effective job particularly with the engagement of bush and clinton in haiti? >> everybody hear that? >> the question correct me if i am wrong, after everything with katrina who wasn't there a better job with the engagement of president bush and clinton in haiti and that is a good question. this isn't the first time aid has gone wrong. people that work in aid and development can tell you story after story of places they have worked where they came in and thought it was going to go another way, came in and it went the other way and there are problems with the aid regime. it isn't a surprise to me or to

anything who knows haiti or disaster relief that many of these issues occurred. they occur here but in a different way after sandy. i was playing close attention to the news as the storm was coming up. and you saw the same tropes come and you saw the fear of mob mentality taking over. and people were looking for the any sign they could find of society breaking down, the looters coming in, and usually blowing it out of proportion because as there are isolated incidents here it wasn't a big

deal. in katrina, that attitude had major implications. you have people who survived a disaster and are trying to stay alive and are getting shot to death by the police because the police assume they are stealing something they are not. so that is a long way of saying that it would have been nice if there had been a period of reflection and new plans were made for disaster relief going forward so when the haitian earthquake hit at an hour of no one's choosing it could have been implemented. it is never too late and i think this would be a great time to have the reflection now.

>> i have a three question for you. number one is what do you think of the current president? and what do you think should have happened to the previous president that returned to haiti? and what do you know about raw earth because i have heard there is discovery of gold and raw material in haiti. and third, what do you think are some of the current solutions they have there with the un being there and stories of abduction. >> what do i think of the current president you asked me and i will dodge that. no i will tell you a little bit. what i think should have happened when they returned -- and what i know about the raw materials under the earth in haiti and what can be done to

fix haiti. okay. easy. i have been waiting for this question. let me tell you the answer is one word: plastics. i have no idea, really. a couple things first of all. this ended up being one of the arks of this book. the president at the time of the quake ends up being quite a major character into book probably to both our surprise. the ark of the book in many ways is what happened to his political trojectory and how that led to the elections which because every in haiti has to happen at the same time occurred the same year as the earthquake a couple months later in november of 2010 and the earthquake was in january. and that resulted into the

election of sweet mickey who was best known before becoming president was a carnival singer and taking off his pants. usually in america we wait until they are president to be part of that. in haiti they reversed it. i like him because his slogan is bald head. right on. he was really interesting because he came in as a political neo fight and was a musician and was seen as a haitian wycliff. he became a candidate people

liked. and it surprised people he became president. many people cry conspiracy and many people would cry that no matter what the election was. while there was -- and you can read about the election, it was a mess. there were all kind of things going on. but he had a large amount of support especially in port of prince. and people really did seem to like him and have high hopes. so far, what i can say is i think you know the safest answer is that it is little too soon to say what the results of his presidency are going to be. my friend in the press in haiti feel a little more restricted than the they did under the

previous president. it isn't anything like what occurred during dictators of the pass. but he is likable and more willing to play ball with the united states states investment plans for haiti of which i am critical of many. but i gus we will see. what is under the ground? there is gold, and minerals in haiti. in the dominican republican, same mounts with enormous amounts of gold so it want surprise me. there are many people that believe everything that is going on in haiti is a grand game to

secure mineral rights for american and canadian companies. i could not prove that at the moment. the president has been willing to sign over the mineral exploration right tos to the pa of the country. open pit mining isn't pleasant if you live around one. i spent two years being ap's correspondent in the dominican republic and reported from an open mine that was open and closed after the price of gold went down but it is going up and it was going to be reopened and there was a huge fight on cleaning up the mine areas. rivers running red with pollutants and dead fish and

people who had lost their water sources and had to walk miles or were abandoned places where their family lived for generations because the land was ruined. if that is the future of haiti, then that is not good. it is not yuusually the host country benefits. the key to everything is rather than plastics gold i am not sure. gold has been a big deal since christopher columbia stumbled upon haiti. i don't think there is one single answer that explains everything going on. and i will let someone else

propose how to fix haiti. i will leave this up to you. >> was the impact of the earthquake largely in port of prince or outside of it? >> this is a fantastic question. it is hard to write about book even. port of prince has stood in for haiti in the imagination of people outside. it is nice way to describe the country by the capital. but it isn't where most of the population lives. it you are trying to increase tourism, which many want to do,

thinking outside of port of prince is important. because the odds of it becoming a tourist destination is strong, but the odds of port of prince becoming a tourist destination is nil. it impacted on where people should send the aid. people in other parts of the county were dealing with problems that were emergency and they were angry the aid was going focused in port of prince. >> [ [inaudible conversation] >> on the one hand the impact of

the earthquake was in southern haiti. port of prince was the largest center of mortality and homelessness and other needs. but it wasn't the only place impacted or the epicenter. it was nearby but in between that there was an area that is the beginning of the country side and the name means cross road and that is why chapter four is called the cross roads. another beautiful city in southern haiti on the other side of the mountains was hard hit. so it was ironic because there was a concern that all of the aid was being focused on port of prince and the parts of the country that were not impack --

impacted by the earthquake were forgotten -- but areas not in port of prince, but on top of the epicenter and i can say, as the resident correspondent, they sent in a big team and many journalist came in and freed a lot of us up to do things and i was the resident guy and spoke creole and i was happy to move around and looked like i needed a break from the city i was getting sent out to other places and even places outside of the quake zone. and i can tell you there were cities that were wiped out.

there were levels of destruction, even surviving the earthquake in port of prince, lagon looked like a monster came out of the ocean and smashed the entire city. many people died. many people survived the collapse of the home. this story isn't in the book so i will share it with you. i was sitting on the back of a pickup truck three or four days after the earthquake typing out my story because i had to file because you have to file. and i was sitting there and just typing what i saw. i think i typed jerry buck film into my mac book. and a group of guys from the

united states came around and we were sitting next to the hull of what had been a hospital. everything was flat and this hospital was cracked and listing. and they came through and they said are you american and i said yes, i am. and they said is the hospital open and i said literally, but clearly not operating. and what they said to me was they came from kansas city and they had raised money and bought pharmaceuticals and bandages and driven out to the city because they heard it was in dire straights and wanted to help and asked if i had seen any ngo's they could give the medicine to. and i said no. and they said are you an ngo and

i said no. and then they thanked me and walked out into the the rebel field. this was like four days after the earthquake and the situation was like this for a while. it was like people, as i said, people were overly focused on port of prince they were not helping other places and that, not to run on too long, but i will say briefly, was a major reason the was so much confusion during the cholera outbreak nine months after the earthquake. the rest of the world was paying to the attention to the news that it was a result of the earthquake. and one of the most important things we were doing in the stories at the beginning and we ended up breaking the story and

showing the link between the un peace keepers bringing the cholera bacteria to the area. it started outside of here and port of prince is here. they are two different populations. it was hard to explain this is outside of the quake zone and very unlikely this is a direct result of the earthquake. and i can talk more about that later. yes. sure. one fast one. >> johnathan, what do you see

for the future of haiti? >> i don't know. i really don't know. i can say this. haiti as a country and port of prince as a city and the other cities of the quake zone and potential quake zone because there have been quakes in northern and northwestern haiti which are hit by floods and tropical storms and hurricanes. those places are no better prepared for disaster than they were on the 12th of january. so if there is another disaster, and a storm that is a bump in the road for other places is devastating there, that is remaining high. there is a chance, and there

could be optimism, and they don't need evidence for that, i share it, as long as people are alive there is hope. as long as, you know, people still have an opportunity to make choices they can make better choices. we in developed nations who are dealing with haiti, we are linked and we are all in one way or another because we are fully invested in the country's past and we have literal investments in the future. it is more productive on their own. we can step back and allow haitians to lead the way and that applies to all kind of countries. we can decide to allow for the

possibility that we have been wrong and made mistakes and we can try to do better for the future. if those are done it is going to be a slow process. things will not turn around immediately. but ten years from now thinks could be better. if we keep going down the road we are going and keep doing what we are doing and what we did before and immediately after the earthquake and what is happening today ten years from now things will be worse. more disaster. put there is no reason that has to happen. i care about the country. i have a lot of friend there. it is wonderful place. i really think if there is some good that can come out of it is that we can look at the mistakes

from the past and chose to make friday a discussion on immigration policy. from the american university public affairs and advocacy institute. er rick rodriguez with the national counsel speaks live at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span2.

i think it's interesting to talk about how the republican party is less unified than the democratic party. when we think about it historically, i think it's an interesting time to be studying this. for the first time in recent years, we are seeing a republican party that is facing many of the struggles that the democratic party faced 20 or 30 years ago when that were triningerring with reform process every four years. the interplay of what happened, how candidates deal with what happened, and the contents which they are running matter more than the underlying substantial itself when it comes to the comeback. especially when you're running in a context which you can present yourself as an abused -- part of an abused group. abused by the system. you can really play that well. whether it's the case that jeff talked about and ash, you know, who used the ten commandments controversy effectively in term

of an attack on christian conservatives. ic that's very much the case. this weekend on c-span, the state of the national parties. and look at the political scandal and politic of recovery. saturday morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern. live sunday on c-span2, your calls and comments for mark levin. now book of it in prime time features author nina.po this is 45 minutes. the

>> i've been a fan of these events that julian has run, and i wrote him wrote him and asked him if he would asking nina. i am glad to be here. and i am the economics and book review editor. we have being tell reported by booktv and a reporter from bearings. so we're covered in two ways. >> everything is on the record. >> whatever you say can be used against you. jeffrey sacks told us this book isn't worth reading. they went on the record last week as declaring i cannot

account for nina being so much c ci synanism. she has to confess she did write about jeffrey sacks for vanity fair. and i think she said you don't have to read the book to blurb it. he said it is a commitment to the live of jeffrey sacks and how much can be achieved by the determination. and admirers will be encouraged to read the book and may have a rude shock when they do.

and it was written the book is about a set of ideas that are intriguing and there is something important in there but it isn't clear what is about. we hit page part here. and another blurb and powerful expose of hubrick and running a muck. that is accurate. but the professor from nyu wrote the following: the most readable account of foreign aid every written it is shown that nothing about foreign aid is easy. jeffrey sachs offered a message to westerners: that they could

be the saver areas who could end poverty in south africa. and realizing it is never that easy. nina is the author of a previous book called "fools rush in" not a bad title for the current book except fool would be change today the singular. she said the book was a different experience but in a way it was similar because they reminded her of jeffrey sachs. but i want to begin by quoting from her statement about sachs and anybody who reads the book

they will realize she bends over backwards to be respectful and kind to do him justice. sachs presents with a choice that is no choice. you either leave people do decide or do something about it. who can resist his plan? after all two million people are scraping by on less than a dollar or two a day. [ applause ] >> tell us for those watching booktv who have never heard of jeffrey sachs -- who was he, how did you meet him and why did you write a book about him? >> he is best known for the 2005-2006 book called the "the

end of poverty" and it is a very hopefully book. i was immediately interested in this man who i read the book. he assured the readers we can end poverty for the millions who live lives of deprivation. i met him in 2006 not long after the book came out. and i wrote a profile of him for vanity fair where i write. and that profile really convinced me this story required

more research and was something i wanted to dedicate more time to. and it became a book and what started out as a six-month magazine project turned into a six or seven year book project. >> i will wrote from easterly's review. you were at ground level and create vivid characters in the book. and it is said you chose two villages and with skills she tells the village's story from the point of view of the local man in charge of sach's project in the village. they come alive on the page. tack about what happened there

and what you saw. >> jeffrey sachs decided for those who are not familiar to start an organization. ...

it's a truly desperate place, eric, populated, sparsely by camel, nomadic camel herders. it really i would say has no reason for being. there is no economy to speak of with the exception of gunrunning and cattle raiding and there is an extraordinary amount of violence as you can imagine as a result of the civil war in somalia. guns pour across the porous border. there is no water and resources are very scarce. it's almost impossible to grow anything. when the rainy season does finally, and it comes with greater increasing -- increase it tends to drain and everything is washed away. one can sometimes go for years where there is no rain at all in everyone's camels died. there is no opportunity and there is no hope. it was in this village that jeffrey sachs proposed to

demonstrate the poverty could be ended and in fact poverty could be ended and a place as desperate as their arguably poverty could be eliminated just about anywhere and if he could prove the experiment so-called worked in a place of such extreme misery, then we should be able to make it work almost anywhere. >> you mentioned here too. talk a little bit more as well as europe. >> what was interesting about jeffrey sachs' ideas from the beginning as he recognized that he had to show that his experiments are his ideas branding poverty could work in various places. so he chose purposely villages that were in a variety of different kinds of agricultural environments. so by sharp contrast to this

arid camel herding community on the border of somalia and kenya the other village i spent a great deal of time and was in the southwestern corner of uganda. it is hilly and the main crop is bananas. it's quite green as long as the soil isn't least of any new bird bird -- nutrients. they are christians as the post to muslims in the somali communities. they are subtle farmers. i spent my time focusing on two communities that have absolutely nothing in common except for the intervention of jeffrey sachs and the millennium villages project. >> all right, oh yes. as another indication of nina munk's dedication she has -- we didn't always see eye-to-eye

and he never asked for my manuscripts nor did he try to censor me. as nina points out all he did was try to deny her access to information whenever the information was unfortunate for his project rio as she writes in her book herself, itself, that when the thing, that things are getting a little bit tough, she for internal purposes found the millennium villages commissioned to most -- postmortem reports to discover why so few farmers had upheld their side of the mutual accountability. when i asked "the new yorker" for copies of airports my request was dismissed.

the reports were not rigorous. i was informed. the millennium had nothing to gain. tell us a vet about what that was in the mutual accountability bargain and what frustration she did experience after a while when these projects were continuing. >> i think jeffrey sachs is a character who too many of us is recognizable. he is a monomaniacal, very brilliant man who set out to try to accomplish something enormous and really staked his career on the claim that he could end poverty and he could do it in our lifetime. and very graciously i think he allowed me to shadow him in a way that is terribly intrusive. anyone of you who have had a journalist like me cover you know that it's intrusive and it's not fun. i asked a lot of questions. i stick rhinos in everywhere and

i demand to see every document in when things were going where, where -- well that was marvelous all-around. jeff sachs was vocal and i was hopeful that the outcome would be a positive one. who doesn't want properties to be ended and yet as the time went by and it's it became clear from the work that i was doing in the villages from the ground level that the hurdles forever greater. i compared it to some people have asked me about the game where you keep trying to knock down the things that pop up. whack-a-mole, thank you, thank you. that's exactly what it is and this was very much sachs and his team would implement villages and make improvements and there would be improvements but as soon as they thought they have solved one problem there would be a host of unintended consequences that would pop up and then they would wind up having to whack all of these problems down. it was really heartbreaking to see what was happening.

from a journalistic standpoint and from the perspective of someone who cares about the visibility and about transparency i suppose you could say as a journalist, what was equally heartbreaking was that jeffrey sachs and his team became ever more entrenched and the data that was coming out of the organization was increasingly problematic. the numbers no longer matched up with what i was seeing and the end reports and the figures and the studies that were coming out were clearly misrepresented. there was a growing amount of august vacation and in so many ways it really mirrored what i think happens unfortunately in a large number of ngos of non-profits generally which is that people are under tremendous pressure to raise money for their donors and to satisfy their donors and to make sure that their donors don't feel that their money has been

wasted. none of us wants to think when we get $100 to an organization that it's all gone missing or it has been stolen or it has just been wasted. and so it was very disheartening for me to see what actually happened. the disconnect between the reality on the ground and what was being told in the official publications and press releases of the organization. >> thanks. i now again i'm going to quote from northern easterly. this is not working. sorry, sorry. excuse me. easterly was not interviewed for the book by nina munk but he is quoted briefly and mentions in his review the following. i quoted one point in "the idealist" as remarking that sachs has tried to create an

island of success in a sea of failure and maybe he is duh but it doesn't address the see of failure. actually, i got that wrong he writes. munk raises doubts about the island of success but you also quote from nina's book in this way. i think a key point and this comes up several times in her book is the following on page 217. the director of u.k. institute of development studies asked the obvious question. who will pay for this once the donors leave? in other words, are we creating an internal dependency? aren't we doing these people a disservice by not providing them with the means for sustainability. nina? >> you know, i said this on a radio interview the other day.

it does not give many me any pleasure to after reporting my book that jeffrey sachs' experiment is by any standards a disappointment certainly and arguably even a failure. i don't take any pleasure in that. and i have said many times and i will continue to say that when i began this project, i truly was hopeful and i'm a great skeptic both by nature and by profession. that is what journalists do, but i was really hopeful that this project would turn out well. and i think they'll easterly who of course we do have to take his review with a grain of salt because he is very well-known as a great jeff sachs nemesis and he too is a brilliant man. when gene mentions i didn't interview easterly for the book i did that on purpose. i did anyone to be able to say

or jeff sachs in particular to be able to say you were swept off your feet by my critics. i wanted to be clear that the it was i personally really is an outsider. i'm not a development expert. i'm not an economist. i'm simply a journalist. i went in there and watch what happened and i followed the story as it unfolded on the ground and frankly i'd spend a lot more time in these villages than any other outsider has been certainly much more time than jeffrey sachs. and it is to migrate unhappiness to report that none of these experiments worked as intended. >> i want to quote one part of the book that william easterly actually criticizes. he said there should be no ad hominem attacks against jeffrey sachs and he interprets as to be an ad hominem attack.

nina writes colon the university would have spent 8 million for townhouse. apart from its six bedrooms and working fireplace is what makes the house appealing is its south facing garden. the day we met the tulips in full bloom, he was grateful for that garden. >> it is a lovely house. [laughter] and i will say that built easterly is an academic. i'm a journalist. i think the details about the kinds of homes people live in are fascinating. call me a voyeuristic you want, that's fine but also to my defense, i think it's important and i think, know that all of us in this room where the live in an 8 million-dollar townhouse for rent in 8000-dollar month studio, we can even begin to understand the gulf between the ways we live between the

extraordinary lives that the lead just by having running water let alone a garden with tulips growing with ease. to me part of the reason why it was important to point out that jeffrey sachs lives in an exquisitely beautiful townhouse on the upper west side is to demonstrate again how difficult it is for someone like jeffrey sachs to even begin to understand what it means to live the way people in the villages that he is trying to help live. i can tell you first-hand again that even in my case, and i spent a great deal of time in these villages. i slept in these huts with evil. i did to the best of my abilities, i attempted to empathize, to really understand how they lived. i don't even begin to scratch the surface. to be in a place where there is nothing as a reporter as an

outsider always knowing that at any moment you can turn around and get the hell out and get on an airplane and go home. by definition it means you don't understand it and i can assure you as much as i don't ever really understand it, jeffrey sachs really really doesn't understand it. [laughter] >> another reason perhaps why jeffrey sachs has another quote from the book. it's never easy to disagree with jeffrey sachs. you might trigger an argument. you might rebel his feathers. in all likelihood he will make you feel small. you may call you misguided or ill-informed are ignorant and millennium project meetings where everyone in the room depended on sachs for his or her paycheck for being a dissenter took courage. that is clearly not a good character reference for anyone to run such a project you might remark. let me finally lead off with a quote from easterly on the general subject of where he

stands and heavy comment on it. it it's not that we choose aid or no aid is easterly's message. aid has had focused successes such as vaccination programs that aid can't achieve the end of poverty. only homegrown development based on the dynamism of individuals in free societies can do that. just as it did for the lucky people of the world whose forebears climbed out of poverty. poor people are their own best resource in escaping poverty. conquering problems every day that are far greater than any you or i have to face. >> i couldn't agree more with that. i don't think that i agree entirely with dell easterly on all of this but arms but i agree with that. i feel strongly and i myself will leave deeply in charity and i believe in foreign aid but i

think that it's very important to differentiate between charity, between doing good and so-called development. when i give money to an organization i adore called mary's meals that helps provide free lunches for school children in poverty-stricken areas, i don't imagine i'm changing the world over the course of history. i'm not that arrogant. i just don't believe that that's possible. so yes. >> okay. we can leave it open for questions. a. >> this is great. thank you very much. two questions. the singer bono is very close to jeff sachs and he is in recent years and particularly a couple of weeks ago made an

announcement about the virtues of free. and investment and lifting the developing world out of poverty. and he is moving more and more in that direction. i was wondering if you happen to interview him because of his closeness with jeff sachs and also when will the day of reckoning come for sachs and the millennial project? the proof is going to be in the pudding someday. it's going to be publicly known and when will that day of reckoning, and when will the jury he in or out or whatever juries to? >> i did in fact interview bono. he was charming. he was one of the nicest people i have interviewed. he didn't hold me up for hours. that somehow it appears that celebrities due to poor journalist. i think bono is very much reflecting what the popular opinion is. when bono began with jeffrey sachs were my start working on the story it was very much that moment where people, the general

public seemed to be behind a great surge in foreign aid that was a real belief i think still that or at least popular support for heavy influxes of foreign aid i think we have seen a dramatic shift and most recently with obama's visit to africa. i think it was made pointedly clear that the popular opinion is absolutely not to increase foreign aid. americans in survey after survey are against that for better or worse that more and more there is an idea of what we should be doing is backing investment investment in african helping business development helping the economic growth that quite frankly it is happening in some countries rather vigorously. and i forget you're the question. oh yes, my book. read my book. [inaudible] >> very soon i am hopeful. >> to quote the great economist pt bauer that aid, foreign aid

can actually do harm and it does harm simply by empowering and strengthening governments that suppress development in their own countries. the whole approach that all aid is good, sometimes no. sometimes a does harm by suppressing development. don smith had a question. >> is there any indication that george soros or any of his staff is ready up look? >> i have a soft spot for george soros because to his great credit he was really, interviewed him very early on in this project and jeff sachs at the time. he is a cool customer and he said very casually, 50 million bucks. it might work, it might not work through the worst thing that

happens is it doesn't work and i've just given away 50 million bucks for humanitarian cause and hey if it does work, well that's a bet i'm willing to take. as you know george soros is someone who likes high stake beds. >> rob milburn will you give george soros a call to find out if he read the book in what he thinks now put his $50 million did and where else he might spend that money, maybe on real development. >> or on a honeymoon. he got married last week. i don't read your book and i have to say all the reviews i've read and what i've heard tonight am absolutely inclined to read it but what i don't understand from what i've read and heard so far as what were the methods employed? what was he doing with the money how is it being spent and what was the plan? >> that's a very good question and the fundamental question and apart from just telling you to read my book the truth of the matter is there's nothing about jeff sachs's prescriptions that

are actually -- absolutely novel. what is prescribing is rather than just building a school in a poor community or just digging a well his idea was that people were trapped by poverty in way that if he just looked after one problem without solving all of them holistically as an academic likes to say that there was no point. it was really a matter of a single-minded focus and doing a lot of things all at the same time, putting in the health care linick recruiting nurses, building wealth and bringing in diesel generators, solving the water problem in trying to hit everything in one -- a combination. some basic health services and schools and bringing in teacher, mosquito nets, sort of a packet of the dozen i would say a sick

interventions. fertilizer and high-yield seeds and vaccinations for livestock. really a packet of fairly low-cost interventions that in his mind did them all at once had a sort of exponential impact. >> hi. i have to confess nina munk is my friend and classmate from colombia but i will ask a legitimate question. i'm originally from uganda and i was in uganda within the ugandan who worked with jeffrey sachs on some of these programs and he said the key problem was that he didn't listen a lot. he wanted to for example talk to presidents and not secretaries of the ministries who actually knew what was happening on the ground. my question is, how much was it

about jeffrey sachs caring about the people and the projects and how much was said about him trying to prove that jeffrey sachs could do this amazing thing that perhaps would never be duplicated again and be remembered her a long time? he wondered why with all these these connections why did he have programs that could make capital available to african entrepreneurs. we know they're entrepreneurs who lacked access to capital my final question is do you think is the consequence of this whole experience with jeffrey sachs there's going to be some sort of a bat lash, people that might want to engage africa effectively will become a little reluctant now because of the experience with jeffrey sachs. >> milton is such an interesting question. i myself pondered often with jeffrey sachs, was he just deluded or was he actually

conning himself? it was often difficult for me to understand why he didn't seem to be following the advice on the ground and why he didn't seem able to change course as i think watching it from the outside it seemed that he should have. and i think in the end, i feel very strongly that he has some of you know and gene alluded to here has been sharply critical of me and my book sense that has come out. i think there's a real poignancy there is sadness because of course you have to wonder, is refusing to engage since some of the ideas might look in refusing to discuss openly some of the failures of the project, is that in the best interest of the poor people in rural africa orders

that an invest -- invested -- of jeff sachs and that's something you alluded to. it's something i can only venture to guess that. i really don't know. i forget what your other question is. you mentioned about the under secretaries and other people in the african ministries at lower levels. the truth of the matter is, there is i think in some way everything is in this together when it comes to not telling the truth about the failure of these programs. and i think not only the villagers whom i interviewed, not only the secretaries of different levels in the government and ministries in africa, not only the presidents, the last thing they want even if they know that jeff sachs broke limbs are ludicrous and is never going to work they are perfectly happy for obvious reasons to continue to encourage the

infusion of this aid. the villagers themselves, i mean one of the astonishing discoveries when you spend enough time in these villages you discover how quickly these villagers realize that when the outsiders, when the white guys, the rich guys show up, how quickly they have to assume a certain persona, how quickly they have to assure that visitor that his donations are going to good use. i think any of us will do that. that's called survival and you'd a stupid not to. there becomes a kind of interdependency that can be quite dangerous. at some point who is going to break the glass and pull that emergency trigger and say this is the bloody joke. very few people. excellent point and i raise that point. i allude to is certainly my book this is a terrible thing jeffrey sachs has accused me of cynicism. i'm not cynical.

i'm skeptical but i'm someone who believes deeply that transparency is the way forward. the only way to make donors want to help us to be fully transparent and to reveal and to speak openly about not just the successes but also the failures. by speaking about the failures, you i think a cord more weight to the successes. people are more likely to believe in the successes if you are honest about the failures. i think there could be a terrible backlash to this and that worries me deeply. >> thanks. that was really interesting. i used to work with jeffrey sachs and continue to work with the institute so it was really interesting to hear your perspective on that. i'm not sure i agree with everything but how complex development is and how difficult it is to do. one aspect of that is it's difficult to measure success and

causality. i wonder if you could reflect a little red on what the villages would have been like, the state of the villages would have been like without the interventions and the millennium villages project. >> is such an important point because part of the difficulty with even a short talk like this is that people talk of these projects very much in black and white. it's a success or failure and that's not a related case at all. there's simply no doubt in and make it patently there and might look that when you pour $10 million into a village or 5 million into village are frankly half a million dollars euro point to see magnificent success stories. you see the impact of foreign aid anywhere you go in africa. people's lives are saved and people are lifted out of poverty. people have the opportunity to go to schools who may never gone to schools. children are pulled out of

malarial comas. it's extraordinary to witness and it will make everyone in this room willing to give money to africa when you see it first-hand, trust me. that however, that kind of success, that incremental personal success where you are talking about helping a single person or 100 individual people is something very different than what jeffrey sachs promised us. i think jeffrey sachs in many people who stated this, jeffrey sachs great failing was to overpromise. the title of his book alone says it all. he promised is not that he was going to transform the lives of people in a dozen villages but that he was going to give us a model to end poverty in our lifetime. he was going to give us a model that could be scaled up and replicated in any environment. that is what to this day no one has figured out. none of us knows how to do it unfortunately. economists like dull easterly

and jeffrey sachs can argue until the cows come home and they will not have a solution because we don't know how people are uplifted out of poverty. we have an inkling and we understand it's related to economic growth winter stand prosperity and wealth are related do we don't really know the drivers are and what exactly make it to happen. otherwise who defended it by now his speech is one thing i want to add is a follow-up to that. i think one thing and i don't know if you have talked about in the book is the one thing that's interesting to mention is that jeffrey is working across scales so there is the millennial village project but i think for the maloney him sustainable goals that jeff is helping to lead with the secretary-general is also raising awareness at the high political levels as well. >> two chapters in my book are devoted to his really extraordinary work on malaria for example. he is done i think probably more

than anyone in advancing some very practical ways to reduce malarial transmission in africa and he's been a bit of dissent dissent -- on that front. you should e-mail on -- me after you read the book and i'd be interested to know what you think. >> i just wanted to know are you aware and the sachs is in effect that most african nations are at the bottom of the economic freedom indices? africa's most regulated country in the world. did that ever come up? >> is that a rhetorical question. one of the fascinating things about my book is the journey that i travel him i should say which a reporter might look is

that jeffrey sachs himself progressed originally from thinking he could go in and provide water and better health care and better schools and at some point along the way realize very quick way and it strikes one is obvious in hindsight is things often do that in fact the key to this was providing some sort of this is infrastructure. suddenly he began to old to figure out a way to get this is up and running. the only way to create long-term wealth as melton said earlier as well is to create businesses. for africa as you say as from many countries that remain poor and mired in poverty it's often one discovers there's enormous amount of regulation strangling places or the corruption is so intense you can start a business must you pay off 10 people or there are no roads to get your product out.

naturally that's a terrible problem. >> in your book you document that early on jeffrey sachs wanted deregulation for russia. he wanted deregulation basically for capitalism for some of these other countries. he has been accused of being oddly inconsistent and he didn't think the african should have deregulation. he didn't emphasize that the way he had for some of these others. >> i think to be fair, that was not where he began his quest to end poverty in africa. arguably he could've started from the pro-business route. he was opposed to it. that wasn't the way he went about it rightly or wrongly. >> next question. >> you address the corruption of the leadership in africa? steam my question is china's involvement, the chinese government involvement in the

country for their self-interest. >> they're both such important issues of course for the continent. i do absolutely address corruption. i go out of my way in the look look -- my book i try hard and anyone who has read it can attest to this. i travel very lightly and i just observe and let my reader reach his or her own conclusions. i think you see over and over again the fact that in the government clearly things go missing and things disappear. money goes missing in solar panels disappear overnight. i think i've moved to the problems of corruption. and yet my book is not about corruption. it's something much larger of which corruption is one part. china also is something that i talk about in the book. again the book is not about china. china such an important motto -- model.

they have been piling enormous amounts of money to africa but interestingly china itself has lifted hundreds of people out of poverty more successfully than anyone else in recent years. they have their own methods of doing that. whether those methods are relevant to africa or not is a question that i posed. i certainly don't answer it but i think it's something that's on the forefront of the minds of anyone who's interested in the subject. >> you said you are not cynical but skeptical and i was just wondering did this experience make you more broadly skeptical in general and did you find yourself thinking scientist and his team experts and politicians across-the-board are actually useless self or motors or something like that? >> are you a journalist? >> yeah, sometimes. >> i think it you can't possibly be a journalist unless you

question everything and we are taught to do that. many people call us cynical and many people complain about us. i have heard it all and they may be right, they may be wrong but i will tell you i don't trust any expert. that's just my professional constitution. i am hope full often that once i do the research myself and once i go to try to back it up, that i can demonstrate that person was right. but i never take anyone's word until i've done my own reporting. >> further questions clacks. >> i just wanted to say i spent an entire night last week reading nina's book cover to cover completely mesmerized and it's really hard to mesmerize me especially given who i am and my background and everything.

>> who are you, maam? can you tell us who you are? >> i am senegalese and i have spent a great amount of my life so far on these issues. when i started reading nina's book i was very afraid in my heart was pounding because i could tell how fair she was trying to be. for me it's not a matter of jeffrey sachs, it's beyond him. it's an entire thinking process of people who never ever would imagine their minds but africa just like anyone else we are no different from anyone else. the only way we will make this is through capitalism and i'd like to say conscious capitalism. that's the only way forward. it reminded me of an argument i had at some point with the editor "freakonomics" in "the new york times." she had the nerve to say i heard

him talk and she was saying i could see why a business can work in china and india as vehicles of economic development but i don't see how it's relevant to africa and that's a problem. how come they got capitalism and we get economic -- >> you make such an interesting point. i talk about this in my book. there is this tremendous overlay or suggestion that neocolonialism is people talk about, make you feel terribly uneasy when you're on the ground as an outsider in africa, watching the absolute domination in foreign aid and humanitarian aid circles of europeans. when africans say europeans they mean americans and europeans. it is unsettling and of course there are so many people who are in development in and foreign aid for deeply devoted. you don't work in those fields

unless you are devoted to your cause but it's unsettling. you raise a very important point >> as we go around and talk about the book i don't know if you have spent any time interviewing people that i think think -- i would have loved when i was reading the book to see some hints on what i like to call the industry of aid because it's a real industry. >> jeffrey sachs was lucky to have sub or for read this book about him. she spent six long years doing it. she's not like the reporter who cause you out of the blue with a deadline in the morning and doesn't have time to check anything. you will be lucky to read her book six years in the making in six years of hard research. it's an rate look. [applause]

>> on friday, booktv on friday takes a look at world leaders. first, scott bird and his biography of president woodrow wilson. and then charles moore discusses the first volume of his biography with former british prime minister margaret thatcher. in the light of simone de beauvoir. booktv starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> on the next "washington journal" the impact of women in politics. plus, your e-mails and phone calls and tweaked. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span.

>> thank you for joining us. you will all live longer if you stand throughout this. the welcome to the council on foreign relations. and tonight is one of the nights i like that.

the thinking that goes into it, the kind of thinking that you only do and it informs them and we are not a book only culture. people write and disseminate ideas and all sorts of ideas. and this includes the intellectual real estate here at the council of foreign relations. and that is good because tonight we have a senior fellow at the council on foreign relations and

the style has been a chairman is the fact in public debate and this is about globalization. and now the new book has been released with the title why growth matters. and he is coproducing it and

then the subtitle is a lesson for other developing countries. and so why do you even have to write a book called why growth matters? who in the world wouldn't think that? >> the people do raise questions partly because they have sentiment around the world. and what i want to do in this book is bring the notion back then in the very large countries, there were very few rich people.

and too many exploited individuals have been a part of this and even if you have been a part of this, you cannot read this except to give everyone out and it wouldn't go very far in that it would disappear as small as a wise. so you have to think of a different strategy and this is where the five countries i would

say are relevant in china and indonesia and brazil and that is about three fourths of it in terms of the population. and it doesn't cover saudi arabia and we had a very different kind of problem as well. and then what would we do? and so the idea was that we would have to go through it. and people at the very bottom levels do lose the opportunity.

and that is one. and the other thing was it would also drive the revenues. and once you have revenues, this is something we know. revenues can then be part of this social spending. because there are many who are asleep up there. >> let me interrupt for a second. so we all agree that we want to expand this.

and i'm assuming that it's something that growth matters. it's somewhere that there has to be some competing models. with two iconic models of development and relief for the world. and so it seems that a subset is how you go and how you attempt to grow. >> yes, many have asked me about this and i have said yes. and in the long run as well. and so we welcome them.

and i am very much against these types of investments. as we were trying to rely on very different models in china did grow very fast and so china, i think they had this advantage to be able to use a variety of techniques to draw this under into the gainful employment and i think that that is where we succeeded. and so china has a big question mark and we have a big question mark ourselves. but with china, you see and as

it comes, there is only so much low hanging fruit. and they are now having to pay for this rising and this includes satisfying them.

and the pots and pans, this type of situation. and that was the idolized version. and they're a loud number of ngos and the independent judiciary's as well. >> you describe to me this and many people would challenge it. and many would say that this functioning or a nonfunctioning and the growth has slowed in recent years dramatically and we have seen this in the elections

coming up. and do you believe that they can grow seven or eight or 9%, or is there something that can be precluded? >> i think it grew in a massive way. and there's a great gift to the world.

and this is exactly the wrong thing to do and it was otherwise you had the bureaucrats telling you how to exercise power with handing out licenses and politicians in which you could make a lot of money. and it collapsed the institutions and what we are facing now is a very important in their there are so many people that are fed up that was going on.

and that is creating a massive problem right now because that is causing part of the problem in turn. and so this could be challenged as a source of corruption. and that is what is slowing down as well. and it's precisely because people are trying to change the system and that means the bureaucrats don't have to take these liberties. investment has not taken place.

>> opening up those two are members and others. you have written important books about trade and migration and movement of people. and he mentioned you mentioned that they are out of money, but the united states still has trade negotiations. so what can the united states and others be doing, do you believe, to indirectly promote these higher levels of growth? >> well, i think that we have to have this and there's no question about it.

and so they did not need the money. they should be able to raise it in the public domain. and so i would want to talk about this so many of them are able to raise this money through these sources. but when i say things like that, it makes it hard to have this great sense of what is going on.

>> there's a lot we haven't touched on. even when we haven't touched on. go ahead. howard? >> wait for the microphone. and so how is that comparing to more traditional export them what model was secreted with much more employment and opportunities for this time? how do you compare those two models and what is the implication for india's model? >> i would say one thing, which is we explain that.

and they haven't made the same impact. and there's not enough bang for the buck. .. actually a lot of labor-intensive manufactures. we have been trying to protect small guys which is a big mistake. as a result they have not been able to grow into bigger ones with more scale efficiency and so on. i think is the wrong way to approach the problem. i think we need to, the next stage of reform we should not knock manufactures out. i think that is the really

wrong. on the service sector if it's going to be important i don't think it carries the full weight but in the sense that we are a freewheeling democracy of the united states. we have actually no problem with people using software. in china for years the problem was we see -- [inaudible] they were very good at hardware but not with software. ..

>> levy to expand its on a massive scale. >> a microphone is coming. >> chai that has been

growing where rarely with did businesses farley monday from the banking system and infrastructure spending has fueled the growth. the five-year plan they introduced 2010 they will reverse that. investment spending was 5 percent of gdp then it was 35. three years into the five-year plan those numbers are still five / 35 with investment spending. if china will grow they have to get the consumer to spend. why haven't they and why can't day and will they ever do it? [applause] >> there is the economy more than in china but what you

ask they have to go through domestic spending why is that in days significant ways so far? to my judgment is the scale of the problem. it cannot be mounted just like that. the infrastructure that is nowhere. >> that is what they are doing. >> they are already. but on the of a hand they don't do well and have a mutual dependence as well. maybe it is the wrong kind of infrastructure as a result of technology. >> but why the transition a little more consumer demand led the economy was not happening?

because the tidies said on the funds they don't trust the government or the safety net this savings rates is fairly high. >> one policy has not helped >> but the growth has slowed down. [inaudible] >> i teach at the upstart university as well. [laughter] but it you have a terrific new governor of the central bank in india. kayhan he and the of macro lovers influence? >> that brings us write-up to now become as what happens now? it is very simple.

if you go less rapidly the bureaucrats not taking positions but if it is slow down that means the revenue intake also has slowed down. and when that is happening cover the forthcoming election means the government at the same time wants to spend more on social spending. like the security bill. you have the attention. then board monday being spent you don't have to be a macro economist, i am not one, but to know that you get inflation. big inflation is in the position to be very dangerous.

the big question mark of the economy now. related to the situation is exactly the opposite of what we have here. but we have here cannot get off the ground. the violence is out of lax -- what. what about the central government? [laughter] other then what is run by my students of macroeconomics. [laughter] >> maybe that is not a compliment. [laughter] >> for me it is because i know nothing. [laughter] so now i say that what you

have this a situation with the fiscal policy with money supply has helped the country because it was not grow ring some of it was sent abroad to leading to a decline of the dollar. leading to more prosperity. so when it comes to india cover the opposite but vitarelli applied the brakes. doing that it will be very unpopular. they don't have the autonomy that the federal reserve in juries. -- in joyce.

i am right about the situation that somehow looking at social spending have you ever tried? is very hard to. >> especially with the of run up to election. if mr. moody is elected what about changing the economic policy? >> very substantial. the last two years the european government has not undertaken any significant changes. it could also mean stymied by the charges of corruption. maybe with the ethnic might blunt dash bias with the prime minister that i don't write about the matter but

to be incorruptible he has never been accused of any corruption. just like the prime minister. he has not been forceful. he is very forceful and is a fantastic speaker. in 2002 it was the and it to other people but i would not go because it had cleared and now there is nothing against him. so i went there and it is from the best american politicians. nothing i could tell you exactly what he had been doing. astonishing. absolutely.

and if we get elected but not a good run for his many -- money it is for the leadership right now and you don't see that in the newspapers like he gets all over the country. the rallies that he never used to get. so i think he should capitalize:that to change the style of the government. i think we have some hope. >> another question. >> a microphone is headed your way. >> could you comment primary

secondary and tertiary education in the role the public sector should play in it with growth? paradise think back to the debates we have had people criticize to say that education is more important than growth and so just having the education is not by itself but if you try to be more productive continuing to the secondary sector but education is important it has to be dovetailed into a changes even considering grows beyond what you have. just to say it is important

is not the look at singapore they can export to a lot cover they turned inward in india with a lot of machinery with the latest technology. but some -- education by itself is not irrelevant. >> this is a rare economic co said as the happy ending the book about how economic policies have done right. and you have some case studies clearly that those of you that economics is the old saw here is your chance to look as a cure for science. then we owe a great debt to you being here tonight for your years of sustained riding, talking, and thinking as someone who has informed the policy debates

of this country. thank you. congratulations. [applause]

>> [applause] i am just going to use it back. [laughter] end taken from here. seriously anita hill was thrust into the headlines

more than 20 years ago when she testified before the senate judiciary committee in front of the hearing for supreme court justice nominee clarence thomas. the televised hearings galvanized women politically and we have a the year of the woman 1992. [applause] record numbers when elected to congress and since then professor hill has been writing and lecturing around the country and around the world on public policy and women's rights. professor hill's, could you just give us a window -- window into what that experience was live and maybe reid direct your vision with the intervening decades? >> a big window. [laughter] i will say it was columbus

day weekend 1991 when i testified. it is very interesting as captured in the story over the weekend in 1991. , there were people all throughout the wedding party and it was men versus women. i think there are lots of arguments that took place about women's real experiences in the workplace that women said that sounds very familiar. then, i will say if it comes back to the saugh -- we

have, all longways in state to 91. one of the things that i think is most compelling is us to talk about it. in 1991 people didn't a and one of the of liberating things socially is in so many ways have dropped a the shave of those experiences and for many of us we stopped believing aerosols to move on and make positive changes for women in the workplace. that has been 22 years of working really hard and we're not entirely there yet but we will be moving in the right direction. after decades, scores

decades, scores, thousands of years to get us to very real are now it will not change over 22. it is a snapshot of over 50 years ago with the status of women. we have been charged to talk about where women are today. we have a lot to cover. [laughter] but in preparations i did go back to listen to that tape of kennedy used eleanor roosevelt. after the pleasantries mrs. roosevelt's said why aren't there more women in the united states? we are privileged, why are

there not more of leaders? when i was going back through to figure out how every talk about where every are today, we have to be willing to act like eleanor roosevelt to it, asks the difficult questions. the questions that maybe a little bit embarrassing but are there to engage in a direction that perhaps the president was not thinking about when he entered in the conversation. today i want to talk about those difficult questions leadership and other things i care very much about with

research specifically than to also sexual harassment and a less rigid of a topic that is not covered very much. but think about where every are today in terms of women leadership. maybe 20 years ago. to women and 20 years later with the most recent election, there are 20 women in the u.s. senate.

that is progress and how the conversation might have been different in the chambers of there were 20 women rather than the two that were there , 20 years ago at the senate judiciary committee of the supreme court, there were two sitting women at that time. then there were three sitting justices on the u.s. supreme court and now that is progress said one is retired with sandra day o'connor. that is progress. but talk about asking the next question, we can say that is great to be on the supreme court to make in -- decisions to impact women's

lives but we cannot be satisfied until we are able to say we can sustain that. how are we going to be able to sustain that? looked at the time line what the courts looked like. women getting to that of leadership position that is the next question. not whether or not we made progress but if we can build on that. what is the structure that keeps us from being able to do that? that is the next move if we have to make. if you don't think we did would make a difference difference, think about justice ginsburg and elite -- leave the better.

had she not read that i am absolutely certain they're not would have been so much momentum for congress to actually act to rectify the supreme court's decision. she did not change your decision of the court but that impacted decision we need to be there and to interpret the of law that affect women's lives in and we need to be the reality check. >> a couple of other points then to move god. i have been dealing with a number of issues. one of those is medical research.

i have been involved with dr. paulette johnson who could not be here today but the director of women at brigham and women's hospital 20 years ago congress passed the national institute for health revitalization act. you probably did not note it because i did not know its that when it was passed for the first time that nih grant was given in and the grant was funded the law required women and people of color be part of the research. before then you could do what you wanted or only

been. after that there was the requirement to include women and people of color but with cardiovascular health, still today only 35 percent of the research projects include women. and said only 31% breakdown the information based on gender. what is that doing? it is creating a gap. for what is actually happening for research. you have to ask for the next question. we have the law in place but is it having the effect we want it to have? we could talk about women of

the foreclosure crisis where women were targeted for some farm loans are the most toxic loans during this period. those were the most likely to be foreclosed. unfortunately that had to be followed through in many women were losing their homes as they become housing insecure because more are paying more than 50% so then with the law's intent in the

lives that the women are they doing. in 1981 we did have the civil rights act of 1991 for the first time began women were able to recover their lost so what has happened is women can make claims or soup but they have to have the jobs, that need to that income are not taking its vantage of that. the problem with sexual harassment in colleges universities is just now beginning to become a part. all of those things we have

made great strides but we have a long way to go. >> thank you. worried about the pipeline for women is the legal circles but to think there is nothing to worry about. [laughter] she stepped forward to february 2012 with congressional republicans prevented her from testifying with and front of a panel of the bet with the affordable care act definition of contraception is part of preventive care for a given. she was vilified in became the heroine for women speaking as the democratic national convention in. also the same question that i asked anita hill although less than two years with

that experience that was personal and public how it affected you end changed your life a unit mission and? >> it gave all of us a window into what was happening with the state legislatures as well as congress. unfortunately we are not paying as close attention and as we've might have done. that was a moment translated into a long-term bull did throw the 2012 campaign where throat the country in the end you were paying attention on reproductive health of justice and human-rights. but now this should not be a moment that passes because the election takes that.