basically a sexual predator and they showed that he was -- so the school district had to fire him and they couldn't. it was just this absolute travesty and a school -- the parents were up in arms so a legislator from that area introduced a bill to the california legislature that would simply make it easier to fire sexual predators. not ineffective teachers but sexual predators. you would think that a bill like that would be passing. it didn't even make it to the education committee. it didn't even make it out of committee and make it to a vote by the legislature. that is how powerful the status

quo is in making sure that no laws will be passed. when you think about it if you went out on the street today and asked people what they thought about it i guarantee you virtually everybody would say of course we should pass a law like that but do you know what? the people on that committee who voted no, nobody knew that. there was no public light shone on that so those lawmakers are not going to be held accountable for those decisions that are to the detriment of children. the only thing this is going to change is if we as every citizen hold our elected officials accountable for the kinds of laws and policies that were put in place and we send that message to them that if you are going to vote with the best interest of the kids and we are not going to vote for you next time around. [applause] that means you all have to figure out who are your school board members and state legislators.

>> why do most teachers receive the same grade every year? you touched on it briefly previously but is it demotivating for the excellent teachers that the poor performing teachers don't have to improve their own performance regardless. they might get the same 2% raise every year regardless of what they do. >> again you see why i was shocked when i was trying to make changes and they got such pushback. you have some employees that are doing really well and you should be a will to compensate those employees more of. that is just not how the education work so we have something called -- >> get paid according to what kind of the degree you have been how long you have been in the profession. it literally drives effective teachers when they see somebody down the hall who comes in when

the kids come in and leaves when the kids leave and meanwhile they are coming in two hours early and staying three hours later and producing results and it they get paid less than that person does because that person has been there longer. it's just not the kind of environment that people would want to go into and stay in and it doesn't make teachers feel valued. you know, i got in a little bit of trouble the other night because i was giving a speech and all foreign and was lamenting the fact that highly effective teachers don't get paid enough. the thing about it is i said ask about players -- go now my husband is a former nba player so this is why i got in trouble at home. basketball players get paid $12 million each year for dribbling a ball around. [laughter] what value are the adding to society? meanwhile i think we should pay $12 million to our most highly effective teachers because they are determining the future of

our nation. but we have this skewed culture where we don't actually respect and honor teachers for the incredible work that they do and we certainly don't pay them what they are worth. >> in australia they have -- schools and china and india 220 days of public instruction. why do you think the united states is only 180 days? which is drastically different. in china and india it is 40 less days per year and if you multiply that by 10 it's a big disadvantage. [inaudible] people all the time talk about what do we need for education in my opinion you have to put every single resource to bear to solve the problem and the resources people underestimate is the resource of time.

if you look at the schools in this country that do the best whether it's the traditional public school or charter schools etc. they are in school more and they have the kids working before school and afterschool and on weekends. we have a 180 day calendar because we are still living off the agrarian calendar. literally, it's interesting i sat on a talk show the other day or a block is said michelle rhee is wrong. ask if it's not doing worse than what it was doing before? that person is actually right when you look at the fact that academic achievement levels of our kids in america in the 1960s and 70's is pretty much on par with where we are today. so it's true that from that vantage points we are worse. the problem is there are

countries that are leapfrogging ahead of us. countries like latvia and liechtenstein. i'm not not kidding. like the end liechtenstein are growing academically at two to three times the rate of american kids. so if we are saying the same because we are running the school system the same way we were 100 years ago based on the agrarian calendar and other countries have figured out to you know what? if we want to get ahead we have to educate your kids and put more time in etc. then we have remained the same in terms of achievement levels but fall in terms of the global achievement. >> two and a half weeks of vacations per year so why do we received three and half months per year and do you think that will ever change when we talk about other countries and the amount of the school year is and

marc focused on students? >> i think it's only going to change if we make a commitment as a country to addressing this issue and doing something about it. as long as school calendar is something that is negotiated in a collective organ in agreement we are in trouble because this in my mind we should set out as a country our kids are kids need to be in school axe numbers of daisy year but he could sit collectively bargained when school districts don't have money to put on the table often things the things they can bargain away is the best german two children. when you have communities who over the last couple of years have gone to a four day school week ago they didn't have enough money to negotiate, that is where we have to draw the line. i am actually for collective

bargaining. i am all in favor of being in the center and around things like benefits to absolutely be able to bargain those things at the table but when it comes to how long kids should be in school that in my mind should not need a bargaining chip. >> at that point feels like there is more -- tell us where's duden's first is going and what is next for the organization? >> thank you. i started a few years ago when i left d.c. with the idea that if you look at what was happening in public education of the last two to three decades he would see that it was largely driven by special interest group whether it's textbook manufacturers, teachers unions,. these organizations have tremendous resources and they

use those resources to put a lot of influence on the political process to get those policies and regulations in place to benefit them. i actually don't have any problem with that. that's that's the american way and it's a democracy we should be able to do that. the problem is not that these organization exists, the problem is at that point would didn't have an organized national interest group with the same teachers union advocating on behalf of kids. and because the kids were being represented at the table you have a skewed landscape, an environment that was tilted towards the centrist and away from kids. we have to start a national movement of everyday people who care about education and who know what kinds of policies that did put in place and who are willing to fight for it and hold public officials accountable. it has to be an organization has political muscle. we have 2 million members across the country right now and over

150,000 in new york. almost 300,000 in california and these are very active people. they have been searching for a venue through which they can fight for kids. it matters to us. we have over 115 laws in 17 states that we are working with over the last few years. we have gotten involved in the electoral college is with over 100 politicians and last year's election. we are beginning to level the playing field on behalf of the kids and i would say we still have a long way to go. >> where does most of the money come from? >> it comes from a variety of sources. people who are passionate about this and what i'm proud of this the fact that we have a lot of proud members who donate. our average during the -- donation is about $84. everyday people, parents and teachers, grandparents, business

owners who know the future of this country is going to be based on whether we can fix the public education system. >> we will take a couple of audience questions before we move to the book signing. i will ask you to speak loudly and i will repeat the question. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] >> that is part of the reason why i wrote "radical" partially because i wanted to tell my story and explain to people why i have come to the views that i do. it's hard to sort of get teachers or educators to understand that but partially for the average mom out there who's frustrated with what she sees and he wants to do something about it and does not know how. what i will say is this. take right here in new york city. it doesn't matter where you send your kids to school and it doesn't matter, you have to make

the decision that you think is in the best interest of your kids. you can't let politics or guilt or anything else make you send your kid to one school or another but there something you can do. let's take new york city for an example. most of you probably know this but the city recently lost $300 million in state and federal aid because the unions basically refused to implement teacher evaluation system. everybody has to be evaluated. everybody has to be held accountable. it's the way of the world. but the fact that the union refused to do this and very rightfully stood his ground and said no because what the union wanted was for the evaluation for the mock to be placed into in two years and it would sunset after two years.

the teacher would be removed after two years but then we would revert after the old system and the mayor said no, what's the point of doing that? where's the public outcry? where are the people that are picketing out there in the streets saying you cannot deny our kids $300 million because you are being held accountable and have a reasonable evaluation system in place? this is where students first is organizing. everyday people like you and it doesn't matter where your kids go to school. you have to get involved in that process because until the legislators and albany and the governors they just have to hear from people like you that you are going to make her decisions on whether you contribute to their next campaign or vote for them. right now they are not -- not hearing enough from people like you.

[inaudible] >> we live in a culture where children go home to homes where they watch five hours of tv a day come compulsively using facebook and hollywood tv filled with various things. mass media of television and radio obsessed and my country is hostile to education. i raise the question with the best teachers what good does it do unless the whole culture changes and maybe that is part of the problem. i would like to hear your

reaction to that. >> he i am an educator so i don't know how to solve all of the social ills out there and i can tell you that the kids are not the only one spending too much time on facebook and texting. i know a lot of ceos that are spending too much time on their iphones as well. there was a study that came out a number of months ago that was done by an economist at harvard. what they showed is that, and they studied over 2 million kids over a 20 year-year period. what they found is that if a child had a highly effective teacher, just one in their third teen year school history their earning potential, the likelihood that the graduated from high school and went on to college was greater in the likelihood that they would avoid a teenage pregnancy was higher.

so i guess they're all kinds of problems out there. we should try to solve a lot of the problems but we also cannot forget that what happens in the schools matters a lot. if what we are concerned about is poverty because a lot of people say kids in poverty -- these are real challenges and don't get me wrong but if we want to fix that problem, the best way for somebody to break the cycle of generational poverty is to get a high-quality education. we have to embrace the fact that education plays a very significant role in what the culture is going to look like in the long-term. if we are producing kids that do not have the skills and knowledge necessary to get a well paying job, and nowadays 50% of employers say they cannot think people in their applicant pool that have the skills they need to fill jobs.

think about that. with this unemployment rate in the country, for half of the employers who say they have jobs than they can fill them because our education system is not producing people who have those skills, we are on a very very difficult course for the future. education can play a very large part. >> he michelle thank you so much. my question has to do with -- [inaudible] for someone with a high school education to work in a factory or an auto plant and make 80 or $90,000 a year. those jobs now are gone forever. and for people to be able to make a similar salary and the

skill level they need, no one is talking seriously for speaking publicly about the structural problem. you have the school district that is fighting about whether whether -- [inaudible] what do you see is the most effective way to address that? >> well, you have to bring reason into how public schools operate. you know, it is astonishing how many conversations i am in in public forums where people will say to me well, you seem to have sort of you want want all kids to go on to college but not all kids are cut out for higher education and i say, excuse me?

>> the bottom line is if you look at the data it is very clear that the vast majority of the jobs 10, 15 or 20 years from now are going to require some level of higher education so viewers saying some kids are not cut out for that you are basically saying that they are not going to be able to find a decent paying job that would keep them in the middle class. you know when i was in d.c. i remember going into a school and they were doing, they had a program that used to be called vocational education and now it is called career technical education. i walk in and the kids are doing shoe repair. and i said, really? shoe repair? are we thinking we are preparing kids for profession by doing shoe repair? we have to be thinking about what are the jobs that are going

to be available 20 years from now? we have to look at things like clean tech and green tech and that sort of thing and our career technical education should be geared towards those skills and professions. so even what we think of as vocational ed and career track what can we do to build the skills of kids so they could intentionally go straight into a profession after high school? it's a wildly different set of skills and fields than we were looking at 20 years ago and we have not made that shift yet. [inaudible] >> 50% vouchers is a great idea, $5500 sounds like around 50%. i'm just estimating. >> you mean in terms of the amount of the voucher? >> per-capita teaching.

>> this requires. [inaudible] this argument that the unions throw out in order to try to have a trump card what about special needs kids? there's a simple answer. each special needs kids counts as two kids. when you figure out the per-capita spending you make your calculation that manner and they have two predefined the special needs of they get a double voucher. so they are calling the teachers unions blocked. the federal government wanted all states to adopt 55% fee limit and they said you were not getting any highway money unless you do. congress can do that with federal legislation money as well. if you don't fully voucherize

districts in this manner you are not going to get federal money if you don't make those requirements all the way down the chain to the municipality's. see let me first say this. there are lots of people out there that believe let's have universal vouchers and let's voucherize but i'd actually don't believe that. i'm for choice but only when choice results in better outcomes and opportunities for everyone. the voucher programs that we have support at students first are geared towards low income kids who would otherwise be failing in school. i actually do think, to your point, can be worked out in terms of how much of voucher should be. what i find curious is the absolute aversion that people have to the concept of vouchers in education and there were two reasons why. one is if you don't believe the

public dollar going to a private institution, you don't believe intel grants. that's the same thing. when a kid gets about grant federal government dollars to go to harvard or yale or wherever they want with their grants. if you don't believe in food stamps that can be used in redeemed in your neighborhood. medicare is used used not just at public hospitals. so the idea that we just can't do that in public education is obvious in the second thing i say is people believe the argument with vouchers. they say well we shouldn't take money out of the system. should take that money and it just in the failing schools to make them better. and here is why think that makes sense. we don't use that logic in any other part of our lives. if you went to a dry cleaner

down the street and if every 10 shirts who took their seven came back with a huge burn marks on them what would you do? you would stop going. what people said weight you can stop giving us your business and your money because we need your money to be able to invest in new equipment and to train our employees and if you take your business away we are not going to be able to do that. what would you say? so if we are willing to take that much care with our laundry shouldn't we take at least that much care for their kids and not be willing to say okay let's continue to invest in this thing that has failed for generations and hope that someday it might get better. meanwhile some kids are not learning how to read and write and not getting the skills they need. it makes no sense. >> ladies and gentlemen, michelle has to go on piers

morgan and she has agreed to sign. >> you are probably going to be nicer with the questions then peers is. >> before we close out, firstly i would like to thank a real old and dear friend for making this incredible event possible and that is leslie cohen who we briefly we briefly mentioned and also anybody who has any stake in education and if they want to get -- students first.org according to many critics and others are doing all types of interesting work. also most importantly the lady right here who has two or three books. the book has received incredible reviews. if you have any stake in education or education means anything to you personally, your kids, your family or the future of the country according to many individuals it's a must-read then i strongly recommend it. please join me in thanking

>> these issues. the reason i read it is because i grew up going to public schools. i was best when i was in second grade. as school that was in the inner-city. i was still in the housing

projects, the poor neighborhoods in the city. so it was something i had thought about actively cents a was a little kid. so when the kids went -- when the case went to the supreme court was interested because it was very personal. >> host: talk about the personal pieces. the personal conviction to the store before we get into the meat of it. when you were busing to an inner city, did you have a particularly status on the site -- question of desegregation. >> has zero kids you don't think about it. looking back even when i was looking back at the reaction for kids in the 70's when it was first -- and they started busting a lot of the kids. there was a, you know, i like it at the school. it was the same way for me, but as i get older i started to sort of think about, not only going to schools, poverty that the nancy and my neighbor in the

suburbs. it was definitely i opening, but the same time the schools that i attended, there were trackings. we have the regular program honors in the we have the advanced programs. those were cut very closely among racial class lines. and so as a kid you absorb that and start to think about it. and i remember being in high school. one of the only class i took was mixed between the tracks. a global studies course. there was an african american student in the class is said she tried to test and sued the advanced program and could not kid it. very intelligent, well spoken. that stuck with me. i still remembered that. , thinking about these rigid tracks. you know, the segregation, but the same time within the school you still had segregation and it

was sending a message to kids when you have class is full of white kids that the supposed to be the smart kids in class is full of black kids that i suppose to be the not smart kids. so i think myself that a lot of my classmates, you know, that hit home and it makes you think about, you know, how this has worked out. i have always been really interested in this idea of how it's up to diversity well. >> host: the dominant narrative in american life, particularly american legal educational history over the past 50 years -- 60 years now has been this idea that if we could desegregate, if we could force the hand of schools and the policy makers that we could have a more diverse school and a greater education, not just equality, but equity. obviously your book pushes back against that. brown versus board is in the background of this book the

whole time. talk about what it meant to the quality of access said education in the country. >> guest: it is a hard question because i think we hold up brown as this amazing be that we accomplished. we drove back segregation. we looked at what happened afterwards and we see how incredibly difficult it was, you know, divisive in some ways, but also that we have this very incremental process after that that was frustrating, i think, to people. and it was a great victory, but also it is important set look back and see what we did not accomplish that. and so when i was working on desegregation and how it was finally implemented 20 years later, after brown, 20 years later restarted. then the way these programs are set up still maintains white

privilege in a lot of ways and class privilege so that, you know, poor kids and my kids had to be bused for more time. part of that was logistics', but part of it was also maintaining the status quo. so i think that the brown decision, you know, it is a difficult decision. one of the most interesting books i have ever read, what brown v. board of education should have said, academics looking at what the justices -- if the justices have done it differently, how it might have changed things. it is interesting. you probably would not have had the unanimous decision, which was very, very important. it is interesting to look at the counterfactual and think about what a victory was but also, you know, what it didn't -- what it didn't accomplish. >> host: is it difficult to write a bush that -- book that pushes back against such a celebrated public policy? relate what is considered one of the biggest victories of the 20th century for america.

did you get an anxiety about pushing back and highlighting a story of people who pushed back? >> guest: oh, yes. [laughter] >> guest: this is not the book they expected to write. i went into it thinking that -- and this is very in louisville, integration was a good thing. and it got people together. it made me think differently about the world than i might have otherwise. a lot of my classmates, i think. and i think, you know, one of the points i make often in the book is that you gain the heyday have desegregation and busing in the 70's and 80's, you actually saw blake -- black and white achievement gap shrinking faster than it ever has. that is a big deal, and so the work complements. >> guest: in that group of desegregation come to you think that was -- i mean, the gap was so huge.

>> guest: oh, yes. >> host: just getting access to books and teachers and resources. one could argue that the actual desegregation process was incidental. >> guest: oh, yes. it is really hard to separate that out. when you talk to people who research, you know, how it affected kids it is hard to say is it because they are learning from each other or is it because, you know, if you are a black child in a classroom with the majority of white middle-class children, well, you might have more resources at that school than you would otherwise have. one of the people i interviewed in the book, his favorite theme was green follows white. that is why he supported desegregation at the time. so i think that is a really -- it's a difficult, complicated question. and there are also a lot of other things going on at the time when that achievement gap is closing. it was not just desegregation i don't think.

i just want to make that clear that i think it was a very important thing to do. but i did -- i was surprised that i ended up writing this book that was looking away wrong so unexpected. >> host: but you open up the book and the first section is about these letters. and i've thought it was compelling as you tell the story of this girl who dreamed of going. she dreamed of an offer life, 15 years of life. but she is sicily was so that she could not go because of racial motives in essentially saying the school could not have more than 42 percent african-americans, and as a result she was being put on a way list that might ultimately derail her dream of getting a good education, becoming a lawyer. that kind of story is compelling how much of that came up in your research? is this a consistent narrative of people? >> guest: i think those stories coming to me, were what made it interesting, how emotionally connected people felt with the school, with the central high school, which is

the book have focused on. but how they thought their future in that school and not just because steve -- she wanted to be a lawyer. no other school in the city had a lot program, but it was also very emotional, her dad had gone there, her mom had gone there. you know, it was the black school in louisville for decades and decades. and so people had a very emotional connection to it. and it was a very good school, and it was. at the time, you know, in the 80's eventually they put in an advanced program there and so you had the elite of the black community going to that school. so, you know, the people that i talked to in the book, those two things that were going on, concerned about educational quality but also about our school and this is our community and very important that we have some say in some empowerment

over our school. >> host: as people got those letters, as people began, and the metaphorical phrase, but the engineering of the 1950's was producing outcomes were none the less harmful. house in did people in the town realize that they needed to make some sort of adjustment, some sort of policy pushed back? >> guest: there was a lot of that. desegregation and negotiated. a lack of sight. this ongoing constant conflict in some ways. and so i think that for some people, a profile activists who were really behind this fight. they had gone to pre desegregation and felt very connected to the school. and so for them they had been watching this and were concerned about desegregation. they just had some writing on the wall because so many other

black schools have been closed as a result. >> host: why were they closed? shifting demographically. >> guest: it happened a lot. it happened all over the south. and elsewhere to make busing work you had more schools then you needed because you split the population, so there is an interesting story in north carolina. these two schools, black high-school and a white high-school. and when they had to desegregate one, they closed the black school. part of that, i think, and louisville they're trying to convince people not to flee to this white -- white parents not to flee to the suburbs, private schools. to do that they had to convince them to keep their kid in the public schools. in their thinking -- i think part of it was there were not going to want to send there kids downtown. all of the schools had been under resources and had fallen

apart so in their mind it made sense to close them because they had not been putting resources into them for a long time, so we might as well shut them down. it was partly just to make it work. i think it was logistical, but also there was, how do we -- how do we maintain, how do we keep the white middle-class happy in that situation. >> guest: -- >> host, but they were reacting. in fact, that might have been totally okay with them. maybe not for funding, but for the stability of the community. but it was essential for other reasons. part of it was the traditional school itself. >> guest: absolutely. it was the tradition of -- it was the tradition of black empowerment, i think. we built this school ourselves. we did this largely without a lot of help from the school district, without a lot of resources. we had to fight for every penny. and so i think a lot of the

people that i talked to saw the way that it happened or just the attitude of the segregationists saying that black people basically failed and doing education in a community, they need this help. they need to have their kids sit next to a white kid. i think there was a sense of -- >> host: from the community or the outside? >> guest: i heard that from the activists, the african-american activists. you know, we should not have to us said that black child next to a white child for them to learn. and you know, i think there was an understandable frustration that where they saw the deficiency in our culture and community is not being recognized as good as. and so i think that was one of the problems with the way desegregation was thought of and the way it was implemented. it was not we're going to share

resources it is we're going to help you sort of thing, if that makes sense. >> host: absolutely. is there any danger in that approach? to me that it returns back to the 1954 mind-set of, say, we're going to hold onto that school to so that we can say we have our own stuff, nationalist kind of posture. irrespective of what the outcome is for the children. >> guest: i a agree. i mean, and i was telling the stories come out people's his stories had not been told and perspectives had not been out there. i think it is difficult question to say, you know -- and it is a question that we are dealing with now. deposes cool down because is failing or because it does not have enough students? because it is, you know, test scores are low or do we, you know, try and keep it together even though those things are

happening. think of the community. i think it is a really difficult balance and that don't actually have an answer. >> host: it i think one of the virtues of this book is it amazingly -- it is amazingly well written. you chronicled his perspective and highlight this perspective, but you also help us track how the activists engage in the push back. oftentimes i think the victory, these victories are celebrated. people don't really get a sense of the footprints and the steps they took to get there. talk a little bit about that. these activists who were pushed to save central and ultimately to advance the legal argument, they shifted the tide for the entire country, not just -- how did they do it? >> guest: well, really a bunch of very interesting and eclectic people. a lot of them i spent time with, but they came at it from very

different places. a lot of them had been friends. one of them was a football coach. he just had a coaching attitude and had written editorials constantly for the newspaper. so then at the edges and activism. kind of knew what they were doing when it came to doing community activism and another had been part of the black nationalist movement in the 70's. involved in that. and so they were grown up from that and they were of the civil rights movement in many ways. of that time frame, but also, sort of on the outside and critiquing it, but learning from it. they knew what they were doing. one of my favorite people i write about, just a wonderful lady. she got very involved in protesting the first iraqi war in the 90's. she was very involved, and that is how she got pulled then.

it because to me you know, she wanted to save the school she had gone too. so, you know, they knew what they were doing. they were also very alone. there were a minority in a community in a lot of ways. it was an anachronism. african-american activists fighting against segregation. it makes it interesting which is why i write a book about them. >> host: i can almost imagine how they can have an argument and maybe even get it to the supreme court. but how you, how do you convince black people. the best way to make schools better. >> the thing is, they were behind the first federal case. and they end up going on to the supreme court.

they won there fight, centralize cool. that is with they cared about. my parents took it on. but when i was doing the research it turns out that in a lot of places you had fights oread the naacp on one side fighting to maintain desegregation programs or expand them, and then you'd have, you know, black school board member or a lead person or group of bell -- black parents and the other side saying let's to read this busing program. we want are never as schools back. so there were lonely, but there were not necessarily completely alone. >> host: also fighting power brokers like the naacp. i wonder, then maybe you can answer this in place of your subjects, i also wondered, positions like they think it makes policy sense, they have an ideological commitment to this approach, diversity and

multiculturalism is its own thing. or if they hold onto a tradition . they make their bones politically. you get a sense, the people, eventful, the black organizations. >> guest: it's interesting. i think for example, the board of the naacp. and so the issues. it became, you did not have a huge uprising in louisville when they were bringing this case. you did not have a lot of, you know, black leaders in the community. you had some, you definitely have a significant, you know, some leaders saying this is the wrong thing to do, but you did not have a big uprising against them. you know, i think there were

people in the community he said, yes, you know, this is not really got our way. but it is an interesting question. i don't know. >> host: again, i don't think there is an answer. i often wonder and after reading your book, i am more compelled to question the reasons why these organizations, if not the national level, certainly the local level, these public policies which have the symbolic value but do not necessarily play out on the ground for the people, you know, who are supposed to be helped. >> guest: and i think in some ways there is a need for our schools to be more divorce then they are. it is -- you know, maybe not an academic need, but i do think that there is this idea that if we if -- is our kids are educated together then maybe our

country will be less divided than it is politically, economically, maybe they will understand one another better, that kind of thing. so i think their is a reason for it, not just the traditional aspect, -- >> a resource question. >> and how do you get money into , you know, poor neighborhoods. well, one fast way to do that is, for example, if you have a fight with the parents. start, you know. it's horrible. i think that is with the education movement is really trying to do know, say, okay, desegregation, it did not work -- it is mostly over in most places. how do we deal with that? had we deal with the fact that in most cities and urban areas it is not even a possibility. it is not, you know, feasibility more. >> host: popular opinion based

on the legal terms. >> i think legally you can't really -- it's very hard. there is this, you know, right about the school choice movement. i really think that has gotten into the consciousness of the american public and people really feel like they deserve the right to have a choice of schools. so i think turning around and saying, okay, implement a busing program and you have to send your kid here, you have huge outcry is makes me think it is not politically feasible. and even in the louisville it is a controlled choice to my choice program, but the choices are managed. so i think that has sort of undermined any opportunity to do this. and just in terms of where people live i think, you know, we have had a glimpse of cities. in some ways schools are becoming -- in the suburbs you have neighborhoods that became

more diverse. inner-city is you had the white middle class moving back and. there are some are virginities, but forced busing is not going to be it. >> host: i'm glad you mentioned that. this sort of demographic has shifted so much that it almost makes no sense to even sort of relying upon the kind of policy move of the 50's and 60's, in 19551975, using the city as an example. burton r. harlem what's so different now. even in the 90's. >> guest: absolutely. >> host: i guess part of what i wonder, still interested in the past before we change gears, sort of if the parents are taking account of those kinds of ships, policy shifts demographic shifts and making demands for new approaches to educational

reform, are they factoring all that stuff and are they locked into a certain historical moment as well? >> i think that the parents, and you talk to them, they just care about whether kid goes to school. and, you know, i hear people talk about parent involvement in schools, and parents are just really focus on their kid and what will happen to them and getting them into the very best school that they possibly can. and some parents have more savvy and others in figuring out what school that is and some people value different things about schools, you know, being close to my house may be, you know, very important thing or the teachers are nice to me in care about my kid, that kind of thing. so people and parents way different things. in all of the people that i talk to, the parents, that was the motivation. so they were not thinking about, oh, i mean, even the crystal

matter ticket to the supreme court. termination what she wanted her son to get into the school is she wanted to get into, so it was not really i want to tear the system down. i don't think that is how she started out. and i think for the most part that is the same with the other parents. we were not really thinking big picture. very small picture. by 5-year-old. >> host: when it becomes big picture. >> guest: all of those traces command i think that is what is so difficult about school reform you have these clashes. so it is really hard to think about the larger society, the good of the larger society when it is your child's. and i think, you know, in my personal case, you know, my parents sent me down to the school. my mother had spent time in the school where i went to elementary school before. so she was familiar. she did not have experience.

she was there is a social worker it was a rough school. high poverty area. and so when she was sending me to that school, i imagine it must have been difficult, but at the same time it has been, they had really, i guess, worked on the school to make it palatable for middle-class. we had this advanced program, and that is what made it okay, i think, from my classmates and i together. i was -- i only had to go there for two years command estate for four because, you know, it was a good program. and so i think our parents can say we are doing a good thing because we are, you know, taking part and investing, but at the same time we left a really good program. i mean, my elementary school, and excellent elementary school.

>> the school program. >> guest: i mean, it is pretty -- there are not very many school districts around the country. i read about a study recently that looked at how few districts, 200 something that is still doing desegregation. but louisville just elected school. they are using in come and parental education and other factors and race. >> host: ultimately in louisville in particular. >> guest: yes. >> host: yes. >> guest: yes. absolutely. i mean, the lawyer there was involved in bringing this case does so angry because it was the areas of the city that there were going to us draw some investment back-and-forth. so it is very clear.

and that think part of the frustration with that and part of the frustration with the program was the you had bussing going on an integration going on between poor black students and upper-middle-class white students, but then you also had black students in somewhat metal working class neighborhoods being sent to very poor white neighborhoods, which is something that i think in lieu of a landing kentucky is may be more of a factor. you have a population of low income and working class whites, very large populations. and so you had the mixing, but you still at very high poverty schools. it was perfectly integrated, but every kid in the schools poor. which is not necessarily solve. i think it is important for those kids to know one another,

but it does not necessarily solve the resource problem. >> host: which speaks to broader issues, reform in particular. all that stuff. right to take a quick break. >> guest: okay. >> what you do about the israeli-palestinian -- israeli-palestinian conflict? his answer was to states for two peoples, the jewish state and palestinian state. but only when that palestinian state will be a decent, stable, peaceful, democratic, non corrupt government. and first that means -- >> an insider's view into the accomplishments and failures of the bush and administration's policy on the israeli-palestinian conflict sunday at 10:00 p.m. eastern,

part of book tv this weekend on c-span2. >> the book talks about desegregation and ultimately the parents frame it as a policy that failed. talk to me about the reasons why. >> so frustrated. the way it is implemented, the undermining in some ways of what black people wanted for their schools. so you had hundreds, thousands of black teachers fired as busing was implemented. and then it is obviously not what people looking for when they were fighting for their desegregation. and, again, like i said earlier, it was to really make way for, you know, bringing white and black kids together and not schering white parents away from the school. >> host: the sense of argument.

the argument of that, white people, white parents don't wants to scare away teachers. >> guest: i think that was the thinking. that is what happened. and also you had world war. that county system. the fear of the situation. but the school closures. but i do think that that was part of the thinking. also, you had, you know, the situations that i write about where a school is going to be closed. and so they kept as school intact even though, you know, it was an issue with enrollment and so on, so those parents had clout and political savvy which also had something to do with it . and black principals were fired and administrators. you had this fallout that i don't think people anticipated.

>> host: how did they not foresee that? because the finite number of resources. now obviously there could have been expectation of fairness, we have a seniority system something and the teachers to our newest would be the first fired, but in the 50's and 60's and 70's probably reasonable to anticipate that black teachers would be fired. was this not foreseeable, may take, or were they sold a bill of goods? >> i think that further at least the naacp lawyers might understanding is they just wanted it to happen. we just needed to get rid of this dual system of education because it was so much more unfair than what that -- you know, having these two systems are you had different salary scales for black-and-white teachers, which was the case before desegregation. you had -- i mean you could not

have any integration between faculty. you have second-hand books. i mean, you had to get rid of that. so i think -- you know, i have no idea if people foresaw. i would imagine that you actually had in the south some ambivalence about this because i do think that, you know, black people saw that this is potentially going to hurt, you know, my school or i am going to lose my job if we have to integrate with the white school because there not going to want me teaching their kids. and there was an interesting polls that were done. not very reliable, but they are interesting in that they showed right after brown v. board of education some ambivalence among black southerners. so i do think that some people side. i just don't think that it was an important -- i mean, getting rid of the segregated schools was may be worth the risk.

i don't know, but, you know, it had this fallout. i think maybe it could have been anticipated, but there was a report that was done. you had a civil rights activists actively saying and tracking this and saying, look, look at how many black teachers we had come how many we have now, and how many we used to have. and so people pointed it out at the time. >> host: the subtext of your book, and tell me if i'm reading too much into it. black activists, black policymakers, bike advocacy groups are constantly chasing symbolic victories at the expense of real policy victories. it seems to me that this was receivable. this seems to me that as you indicate to all the signs were there but that the end of legal segregation was such an important symbolic victory may

be not just for black people but for america, brown v. board of education is such an extraordinary symbolic victory, but all of these other sort of residual effects are literally collateral damage. as you said, we in the legal segregation. is that a fair analysis? >> it is hard for me to say, you know, i think every time we looked at these issues their is a feasibility. the dream of what could be and what is practical and what we could do. we will was politically possible in the 50's obviously brown v. board of education had a lot of other ripple effects that i think were a big deal in or very important. so, you know, i don't know if the calculations were made and they said, you know, jen going to get everything we want the we

will at least get this big symbolic victory i think weighing the difference is that it was still an importance victory. i wrote in the but. >> host: you have to read the book. it wasn't good. >> guest: it did not work like it was supposed to is what i think happened. i think there was this stream, this was going to up open up the doors for black and white children to be educated together and they were going to finally share resources . there was limited progress, but still today you can look at the resources that minority schools have and compare them to suburbs. you will see huge disparities.

>> host: there is another piece of this. part of it is that collateral effect, liquidating schools because the teachers. those sorts of things, but also the community effect. in your book you talk about how people were pushing back not just because teachers were fired and that stuff and not just because programs were lost all of that was important. but the communities were broken. the communities were actually fragmented. >> guest: i think that was one of the big issues that people talk about, that never in school. and i don't have an experience of a neighborhood school, so i don't really get that because i did not go to my neighbor and school. my schools, i love my elementary school. but that was a very important thing to people. a cherished that. >> host: what is a neighborhood school, that perspective of for a community? >> especially looking back at

the history of southern black education, there is this deeper pride and in the in a lot of the schools that were built because it started out that these were, you know, black education in this out started out in people's homes and churches. and so this, you know, it was not something that white society set here is your school does something that the black community built themselves. and they get help from philanthropists in the north in a lot of cases, but there was a lot of pride in that. and so this is more than just, you know, the school down the street where i send my child. it's convenient to my house and all my neighbors and their kids there and we can go to hang out at the pta meetings. we built this. this is our pride of our community. it was very symbolic. >> host: i want to know you down. symbolic is trumping the practical in policies. >> guest: yes. but i think symbolic -- i think

that symbolic matters. i think that it matters to people. it's about your identity and who you are. and there is this tension that look at, people are grappling with, and my american or emma african-american? how you deal with assimilation and success and the larger society and still maintain my history and identity which is really what people, you know, the heart of what a lot of people are grappling with a mad least from the activists in got involved with this. how much of that identity and culture do i have to give up in order to succeed in a larger society. so i think there is symbolism, but there are also deeper questions that i think are really important. >> host: absolutely. and part of how people hang on to things, the collective, the community identity is your having a kind of stable,

somewhat dense even community of people that included middle-class people, working-class people, not rich, but upper middle-class, the professional class along with the blue collar class, and the same neighborhood which is not even exclusive to your book. a broader element of how the black community was fragmented because of desegregation. you had black folk the other way. >> guest: absolutely. my previous book, the gains that i was looking at, suburbanization and it is interesting, the rate for blacks is much bigger. the numbers are smaller because there are fewer, but people are running out of there. >> no one wants to live there. that is the argument. mosul, in security, crumbling housing, opportunities. it was bad.

but people don't want to live there either. they leave the first chance they get, but they are you and says that that is why they stay and rebuild. the best and brightest and the most educated and well researched and responsible. if they all leave the neighborhood falls. you know, take your kid to the charter school, the own school, whenever. so to that extent, at your book is a pretty persuasive argument. this is not a good thing because we're getting the best people and letting them go to schools elsewhere. >> yes. i am a journalist. always careful. i do think there was this very detrimental fallout. and the answer is not to just not to have lifted the segregation laws. obviously that is not the answer

i think the role of federal policies that made it attractive for people to move out of the city and into the suburbs and sort of take apart these vibrant city neighborhoods that used to exist that were mixed in, and so on. it was not just individual choices. hey, let's all move to the suburbs of a sudden. this is the federal policy choices and local policy choices to make this easy for the people who had the money to get out to get out. so, you know, i think that there was a shoes, but it was not just desegregation. a lot of other things that went on to facilitate what went wrong so just as, you know, desegregation did not fix the achievement gap it helped probably. also did not cause all these problems. it was one of the factors.

>> host: i think your book released by lights that complexity in a masterful way. talk to me about the supreme court because that -- you mention that while this was routed in black parents advocate for themselves and their neighborhoods and in some ways just their schools, ultimately this becomes a supreme court fight that changes the complexion of the nation. it really kind of in desegregation. >> it got out of their hands. i think they could not find anyone to be their lawyer in the first place, so they found this guy, to the gordon, who is a very interesting guy. very enthusiastic and saw this as a great opportunity and was compelled by the story, but it really was taken up by white parents who wanted this -- want to set send there kids to school. the ticket to the supreme court. was a big deal in some ways.

i think it sort of was also just kind of a bookend to something that was already happening. so even when that decision came down, you know, most school districts in the nation were not doing busting any more, so in some ways it was an official end to something that had already been leading in a lot of ways. >> host: but it did allow for a a conversation about the role that race played in public -- public policy. it still matters now. at the same time this is happening, we're still wrestling with the question of what role race should play. essentially you made an codified it as a trend toward saying race cannot be the only factor. can be a factor, but not the only factor. >> guest: that's right. >> host: whether the other factors that can now play based upon the supreme court decision? >> guest: they have been creating education. and using proxy's for race.

you have, you know, you can look their race and poverty levels and they tend to coincide. but there has been -- i mean, the big idea now is that we should be looking at the socio-economic status and really using that as a basis of integrating schools at the c-span level and also a big conversation happening with ira as well rather than affirmative action which tends to, you know, the best and brightest. we should be using a class instead because there are so few persons attending universities. >> host: you could end up in a place like louis will. a bunch of poor white kids in one school of the bunch of poor black kids and another. >> yes. and that think that is, you know, the complaint all along. one of the big complaints all along is that you still had

high-powered preschools. but i think it is a compelling case. i think the people who say that race still matters say that, yes, in come can capture, it can be a proxy for making sure we also have racial diversity, but racial diversity matters because people come with different experiences. they argue that it matters. and the experience of race is more than just about and come. so for black americans, the wealth gap i think is much harder to measure, but you may have differentiation is in income, for example. but wealth is a different matter, if that makes sense. >> host: absolutely. and come to make it the property. which says more. >> host: -- >> guest: which is harder to

capture. the argument is those experiences really are caught up. the history of discrimination and history of segregation that continue the institution of racism in this country. but those things are not captured by just looking a class so that is the argument. we still need to do affirmative-action. i understand that the nationalist argument. we want to protect our schools. but was there a division within the community that sort of mirror the argument that the academic elites say we need to value of diversity for its own sake. there is something good in school about having blacks and whites and latinos in the same place, something in your

argument. maybe that latino might have to be offered a school. >> guest: it is interesting because the two families that i focused on, they, within the mom and the dollar each case had different opinions about this which i, you know, in jackson's case she had this horrible experience when she was in the 70's, white working class fairly high poverty neighborhood out in the excerpts, you know, kids spitting at her, throwing rocks and just awful experience. so it was nervous to send her kids when they had to be bused eventually. they had a good experience to answer sheet and a change to mind. she saw that this is important. my kids have had opportunities

that they would not have had if they had gone to the school across the street which was still, a struggling. and so she, you know, when we talked about it she really said camino, these are opportunities are important. then the people they would not have met. they had these networks, experiences that they would not have gone camping. would not have been able to do that for them. and so with that said, she had a really good experience because she ended up going to school actually nearby neighborhood. ..

>> that's interesting. >> host: that they interpret your book that way. navy a conservative or a

libertarian this is what happens when government tinkers and engineers and as a result we hurt the very people we try to help. >> that is not necessarily what i was trying to do give off. [laughter] >> host: it is not absurd. >> guest: the issue with that is who is running government and for whose benefit? but the decisions are made for the most part with a certain constituency in mind and to keep them happy. it was not just the white middle class but to keep the black civil rights liberal and that is contingent but

very intense lee all these as well but in truth of what works i a listen to lots of people every day and i don't have an answer i spent time in the good schools that seem to be working something that is problematic and why it works so well. it is a hard question to answer but i am interested in the efforts of school choice and diversity at the same time which is a new trend. this is what charter schools are more interested in and here in new york city but also the purpose is to

create divergent student bodies. people was say that is voluntary but there is a huge controversy. >> part of it is the anti-a charter school movement why don't you work on the schools that we have verses' opening a new school to those students who are doing well? >> with high parental involvement to be taken off the top leaving traditional public schools with less. >> exactly. that is the main issue but i went to a fascinating school in atlanta where the mixed income community was a

planned community where not only was it not diverse but they created a school in the issue was they had to tear down the projects before he and and people could not say and benefit. >> host: often it is the dislocation. i said a person could read this with democratic liberal tinkering. i could say we rejected that argument but another is why we need school choice with the most liberal sense possible that we should let the options flow and go

wherever they have access to education and increase funding for the home school options than the charter school movement should expand to become privatized. would it be fair to interpret your book that way of school choice? >> no. choice is not a bad thing kids benefit from different learning environments and parents know best but one issue is equity. if we care about equity and providing a good option there are kids you don't have the parents to navigate the choices. and you find that in new york city where in

high-school there are hundreds of choices of schools that you can go to but the comprehensive high schools a lot has struggled because they get those who don't make the active choice. so there are problems that come with it to so we could look back and to think this did work and and it is a way to make them better to try to repeat the same mistakes. >> host: so you have not solved it? [laughter] u?ooacq1qq#

and they were entertaining people who could find things in this city and she had very nice things. so this dual image of a country lady, she was not that exactly but it was more of her comfort in the big city then her actual appearance.

>> ladies and gentlemen, will come to the texas book festival we are glad to have you with us and we are especially glad to have our authors with us today. paul tough, author of how children succeed, meira levinson of no citizen left behind and michael brick of saving the school. there are some connections year. my name is mark diana a state representative and a member of the public education committee in the texas house. i want to start with educational context i got a press release from the texas state education agency on

the fourth grade national assessment of educational progress, a texas texas, african-american students performed force best of all african-american students in the country compared to every other cohort in every other state in the country. hispanic students were the sixth best on the fourth grade level. a anglo where that eight best and i thought that is an interesting record. a little different than what i expected. so i went to the naep web site and found in the aggregate those scores ranked 29th in the country. that is not so great but how is it possible when you have

those coleworts and evaluate each is in the top 10% in the country, we although they comprise over 95 percent of the student population how is it collectively they are 29? the answer it turns out, african-american and hispanic students in texas significantly underperform anglo students. and in texas african-american and a close students make up a significantly larger share of the entire student population. when you are lower performing categories are a larger percentage of your student population, you can have all free student groups

in the top 10 and still be 29th in the country when combined. our public schools doing a good job or are they mediocre? how they doing with the student population relative to where they started, we are doing a better job of moving them up but because of the demographics the mountain is steeper than all other states. if you measure not necessarily our black students to other black students but what is the output of the system? there 29th of the purpose of the education system produces a citizenry two's sustain democracy in the work force to sustain prosperity, we're not getting the job done by that measure. as bad as context we have a

lot to learn from these three books and i will ask paul tough to start with his book, how children succeed. >> thank you representative i will just talk for a couple of minutes how children succeed to give you some background. it is an argument against conventional wisdom that the one quality that makes the most difference how well they do is there iq. i am writing about and educators and scientists you take on the idea for a different set of skills perserverance, conscientious ness, optimism that are better predictors of how well children do long-term. part of the book is about neuroscience and the underpinning is formed and

to with a pediatrician in san francisco to improve the environment with kids and dealing with adolescents when the qualities become character and in different ways to a private school principal in new york city to mentors working in the highest poverty neighborhood in chicago to give students the support and help that they need to do better in this realm. how to help kids improve but to look at new innovative ideas but in the process to do better in high school and in college and in life.

>> to follow-up beach introduction was one question, while reporting for "the new york times" you turn the book in to whatever it takes people took note and we aggressively pursued of a grab from the government to replicate the model. yesterday's one of the kips students read you a paragraph you had written tear four years ago and your response was a lot of this book is my repudiation of what i had wrote then. and i read this book as a validation of the science behind the wraparound cradle to college model makes sense with the harlem children's own but is this said

confirmation of the harlem zone strategy or deviation? >> i hope i did not say it was a repudiation but she was talking about one particular of mind where i talked about middle class values to be an important part of education so a lot of that is to look more deeply at the skills that are more important part of what successful schools are teaching but how this relates to my reporting, a little of both. aid is an affirmation that the best way that i know to deliver services to hide poverty neighborhoods is to do it comprehensively working in a school alone is not enough. that's cool needs to be surrounded by a survey childhood programs

programs, after-school programs all about what the children tries to provide the program it is too small for my liking but to spur different committees in to replicating the model. this does cast doubt on the harlem school model that the chapters that are focused on the charter schools was very focused on standardized test results and as a journalist that is a handy device because each year focuses entirely on the standardized test it is a great narrative device when the test scores, all and see there are principals and teachers and legislators that feel

that way but the research i read it challenges the idea they measure the skills that matter most. i have come to be more of a daughter of the educational for it -- focus the u.s. is using its clout now i believed more in the infrastructure he has built around the schools. >> meira levinson is not just a faculty member at the harvard graduate school but as a high-school graduate of austin, texas. [applause] i will let her speak. >> i want to pick up on the dilemma from the beginning how to interpret the scores

and should be looked at the aggregate for the subgroup work texas is outperforming 80% for every subgroup? what i want to argue or talk about is we are assessed as a nation with the question academically. it takes up the lot of work with public education and is this good or bad or the african american students sandy we need to think about much more than academic achievements especially but not only as measured by standardized test, even good ones like naep. because kids are doing much more but the idea that it

should not only be a nice place to spend 12 for 13 years of your life but all too often it isn't especially serving low income kids of color is lousy and demoralizing and disrespectful and demeaning but also that time should prepare them to lead happy and productive the filled lives as workers and citizens. for to think what citizenship is in this country we talk about patriotism and who is not a citizen and we don't take seriously what it means to be a citizen and why we are a democracy in what we would look like if we are a better

democracy than today. so i write about we have a civic empowerment gap that is as documented as the achievement gap. so we know if you are well educated, have a fair amount of money, natural born psittacine you're much more likely to have voted, be a member of the political party, contacted by a candidate, have a conversation with the government officials, even to protest or do other things, all of these with the more privileged society but right now our demographic characteristics that is determining who has power as a citizen and that

is an anti-democratic. we should not predict to has power based on that cholera somebody's skin, the language they speak at home or the wealth in the bank. as said teacher for eight years and the proud graduate of the austin independent school district i realized and understood my fellow opportunities -- colleagues the way they can see civic and political power to fight for democracy and justice on their behalf and others' behalf. it will not be one child rising up out of poverty and is keeping the neighborhood and making those behind but kids together to improve

communities where they are so they could lead to a better democracy. >> let me follow that up with this concern. him i have a background of getting young people engaged in programs, running campaign academy eyes of young people's engagement when they are on my side. [laughter] when we engage the public school system in that, i have a friend whose views are the exact opposite of mine she teaches a majority minority class a and would take them to the tea party

gatherings of following your model. so what about boundaries and politics of public education? >> it is important we engage students as citizens. one argument is right now we fully recognize to teach kids to be writers they should be writing every day to master mathematics they should be doing math everyday and that it is reasonable for a kid who wants to play baseball will start at five for six then the league can play every single year then join high-school team then preseason, postseason and a lot of time practicing with the ball. be spent no time asking students to do citizenship or practice citizenship.

if we reform education to close a civic empowerment gap then yes she may take her students to the tea party rallies but she will also take him to the city council hearings, testify in front of a school board why they should have the advisory, she will have them write letters and she will we teaching a politically engaged class but not ideologically particular. there are ways to teach the class from being driven and partisan but yet politically engaged to do citizenship in the way they are writers and mathematicians. >> michael brick former "new york times" reporter who now lives in austin was texas

roots and his book is about reagan high school and everybody remembers if they did not make the scores they would be shut down by the state of texas. >> thank you for the being of conversation. it tells the story of reagin high school that opened in the '60s as the pride of the city the madrigal singers and go bay blue banners all over town and 40 years later the police raided academically unacceptable for years in a row a lot of families fled for charter schools, a magnet schools

and and other public schools. the year that the representative was referring to, it was a one-year deadline the teachers and administrators had to save the school. it follows the principle a chemistry teacher named candice, as they try to raise scores which involves taming of the broken system and number crunching and at the same time to realize they cannot be in any sustainable fashion to bring the numbers up and they will need tutoring and they spent the your trying to put into

place what we remember about a high-school with clubs and sports teams in may be one-third of the book is about basketball. [laughter] >> he was a sports reporter for a part of time and the chapters about basketball are very vivid. [laughter] >> i asked the other to policy questions but what would you have written after spending one year inside reagan high school and inside their lives if jay q. had not scored their winning basket and if they had not crossed the threshold to the projection measure that year on the standardized