neither one of us are new. and it is not much different. and from a leader should standpoint i have always been open and transparent. i have always been open to it. .. >> gentlemen, i am extremely

concerned, as i'm sure you are, about the young people in detroit. we have heard our schools described as pipelines to prisons. one of the issues that people don't talk about but think about a lot in detroit are the scores of young people, they don't have jobs, we don't have the recreational centers we used to have, the training we used to have. what commitments can you give us now that, as mayor, you will make sure these young people have better opportunities for jobs, for recreation and for the future in detroit that you both say you want to create. >> moderator: mike. duggan: my turn? well, i think it is absolutely the center question. there are many things i disagree with, but none more than the priorities he put on recreations and parks. he basically said parks and recreation are here, we're just going to cut them off, and i think that's a terrible judgment because if we do not provide something for these young people to do, we're just going to be

hiring police down the road to catch them. we may not be able to afford to build stand-alone recreation centers in the future, but we could potentially hire staff and partner with them to open these up as opposed to running our own centers, and i want to do more what we did at the detroit medical center where we started project genesis, we hired a hundred high school kids to work for $10 in the dmc facilities because it's hard for these children to be something if they haven't seen it, and eight years later kids we hired as juniors are working full-time jobs at dmc. we need to do more of that for our young people. napoleon: you know, cliff, i was not born a child of privilege. my grandfather was a sharecropper with a third grade education. my dad was a sharecropper with an eighth grade education. he came here with great promise of making a living for their family.

educating our children is the quickest way to lift them up out of the circumstances that they are in. we have to recognize that our kids enter school not equal, but they come in on two different tracks. there's a 30 million word gap that our kids have when they walk in the door. educating children in an urban environment is a challenge. it's a challenge that i understand. having worked in that environment as the head of the child abuse -- [inaudible] head of the gang unit, head of the youth section in the detroit police department, working with the detroit public school system for years and years at a time, 13 years of my career. the mayor of the city of detroit has to be the strongest advocate of education of any person in this community including the superintendent. duggan: this is one of the few times sheriff napoleon and i are going to completely agree. i don't believe that means taking over the schools. i think it means finding lots of ways to partner. it is hard for our teachers to teach when the children are not in the classroom, and yet the

city is not providing the kind of truancy support that we ought to be doing. and i want to come back to project genesis. it's my intention to go to every business leader in this community and say let's create job opportunities, part time in summer, so these kids can see the kinds of job opportunities there are. napoleon: once again i have to say that it's amazing to me that my opponent will say that he's opposed to the mayor taking or anyone taking over our school system when he has served on the eaa board as its treasurer. that is part of the takeover of the school system that is educating our children. how can you be against it when you are a part of it? that system needs to come back under the control of the residents of this city just like city government so that we can move forward and educate our babies from the city of detroit. >> moderator: gentlemen, there's been much conversation about the city of detroit being reinvented not just from the fiscal standpoint, from geography in terms of where neighborhoods are located.

mayor bing put forth a plan about shrinking some of the neighborhoods, your quick thoughts on the needs to shrink neighborhoods and which ones should be the ones that would go or add and what would you do, and sheriff, let me start with you. napoleon: you know, i have gone through all of the information that was put out by detroit future cities, and a lot of it i agree with. i'm just not certain i agree with shrinking the city from the perspective of, you know, putting people out of their homes and relocating semisomeplace different than -- someplace different than where been. i think about my mother, she's been in her house since 1960. the neighborhood is not the same neighborhood that she raised her children in, it's not the same area. but to tell her after all this time that she has to leave her house and go someplace else because you want to shrink the city is, i think, a little unfair and insensitive. we have to be more creative in what we do. and as it relates to the urban farming, you know, the city of detroit was once a great

metropolis. i think it can be that again if we have the vision and the foresight to do it. i just haven't given up on the city of detroit. we're going to be bigger, we're going to be better, we're going to be stronger. duggan: and this is the difference between us. i have a plan which is on my web site, dugganfordetroit.com. what do you do with neighborhoods that only have two or three houses on that block? i agree, nobody should be pressuring you to leave it if you don't want to go, but can we create positive incentives? here's what i want to do, we're going to go back and take the abandoned houses in the neighborhoods that have one or two vacancies and sell them on the internet as we did when i was a prosecutor. i want to go to those blocks and say to the folks if you want to move, no pressure, but we'll give you the option. we'll give you triple the credit on your house to move into this neighborhood. so if your house is worth $10,000 on a block where there's only two left, we'll let you move in a house worth $0,000

and -- $30,000 and fill in another neighborhood. i think we can get people to do things at once, fill in the neighborhoods we need filled in so we can build our population and also allow some people who want to have the option to move. >> moderator: are you okay? napoleon: something's flying around. >> moderator: a republican fly in the house here. [laughter] napoleon: you said that, carol, i didn't. look, i have an economic development plan for our neighborhoods that will put anchors in every community in this city, in every new council district. and from there we will grow out. i hope to see our city, the city that i grew up in where you have livable, walkable, sustainable neighborhood, where you get rid of the blight, you build new houses, you bring more residents in. detroit has an opportunity to regrow itself and be the great city that it was once again. and i'm not saying i disagree with what mike says, i just have a different idea. duggan: and let me come back again to the specific plans. so here's the next piece of what

i want to do. when we move the folks out of these sparsely-populated neighborhoods, we're going to sit down and partner with the neighborhood groups and say what do you want to do with that stretch of land? do you want a community garden? a recreation area? so we'll move some of the people out of the declining nakeds, but then we'll -- neighborhoods, but then we'll partner with the community groups to see what we can do to reuse that property. when we start creating that kind of partnership, then we'll start using our land well. >> moderator: i'm going to ask you both to be a copy editor here for a moment. it's january, 2015. each of you are mayor at this time. what will be different for the city of detroit, and what will they say about the difference you made to the city in your first year? napoleon: detroit, the miracle city. it is bigger, it is stronger, it is greater, it is tougher, it is prettier, it is better than it's ever been. duggan: i have a clear plan on what i want to do, so here's where we've got to go to first year. we are going to get the police to show up. we are going to cut that police

response time so people and businesses feel safe. second, we are going to demand accountability from the street light repair crews so we can stop living in the dark. and third, we're going to start to take these abandoned homes. if we can do that, we can bring the neighborhoods back, and then the other thing i'm going to do that first year is i'm going to do similar to what we ran at dmc. i want to start a city of detroit car insurance plan where we offer auto insurance. it is absolutely ridiculous the car insurance rates in the city, it is -- >> moderator: and that'll have to be the last word here. again, we're winding down on the questions, but with time for closing statement here and, again, by toes of a coin -- toss of a coin, mike duggan you go first. duggan: well, it's been almost a year now since i left the job i loved at dmc, and i've campaigned in every corner of this city and this week did my 238th house party. i've been campaigning living room to living room, backyard to backyard, church to church, and

i've been greeted with warmth and kindness. now, it hasn't all been easy, we had a period of time where i got thrown off the ballot for filing my petitions too early, and every place i went people in this city said, mike, do a write-in. and we saw some dirty tricks. they sued me. people said, don't worry, we can spell, and 48,000 people spelled my name properly and filled in the circle, and i want to say thank you. and i'll promise you one hinge, that if you'll trust me with your vote on november 5th, i will fight just as hard the next four years as your mayor to help build the detroit that the people of this city deserve. >> moderator: and we'll hear now from sheriff benny napoleon. napoleon: detroit, this is a serious election. i have a neighborhood revitalization plan that is online that's 63 pages long. it's going to revitalize this community in a way that it has never seen in the last 50 years. i have a square mile initiative that will make this city safe,

livable, walkable and sustainable once again. one square mile at a time. but let me just say this, my opponent says that he's been come anything and out of detroit for the last 32 years. how many of you have seen him in that last 33 years -- 32 years before he began to run for mayor? while he was sleeping, i put on a bulletproof vest, a 40 caliber block and patrolled these cities. while he was sleeping we were arresting murderers, carjackers and break-ins. while he was sleeping, we were getting rid of young boys incorporated and the chambers brothers. while he was sleeping i was taking flags off the coffins of slain police officers who had given their lives for you while you were sleeping. >> moderator: and, gentlemen, i want to thank you both for taking time to be part of this, and cha concludes the first televised debate between mike duggan and benny napoleon with. again, thank you both for being here. i want to give my thanks to

cliff, dave and -- [inaudible] and if once was not snuff, you can watch this debate on wkbd-tv at 5 p.m. on sunday, october 27th, and you can also listen on news radio 950 this tuesday, october 22nd. the next conversation between these two gentlemen will take place wednesday, october 23rd, at the detroit economic club of which i'm pleased again to be moderating. from all of us here on your michigan matters crew, thanks for being with us. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> coming up here on c-span2, live coverage of pakistan's

prime minister speaking at the u.s. institute of peace. he's expected to address u.s./pakistan relations, regional stability and counterterrorism. that's at 11 a.m. eastern. >> you're watching c-span2 with politics and public affairs. weekdays featuring live coverage of the u.s. senate. on weeknights watch key public policy events and every weekend the latest nonfiction authors and books on booktv. you can see past programs and get our schedules at our web sites, and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. >> north carolina governor pat mccrory was at the heritage foundation on monday talking about challenges facing states including whether or not to expand medicaid under the affordable care act. this is a little less than an hour. of. [inaudible conversations]

>> good morning. welcome to the heritage foundation and our douglas and sarah allison auditorium. would you all please join me in welcoming our special guest, the governor of north carolina, pat mccrory, and becky morton dunlop, vice president here at the heritage foundation. lady and gentleman? [applause] and, hopefully, microphones are working, and we will start. test 'em out. >> very good. test these mic, and you'll give us the high sign. >> yep. >> okay. well, welcome, welcome, welcome

to the heritage foundation. you know, one of the things that we love to do at the heritage foundation is bring reformers to our auditorium. it's a great thing to be a reformer and to use principles, conservative principles, the founders' principles to do those kinds of reforms. so today we have brought to our stage a reformer, the governor of north carolina, pat mccrory, is the 74rd governor of that great state. he also served as the mayor of charlotte, any of you who have ever visited charlotte, you know that he's very proud of that city and his experience there. he also served on the city council. but in addition to that, he has a great record if the private sector. he worked for duke energy for quite a few years and also with sales consulting for a private sector company and on strategic initiatives. all of these things do a very good job of preparing someone to

be the governor of the tenth large state in the country. so welcome, governor. >> it's an honor to be here. thanks for having me here at heritage. thank you so much. good to see so many young people, too, it's great. [applause] >> thank you. well, governor, we're going to have a conversation here today, and there are so many things on my list, we'll just start through it, and i'll try to keep an eye on the clock so we have a few minutes left for questions. >> all right. >> but tell us a little bit, if you will, first of all, about your governing principles. what do you think about when you think about governing a state as large and diverse as north carolina? >> one principle may surprise you, and it's a principle i bring from the private sector that i don't think we talk enough about in state capitals or in washington, d.c., and that is operations. one of the things that people forget about as executive of the tenth largest state in the united states of america, not enough focus is put on operational issues. everyone, including the media,

tends to talk about policy and politics. but i think one of the majors of this country -- challenges of this country and many states is how do you get the work done in an efficient and effective way. and we're seeing that with obamacare right now. the debate about obamacare was primarily about policy which is a good debate on both sides of the issue. but there was very little discussion about how's it going to be implemented and what are the details of implementation, what's it going to cost, what are the ramifications. and i see that in state government, also, is that when i came into office in january of this year, none of my cabinet meetings were about operational issues. some of our civil protections for state workers and how do you reward good state workers and, frankly, deal with state workers that might not be doing a good job, how do you deal with transportation issues, is the policy really based upon where do we need the roads, is it

based upon the politics of road building? and, therefore, we have to think about the operational issues. we have budget issues from an operational standpoint. i have my budget director in the audience, in fact, and we had many budget issues. are we really dealing with the true budget issues of the day? are we doing true accounting of what the unfunded liabilities are on the books and off the books? those are operational issues that executives are dealing with in fortune 500 companies every day and, frankly, i think we -- both you and the heritage foundation and us in government -- need to be talking about operational issues. the other two basic, two or three basic things that are required from my cabinet is, one, ethics. that was the first requirement, we must do what's right. the second requirement that i have is we have to work as a team. there can't be any turf among my cabinet team. and we have to work as one team in the most effective and

efficient operations possible. and the third is initiate policies that have a long-term impact on the state, not just an impact for the next election cycle, but an impact for generations to come. and that don't just put band-aids on short-term fixes, but are long-term fixes to very complex problems that all of us are dealing with in this very competitive world right now. >> well, that sounds like a lecture that could have been given in a business school, so thank you for -- >> well, we should be, we should be thinking like business people but also realize that we're in a tough political environment. but a lot of times, again, we don't think about the operational issues, and i encourage all of the -- especially the young people here -- to put your operational skills into place in some of your thinking. >> and, of course, your shareholders, so to speak r the taxpayers. >> well, not only that, they're customers. they're customers. and we're doing a total review of dmv right now, and what better area than dmv than to

think about as a retail customer. when you walk into dmv, what is your first impression as you wait an hour and 45 minutes to get a simple renewal of the driver's license? it's the first impression of government. and so we're doing a total business retail assessment of dmv, and we hope to have some major announcements come january, february time period where we're going to restructure how you get a driver's license in north carolina and, hopefully, make it a more customer-friendly experience. >> well, that does sound exciting. well, now, listen, you also have kind of at the cusp of an historic time in north carolina where for the first time, i think, in over a hundred yearsing with you have republican majorities in the statehouse, the delegates and the senators. how is that -- how has that kind of changed the outlook about how your party and your administration go about doing business? >> well, i still have the same

programmer ifs -- parameters of ethics, long-term solutions and breaking down the barriers and political turf. and whether you're in one party or not, you're still going to have some of those issues that you have to deal with. but it's been great working with a team. and i'd say in my first nine months in office we got 80% of what we wanted from republican house and senate. which is a pretty good track record. but there were some things where i disagreed. tax reform, for example. we initiated the most dynamic tax reform that we saw in this nation in the past four or five years. we were the only state in the nation that did tax reform. but it wasn't easy, because i had some people on one side in my senate primarily who wanted to institute tax reform, and i didn't think their numbers added up. and as a conservative, i want to make sure the numbers add up. i want to do true accounting in

the long run while also trying to stimulate the economy. so i had to require them to compromise, i had to compromise some. but in doing so, we came up with a pragmatic, reasonable tax reform which, frankly, stepped on the toes of everyone a little bit. but we knew we had to change to become not only competitive with the nation and the world, but, you know, i've got to beat nikki haley and bill mcdonald next door to me. [laughter] we have good republican governors that are my friends and my competitors. and we're fighting for jobs against each other. and in doing so, i'm going to respect what virginia, tennessee and south carolina are doing, but as i've told nikki, very good friend of mine, we're going to beat you for jobs. and she thinks the same way. we act as though we're private sector competitors while we're also partners in energy and things like that. >> it sounds to me, though -- correct me if i'm mistaken -- but it sounds to me that, first of all, you actually are

personally, deeply engaged in coming up with solutions working with the legislative branch which perhaps washington could take a few lessons from and, secondly, that you have the view that principle cannot be compromised, but preferences are where we can work out our differences. >> absolutely. you work within a philosophy, but within that philosophy you know you've got to give and take. and i asked with my legislature i focused on primarily three areas, the economy, education and government efficiency. frankly, everything outside that area i didn't pay a lot of attention to. now, i had certain state reps and senators that focused on other things, which they need to, but i wanted to focus as the executive branch on the economy, education and government efficiency. and in doing so, i asked for tax reform, and we helped present the major plan for tax reform. we asked for transportation reform. we initiated the first transportation reform since

1988. we asked for state personnel reform. i got about 30% of what we really need. we asked for major reform in commerce. it's such confusion in my commerce department in dealing with customers, both new and existing customers, that we had all these middle people involved, and we needed to streamline it. and, in fact, we're going to privatize part of my commerce department. this is radical, what some would say is radical change. i think it's pragmatic change. and i'm very proud of that. >> well, that sounds exciting. tell us a little bit about this commerce department reform. >> you know, it what was happeng was that that we had a lot of different departments that were set up many years ago for good reasons. we had a rural center, we had a biotech center, we had the charlotte regional partnership which was where i was as mayor of charlotte, so we had all these different groups working for commerce but not in a coordinated, effective and efficient manner. and it also had a lot of

overhead. and the customer was confused when it came to north carolina, who do we talk to if we're interested in investing in north carolina? and what we found out, they had to talk to all these different groups, and no one person was in charge. i don't think that's good customer service. so we're putting all these people under one umbrella, and we're also privatizing the marketing of north carolina and make it more responsive to the customer and those who are in the private sector of my commerce department, they'll be rewarded. they'll be paid for that. but it's going to be based upon results, not based upon a kind of a civil servicemennalty. >> well -- mentality. >> well, that sounds exciting. let me turn quickly since you're talking about economic growth and tourism and things like that to transportation. you know, we think as conservatives that government has very few responsibilities, but what responsibilities they have they should do well. and, of course, the infrastructure to allow people and goods and services to move

around not only the commonwealth or the state, but the nation is a responsibility. so tell us about your transportation reforms. >> well, first of all, i kind of consider myself, i'm an infrastructure fan. i believe government has a major role in infrastructure to support the private sector. and i consider myself kind of an eisenhower republican. in fact, i don't think we as republicans talk about dwight david eisenhower enough. not only was he a great allied supreme commander during world war ii and an american hero, but he was a great president for two terms. and what he did was bring about a vision of infrastructure or for the future. he connected rural with urban areas with our interstate highway system. he connected the east with the west with our highway system which we're still enjoying today. to me, that was well spent federal money. but with a vision connecting the economy and commerce with government's responsibility for infrastructure. and here after the 1950s when

he was president, he was president when i was born, we're still seeing the results of that. now, i took that same philosophy as mayor of charlotte. i introduced in 1996 a 25-year infrastructure plan. they're now in the 18th or 19th year of that plan. and it's showing results. and what we did was we showed the taxpayers exactly what the plan was before the taxpayers were asked to invest in it. so what i want to do for the state of north carolina is present a 25-year and even a 50-year infrastructure plan in four areas; transportation, energy, water and communications. it's always dangerous to say i have three or four ideas. you're afraid to forget one these days. [laughter] but we, i think we as republicans, we as conservatives need to present a vision for the next generation. a vision of where's our transportation going to take us

and how's it going to connect commerce and trade to jobs? and show that plan in 3-d. this is the plan percent next 50 years -- for the next 50 years for your kids and your grandkids. and then we need to do the same thing with communications, especially in rural areas. rural america is hurting right now. i'm telling you, the unemployment rate is 15 to 20 to 25%. small rural towns in north carolina and throughout the united states. we've got to connect them to the economic centers of the world, much less our states. and one way to do that is through communications and other types of infrastructure. same thing as with energy. if we do not have cheap and reliable energy in our country in the future, we're going to suffer. that's what helped build manufacturing in our nation. and right now i have no idea what our energy plan is for our nation, but i think part of my job is to present an energy plan for the state of north carolina, and i plan to do just that.

>> well, you know, it is very exciting because in all of these areas there's much that that the private sector can do to come alongside, you know, government ideas like this to provide the goods and services that people need. do you envision the private sector playing a role in any of your transportation ideas? and, obviously, in energy that would be the case. >> absolutely. in fact, the private sector from trucking firms to infrastructure firms, they want to be at the table. and i think there are incredible opportunities for public/private cooperation. and public/private partnerships in the building of new roads. it shouldn't just be all government. it should be incentives for the private sector to build them quicker and faster and even have the hot lanes where money is paid in certain ways and governor daniels did this in indiana, we're looking at certain ways to share private/public sector risk in future infrastructure.

most companies know that if you do not have the infrastructure for the future, they're not going to move here. you've got to have the ports, you've got to have the highways, you've got to have the rail. and this is what stays for generations. and the biggest mistake that i think this administration made, and i said this in a "wall street journal" editorial when i was mayor, was with the stimulus money which was almost a trillion dollars of stimulus money. most people think that money was spent on infrastructure. when, in fact, very little was spent on infrastructure. at least roosevelt and eisenhower, democrat and republican, spent money on infrastructure that is still here with us today. what we did during the last six years was we put money on short-term infrastructure, repaving roads or putting -- widen the road a little bit. the money's gone. that was borrowed money which your kids and your grandkids are going to be paying for for many years to come. that would have been an

excellent opportunity to show a vision for the future and then invest that money which would stay while you pay the debt. >> yeah. >> now you're paying the debt on potholes that have to be refilled again. that's basically what i said in a "wall street journal" article six or seven years ago and, sadly, that's come to fruition. >> well, as we talk about transportation being important for economic development, so too is an educated constituency, an educated citizenry. talk to me a little bit about the education reforms that you have advanced and put in place and some of the challenges you see ahead. >> well, one of the first policies that i talked about actually when i ran in '08, i lost a gubernatorial election in '08 during the unique presidential election time. but i stressed then that there's not enough emphasis on vocational training, technical training and math and science training, because right now i think one of the biggest dangers the united states of america is

there's no one to replace the baby boomers who are engineers, who are technicians at this point in time. in fact, even with a high unemployment rate in our country, there are job openings for welders, there are job openings for mechanics, for electricians. and that pay a lot more money than a lot of four-year college degrees at this point in time. and i think we as a country have misled young people in saying the only way to success is to have a four-year college degree. now, i think that is a great way to success. but i think another pathway to success is to get a two-year technical degree or certification. very similar to what you see in germany during the last 20, 25 years. it's well respected, it's seen as prestigious, and i think we need to do the same thing in america, and our economy has to have it. companies have to have the next

generation understand an hvac system, understand how to fix and repair something and innovate something. we're not talking about that enough. i think we got caught up in a little academic elitism thinking that everyone had to have a master's degree. well, the economy doesn't need to have everyone have a master's degree. you have to have vocational training. >> we need those master plumbers and those master electricians. >> and you know what? i used to tell a story where i had a person come in and put new wooden floors down in my house, and he was working his tail off. have you ever seen someone put down wooden floors? it's a science. you have to understand both geometry andal algebra. it's a science. and after working on a very hot day in my house, he put it down, and here i was the college boy saying, hey, why don't you stay over for dinner. why don't you have dinner with me. he said, oh, no, i'm going to eat dinner at my house on lake norman. that's a pretty nice place to live. [laughter] and i'm sure he had a very, very

nice house on lake norman. and guess what? he deserved it. he deserved it. he had a skill which the market needed at this point in time. so that's one area of educational reform. the first bill i signed as governor was a vocational career path degree for high school students, a curriculum for high school students in which they have a choice; four-year college curriculum for high school students or a vocational curriculum. and by the way, you can change your mind. and one is not easier than the other, they're just different. they're different. and we should respect each one. >> well, and i think it's important point to underscore here that not only are you emphasizing the options, but students and their parents can make different choices as students mature and change their ideas and their minds. that's huge. >> in fact, you know, a lot of people start vocational training end up starting a business, and then they might end up getting a

college degree and a master's degree in business or a law degree to help them run a business that they started. so things happen in different orders. heck, i've seen a lot of four-year college students go back to a two-year school. i have a niece that graduated from east carolina university, and then she went back and got her nursing degree at the vocational school. doesn't have to always happen in the order that we seem to think the institutions require. the market might demand the order. we ought to follow the market's lead. >> yes. and you've also done some things, as i understand it, to help students who might be in failing schools. >> yeah, no doubt about it. well, first of all, we've got to start measuring results. one of the first things we did in our budget, and i'm very proud of this, is that even in our universities and our two-year community colleges is that we ought not pay government funds to a school based upon

just how many students they have, but what are the results. what are the results of reading and math and basic skills and their graduation record, but also the results of getting those kids jobs. not just debt, but jobs. so what we did, for example, with our two-year community colleges is that we changed the formula a little bit where we reward those classes that cost more, that have a smaller volume of kids or students in those classes, but they have about 100% job placement rate. we shouldn't punish them for that because it costs more. so we put in technical training funds for smaller classes that have higher job placement. we ought to think the same outcomes for our elementary schools or middle schools and our high schools. and so we're thinking long term. >> and how about the tuition tax credit scholarship fund that has gone in place.

>> what we're doing, we're doing several things. first of all, i'm a big promoter of charter schools. and which, by the way, most people don't know are public schools. i think there's a lot of mischaracterization of charter schools. charter schools are public schools. we also have a voucher system where i'd call it a scholarship system for those kids especially who cannot get their needs met due to the public school maybe not having what they need. and so we're doing a lot of different things. and we also want to do pay for performance for our teachers. we're instituting a system, and we're going to get feedback. in fact, just in the last two weeks i'm putting together a teachers' committee which will help me come up, government come up with the idea on how do we reward good teachers. you know, when all of us go to school, the principals, students and other teachers know who the good teachers are. don't you? everyone knows who's the good

teacher, who's the bad teacher, who's the easy teacher. we all know it in high school, we know it in college. we need to start rewarding the good teachers. and that's what we want to do, pay for performance system for high schools and our elementary schools. and we also, i think, need to start paying our math and science teachers more money based upon the market, because they tend to have a higher attrition rate. and that can change year by -- year in and year out. i was a recruiter for duke power company, and some years you paid electrical engineers more than civil engineers based upon what the marketplace is. sometimes you pay a business major more than a liberal arts major based upon the marketplace. i think we need to adjust the marketplace pay standards to education also. >> well, no -- >> and it varies year by year. >> one of the areas where heritage has been deeply involved in education reform is the issue of common core. >> yeah. >> and i know in north carolina the legislature passed legislation putting common core in place, but as we understand

it from some of our allies around the state, that is getting some critical review and perhaps some reexamination. is that something that your education team is taking a look at? >> i'm actually an advocate for common core as a concept especially with the emphasis on math and science. if we do not get better in math and science and basic reading in our nation, we will not be competitive with the rest of the world. and i think our standards should be worldwide standards. the problem is in its implementation, in its testing. and i think right now north carolina, there are over 100 tests that happen to be given by teachers, and they're now only testing teaching by a test. and i think that's far too many tests. i think 13 more were added due to the race to the top federal grants that were extended, and one of the reasons north carolina got that was because of these new tests of common core.

i'm an advocate of common core. but you cannot just ask teachers to do only test. so i think the problem is not common core, the problem is often in the implementation of common core and thinking this way instead of bigger picture. >> be well, i must say i'm a virginian, and we're competitive in education, too, so we think our standards in virginia actually are better than these national standards. so be careful, we might be competing with you. >> i have no problem with national standards, but the states should determine their standards. but i'm telling you right now, every state's standard should be worldwide standards that better get better in math and science and basic reading. because that's what's hurting our country. i think the biggest challenge to our country in the future. >> well, it is, it is no, it is not something that heritage takes lightly and, of course, we watch the district of columbia education system, and we see

firsthand here that so many young children are actually forced to go to schools that are failing and are not safe -- >> yeah. and you had a superintendent and, frankly, a mayor who was pushing for higher standards -- >> that's right. >> -- and demanding results of the teachers and the principals, and they kicked him out. >> yep, yep. >> which is a sad commentary. >> but competition is good, and i think -- >> competition is the best thing for education. and by the way, i'll tell you another thing that's going to change competition is this right here. this and the ipad or any type of device. this is going to connect the rich with the poor. the poorest person can get the best education if we can connect them to communication, rural to urban. you'll be able to take -- in fact, now you can take chemistry classes on your ipad in which you can actually pour chemicals from one to another through a simulation on your ipad. i think education's going to change in the future where it won't be all about bricks and

mortar and the incredible capital expense we put into education, but it'll be more about operating expense. and using technology. that means we don't depend upon technology by itself. we need to facilitate this technology. but if the public education doesn't recognize this quick enough, the private sector will. and it will go around the public sector. georgia tech, for example, is now offering just three or four weeks ago offered courses for half the price through technology than they offer on campus. and believe me, kids are going to do that. if they can save their student debt. >> yeah. >> so the marketplace is going to look at technology much more aggressive ways within a very short period of time. >> okay. well, let me shift gears once again and talk a little bit about medicaid expansion. this is, obviously, a challenge and, again, heritage has been active in research in this area, and i know that some of the

experiences you've had in north carolina might have provided some lessons, let's say, that one can learn at the state level about all these expansions and reforms. >> well, first of all, you've got to understand medicaid expansion is a part of the obamacare legislation. in fact, the supreme court ruling that came out of washington was really 4-4-1. one vote was really chief justice roberts which gave the states a choice on whether or not they would do medicaid expansion or not. that was the one vote. it was one of the most unique supreme court rulings in our history. and at least he did that in that one vote. what's ironic is i made a decision as governor and so did my legislature, we decided not to do medicaid expansion. and it's almost, and the media almost says you're not doing medicaid expansion, they don't realize that's part of obamacare. and the reason we did not do medicaid expansion was, first of

all, we couldn't deal with the debt of our existing medicaid. which was, is for women, the elderly, children and the disabled. what medicaid expansion does is expand that to much more of our population. and i could argue for good reasons, because they're being served often in the emergency room and so forth. the dilemma i had was this: in a very period of short period of i would have had to have put a brand new bureaucracy together at a time period that i couldn't meet, i knew i couldn't meet it when my current bureaucracy couldn't handle the medicaid cost overruns that were currently happening. by the way, in my state it ended up being over $500 million over projections set forth by my previous legislature and my previous governor. over $500 million overprojection. that's out of a $20 billion budget, so it's a pretty big

hit. there went all my teacher raises right there or infrastructure money. so the medicaid expansion is, i think, one of most difficult issues on governors' plates right now. let me tell you the other issue that we are having, and that is that the rules and standards weren't written. in fact, even in the last four or five weeks the administration has sent us new regs on medicaid, and no one is talking about it. we just got a new reg which might, in fact, force us to do medicaid expansion whether we want to or not in the upcoming year because a new reg came out five, six, seven weeks ago which basically said if a person goes to the hospital and they say they cannot pay for it and they might not even qualify for medicaid, they can still sign up for medicaid even if they're not under one of the four or five characteristics of a medicaid recipient. if they do that, the hospital

then and that person can fill -- can bill the state of north carolina for two months. and after two months if the state finds out that they did not qualify for medicaid, they will be taken off of medicaid. but the state still has to pay for that two months. and that is two months of tests and services that we did not have budgeted. so it's almost around that 4-4-1 vote by the administration which then says the state has to take 100% of the responsibility. so now i have to make a decision, wait a minute, the fed says they'll give it to me for free for three years, but after the third year we have to pay 10%. and one of the reasons i didn't do that is because i didn't know 10% of what. 10% of what? we had no idea what the future cost would be. but now that the new reg has come in, i'm in a very difficult position on what decision to make. we've with checked the

constitutionality of it, and our lawyers say the administration has every right to do what they're doing even based upon the supreme court ruling. it comes as a surprise to me. >> yeah. >> but these are the difficult parameters of obamacare right now that are still being rolled out that, frankly, haven't been discussed enough publicly. all the publicity has been on computer system which everyone knew wasn't going to work. i've got my own computer system that i inherited that had been delayed for a year or two by my previous administration, and i'm having a heck of a time with the rollout of a statewide is system for health care. and the minute we looked at that my first two or three weeks, i actually said there's no way the federal government can roll this out. i think, frankly, behind the scenes everyone knew there was going to be an operational breakdown which goes full circle, operations. >> well, i must say, you have some really outstanding members

of your house congressional district who have been really trying to point out some of these challenges -- >> yeah, tom tillis, speaker of the house, has done an outstanding job. he's running for the u.s. senate right now. >> oh, is he? >> so he's on the campaign trail, but he comes from ibm, and he understands operations. so much of our discussions was, were about i.s. issues. another basic operational issue was previous administrations and state government which were the democrats, they were underfunding basic maintenance of buildings and i.s. systems. and sooner or later that catches up to you. and it's easy to build a new building and worry about operations later, but believe me, sooner or later your roof or hvac system needs to be replaced. >> things wear out, that's for sure. >> they wear out. you mess around with capital and operating and transfer costs between the two which are basic accounting no-nos, it catches

up to you sooner or later. >> well, listen, one of your biggest constituencies in north carolina is the military. talk to us a little bit about some of the challenges you face with such a large number of people serving in the military and the challenges that brings to a state. >> well, it's a challenge, but i also see it as an opportunity, because as we withdraw from both afghanistan and iraq, you're going to have a lot of military people with technical skills and leadership skills that industry is going to be seeking. so we're setting up, in fact, one of the reasons i'm in town today is i'm going to be meeting with the u.s. army, and we're going to be setting up job training programs. so when these returning veterans come back, we can use them as recruitment tools for industry both existing and new industry to return back to the private sector. now, one of the things we know we have to do is some of them

already know how to fix a car or fix a truck or fix a computer system or do welding, but they haven't got the certification. so what we're trying to do is can we jump through the hoops of the bureaucracy and have some of these military people just test out instead of going through the process of having to sign up for courses which they can easily do in their sleep because they've been doing it under fire in iraq or afghanistan. why do they have to go through all these courses? so we're looking at ways we can test them out. we've already tested out with truck drivers. we're kind of doing a speed-up certification for truck drivers that are returning from the military, and we can place them immediately into jobs that are open in north carolina. >> you know, one of the other places where we've heard that that is of interest is, actually, in teaching. some of these veterans are excellent teachers and could actually move into a classroom. is that something you're thinking to have? >> absolutely. not only for veterans, but we

think in the private sector. i actually have my teaching degree. >> oh. >> my goal was to be a teacher. in the private sector, i was actually a manager of training for the utility company, so i did teach, adult teaching. but right now for me to go back into teaching i'd have to go through a lot of different hoops to, again, recertify my teaching degree. i think i'm pretty qualified to teach civics at least and a little bit of history. [laughter] and we need to make it especially easier for engineers and math and algebra, potential people coming from the private sector to return to teaching or to get into teaching, not put them through what we typically require of a college graduate. >> right. well, this has been wonderful. i wonder if you would mind taking a couple questions from folks in our audience. >> i'd be honored. >> we've got a couple microphones and, andrew, i'll let you identify a questioner for us. please identify yourself,

please, and where you're from. >> hi, governor, my name is daniel strauss, i'm a reporter for a web site called talking points memo. >> for what memosome. >> talking points memo. >> great. >> i was wondering if you could talk a little bit about the voter id law which is getting a lot of attention right now and really what your take on the lawsuit is. it seems like this is the second in a number of lawsuits that the obama administration wants to put on states related to the preclearance standards. so i was wondering if you could respond to that, maybe address how your administration plans to approach it especially with roy cooper who is planning to run for governor and as a democrat, but he said he wants to follow your lead on this. >> well, first of all, i think the eric holder's lawsuit is both political and without merit. our laws have been greatly exaggerated, especially by "the new york times" and other publications. they're very common sense laws

which we require a government-issued id to vote which over 32 states currently do in the united states of america, and i notice he didn't sue any of those other 32 states. we still have the exact number of early voting hours open which the national media doesn't talk about as we did before. we're just trying to take some of the politics out of where you place the early voting which was extremely political. in fact, new york does not have early voting. north carolina does, and i noticed eric holder is not suing the state of new york. and we're very, very -- we have even more transparency in our voting rules where now we actually are prohibiting lobbyists from bundling money -- which you were allowed to do in the past -- and be the bundlers of money, and we have stricter rules for lobbyists that often is not mentioned. and the list goes on and on and on. but, you know, we require a voter id to get a tattoo, to get

with sudafed, to get food stamps, to get on an airplane, to get almost any government service in north carolina right now you have to have an id. and we're, our legislation is actually offering free ids, and the first election in which you have to have these id in place is 2016 election. so people have three years to get an id. and by the way, we still have early voting and voting by mail which you can do early voting which you don't even need an id on. so someone could do it from a nursing home through the mail at this point in time. so i think our voting id laws by the national media and, yes, even by some of our local media in north carolina has been greatly exaggerated, and it's common sense reform which protects the integrity of our ballot box. regarding the attorney general, my only comment regarding his is he can have his personal opinion, but as a lawyer you should not publicize your

personal opinion if you're going to be defending the people who are promoting in the common sense law. promoting this common sense law. good lawyers don't do that. >> very good. thank you, governor. here. yes, please. >> governor, i'm grace-marie turner with the galen institute, but i want to ask you about tax policy because i'm very interested in your ideas about tax reform in north carolina. scott hodge and steve edison both who have either worked for or closely with heritage over many years have a piece in todd's "wall street journal" about the difficulty of tax reform at the federal level primarily because of the complexities of how it's going to be scored; flat, static scoring. >> i've been through it. >> i know. and i'm interested in how in north carolina, how you intend to get through these barriers to show the incredible economic growth that can come from lowering tax rates even though

with static scoring that's hard for budget people, budget persons here to -- >> well, first of all, i've never met a liberal or conservative who's against tax reform until it hits the one tax break that they might get. and i will say this, both liberals and conservatives can be rather hypocritical on this because some of my opposition on tax reform came from both sides of the aisle who said i'm all for tax reform, but you better not touch that one. it might have been an interest group, a loophole that was associated with their own business, even a state legislator's business. so everyone's for tax reform until it's their loophole that we might close. and, you know, right now, you know, we reduce the corporate tax rate and the income tax rate which i think are the two tax rates which hindrance our competitive way to both retain and recruit new businesses. but i had to step on the toes of

some people. when you go to a movie now, you have to pay a sales tax. you had to to buy popcorn anyway. so we now have a sales tax on movie theater tickets to make up for the income tax we reduced. by the way, we now have a tax on newspapers. maybe that's one reason newspapers are mad at me, i don't know. [laughter] they haven't brought up that conflict. but we have a tax on newspapers. it's more of a consumption tax as opposed to a tax punishing productivity. and i'm an advocate of rewarding productivity. and that's the type of tax philosophy i have. and you have to sell that. and i'm, i've had my most conservative businessman say i'm all for that, but i can't believe you just closed that tax loophole on my law firm. i go, we did because you're not going to have any clients if you don't have any businesses in north carolina. >> okay, we -- >> so that's just to let you

know that's -- you've got to sell the long-term impact, not is short term. >> well, we like that idea of encouraging people to become producers. now, you have -- >> manufacturing, i'm still a strong advocate in two areas that we've got to etch size more. -- emphasize more. my state has to be a country that makes things, builds things and innovates thicks and ag, grow things, produce things. ag is still huge in our country, and we ought to talk about it more. and energy. we have to have an energy policy, and i'm a big advocate for drilling offshore and also inland drilling. and i encourage while i'm in d.c. here support governor mcdonald, myself and nikki haley to allow us to begin the lease process off the atlantic coast for natural gas and for oil. >> absolutely. well, there are so many things we didn't get to, first of all, let me say we'd love to have you come back, and, you know, do another agenda. but let me, let me just ask you

a couple quick questions here as we wrap up. you have economic growth in north carolina, things have turned around a bit, and are you -- >> our unemployment rate has gone down 16%, but we were the third highest unemployment rate in the country k. most people didn't realize that. we're the sixth highest now. that's not good enough. i'm not about to go brag about that. i want tock the sixth -- to be the sixth lowest unemployment rate. that would be the visionary goal. but north carolina, we've got to unleash the resources. our energy resources, our manufacturing resources, our talent, our universities, our ag, and we've got to start treating our people as customers, not as adversaries. >> this sounds like a good trend line. one final question, nascar. [laughter] >> i'm a big nascar fan. mcmurray won the race, we only had one wreck at talladega this weekend. [laughter] >> but nascar's big in -- >> you've been to the nascar

hall of fame. >> i have been. it's wonderful, in charlotte. everyone should go and visit that because most people know what they see on television or read in the headlines of the sports page, and they never really get to the understanding -- >> well, let me tell you from a business perspective why i'm a big fan of nascar and jimmie johnson and jeff gordon and dale jr., they're all great people and brian vickers, get well with the blood clot as soon as possible. but let me tell you what nascar industry does. the private sector jobs of nascar, go to rick hendricks' machine shop and, first of all, you can eat off the floor, but you have aerodynamic engineers, engine builders, and what's happening is as mayor and as governor i'm using that work force to recruit the automobile industry and the defense industry. because they can repair things quickly. notice how quick they repair after a wreck? well, that's what the automobile and the defense industry knows.

so the talent of the people who work on these crews is high-tech, and so it's not just for travel and tourism that i support the great races that we have in north carolina, but it's also to recruit new industry. become a hub of that type of manufacturing talent in north carolina. >> well, that's great. we have a creative, innovative, dynamic governor, let's thank him for coming to heritage today. [applause] >> thank you all very much. >> thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> live here at the u.s. institute of peace in washington, d.c. for remarks from pakistani prime minister nawaz sharif. among the topics he's likely to address include relations between the two countries, counterterrorism and the use of drones as well as u.s. economic and military aid to pakistan. prime minister sharif is scheduled to meet privately with president obama tomorrow at the white house with. stephen hadley, a former national security adviser and the u.s. institute of peace's senior adviser on international

affairs, will moderate this morning's discussion. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> we're expecting this live event to get underway shortly here at the u.s. institute of peace in washington d.c. we're expecting remarks from the pakistani prime minister, nawaz sharif. he'll be expected to address topics such as counterterrorism and the use of drones as well as u.s. economic and military aid to pakistan. stephen hadley, formerly of the national security adviser, will be moderating this discussion. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> we're just getting word that the pakistani prime minister is running behind schedule, so this event will be a few minutes late. so in the meantime, we'll show you a segment on the role of gerrymandering in american politics from this morning's washington journal. as soon as this live event gets under way, we'll show you that as well.

viewers like you will send us suggestions for segment, and we'll take them and actually turn them into a segmentment that's the case for our next segment at 9:15 today. the topic is gerrymandering, and the viewer who gave us the suggestion is john middleton, a c-span viewer. mr. middleton, why did you want to send us this suggestion? john middleton, are you there? let's try one more time for mr. middleton. >> caller: hello. >> host: hi, middleton, tanks for joining us. why did you want to learn about the topic of gerrymander oring? >> guest: well, i've been watching various media including c-span over the last several weeks as the discussion of the deficit and the tea party came about, and i got a very clear impression from the media that gerrymandering was something new and nefarious and had been invented by the tea party, and that's how they got to be so powerful. but i didn't think that was the

case. it's not new at all. and so i just thought it was very interesting, the media's current portrayal of gerrymandering and the actual history of it being so very different. >> host: how long have you been interest inside this topic? >> guest: oh, 50 years. i'm an american history major, so i've always been interested in it. >> host: talk a little bit then of the things you've learned either by watching this network or your own study, what have you learned about gerrymandering? what would you think would be of interest to viewers who watch the program and maybe not know it to the extent that you know it? >> caller: gerrymandering is a long standing american tradition, not one that we're necessarily, should be proud of, but it's been there for a long time going back to the era of the founding fathers. you know, reshaping districts to

sort of get the voters that one party or another wants has been around for hundreds of years, and democracy seems to have thrived nonetheless. be. >> host: john middleton, i don't know what state you're calling us from, but what's the state and do you seefects of gerrymandering within your own state? >> caller: i am calling from florida, and, yes, if you just look at the map, you certainly do see some unusual-looking shapes, voting districts. but then again the population in florida is sort of quite skewed towards the coastal regions, and it's very sparse in the middle. so it's not entirely unusual that you would see odd-looking-shaped districts. i'm not really an expert in florida districts per se, but i don't have impression that one

party or another or one faction of a party is really getting often unfair advantage. >> host: and so mr. wasserman -- mr. middleton, i'm sorry, we have a guest on set to talk about the details of gerrymandering. what's the one thing you would like to learn during the segment? >> caller: i would like to understand better how districts are shaped and reshaped and who really makes the decision and what bearing does, you know, everything your census have on it? >> host: john middleton is a c-span viewer and has suggested this segment for today, so we're going to oblige him and actually talk about this discussion. mr. middleton, thank you, first of all, for the suggestion, and i thank you for calling in. >> caller: well, thank you for having the segment. >> host: and, of course, if you at home want to give your own suggestions for segments we can do in the future, you can do so. we've set aside a special e-mail, that e-mail is wj viewer@c-span.org. as promised, joining us on set,

david wasserman from cook political report, he's their editor for activities in the house. you heard mr. middleton talk about his interest, let's start at the beginning. what is gerrymandering? >> guest: mr. middleton's absolutely right, it's not new. back in the early 19th century -- yes, 19th century, governor el bridge gary of massachusetts drew an infamous district that connected various disparate towns for political gain, and the definition is, essentially, manipulation of political boundaries for partisan or other gain. i've order someone say it's lord of the flies on steroids, and i think that's an appropriate way to think about it, and it's a uniquely american law some would say in our political system. in other single-member representative democrats redistricting to update where people live and draw equal political districts is a bureaucratic function that's relatively noncontroversial. in america it's absolutely a

partisan game that's played by both sides. and we see both sides in various states doing it, but predominantly in the last round of redistricting after the 2010 census, it was republicans who were able to gain the most political advantage and win more seats in the house even though they won fewer votes for congress. >> host: so talk a little bit about the process, what goes into the steps of changing these political districts within a state. >> guest: well, every ten years we get fresh census data, and we constantly need to update our political boundaries to reflect not only changes across state lines and apportioned seats among the states, but also then to redistrict within states to reflect where people have moved. and so this is done every ten years after each census. and so we just went through a round of redistricting in 2011 and 2012 following the 2010 census. but there are some states where party control will change in the

middle of the decade can and certain parties will see fit to reevaluate their lines in the middle of the decade. in 2004 in texas, tom delay who was then the majority leader of the house, a republican, didn't like the fact that texas was mostly a republican state and elected mostly democrats to the house. and in 2004 republicans in texas engineered a new plan that eliminated a lot of democratic seats and gave them, basically, what we have now which is a 2 to 1 republican majority from the state of texas. >> host: and so are the decisions to change the boundaries of these districts made by state legislatures only? >> guest: no, actually, that's a good question. but in 30 some odd states, i think it's 36 states redistricting is the responsibility of the legislature, and that's controversial for a lot of voters who believe that voters should be choosing their politicians, not politicians choosing their voters. in seven states we have commissions that are either bipartisan or nonpartisan that are responsible for redrawing lines. the largest state that has a

nonpartisan commission is california. and california implemented a reform in 2006 and 2008 for the 2010 round of redistricting that took power away from the state legislature which was democratic and put it in the hands of a 14-member citizen commission. and that commission was made up of several partisans but also several independent citizens, and they were prohibited from taking into account the residences of incumbents and any partisan data in drafting the lines. and the result was that you had lines that through, i believe 12 sets of incumbents into the same district so they had to find new districts in which to run. for a lot of incumbents it was very challenging, and you saw a whole lot of turnover in california. >> host: our guest is here to talk about the process of gerrymandering in politics. he can answer your questions on in this as well. if you want to give us a call, it is 202-585-3881 for republicans, 202-585-3880 for democrats, 202-585-3882 for

independents, and you can tweet us as c-span wj and e-mail journal@c-span.org. you have given us a map of north carolina to kind of help in our discussion and help illustrate it. here's the map, what are we seeing? >> guest: well, one old axiom of partisan gerrymandering is that the goal is to design wombs for our your own incumbents and tombs for the other side's. and north carolina was a state in redistrict anything 2012. what they were able to do was take a map that had elected seven democrats and six republicans prior to redistricting and engineer a pap that would elect up to -- engineer a map that would elect up to ten republicans, they actually ended up winning nine seats. but what they did was to employ two age-old crafts of gerrymandering called packing and cracking. packing is a term for trying to pack as many of your opponent's voters into overwhelmingly democratic districts as

possible. so you see the 12th district stretching f voting strength of democrats who worked there. and it worked with great concern. >> host: is that where you're talking about the -- >> guest: yes. so the 11th district to the west of the state used to elect a democrat named heath shuler, a blue dog, former redskins' quarterback. but he retired after republicans redrew the lines, and the 11th district elected mark meadows. even though he's a freshman congressman right now, he was the republican who circulated a letter around the house that got 80 signatories that, essentially, usualed speaker boehner to pursue a -- urged speaker boehner to pursue a strategy of shutting down the government unless obamacare was defunded. this can have a legitimate impact on the way we deliberate policy. >> host: i want the give you the opportunity to talk to our guest and ask questions, the number will be on your screens. jean is up from honolulu, hawaii. she is up first, democrats'

line. jean, good morning. >> caller: good morning. yes, i'm very much concerned about this. i think this is one of the worst things for our democracy. in hawaii we do have a commission that does the appointing. however, the people who appoint the commission members are legislators. and i believe the governor does have one or two appoint. how much, because they're appointed -- >> well, some of you have been here for a couple of hours. really appreciate your patience. we are delighted to be hosting prime minister sharif. i think everybody in this room is well aware of the fact that pakistan's success is a world success, and a world success is america's success. and we congratulate pakistan on

a peaceful transition to power, democratic elections. it was a remarkable showing of strength by your party. not expected and quite a showing of strength. i'd like to recognize a few people who are here today. where is ike khan? ike khan is a member of my board, joe you would bridge, kristin lord who is our executive vice president, andrew wilder who is our vice president for south and central asia, and where is muid? he is right here. he is our pakistan director. it was a good team of people that brought this program together, and i thank them all more that. i think everybody in the room is pretty familiar with usip, but we have others who are watching by television, and so i should simply say that the united states institute of peace has a mission globally of attempting to prevent, mitigate and resolve violent conflict.

that's really our focus. and we work very closely with the state department, the defense department, usaid other american usg entities, ngos and then foreign governments, foreign ngos, parties all over the world to further that mission. our most active programs, actually, are now in iraq, afghanistan, pakistan somewhat, our south and central asia program is really quite large. where pakistan alone is concerned, we've convened roughly 80 meetings here at the united states institute of peace with experts from all over the world to talk about pakistan and how to move pakistan forward in a positive way just in the last three years alone. we've cone a lot of -- we've done a lot of analytical work in pakistan looking at the things that sort of prompt violence and what might be done to lessen the likelihood of violence, build the capacity of civil society. we've done track 1.5, 2.0

dialogues both at a community level and then between pakistan and india, bringing groups together to talk about ditches of opinion -- differences of opinion between those two countries. as everybody knows, we're very actively involved in the election process in afghanistan, stability for afghanistan is critically important for stability in the pakistan. the last thing you need is a collapse and an ethnic tsunami arising from afghanistan because it won't be contained simply within afghanistan's borders. the prime minister is in a difficult part of the world. he's got a very difficult job, and we really appreciate his being here. the event will involve remarks from the prime minister, and then we will ask steve hadley, who is also on my board, former national security adviser in the bush administration, to come forward and sit with the prime minister and ask a few questions in a casual setting after the prime minister has finished with his remarks. when we are done, i would ask that everybody remain seated

while the official party leaves, and i thank you for your patience already and hope that you enjoy this event. mr. prime minister, could you come forward? [applause] >> thank you. [background sounds] >> congressman jim marshall, president usip, mr. stephen

hadley, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, i am honored to speak at this prestigious forum on pakistan's vision for regional peace and development. we appreciate usip's noble mission of promoting peace and understanding among nations, and i deeply value your kind invitation. ladies and gentlemen, i have come here as the elected leader of pakistan, a land of ancient civilizations and rich cultural traditions, but a state still young and aspiring to be a modern, pod rate and progressive -- moderate and progressive country of 180 million enterprising, hard working people dreaming of a

better tomorrow and a rapidly-changing world. they also yearn for peace, security and well being that have eluded them for the past many decades. it is their hopes and aspirations that i have come here to voice before this learned gathering. ladies and gentlemen, this has been a momentous year in our history. not only have we had a free, fair and transparent general elections, but a peaceful, dignified transfer of power from one elected government to another. also elected president succeeded another elected president in a graceful ceremony that the entire nation witnessed with a deep sense of satisfaction.

these events would, of course, be of a routine nature to you. but for us they represent a remarkable transformation of our democratic culture, signifying political maturity not only for the electorate, but for the mainstream parties as well. they will surely strengthen the democratic institutions and the rule of law in pakistan. ladies and gentlemen, we view the mandate given to our party as a trust of the nation which we should endeavor to protect and promote in a manner that strengthens the democratic institutions and enhances the welfare of the people. this is a new and confident pakistan, but i am not oblivious of the daunting challenges that we have inherited. my government is fully aware of

the enormous economic and security challenges that face us today. we're also conscious that the people of pakistan have high expectations from us given the fact that in earlier aborted terms in office, we introduced many far-reaching reforms to liberalize the economy, strengthen the private sector, facilitate foreign investment and create a business-friendly climate in the country. these enabled us to complete major infrastructure projects such as modern motorways, ports and airports and dams. we intend to resume our journey where it was interrupted by the military coup in october 1999

both in terms of reforms at home and a new direction in our foreign policy. we want to create a society based on social justice and well being of all our people without any discrimination. ladies and gentlemen, we also recognize the realization of this ambitious agenda requires internal peace and security as well as peace and stability in the neighborhood which is why we are determined to transform our relations with friends around the world. but more importantly, with our immediate neighbors. i am, however, aware that the greatest challenge to pakistan comes from terrorism and extremism. but pakistan is neither a source of -- neither a source of, in or the epicenter of terrorism as is

sometimes alleged. in fact, pakistan itself has been a major victim of the scourge for over a decade. pakistan sacrifices in the struggle against terrorism and extremism are well known. we have faced hundreds of suicide attacks in the past decade, losing over 7,000 of our brave soldiers, security personnel and policemen. while our civilian casualties exceed 40,000 lives. our sacrifices are immeasurable both in terms of the loss of human lives and the damage caused to our infrastructure. excuse me. my government is firmly resolved to bring this cycle of bloodshed

and violence to an end, but it cannot be done overnight, nor can it be done by unleashing senseless force against our citizens without first making every effort to bring the misguided and confused elements of the society back to the mainstream. we also have to insure that the political parties and civil society are on the same page. the political parties and the civil society are on the same page so as to create the enabling environment necessary to tackle this menace. ..

energy sector which has hampered our national goal, and created huge social unrest. major reforms have already been introduced to ensure sound macroeconomic policies to reduce budget deficits and show balance of payment, reduce the country's dependence on foreign loans and assistance. we also engage in efforts to bring half a million new -- [inaudible] these measures enhance attacks distribution ratio from current low of 9%, to 15% by 2018.

it has also been decided to privatize the major state-owned enterprises, including entities such as a national airlines, the steel mills, and the national oil and gas companies. turning to foreign relations, ladies and gentlemen, i wish to state that we firmly believe that a peaceful, stable afghanistan -- pakistan is in afghans wider interest. our efforts are therefore focused on helping the destabilization of afghanistan which is growing to a widely important phase with security and critical transition. pakistan wishes these landmark transitions to be completed peacefully and simply. we also wish the international community to remain engaged in supporting of afghanistan's reconstruction and economic

developments. we hope for and afghanistan that is firmly on the part of stability, and prosperity. as an essential element of our policy, we strongly support and inclusive foreign led and foreign owned peace and negotiation process. during president karzai's recent visit to pakistan, we reaffirm our solidarity with afghanistan and its people. i also ushered president karzai that we wish not to interfere in afghanistan's internal affairs, nor do we have any -- in afghanistan. in fact, it is our earnest hope to see the afghanistan's themselves unite for peace, prosperity and development of their country. simultaneously, we are making

efforts to upgrade our of our relation with afghanistan and all its affairs. my own vision is, ladies and gentlemen, it should be defined by a strong, great an economic partnership. in relation to hosting millions for decades, pakistan is extending assistance to more than $450 million for afghanistan's capacity building. with special focus on infrastructure, health and education sectors. we have also decided to extend the karachi peshawar hallway -- highway. this is our modest contribution to bring afghanistan into the regional economic hub. we believe that we can work with afghanistan to enhance regional and economic cooperation that will establish and reinforce regional energy and indication

corridors. the to corridors are participating in energy projects, namely -- and central asia, south asia, and a project called 1000. this will and that would strengthen efforts and stability and advance our common objectives of focus and prosperity. ladies and gentlemen, our other important neighbor, india, our other important neighbor is india. with which we share a common history as well as common destiny. our past and a future are intertwined. pakistan is happy to see the people of india live in peace and security. the people of pakistan want to resolve all outstanding issues with india through dialogue and

with negotiations. we are confident there are areas where we can make quick progress. we also wish to put ourselves on the path for normalizing relations with india. my meeting with the prime minister last month in new york reflected this desire. and i'm confident that we can overcome challenges and find solutions to all issues as long as we stay engaged. in any case, we do not want isolated incidents to interrupt our dialogue. our message is simple. future prosperity and economic development in south asia depends on peace and security in the region. therefore, all of us have a stake in working for these noble executives. for our own sake as well as for the sake of our future

generations. it is about time that the two sides adjust their -- address their bilateral issues with utmost seriousness in order to avail themselves of the historic opportunity of devoting their energy and resources to development and betterment of the millions. may i add here, ladies and gentlemen, that had our two countries not waste their precious resources in a never ending arms race, we would not only have avoided if utah conflicts, but also emerged as stable and prosperous nations. i wish to assure this august audience that pakistan desires to live in peace with its neighbor. we would not be found wanting, and walking the extra mile. our dream is to realize the potential of mutual beneficial economic cooperation. at the bilateral level as well as the broader regional level.

even more promising are the prospects of into regional cooperation. as a populist energy deficit but technologically advanced region, south asia stands to benefit tremendously from the energy enriched central asia and west asia. there's a huge potential for connectivity. afghanistan provides central india with access to the warm waters of the arabian sea. ladies and gentlemen, contrary to the common perception, pakistan, united states relations have stood the test of times. despite the occasional hiccups, the historic foundation of this vital relationship have always weathered the occasional storm and turbulence. as democracy takes loose in

pakistan, let us build a strong and stable partnership between the two countries. this should be based on mutual interest and mutual respect. as so clearly articulated by president obama in his cairo speech. our two countries share perceptions and interest on a wide range of issues. these include afghanistan peace and stability in south asia and in the middle east as well as extremism and terrorism. moreover, despite the planned drawdown, there would be continuing the for close corporation between the two countries. especially in afghanistan on issues of mutual concern include terrorism, the united nations reform, international economic cooperation, and enlightening. pakistan appreciates the role

the u.s. has started to great in easing tensions between pakistan and india. with this growing influence in india, the u.s. now has the capacity to do more to help the two sides resolve their disputes and in promoting a culture of cooperation. ladies and gentlemen, there is, however, a matter of drone strikes which have deeply disturbed and agitated our people. in my first statement to the parliament, i had reiterate our strong commitment to ensuring an end to the drone attacks. more recently our political parties in a national conference had declared that the use of drones is not only a continued violation of our territorial integrity, but also detrimental to resolving efforts at

eliminating terrorism from our country. this issue has become -- [inaudible] i well ask for an end to drone attacks. ladies and gentlemen, it is my endeavor to approach this important relationship with an open and fresh mind. leaving behind the baggage of deficit and mutual suspicions. instead, cooperation in key areas including create energy technology, education and agriculture under the rubric of strategic dialogue to be the main plan of our partnership. as large democracies, they should be greater interaction between our two countries, not only of the parliamentary level but through exchange of

investment, students, opinion makers, and tourism as these will help to move many of our misperceptions. moreover, the traditionally strong ties at the military level should be -- the vibrant community of pakistani americans is playing an important role in bringing our two nations closer. i'm thankful to them as they constitute a permanent link between our two countries that can and should play an important role in eliminating the negative perceptions. ladies and gentlemen, as a responsible nuclear power and a major developing country, pakistan is destined to play a key role in the region's stability and world peace and security. pakistan remains fully aligned to protecting its sovereignty, technical integrity and independence. without engaging in an arms

race, pakistan will maintain credible minimum deterrence to ensure the region's security and stability. we would never the less consistently pursued the goals of disarmament on a non-discriminatory basis. it is our hope that the united states will fall and evenhanded and nondiscriminatory approach, and feels like civil nuclear cooperation. ladies and gentlemen, as you would be aware, pakistan is a country blessed with enormous human and material resources. it is strategically located at the crossroads of the vast regions of south and east asia on one side, and central asia and west asia on the other. pakistan is a natural land rich, connecting these two vast regions, and thus has the

potential of becoming a hub of transit and create among these regions. with a society of critical media and independent judiciary, -- young politicians and the phenomenal expansion of i.t. network, pakistan is emerging as a modern, knowledge-based society. with a fast developing infrastructure, abundance of skilled labor and attractive investment incentives, pakistan is poised to attract its share from globalization. we have started democratic transition after the may 11 elections, had been hailed by international community. it is also instilled confidence among the investment community within the country and abroad. i avail myself of this

opportunity to invite the united states private sector to join us in efforts for sustained economic growth and development. that a viable economy is the key to progress across the entire spectrum of challenges that we are facing today from terrorism and extremism to development of hostile sector. it is also an essential -- strengthen democracy and the rule of law. this is what we learned from our own experience. and this is what i recall -- this is what i recall president franklin roosevelt emphasizing in one of his speeches. true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. people who are hungry and out of jobs are the stuff of which relationships are made. ladies and gentlemen, i am aware of the fact that the driving motivation of the founding

fathers of this great nation was their intense desire to live in a country where religious freedom and economic opportunities would be available to all. our founding fathers, too, sought to establish a homeland with similar goals. it is, therefore, a national affinity between our peoples. the majority of whom believe in the same and just merciful god which remains, which reminds me of jesus christ's sermon on the mount, when he had declared, blessed are the peacemakers. some six centuries later when the holy quran was revealed to the holy prophet mohammed, peace be upon him, we were reminded of the eternal truth. we make these two nations and tribes so that you may know each

other. the most honored of you in the sight of god is he who is most righteous of few. let us, therefore, endeavor, ladies and gentlemen, to know each other better so that we can all make our modest contribution to making the world a better place. thank you. [applause] >> thank you.

>> again, prime minister, this is a real honor for us to have you here with us today. and thank you for your thoughtful remarks get i just have two or three questions that i thought we might use as an opening for a further conversation and collaboration on some of the points you made in your address. you are seeing widely as someone who prioritizes the bible of the pakistani economy as a way to the country's success, and to peace. how challenging is this task? and do you feel give managed to put the economy on a path to sustained progress, even though you've only been in office for four months? could you talk a little bit about your hopes for the pakistani economy? >> we are facing a huge -- i

just mentioned in my address, and let me tell you, economy is also one of those few challenges that we are confronted with, and our party, while in the 1990s, when you are of course in office came out with very bold economic reforms that became very popular in the country. and we very successful confronted those forms in the 1990s, which also included privatization, the nationalization of the state-owned enterprises which were nationalized in 1971. and with it we managed to privatize and the nationalized banks. other state-owned enterprises very successfully. those institutions we're running into, the losses by the

government are now making huge profits and paying tax worth billions of rupees in pakistan today. >> so economy is very badly affected by the scourge of terrorism that we've been facing in pakistan, as i just mentioned. it's taken more than 40,000 lives in pakistan. and we have to put the economy right of course today. energy is one of our biggest problems. it has not been addressed by the successive governments in pakistan. the previous governments. so this is one of the major issues that are being, which is being dealt with by this government. i hope that the international community will certainly support

us in getting with our economy. not in terms of any aid, but i believe that a lot of other things can be done that open, especially the united states of america, open the doors to promote our trade here in america. and then we are struggling hard to deal with the law and order situation, which, of course, i just mentioned, including the terrorism. and once we are able to effectively deal with it, i believe that the economy will be booming. [inaudible] if you want to have a conducive investment climate in the country, you've got to have, have a good law and order situation in the country. and to have a good law and order

situation in the country you must address the issues of poverty. you must address the issue of unemployment. so both of these are very closely linked to each other. so we are dealing with this issue. these are our top priorities. >> prime minister, you mentioned energy, and nothing seems to have hurt the pakistani economy more in the last few years than the energy crisis. do you agree with that assessment? and could you tell us a little bit about what are your plans for the energy sector, since it is so important for the economic growth you have talked about? >> this is an issue that has been there for the last several years not being addressed by the previous government, the government before that, and we've had outages for several hours in a day. in most of the areas in pakistan

we've been able to fix this problem to some extent, i would say to a small extent, by paying off the circle of debt to the tune of 500 billion immediate after coming into office. i think that was a very big decision and very big step that the government of pakistan, our government to to solve this problem, to at least pay off the debts. and now, of course, pakistan, you see, there are a lot of tears better in the system that we are trying to overcome -- terrorists in the system. under capacity, the plants are running under capacity which are being addressed. and inefficiency of course has crept into her system and we're

trying to address that as well. but we have come out with a very comprehensive power policy, which provides means to the investors to come and invest in pakistan and also we have announced an up front tariff to all those investors so they don't have to waste their time in negotiating the government. very transparent system that would introduce in pakistan. and now pakistan has tremendous potential in three different sectors in the over all energy and power sector. one is of course the hydro generation. pakistan is, produced more than 100,000 megawatts in this sector alone. and the government is undertaking three major projects like, i just named them for you. one is bosh out. the other is -- the third one is

-- what is the name? [inaudible] these three will produce about 15,000 megawatts -- 15,000 megawatts? 16,000 megawatts of electricity. and that we also have an energy park near karachi which will produce about 6600 megawatts. i think this will not only overcome the gap in the supply and demand that we are facing today, but we will also be able to care for the future in energy. and since this is a sector which provides very quick returns to the investor i would like to welcome the american investors, investors and all of the world to come in and take a look at pakistan, invest in this sector. the government of pakistan does provide and will make sure that

the principle and as well as the profits are fully repatriated. >> in your address you spoke very passionately about improving pakistan's relations with india. how do you plan -- [inaudible] [laughter] >> well, it is a difficult subject and it is not without controversy. can you say a little bit about what is your vision, how could they improve the relationship, improve testing and particularly about kashmir, whether there is a formula to bring peace to kashmir. >> my government paved the way in 1990s and laid the foundation for building better relations with india. and they were very kind to undertake first ever state visit to pakistan in 1998.

is so soon after the nuclear technicians by india and then subsequently followed by pakistan. that was a very successful visit, both of us sat across the table, decided that we would resolve all our outstanding issues through negotiations, through peaceful means, and through talks. i think that was a major breakthrough, and also kashmir was mentioned very categorically and that agreement and the treaty with both sun. i was very pleasantly surprised by the statement of him, that mr. nawaz sharif, let us announce, let us declare 1999 as the year of resolution of all our problems that exist between pakistan and india, including the issue of kashmir. i was pleasantly surprised to do

that. and then we both started working for an established back channels. anyway, the whole process was -- by mr. musharraf who toppled the government unconstitutionally. and opposed -- impose martial law in the country. and you know what he did in the country. he even fired the judges, send them home, house arrested them. we are the ones who actually then had to struggle for the reinstatement of all those judges who were unconstitutionally fired and thrown out of office by mr. musharraf. anyway, the subject that i was discussing, we would like to pick up the threats from where we left off in 1999. and then move forward.

i had a good meeting in new york last month, and we discussed all these issues. you see, whenever we want to move forward, something happens and then the process again gets us a setback. for example, when we were about to meet in new york, just weeks and days before that meeting, there were clashes on the line of control. people getting killed from both sides, our side, their side. and then we also were in a very unfortunate arms race since the partition. all of this about 66 years. so we wasted all of this as i mentioned this in my speech also. i believe that we need to get out of this situation. and i believe very strongly that both countries, of course, will

have to sit down together. and if we sit down together, if we seriously address these issues, i don't think we will face any problem in addressing these in solving these issues. cashmere of course it's a very difficult issue, and very difficult to resolve but i think by sitting and talking we will be able to find some way of resolving that, too, because that is a flashpoint. and not only the region but the whole world. and then any solution which can come about will not be able to come about unless the people of all, resides, put their endorsement of this people of india, people of pakistan, and the people of kashmir. and i believe that by talking we

can -- and tn,