that seem almost fairytale like. i came out of my first apartment building in new york shortly after i had graduated and i was working as a news clerk at "the new york times" which i would say was like the devil wears prada but without the prada, lots of bow ties and silk. the old newsman who would give me bits of advice and i really wanted to be a novelist which i'm actually going to return to per minute's project which is going to be fiction. but i came out of the building and there was just something too good to resist which was a dumpster and not any ordinary dumpster because it was filled i could see with about 50 old steamer trunks. these are the old kinds that were brought on the titanic, vintage labels from paris and monico and the french line. listen i'm not a dumpster diver by.

but i do love vintage clothing and a good story so what do i do? it's about 8:00 in the morning. i literally climb on top of this dumpster and you are all looking at me very oddly. i started going through these things and they are old flapper dresses and the vintage collection of handbags and among this sort of urban treasure wreck was a red leather diary kept by a woman from 1929 to 1934 at the height of the depression and long true fairytale short, ended up tracking down the diary's owner at 90 with the help of a private investigator. and befriending her. she wanted to be a writer. she hosted a literary salon. she was a renaissance woman who had had love affairs with men and women as a young woman. her story had spoken to me so much that i ended up telling the story of how this chronicle made

its way back to her and was sort of given as a gift to the rest of the world. so i think telling that forgotten woman's story was very intriguing to me. the little things i remember from professors in school, the good stories with often little margins or footnotes at the sight of the page. it's not the typical heroic model but it's the other side of the coin. i think certainly it was that tradition and that desire and hunger to tell redemptive women's stories. it's telling in arms -- untold story but this emotional catharsis for the subject when their story which has been under the radar is finally revealed to the world. i know from speaking to the

wives that not only did this world take taken back in time but i think that they feel very gratified that people care a bout their story. i don't think many of them call themselves heroes because they were so in support of their husbands and would have seen that as arrogant and inappropriate. i certainly see them as heroines myself. and i think they have the right stuff. [applause] so i'm going to and there are and thank you so much. [applause]

>> it the end of the day i think the economy's going to need enormous monetary stimulus i think the fed will not be raising rates for quite some time. i am optimistic that the u.s. economy is going to accelerate. i think one of the core things here were the core dimensions is the fact that less to the u.s. economy grew 1.9% with fiscal drag from higher taxes and government spending tax reducing growth by 1.3 percentage points so without that fiscal tightening the u.s. economy

would have grown over 3%. as you know cbo has not made policy recommendations and that's very important because policy choices depend not just on the analysis of the consequences of different courses of action but also how one ways those consequences and what values one applies. there's nothing special about our values of your or my elected leaders to make those policy judgments. our job is to make congress understand the policy consequences.

in a few moments the sierra club news conference of the 25th anniversary of the exxon valdez oil spill.

monday is the 25th anniversary of the oil spill in prince william sound alaska where the exxon valdez oil tanker hit a reef spending -- spilling tons of -- >> thank you opera joining us this morning. my name is gene karpinski and i am the present of the league of conservation voters. you will hear from five speakers briefly and have plenty of time for questions. we will hear from david grimes and rick steinert all from alaska to tell the stories of

how they have been involved in the efforts in the aftermath of this bill for the last 25 years. we will hear from the executive director of the dash and the director of the sierra lands protection program. again i am the gene karpinski. it was 25 years ago that alaskans suffered from the oil spill seen around the world. it's an absolute tragedy that today 25 years later alaskans are still suffering economically and environmentally from that spill. we are still seeing the effects of that spill. that makes no sense. it's time we learned a lesson from that spill from 25 years ago. one final opening thought as we know the biggest challenge facing us today from an environmental perspective and a national perspective more broadly is the challenge of climate change. president obama is recognized that challenge.

he has taken significant steps forward to cut carbon pollution that causes those problems but the science mag's it clear that if we are going to solve the climate crisis in the future we need to keep a significant portion of those fossil fuels in the ground. that is why our community is united to make sure the tar sands don't come out of canada and that is why we we are asking the president to declare them moratorium. we need to keep many of those fossil fuels in the ground. let me turn it over to my friend and colleague david grimes first and rick will speak about alaska. thank you. >> thank you gene. greetings. david grimes cordova alaska former commercial herring and salmon fishermen, accidental activist and wilderness guide.

the oil spill for me and my friends and for all of us became an a profound huge way -- waves of crisis and opportunity. we are all aware of the crisis and the damage that we incurred through being addicted to our number one drug fossil fuel but we also want to speak about the opportunities of the crisis. let me set the stage. prince william sound, the copper river delta, to ecosystem side a side at the very northern end of the coastal rainforest, a giant bioregion, and earth or do in that runs from north northern california all the way up the coast of kodiak. prince william sound and copper river at the northernmost part of this rainforest coast. prince william sound is arguably the finest marine ecosystem in north america. the copper river right next to

it is arguably the finest wetlands fischer while life habitat in north america. this is the place that took the hit. it's incredibly powerfully symbolic. it took place 25 years ago on good friday the day of sacrifice. 25 years before that in prince william sound was the giant alaska earthquake epicenter do in the same place also on good friday so right before the oil spill and the week before we were thinking the 25th anniversary of the earthquake is about to happen wondering what could happen. here we are 25 years later. it's a bittersweet irony and i'm so grateful to be here with my friends and loved ones that went through that and what we want to remember is it's not just humans here. we are speaking about the slipping land fish and wildlife without which we are not fully human. the lay of the land at the time of the oil spill, the wall comes

down in berlin. tiananmen square, apartheid falls apart in south africa and the animals died for our sins and the oil in alaska. the day before the oil spill it was widely known that the arctic wildlife refuge was being greenlighted to be developed. in cordova the day before the oil spill our conversation is this is the year we have got to get serious about the forest. the northern and of the great temperate rainforest north america had never been commercially bought. tax loopholes were going to force that issue. the trees had just started to fall and in the next 20 years the whole area was going to get clear-cut. the day before the oil spill we are thinking how can we ever spotlight this place? we the citizens were going, this place we love we are going to have to figure something out. the oil spill happen.

the great irony of the oil spill is that seven years later in that crisis of opportunity the roughly $1 billion that exxon under duress was forced to pay full restoration our argument of the wounded resources, our argument was only mother nature can clean up the injuries in the ocean of the oil spill. humans cannot cleanup major oil spills. in the meantime we are about to have the equivalent of an oil spill on land in the same ecosystem. the whole forest is going to come down. salmon are forest animals just as much as they are ocean animals. if you clear-cut their native streams. one of the great opportunities in that crisis seven years after the oil spill we managed to protect the most significant fish and wildlife habitat in the

forest that were about to come down. so i won't -- this is the time to remember but it's also a time to keep track of what did we learn to prevent more oil spills into no more harm, protect this habitat. habitat. you've got to have some habitat. thank you. >> i'm fighting some allergies so bear with me a little bit. my name is given blinkered. i am an indian from the copper river delta in alaska from the eagle. my name means little bird that screams loud and won't shut up and sometimes i have to live up to that name.

i guess what i'm here to share with you is that oil spills continue to happen around the planet. we haven't figured out how to clean them up and we never will. so the best thing we can do is figure out how to prevent them from happening in the first place. alaska was in prince william sound i grew up fishing with one of the last families to fish in prince william sound. when they exxon band -- felt these oil spill happen in our backyard a part of the ocean died and yet a part of me came to life than i realized that i had to become louder than everything else but yet remained a voice of reason and work with david and rick and ricky body and karol hoover and these amazing people to try to figure out how we could say but was

left, sable is right. but we lost, we lost our faith in humanity. we can't trust anybody anymore. it will never be the same. we thought people would come and help us. we really thought the calvary would come. no one showed up. so we had to defend ourselves and defend the land and the animals and the fisheries and go through 25 years of hell. it's not over. this oil spill never leaves our mind. it's a part of who we are. and so i do everything i can every day to let people know that we can do things differently. we can figure this out. when i think about the development in the arctic

national wildlife refuge and the church key in the beaufort sea we are living proof of what can go wrong. not only will they not be a will to clean up the mess if there is a mess they will never settle with us. they will never take care of the people. our way of life will be lost for why? money, greed, for oil? our way of life there is nothing like it. it's comparable to none. i'm proud to be a fisherman and i'm proud to go out there and harvest off the land. i remember when i was a young pup and my father would always do about 10 to 15 drops of different families. we would drop off fish and hearing and deer and what not to

different families. i asked him, why do we do this? he said because we can and those people can afford to get out there and get this food themselves. and so all my life i have been able to have this incredible bounty at my fingertips. when we lost that we lost a part of ourselves and what a lot of people don't realize is subsistence is philanthropy. when we give to another family, when we take care of someone else they'd share that fit with someone else and someone else and you know we don't know what's going to happen. but the herring haven't recovered. it was 50% of our annual income, 50%. we haven't finished hearing but three out of the last 25 years. our wild salmon haven't come back, not in the numbers that they were. and so when we think about

development, we have got to figure out how to do it right. we have the technology. we have the intelligence. obviously the companies, the oil companies in the energy companies have the money that we have to make them do it right. otherwise we end up with more exxon valdez is. it's one of those places where we only have a few chances to get things right. right now we are just starting to recover but an oil spill could happen tomorrow. it could happen again. when i see these other spills happening around the planet and people call me and asked ask me to come there and help them i can't do it because i can't live through it again. i thank rick and ricky for doing what they do and traveling to

help the people. the last thing i would like to say is that we can't let the arctic wildlife refuge in places that are pristine and absolutely bountiful for the people who choose to live this way of life, we can't let them suffer and go through what we have. it never goes away. for the oil companies to just go in there and destroy our way of life and take what they want and leave us with nothing, it's not good enough. americans are better than this. we have what it takes to figure this out. we can't drill our way out of this problem. and so i just want everybody to remember that the exxon valdez

was a terrible terrible nightmare. we obviously haven't learned anything yet because the number one response to the oil spill's today is disbursements. sync it or try to evaporated to get it out of the public eye so when i hear all of these things that they will be able to clean up the oil if it hits the ice, what's it's in the water and what what's it's on the beaches is over. there's nothing we can do so the best thing we can do is to prevent it from ever happening. thank you. ..

>> ending up oiling over 1700 miles of the very pristine shoreline, the wildlife refuge's one of the

largest national forest, indigenous lands in to redo the damages images were a spectacular horrible with the otters and the birds into mortality was spectacular but 25 years later what we have learned to is the injury persists most of them monitored fishing and wildlife population and wildlife habitat are still not fully recovered. i will say this again most of the fish and wildlife population have not fully recovered. some. the killer whale pods pacific hearings are listed one quarter of a century later as not recovering not recovering. one member of the pawn with 22 members resaw them surfacing in the wheel that

summer day dropped to seven members san blas the reproductive females now this is from the government trustee council, they conclude there is no hope for recovery of this killer whale pods be coz the last half was just before the oil spill. they expect them to go extinct. the take home from this earth is there will never be a full recovery from the exxon valdez oil spill period. says has to be figured into the wrist calculus of wheel developed pathan pipeline pipeline, and shipping, we have to be honest. of the potential risks there is long-term damage in the litigation is not resolved private litigation was resolved several years ago

put the government litigation for the unknown injuries but in to the settlement allowing the government to collect another $100 million for the lead anticipated injuries injuries, the government presented a a claim for $90 billion in 2006 although they had agreed to do the stipulation said we are not paying a and they haven't. that is a betrayal from this. the government in this state has an absolutely nothing to collect this delinquent payments for co is unimaginable. the attorney at the time they made the claim but now

the governor is in charge of collecting the payments from the former client. there is still thousands of gallons of oil in the beech said it. we do that would be there one quarter of a century later butter with still be relatively of weathered comment toxic and taken up into the ecosystem. any way you look at it the whole risk of oil development is much greater than we knew 25 years ago. my take-home message is they will happen if you cannot contain them or clean them up once the oil is out it is the gave over. i have worked on oil spills all over the world and that is the sad and unfortunate conclusion.

newt have permanent ecological damage to and cannot restore a still injured ecosystem. period. all the money in the world cannot fix what we break. three lessons. number one we need to prohibit oil drilling a and transportation with the ecosystems and where we do not want to except or cannot tolerate the consequences of a catastrophic oil spill. that includes the arctic ocean in other precious coastal places. wipe with that data risk. but with the highest best available technology standards possible regardless of cost. that is something the oil industry have yet to step up to.

they now have a standard as lohan as reasonable practical. the lawyers will understand they will do if it seems cost-effective that is a very unfortunate posture the consequences are so large it needs to have best available technology and risk reduced to as low as possible regardless of cost. with prince william sound treated for didn't a system we can talk about that later. but it gets serious into low carbon sustainable energy economy. it is disgraceful our energy is get more carbon now to of the ground. i did a back of the envelope

calculation in the world has used twice as much oil since the exxon valdez as in all of human history up and tell that day. several hundred billion barrels of oil have been producing and berndt subsequent to 1989 and 300 billion overused up until that day. atmospheric levels were parts per billion at the time of the exxon valdez now 400 we have lost half of the arctic icecap since the exxon valdez. we can talk about specifics and questions. thank you. >> i am with the alaska of

base to hear it i am honored to be with my friends from alaska and i am mad we are still talking about drilling in special places and have not learned our lessons. this is the time to remember promises made and promises broken. rick had a list of the promises made and broken even before the tragic spill. , march 24th. he talks about the permanence. but once and then the damage is irreversible and the battle lost. with the deep water horizon tragedy the government in the oil industry make the same bad promises about safety and also technology so we need to think about these promises and the talk about drilling in the arctic ocean so without thinking

through the consequences. nothing like the gulf of mexico. it is very remote it is harsh as gale force wind and a sub of freezing temperatures. this presents challenges to drilling with the unique infrastructure i'd like prince william sound there is no infrastructure around the arctic ocean no sites are more than 1,000 miles in the water has ice floe in the summer no one knows how to clean up the orioles bill and no company is truly arctic ready. then as you might remember we all watched as the problems became part of the national stage.

soon after we learned that the show oil spill was crushed like of birkie and in addition to other accidents as the operational management failures demonstrate oil companies are not ready to operate safely. in the arctic ocean the ribby devastating long-term effects. that is why we call on the obamacare administration in to have a moratorium. so they has insisted there for millions of years. >> with the oil and gas

issues i have dealt with this for a while and i talk about our social life to match. but with the exxon valdez oil spill and the fight in court and talking arrau's sarah palin of all people pushing for exxon to pay their fair share. i will echo the remarks 25 years later still talking about the same issue the consequences of our dependence on fossil fuel standard the energy. but prince william sound still has not recovered but we did not learn those lessons because we saw the deep water horizons bill then again caught to not meet promises in you still

see that damages in the gulf of mexico. to see reid and a mammal's impacted the gulf has not recovered the way that france william sound has not. to dip have said dependence on fossil fuels to handle special places but now that has been made more profound even this bill alone like the arctic refuge toward the ocean but climate makes all those issues much more urgent. so talk about protecting special places to keep the oil in the ground where it a belongs. and to solve this challenge they never fired drill in

the arctic ocean to have a moratorium to cancel the lease sales planned and not allowed shell to drill until we studied there drilling plans completely. cannot develop the tar sands but we would not open the south atlantic to neutral iran -- two new drilling. those are important choice is the hard choices we have to make if we are serious about avoiding disasters like deep water horizon but we are up to win as the nation and to lead on these issues or protecting special place is or climate change hopefully we don't have to come back another 25 years lamenting an oil spill in the future. we want to wrap it up and

open to any questions you may have. >> from the houston chronicle, there is a discussion about technology and prevention of oil spills to the extent we do drilling and looking at the arctic developing standard is the indication is a long time during one show committed to already. is there is the indication the way that is going also do you see it being incorporated in any way? >> a very spot on question. we are very worried about the standards put in place. people will continue to make

mistakes. skiddy equipment will continue to fail. we can reduce risk of a highly complex technical operation but there is still a residual risk. aviation industry presently is a good example. no matter how safe they think they can get charlie in the arctic ocean there is a residual risk of a catastrophic plow. everybody knows that. they are just lowe's it to give voice to that conclusion. there is a new center for offshore safety the industry has set up. new offshore energy saved the institute's add a few texas universities. they are good conceptual be but what will matter is what gets in the water. we have not seen anything.

it is to a tentative to say they are effective efforts. i have no confidence whatsoever that government and industry operating together will put this in place anywhere. that is why one fundamental thing we learned to from the exxon valdez is to have a robust citizen stakeholder oversight function to make sure all the eyes are dotted and the t's are crossed every potential risk we have the advisory council in prince william salad and recommended that it even before the exon bill the sale of the industry said get lost. we need that in the arctic regardless they are shipping their now and there will continue to be a robust citizens stakeholder oversights to make sure government and industry get it right to.

>> we think the arctic ocean is the last place to be drilling either was stronger regulations. the infrastructure is laughable and shell proved all of our fears when they tried last summer it is 1,000 miles to the nearest coast, one porch to store facilities or the response on-site. the closest thing is a boat ramp. there is not in the onshore support. we don't think the area should have been leased for the permit should have been issued to shell. they had six years to get ready with exploratory drilling and were caught completely unprepared for drilling in a very high style admire reverend ralph -- in a very cost dial and fire -- and fryer matt.

they will take it with a key and they will do as much as they can but even those laws are inappropriate. it is a dangerous place to operate that is the last place to be drilling in the arctic ocean. >> there is a profound misunderstanding the world is toppy tirrivee like bristol bay, the arctic ocean they are already developed. there is enormously profoundly productive factories of mother nature producing those magnificent salmon runs some of the great fish and wildlife habitat. we are not fully human without that. the already developed and we

can only undeveloped them. as i money, you heard the expression just say no. nancy reagan's people brought it as the great slogan. do you know, there that first came from? it was a national poster as i a understand the story, one of the winning posters from the contest was from a youth in the arctic village alaska is said just say no to drugs in in the arctic refuge. oil is the number one drive. it is a great challenge of our time to see why did we care about alaska? deep in the child part symbolically a round of

world it is the symbol of for revenant of eden and we know we cannot live without the rest of creation. it is who we are as a great test of our time. think you for your time. >> after the bp still congress talk about legislation but never did. >> i thank you know the answer. probably not. it is unfortunate in 2010 they had written a bipartisan response bill but the markup torpedoed over the issue of revenue sharing.

is unfortunate. people remember 9089 so we thought the spill would motivate members of congress even one year removed but that did not happen and i don't think it will happen anytime soon the committee is not looking at oil spill response or safety as a serious issue. they're looking at other issues but not the oil response bill. it was the real sad the house did not pass the last day before the august resource. but they could not step up because of the obsession with revenue sharing with oil state senators. >> in your packet i have a list of some specific acts

of congress and the question is good progress has only past one piece of legislation relative to oil spills post deep water horizon is simply dedicates 80 percent of clean water act recoveries but that would probably happen in any way. it has done nothing to raise limits and that is disgraceful. we have been recommending this for years. all liability limits dtb eliminated period. that is a strong motivator for companies to put it as low as possible technologies into the projects if they have won the bid liability which they do not.

they will put as safe as system in as possible. no matter of what they do for a response it doesn't work. its never worked and likely never will. all the orange suits in the clipboards in hard hats will not clean up the major offshore oil spill. it will not happen but we need to prevent them there was of federal funds called the oil spill liability trust fund past 1980 it has 3.$3 billion in it just sitting there. earning $500 million per year with the tax on all oil in and out of the u.s. we need to clarify that can be used for spill prevention

purposes. right now it is authorized but never used for that because they sit on that using it for their response activity to reimburse them. that is irrelevant it is sitting there all the arguments we cannot afford the cost of spill prevention better tracking systems, escorts, the next generation of tankers we cannot afford not to do. >> [inaudible] >> these quotation is the official government position is on the trustee council web site.

there is a link during oriole page -- lingering oriole page on the web site that is directly where these come from if there is a long-term injury page where they use the no hope for recovery. that is start. no hope for recovery that says it all. we do see oil would be there also it was the epicenter of prince william sound where it ruptured the fuel tank and the feel wolf came out you can see splatters from the earthquake on the rock as part of the geology this

is now as well. is so full -- several inches deep also it is hard to end of the rock surface that will be there for centuries. it would is asphalt over and the beach protected from weathering so it did not evaporate word tea grade as quickly and has a relatively high content of the nastiest component of the oil and the enzyme that harms the otters and the birds and fish show continuing toxic exposure. this is what the government claimed it was about to go back out to inject oxygen compounds and nutrients to enhance the degradation but they've made the claim is

represented with a $92 billion bill and exxon said i am not paying it than the government has done nothing. it is that end of a long list of the trade promises. it is still there is and still toxic. the estimates are around 30 or 40,000 gallons but nobody knows to be honest. >> the best estimate is 100 tons which is about 30,000 gallons. it could be much more or less than that. the greatest problem with lack of recovery is the immediate demographic effects with the toxic crude-oil and with those

killer whales they are not affected by the residual oil but certainly were affected by losing their reproductive females the last half you can see in the distance was born just before the spill. he is a 25 year-old fellow and they're not expected to reproduce ever again. they are genetically extinct. >> baddy enormous acute effect of hundreds of thousands of kurds killed a and lauder's you could walk are in a beach the oil would be several feet thick you did not know if you were stepping on boulders or dead ducks. with the herring population it took four years for that

population to collapse. young hearing take four years before they become adults for years after like clockwork they plummeted. all of the young born at the time of the oil spill for the next three years were picking up enough hydrocarbon's they could not make it to adulthood then back then it is a cornerstone of the food web now 25 years later they have not recovered. >> florid deepwater horizon there is some money there i don't know to what extent you follow that but are there lessons that you look back five years later and how the process is going?

>> we are tracking that but i have to get back to. >> the of one thing we learn to exclusively from exxon valdez that is applicable you cannot fix what was broken period laws protecting the injured ecosystem from injury. that is why using hundreds of millions of dollars to purchase conservation habitats threaten to buy other activities that is the silver lining to be honest. i am following the gulf i have worked down there and i sympathize with the folks down there to the credit of that situation putting $500 million early into restoration before there is

a settlement is the right thing to do. we tried to do that in alaska but exon told us tucana lost. i do know some of the state's that are the recipients one is planning a ball field another with a resort casino with restoration fund? that is the distraction and at the dark alley that big money can cause. there has to be a part launch dictums that all moneys need to be used with all ecological recovery period. economic recovery is something else that is what the private case is about but the government monday should be used for full ecological recovery period. no ball feels. no casinos. they have nothing to do with

the environmental harm. >> thank you for joining us. we will be available for additional questions and also for thank you for sharing your experiences. [inaudible conversations]

>> up next we have the former governor of new hampshire as well as former chairman of the west budget committee today speaking to the national correspondent from "the national journal." [applause] how about right here? we can focus a little more. senator gregg you have been known as a master of the numbers but i thank you just did.

[laughter] on the other part of the capital. but as they get members all day long i want to start off with a political question. you were one who wrote last september the republican party was in danger of failing because of what you called the self promotional babel of a few in forcing the a government shutdown. we have been through that and it appears the leaders came to share your view in terms of sharing those issues to defund obamacare and i just want your assessment where the party is now. has some balance been

restored? >> the first think you for this opportunity to be here and also with the area of intelligence community. [applause] your question is very courage because -- current because it is in the of wilderness and passed to figure out how to get out. i compare to the democratic party in 37 cheese when it lurched to the left with the mcgovern nomination than spent 10 years trying to get back then was led back by the leadership council by bill clinton and al gore and others. we have allowed the shah out

to take the playing field for too long as a party. national parties and really have to you don't want to have a multi-party system in a country our size because then people never get a compromise. national party must be the first up in the madison form of government with the checks and balances which demand compromise that people covered by reaching agreement across the ideal. the way you reach is gather every by the end of the tent with the basic philosophy and that filters up then becomes the framework for people going across the aisle win big pictures, that the national level. our party unfortunately

allowed to many people who had no interest to the governing to take center stage and dominates the best example is the debt ceiling fight. we used to have a saying that came from phil gramm who had a lot of great sayings was never taken hostage you can shoot. [laughter] you could not shoot the debt ceiling or the continuing resolution you always shoot yourself and that was proven to be true in the last three years. so now we have been through that exercise and those folks who have been shown to be more concerned with their own personal reputation to raise a lot of monday and has been shown to be

ineffective for a party that is willing to govern. it has got its act together in understand the fit communicates it has to show it can govern and the speaker i can congratulate him and mature coddle understands this and has been pushing this approach. i do believe we start to see going back to the realistic needs purses and shouting from the corridors. what does this translate politically? i happen to think if not this spring but certainly in the next congress with a republican senate the republican party will have to govern by reaching agreements with this president's on his core

issues. first on the immigration. most americans don't care but to have fiscal policy and tax reforms this fertile ground for them to work together. >>host: what changes of political dynamic? if it does deal the republican senate and a house is the two-party gone? i think ted cruz would disagree. >> i don't think he has left the stage or that segment will or should leave they are an important influence on policy. but those who understand you cannot speak to the american people of this you explain how you intended to do something positive. you cannot always foster in the negative but at some point he is the of positive that affect every day

americans and everyday lives. those folks will take the dominant role. i see three issues for opportunity for that consensus reached. you don't have to give up your philosophical beliefs. jane harman is the classic example to reach agreements across the aisle that makes america a better governed nation without the basic core beliefs because there is a lot of identity of interest most of which comes down to have a better life for their kids. >> let's talk about the fertile ground is said to saw a few nights at the end of the tunnel and decided he saw as senator wide in taken over the finance committee as opening a door to dynamic

scoring and the tax reform plan that republican congressman camp has put forward also the czech cable budget to you still think they are realistic? the ground has shifted and now sarah taylor and says it is retiring its head raising questions if we want to tear down the defense budget as we once thought. >> yes. of three. dynamic scoring is dangerous as former chairman i'll always defended the rights of the cbo to be irrational which today are on all sorts of scoring issues there is no relationship to common sense or the practical effects or people's reaction but with tax policy some

things are very obvious. one of which is if you ask people to invest or create a tax law that tells them to invest as avoiding taxes as a primary goal or to get a better return on their money you will get a better and stronger economy generating more revenue if people move in the direction for a return. of that is the ron wyden and my view of the world and with a progressive and conservative working in this context. that is good duse's some point the cbo at some level will have to acknowledge that. you cannot do a of a grand bargain on the budget if you

don't fundamentally reformed the tax law eliminates deductions and exemptions and generate revenue like what simpson-bowles proposed. the tax bill from dave camp is the starting point but it is a good starting point he steps on everybody's toes. that is the way to start. when this was done in remember it did not start with reagan but with bill bradley and jack kemp to start talk about major tax reform renato 1986 and you also have ron wyden to put forward his proposal the

opportunity is there and should be taken. and president obama wants to have their legacy. the third issue of what secretary haig goalpost -- hegel proposed is thinking about it a term that has not been thought about what are the threats and how do you respond? and i cited a great farewell speech the biggest threat is the defense industrial complex to stratifies the defense community as a result what the secretary proposed and i disagree but the concept the main

emphasis should be on the threat as a terrorist using a weapon of mass destruction they're not nation states they are asymmetrical purple you have to find them in a different way. that requires massive intelligence gathering capability and second to you have to deliver of the full force -- lethal force to them with capacity to deliver does that russian and situation in cry yet change this formula? no. we will not engage militarily over the issue of crimea. those roots go back to peter the great. we have leverage we have not

used but it is not military. what secretary higgle has done is open a discussion of reproaching defense spending that has not been occurring and should have occurred before 9/11 but definitely after. >>host: what should have obama done with the ukraine? gimmicky should have gotten the european to use considerable leverage to aggressively assert sanctions. there should have been a no-holds-barred to get the european union nation that are concerned about their gas supply but make it clear they could also be concerned about our friendship we have much more leverage sale of the russians have to bring them together of what should

have been very aggressive sanctions. 20 people? that is like sanctioning the board in in in chicago it is a surge. it is embarrassing. it was the wrong approach. >> back to the budget there was a reasonable discussion of the simpson-bowles commission report in 2010 and you approved of the work a year in the obama did not embrace it to eat enough perhaps. designed a perfect budget but what is passable by both parties and a bipartisan way. what would work to address slow growth, a dead deficit deficit, .

>> i did support the commission and the irony is that both parties in the senate took the most aggressive fiscally people on its tour of the most fiscally liberal senators and we still reached an agreement that shows it could be done. from 20,000 feet you don't want short-term austerity austerity, you don't need it and it slows the economy you want to pat that shows in the third decade you get the curve from spending so you have a ratio lower than 70%. debt to gdp nation up and tell 2008 was 35% of very strong position it jumped aaron doubled in four years as 60% of 70 her four long dash 74% to put in context

our debt to gdp ratio the only countries that have for stannous is japan but they are self financed the second is eyes land which has gone bankrupt a the third is greece they have gone bankrupt italy nobody knows because nobody knows how they keep the books will we're fairly sure it is being craft. then it is ireland than the united states. so all of the countries in front of us have fallen except japan that has massive domestic savings. we are on the wrong path. but the world looks at us do says we do solve our problems they should have that confidence but if we continue on this path at some point we will wake up

to say i just went united states $100 in ted years they can only pay be back $70 so i will have to spike in interest rates that is with a fiscal crisis and it will come. it is undeniable you cannot avoid that without deflating currency. thinks simpson-bowles put down the template you do need to give credit for what has ben done so far as the three vegas tool. -- three legs tool one is entirely in -- and tadema's spending -- entitlement spending. 1.2 trillion under the sequester as a means that its holds.

that has been done. revenue is a big number that has been done incorrectly only by raising rates. entitlements with that account only three dash count. of medicare. medicaid. social security united states has spent 20 percent of gdp they will account 20% by 2025 because of the massive demographic shift related to aging and the systems don't work. we have to adjust these entitlement programs not in andy dramatic way but ted years from now you been to

the cost curve to raise the age of retirement by two years but we took 60 years to do it it did not affect anybody over that age of 15. we could handle that and the president suggested the way we calculate cpi that was the best offer on the table so far. >>host: is that feasible with new politics? >> no. unfortunately i don't see a grand bargain coming down the street i see bits and pieces. medicare will be adjusted in ways to been to the cost curve to move to the outcome based system.

but done by a grand scheme? no. >>host: one last point you were very involved 2008 spending seven months as head of the major financial industry lobby. what is your assessment with the too big to fail problem? what about the financial reforms from the of volcker role? we have not heard from you for a couple of years. >> dodd/frank has not accomplished its goals that it was to stabilize the banking system to allow more liquidity but it is doing the opposite and contracting liquidity in lending in pushing activity off to balance sheets because it is all too big to fail? i think so and capital

requirements are stiff and good. really you did not need dodd/frank which has produced 20 million words in the new regulations every 2.six days and only 40% to through it. you did not need that but tough capital requirements. that would have solved the problem to a great extent the problem that created those issues in 2008 for failure of the underwriting underwriting, securitization underwriting, securitization , and as a result lot of capital behind those two activities. the 1,000 page proposal from the idea that makes sense with concept but not executed it is almost impossible to separate market making from the structure of how a bank works in a way that is clear

see don't end up with massive regulatory oversight that chills the market. with the great american it vintages that is unique if you are a person who has a good idea you taken a risk to grow that idea to create economic activity a bunch of people will come behind you and give you money called stocks and bonds. no place else does that happen with twitter or facebook or tesla. >> in.needed to be addressed and had an underlying relevance to the problem and will produce problems for our capacity to be as

competitive as we were before or as vibrant as before. it is striking the economy a and little better. >> we will open to the audience. >> my question to you senator and i am concerned you are still a good senator pri could you address the situation with russia right now where exxon mobil has a major deal with that major elephant to do drilling in the arctic and become so huge and what that will do in terms of affecting us could we change our tax code so exxon house to pay its dues? >> i am not familiar with that issue but they have

massive oil and gas reserves one of the levers we have to put pressure is they cannot get it without our technology. talking about ways to put pressure on russia, we should talk about sanctions on the ability of our technology but also on to the other nations to we delivered. this is where this administration has failed they have not been progressive to gather those said to have the capacity to gather together to do it. with specifics on exxon mobile i don't know about that. >> you mentioned the importance of providing more tax incentives or investment could you clarify that?

things like the capital gains tax is not promoting new investment but supporting long-term gambling on the stock exchange to buy existing assets to carry forward and sell them more the interest carryforward tax benefits for those who do trading with hedge funds sell what incentives promote real investment that generates more productive capacity and jobs? >> i am not a fan of incentives with industrial policy whether supporting a group like solyndra or through the tax law. you reduce as far as you care of the deductions and exemptions in and bring a the rates way down. in fact, so far you don't need that capital gains differential. . .

>> thank you for coming today. my name is arnold king. [inaudible] my question is what can the department do -- to get the issue on the economy back?

in other words how can they fix the economy this year and 2015. we need to get back to our talk about the economy and what can we do about the economy? what can a business do to invest in the economy and so forth? >> a great question. how do we get the economy going? i believe the united states is on the verge of a massive economic expansion. probably as large as we have ever had in our history and it's going to be driven by four basic factors. the first and most important by far is the new energy paradigm where for the first time since the 50s we are going to be an

energy exporter rather than importer but more importantly than that we are going to have an incredible competitive advantage over it the industrialized nations in this world because ours would be a factor of two, three, five or in japan's case governor eight times less than their cost of energy and nothing translates to an economy with more aggressiveness, not just talking about oil and gas here, talking about everything in the economy impacted in a positive way by a lower cost of energy and we have discovered massive capabilities of energy. this is going to translate into i think a huge economic opportunity for us as a country. the second thing we have going for us is we are still in the place where great ideas come from whether it's twitter or facebook or tesla or in my part of the country biomedicine. we are the creative people and we are creating these ideas. the third thing we have going for us is there is a massive amount of capital waiting on the sidelines to invest in these

ideas so we have a lot of people who are willing to follow and take risks with their money through pension funds and whatever else on people who have these ideas. the fourth bang we have going for us is we are in inherently entrepreneurial people. we are still the best place in the world to come if you have an idea and you are willing to take a risk and put your sweat equity into it and grow your opportunities and that's just our culture and it's there. what is holding us back? one thing i see holding us back is their fiscal policy effect the way running deficits and desks putting us at risk on the fiscal side. i happen to think we will straighten us out and i hope it would be through a grand bargain like simpson-bowles but i think incrementally we will get to it. we will get tax reform and medicare reform which is really all we have to do. i'm pretty positive about america's future and our capacity for economic growth and actually a lot of it's coming in

fact 90% of it is coming because of things that washington is not involved in. >> one more question. right over there. this gentleman right here. >> yes i am very stern. i'm an educational workforce advisor to the edmund -- my concern worldwide and i was reminded by professor murray t. who talked about a great economic stimulus being babies and certainly that would be churned perhaps united states and perhaps italy and perhaps even russia but throughout most of the world -- excuse me, it's what? >> throughout the most of the world is too many babies. the demographic pyramid's look differently than they do in developing countries and that translates into tremendous unemployment throughout the world. there are a lot of angry young men especially around the world and the numbers are enormous.

do you see any kind of geopolitical threat of lots of young men unemployed and primarily in developing countries and are there any u.s. foreign policy initiatives and defense initiatives that ought to take these things into account? >> that's a very legitimate concern but it is not one that we as a nation are government can do a heck of a lot about. there is no question that a lot of the radicalism in this world is driven by the fact that there are large numbers of young people who don't have much else to do but be radical and that is especially true in some of the countries which are feeding islamic fundamentalist movements. what can we do about that? probably very little. we can solve the worlds problems of unemployment. what we can do have over his have a vibrant national economy and that does help the world.

i saw some statistics somewhere about the implications of walmart for the rest of the world's employment and it was massive simple fact is if our economy is growing we have brought a lot of people with this in the best way to make our economy grow is to highlight our strengths and our strengths are innumerable. we are so well positioned as a country compared to our competitors. it's staggering to me and i just don't see any way that we are not going to grow and be extraordinarily prosperous. only thing it will stand in our way is our government and our government won't stand in the way that long because it's filled with people who want to do it right and they will get it right after while. it just takes them a while and they have to make a few mistakes first-hand. winston churchill's theme democracies will get things right after they have tried everything that is wrong. we are in the process of trying things that we are still moving in the right direction. we are still the strongest and

most prosperous nation in the world and the best place to live and we will be for the foreseeable future. as we grow the world will benefit. that's my only answer to that question. >> on a high note relatively speaking thank you very much senator. [applause] >> we are almost at the signature cocktail time but we are very lucky to have richard trumka president of afl-cio for the last session and we are going to try something a little different. we are going to have, this is going to be -- never been done before. we are going to have steven clemons and margaret carlson so please welcome richard, margaret

and steve. [applause] >> we will put you here and margaret there are. >> we will put you in the middle. >> i'm on the far left here. >> another big shout out. we have camera guys and a ton of c-span folks but it has been all of you may be tired and you all deserve a medal or a mug or t-shirt for being with us most of the day but they deserve to be so i want to thank those have been viewing this and sharing this with audiences all over. [applause] margaret, you are up. >> richard is so great to have you here, real working man. i don't know about all of you but certainly the people i know never really had a job where they work with their hands. i wouldn't know what to do and so we don't have as much affinity i think with how hard it is and this what i see as the

war on working people. if you give them any benefits they are basically lazy and they are going to stop working or you give unemployment benefits and they won't work because they don't want to and most people i know including my brother who was laid off a year ago are dying to have jobs. they want to work. this is a leading question to you. it really bothers me the attitude that is now prevailing against working people. >> that's a ruthlessly devilish question. >> i know, i'm sorry. >> it really is disappointing because i have seen people every day trying to get by. they send their kids to school and they keep the home. wages have been flattening and here's the economic reality of this generation. productivity has doubled and wages have stayed flat.

that money has actually been stolen from working people and the compacts that used to exist between working people and capitalism i think has been shredded. so people are both right now to things. they are very angry about it but at the same time they are very hopeful because we see signs right now that i think are real historic moment in the united states that is changing the debate from what it was to how we raise wages for working people. you see it from the pope to the president to fast food workers today care workers, workers everywhere are talking about how we raise wages and how we work together to raise wages. i think the icon might meet, my legacy of i think probably the reagan administration where we are all independent and we don't need anybody and if you work with people and you need people

somehow you are inferior that his putter rob price on the country. there isn't anybody out there that doesn't need other help. steve can i just do a softball follow-up? thank god for the pope by the way. >> he makes me proud to be a catholic. >> i know, i was worried. [laughter] so we are all happy appear. >> the love this pope. >> i love the ropes in the shoes. that was so bad. the gap however didn't begin to grow as much as it has recently. it didn't grow in the reagan administration to this huge gap we have now where there is no

maximum wage. as far as i can tell for ceos there is no maximum wage for as we are going to fight forever over minimum wage. see. >> that's absolutely right. if you look at it, the ceos salaries have increased 831 times over with the minimum wage has. if we had kept pace and if minimum wage would have kept pace with ceos we would be at $25 70 cents and if we kept pace with productivity would be $10.75. if we raise the minimum wage to $10.10 we will lift 3.5 million people out of poverty. that's going to be a good thing the matter what party you're in. it's a good thing for the economy and a good thing for the country. we are fighting the same tired

old dead arguments were they say if you increase the minimum wage we will lose jobs. we have done it 37 times and it has not cost us jobs yet. moreover find any minimum-wage worker out there and say hey would you rather keep wages where they are or get a raise to $10.10 an hour and risk being fired? i know what they are going to tell you. they are going to say i will take the risk. i need the money. work should reward people and lift people out of poverty. it shouldn't trap people in poverty and right now working at the minimum-wage you work 40 hours a week and you end up in poverty at the end of the year. it's trapping them in poverty and yet we have people advocating doing away with the minimum wage. >> pick up and asked the hard hitting questions. >> i've been worried all day with what question i would lead lead with tonight being giddy and trying to decide.

i was going to asked us richard trumka date trade stocks and then i said i better not asked that question that might need inappropriate. >> did you say stocks? >> stocks. >> it could be stocks. >> forget that question. the reason i find it interesting and the reason why this topic that we are discussing i find a bit traumatic and difficult is that when you think about how turbo charge the economy is we had a dinner last night with others that gave us insight into the transformational change technology robotics sensors and everything and internet of everything except the malaysian airline that disappeared off the internet. but the broad point is that i sometimes worry that these discussions of labor seems so trapped in the past that they

seem trapped about preserving equities and when you begin thinking about the world that we are going to have five years and now it's not just going to be ipads or iphones but it completely transformed relationship with technology and with what we are building and doing. i don't know how much of that we need in the u.s. but it will have a transformational impact on people and workers in how people interact. my question is the american labor department begin about that in thinking in a futuristic way about not what you are trying to preserve what we have had in the past with positioning yourself for a future that is coming like a tsunami abbess? >> let me agree with you on one point before i answer your question directly. i think we are trapped in the past. we adopted these economic policies that were starting to lead us over the cliff before the recession and then the

recession comes in that leads us over the cliff and now after the recession is over people pretend like none of this happened and they are trapped in the same economic policies that led us there. they won't take a new look at it they won't analyze things. they won't say maybe we should re-examine deregulation with her giving wall street everything it wants whenever it wants doing away the taxes were multinational corporations. what we hear is well if we are just a little bit more humane around the edges then everything will be okay. well, it won't be. it will lead us to the same exact results. being trapped in the past is a dangerous thing. the labor movement i think four years we denied what was happening. we denied that globalization was going to make a difference but i think 10 maybe 12 years ago that

started to change. if you look right now the largest provider of adult education and skills training in the united states other than the military is the u.s. labor movement. we provide skills training for everything. we are trying to reach out right now and give people careers. we are trying to reach back and give people remedial training so communities that have been lost and can't pass an interest exam to apprenticeship school we can get them the skills they need to get there to give them a career. so we think about it all the time. we think about the policies that are necessary. we think about what it's going to take to have an economy that works for everybody. not just the top 1% but for everybody. we see precious little in the way of new ideas coming out of wall street and quite frankly a lot of the policies here in d.c. even at the state level.

>> our u.s.. representative -- can someone toss me a bottle? >> this will be a short interview. >> thank you. there we go. >> that one was yours. >> this is claim. >> thank you. these are real stakeholders. >> this is a lesson that dcf to learn. everybody works together look what can happen. >> ambassador froman was here and of course he has been working on these two big. did -- trade deals ttp ntt ip with europe and i think the question whether the afl has in the past found itself supportive of any

of the trade bills we have done and if not what would it take you to be supportive of any. deal and what would it take for you to be supportive of these. deals? >> first of all we have supported some. deals. they haven't been many because most if not all of the. agreements have been fashioned on the nafta model. the nafta model which even its creators bill clinton rubin and a couple of others have said have not lived up and have failed the coast they were supposed to raise living standards on both sides of the border. they haven't. living standards in all three countries have stagnated or dropped. they were supposed to increase their. balance. we have gone from surplus to a deficit. they were supposed to create jobs in our country and they haven't. we have lost jobs so as long as they are predicated on the nafta model it will be difficult. when the tpp came up we

submitted over 300 recommendations. now i don't know how many of those are going to get through and make it to the offering table let alone the agreement. >> you don't know because you are not in the process not consulted and we don't see what's going on in the trade deals? >> we have some negotiations in the product. we don't know. we have been consulted and to mike froman's credit ps asked is what you want but there's a difference between saying what would you like and seeing what you would like him out of the final product. he can ask me or never ask me as long as what i want comes out and what we need comes out of the final product and we are okay. i'm fearful that precious little will be in the tpp and we will have another. agreement modeled after nafta. if it does does we would have to oppose that because that has

been in our opinion grocer for working people in this country. it has not been good for anybody. there are a lot of things that can help us. we could go after currency manipulation. that gives people the 19 countries around the pacific rim gives them an unfair advantage of american producers and manufacturers. there are other ways that they violate the. agreement. china doesn't enforce this child labor laws, prison labor laws health and safety laws are minimum-wage laws. that gives them a 60% of managed over an american producer. before you open the door we have 40 for currency and 60 for the other stuff. they have a 100% advantage over an american producer so we think that's unfair. we will try to fight that to have a level playing field. i'm hopeful that we can support it. the trade agreement with europe is a different story. it may be europe in the position

that we are with mexico and if they make a bad agreement or an agreement that is to our advantage we will take jobs out of europe like you have never seen. >> you are okay with that. >> yeah. i don't think that's good because i think it's a short-term strategy. what i like to have jobs back? absolutely i would. what i like to see manufacturing here? yes but any. agreement that is a one-way. agreement with the trading partner is not going to endure and what we need is a balance. agreement that both sides win and the workers on both sides win. >> i have my hard-hitting questions now. is there an enemy within? >> a white? >> an enemy within the movement where workers say for instance in tennessee are voting against collective bargaining? >> well let's be truthful.

workers in tennessee didn't vote against collective are getting. they voted because they thought they would lose their jobs if they voted for collective bargaining. look, this will come as a surprise to a lot of people in this room but the policy of the united states is to encourage the process of collective bargaining. that is written right into the law. not to tolerate, not to allow, not to be -- but to encourage it. senator corker. >> he didn't read that. >> he skipped class that day that he had a governor that said if you vote for collective bargaining it will take away all the subsidies. he had a governor or the head of the senate and the head of the house that said we are going to take stuff away and you will lose your job if you vote for collective bargaining. they warned the bin doing with the employer wanted because in

this specific instance volkswagen wanted to have a code determination council, it works council where we have could work together and help plan products and help to things and actually succeed. they were worried about unionism. the fight is about the union being there not whether it's good or bad for the company. not with the workers wanted board don't want but it's going to be good for them politically. they determined it would not be. they stepped across the line and they broke the law. i think a new election will be held ultimately. i think we will get a union in there and i think other people in the area will be emboldened at that point and they will join the union too. >> senator corker to give him the benefit of benefit of the doubt wrote an op-ed and said i'm a u.s. senator and i'm entitled to freedom of expression.

>> he is not entitled to violate the law and threatened people if they exercise their right. not even a senator is entitled to that. it is interesting. of course you are one of those workers that were denied collective bargaining and it's not interesting but sad and tragic. look, inequality in this country is growing. upward mobility in this country is growing. we are at the bottom end of the oec when it comes to upward mobility. there is only one way you are going to eliminate inequality in this country and that is to give workers the right to bargain collectively with their employer. this year we are going to introduce a bill that says whether you have a union or not every worker ought to have the right to bargain collectively for better wages with their employer. you don't have to have a union but you can get together and

they can't discriminate for discipline you for that. unless we find a solution to inequality at a certain point, at a certain level it becomes self-perpetuating. those that have the most make the rules the tax rules, the labor laws. they then make voting rules whether you can vote or not. it becomes self-perpetuating and that level of inequality grows. the middle-class in this country will only be restored if we give workers bargaining power and the ability to negotiate their fair share of what the labors produce whether you have a union or not. >> one more question than we will go to the audience. is that fair? you are one of the most powerful men in america. i've been joking about house of cards and u.n. grover norquist

the most powerful guys in town. tom donohue also helps run the u.s. chamber of commerce and the very powerful guy. john engler and others have been doing so much. i can't imagine the business roundtable and the u.s. chamber of commerce and the afl-cio lined up saying more infrastructure in is vital for the country. we are eating or seed corn and not taking this seriously. we are all on the same page. why has the performance in that been so pathetic in the sense of so few results in the political system? >> because it's not about fact or logic or solving problems. it's about ideology. you have a small group of people out there that say we are not going to raise taxes no matter what happens. we are not going to increase revenue. the infrastructure, to bed. this used to be a no-brainer.

it was never partisan issue. democrats republicans got together and did the infrastructure in the country. it cost you out there $22 billion a year if you are in business just waiting because of bad roads, bridges and things of that sort, intermodal means of transportation that doesn't connect with one another. it cost you another $20 billion a year if you are writing back and forth by commuter waiting in traffic, killing traffic. the country used to have world-class infrastructure and now we are dropping like a rock in decline and we keep getting worse and worse. the society of civil engineers say we have the d+ right now. it will drop again next year. some of the business forums downgraded us from 11 down to 17 right now in the world's infrastructure. >> are you in tom donohue still meeting and talking about this? >> absolutely.

tom donohue and i disagree on a lot of things but we see one to one on infrastructure and the need to do immigration reform because wages will go up in this country as long as employers can abuse people that are undocumented taking away their wages. we agree on that. we agreed on manufacturing and we are going to did try to do something jointly on manufacturing this fall. the things that we can agree on by try to work with him because i think it's good for the country. >> let's just bring in a question about women, wage parity. if steve and i were being paid for this which i -- we are not. i would likely earn 77% of what he would earn for doing it. what are you doing to get parito get parity for women and

minorities in wage levels? >> first of all of you have a union that doesn't exist. women make the same as men and if you are in a union and i will tell you exactly. >> this wasn't a hard hitting question. >> if you are with woman in beginning you make $898 a year, i mean a week and if you are nonunion to make $6.76. if you're a latina you make 838 and make union 547 if you don't have a union. overall you make 950 and if you're not in the union to make 750. if you are and make union shop you get the same wages as i do. that's point number one. point number two raising the minimum wage will help. it will lift more women out of poverty than a lot of other things will and that includes the tip wage. by the way the tip wages $2.13 an hour right now.

it has not been increased since 1991. it's 77% of the people who get tipped wages are women and so bringing the tip wage up to the regular minimum wage will help dramatically. >> let me explain the tip wage for people walking -- watching on television are there other tip wage positions? >> anyplace where you depend on tips for your salary. in restaurants wages are one of the big ones and another one is dormant and things like that. if you're working at morton's over here every meal is 150, 250 bucks without wine. somebody plunks down 18 to 20% tip that's big money but if you are where i grew up and breakfast is $3.50 that tip is pretty slim. >> and it's not going to get you

20%. >> that wage needs to come up and as it does it will help women significantly. >> this is a small point. one of the reasons the restaurant workers got the tip on the credit card. what can you do for hotel workers to get the tip on the credit card? in other words if i go to a restaurant the tip line is there are and if i have an expense account that gets paid -- [inaudible] >> exactly. that's a real good agenda item. my grandmother was an irish working class and worked in hotels here and i want that fixed. you are the man to do it. >> we work on that continuously. there is also a health and safety issue. >> do you have a question pat malloy? i have to call him pet. he is one of my godfathers in

washington. i am scared of him. he's irish. >> i am pat malloy in on the trade lawyer in washington. jared bernstein who was on an earlier panel wrote an article in "the new york times" recently saying that we should focus on the trade deficit that that's a real problem for this country and as you know we have run about $9 trillion worth of. deficits in the last 25 years. now many people including warren buffett have said we should set a national goal to balance our trade. i have asked two previous speakers whether we should do so. i didn't quite get clear answers. does the afl-cio support in national goal to balance trade and then to evaluate trade agreements and whether they are helping us do that are not? >> absolutely. i could and there but i won't. we do support that.

we have a deficit in the way you are going to fill it is you have for ways to fill the gap. one is government spending. we are about maxed out there and you are going to do much with government spending because of political will. we are not going to invest much more. we are almost back to pre-recession levels and that's not going to happen. a third way is consumer spending. 72% of the economy is driven by that and what you have there are stagnant wages so that's not going to increase. the only other thing is net exports. the only way you're going to balance the budget in the short-term is net exports, get it down to zero. the biggest thing we can do is look at the value of the dollar and look at the those that are manipulating the currency. play with those two figures are making get it down. now here's the gimmick that they will use. mike from and probably told you well if you take away energy

costs are balance of. is almost equal. that's a new standard. they started measuring trade and exports differently. if you go back to the old standard and have a uniform measure so we can actually compare 1995 to 2015 you find out that we have a tremendous deficit there. $500 million probably this year or three to 4% of gdp depending on the actual figures. >> that's it b4000000000. i want to make sure people understand it's billion. a billion people. he didn't say a million. >> slap me silly for that one. >> is general in right here and we are going to make a very brief because we are running out of time.

>> too brief pieces. first of all picking up a conversation we had in the early 1980s when i was with senator john glenn and you had a remarkable story about someone from the mayan community who went to law school. he said at the time was concerned about communications for the union movement and you said the time has come for it to change its national image and to use the most sophisticated tools of communication. someone there at another table who are proposing that in that issue has yet to be addressed. that's number one. the second statement last year he wrote in an op-ed something that was also wonderful to read which was the afl-cio was reaching out to groups that were too small and too poor to be regular members of chapters of the movement. i'm a volunteer representatives of one of those. we volunteered time to protect a group of women mainly. they can afford to protect --

so i have yet to find out what that initiative is and how that can be made real in schools and other places where these people are trying to be unions but don't have the tools or access to those who do. >> let me do the second one first. we are going to introduce a bill that will give them the tools to bargain crackled -- collectively with or without a union. second of all six months before that unlike any time in the past we reached out to our progressive friends in the community and all different sorts. we brought in a couple hundred of our progressive friends in said look we have three major committees that will chart the future of workers in this country. we don't want you to be part of this because here's what we used to do in the past. we would say yours are planned, come and join us. they either would or they wouldn't. this is a much different dynamic we said set help us develop the

plan so it meets your needs. we brought those in and we took the committee meetings of the convention and brought those progressive friends not union members that progressive friends and allies to the convention and made them part of the convention. they helped us adopt the course of what we are going to do. they said raising wages in this country is the key question in the most important thing you can do for us so we are working with them. we brought in taxicab drivers excluded under the law because they are supposedly independent contractors. we just organized 20,000 up in new york city. we brought in and day laborers. we have a strategic heart worship with day laborers with home care workers. these people aren't in a union that we are working together to help them get health and safety rules and fair wages and decent treatment on the job. i believe my job is to make sure that workers live better that

they get a better chance. i joined the labor movement because i believed it was the best vehicle to create massive social change that helps workers. i will die trying that. on the image issue you are absolutely right that we have been working on that. we have been doing a lot on image and doing a lot on redefining ourselves not just what we say about ourselves but how we act ourselves. changing our conduct so we are less self-centered and more are reaching to the community. bringing in the community with us and building programs together educating on them and executing together so the entire community can benefit from those efforts. i'm extremely proud about that. are we going to continue to have people like politicians in tennessee that have a vested

interest against us and trying to knock us down? absolutely but who led the fight for immigration reform? that was the american labor movement. we came together and said this is good for the country. giving people 11 million people who are citizens in every way except on paper is good for this country and it also happens to be good for all the other workers out there. as it currently stands they use the workers that are out there without any rights to drive down wages for everybody. i think it's an example that happened two weeks ago, steve. the guy by the name of francisco ruiz undocumented worker working in los angeles. employees are cheating them out of 40 or 50% of his wages by misclassifying him. he files a claim with fls say a fair labor standards act claim. the department orders a court-ordered mediation. he shows up for the mediation

and he is arrested and deported. his employer turned a man and deported him. now the message for every other worker in that area is enforce your rights and you are going to get deported. they become a permanent underclass that drags everything down. it's a moral issue and we should do it because it's morally right but we should also do it because it's economically the right thing to do. for those workers and for every other worker out there. we are leading those fights. we are leading the fights to increase minimum wage. minimum wage doesn't affect a lot of my members. some of them perhaps but not a lot. i will tell you one thing, 3.5 million people that live and work 40 hours every week and end up in poverty is wrong and we are a country that can do better. let me just say this one last thing.

right now there is a probably a kid in southeast washington d.c. that is about to make a decision his dad and mom work 40 hours a week and they slave away and they are just getting by. at the other end of the block is a guy with a roll of money that big. a new car, a new suit, looks like he is the world. we are asking that kid to give up the chance that at a life like that because it's illegal and he should give that up to slave away at minimum wage and lives in poverty below the poverty level. now that's a decision no american should have to make. we can do better than that. i intend to fight to make sure we do better than that and i won't quit until we do. that is part of our legacy. [applause] >> that was a great answer and if you will limit yourself to a 30-second question and if you

can't we are not going to go ahead because we are right at the end. can you do at? >> i will try. i want to talk about equal pay for equal work. my daughter is a cashier at giant and a union member. has two contracts. same work, she gets paid $7 put fsns and the person next door gets paid $15 based on they signed up but i also want to ask about the uaw deal because there's a fear on the part of some union workers for union supporters that uaw wasn't going to be aggressive enough in the volkswagen thing that they were going to be sort of like a union. >> the uaw and before you answer that i cannot proceed without letting joel -- you have 30 seconds. he loves economics. he's a former chief economist. >> he taught me everything i don't know.

>> i was waiting all day for you rich. i wonder if you could elaborate a bit about the growth of contract labor especially manufacturing. there was this really troubling article in the "washington post" by a guy who was working in a nissan plant getting a fraction of the pay and not getting any benefits. >> three great comments. equal pay, equal work, uaw. >> if you look at the fringe benefits over the year it's almost laughable to say the uaw is not going to fight for their members. they also fought and they were the vanguard of the civil rights movement. they were way out in front of us the saguaros movement. they were there fighting for every worker out there. they are great union and the members that i know understand first evolved the union is the members. there isn't this amorphous lob

somewhere called the uaw. the uaw is made up of all of those 2000 workers at volkswagen and those 2000 workers at volkswagen have to decide what and if it's they want and the uaw will give them the know-how, the mechanism and the structure of to help achieve it. those members are uaw. i believe the two-tiered wage system was employers decided the best way for us to reduce wages or reduce costs right now is for us to have two tiers. we told them that wouldn't work. able get resentful. people say i'm doing the same job that you're making twice as much as me. that's a stupid system and it's being phased out. it will be phased out in grocery stores and it's been phased out elsewhere. >> the growth of contract labor.

>> what you have right now is virtual companies where you have a company that doesn't have any of the employees and here's what they do. they come in and organize a group of people in the next week the company is gone. it's a design to keep workers from being able to get a fair share. it's dangerous and people are now finding it doesn't work so well because of the quality, because of the skills and the upgrading skills and turning people over too fast and they can keep them. he can't keep the quality up so they are starting to come back to where they are saying they want a solid workforce. the peripheral stuff instead of being vertically integrated we will concentrate on a large segment of this thing and have people that are trained and well-trained inside the shop. >> i love the way you ended a few minutes ago. would you do that again? [applause]

>> thank you. thank you very much. >> at the end of the day the economy is going to need an enormous monetary stimulus is the fed will not be raising rates for quite some time but i am optimistic the u.s. economy is going to accelerate. i think one of the core things here one of the core dimensions is the fact that last year the u.s. economy grew 1.9% with fiscal drag from higher taxes and government spending cuts reducing growth by 1.3 percentage points. without that fiscal tightening the u.s. economy would have been growing over 3%. >> as you know cbo does not make policy recommendations and that's very important because policy choices depend not just on the analysis of the consequences of the different courses of actions but also how one reads those consequences and what values one applies. there's nothing special about our values. it's up to our elected leaders you're in my elected leaders to

make this policy judgments. our job is to help congress understand the consequences of alternative courses of action.

our special booktv programming continues in a couple of moments with sandra grimes with "circle of treason" the cia account of traitor aldrich ames. sandra grimes was one of the small group of cia officers

exposed a russian mole who seriously damaged national security and compromise sources. she writes about her experiences in "circle of treason" the cia account of traitor aldrich ames and the men he betrayed. this is an hour. >> we are very fortunate to have with us sandy grimes this afternoon. she has quite a remarkable story to tell, a story from inside the cia where she worked for a year hired by the cia right out of college in 1967. sandy spent two and half decades rising through the agency's ranks of assignments working against the soviet union and eastern european countries. she was about to resign in 1991 when she was asked to stay for one more assignment. that assignment involves joining a five person team charged with a year and out why so many of the cia's most valued soviet

assets had been executed or imprisoned several years earlier. investigation ended up exposing one of the most disruptive traitor aldrich ames. since his conviction in 1994 ames has been serving a life sentence. a circle of treason, sandy's book is the first account from inside the cia not only of how ames was caught out that of the men he betrayed. sandy wrote it with another longtime agency member who participated in the investigation. their book was first published a little over a year ago in 2012 and gene passed away at the end of 2012. but their story has gained fresh attention as a result of the

eight-part abc miniseries the assets which started airing last month. there has been a lot of focus lately on women at the cia. the movie zero dark 30 played out the role of the female undercover officer tracking down osama bin laden and the showtime series homeland revolves around the female analyst. sandy's real life experience lack some of the heightened drama of these fictionalized characters and she told me also that one of her conditions in putting together the assets was that her character had no affairs. she put her foot down there. old school, old school she said. but sandy was definitely a very bright and determined intelligence professional who did our country a very great service.

a review of her book in "the washington times" sub for the most gripping insider account of a counterintelligence operation that you were ever apt to read. ladies and gentlemen please join me in welcoming sandy grimes. [applause] >> thank you very much. can everybody hear me? i'm going to have to take the glasses off so i can see my notes. i am delighted to be here to talk about our book "circle of treason." before i get started though my remarks are going to be fairly brief because i want to leave a lot of time for your questions and i will be glad to answer i assume most of them i will be able to. i also want to say i am here to represent my good friends and co-author. as i tell you about our journey

to the gentleman that caused the wholesale loss of our assets in 1985 and 1986. in 1991 that led us to search for a traitor in the cia. to make matters worse we knew he wouldn't be a stranger. he would be a co-worker, a colleague, someone we had known for a very long time and someone we probably saw every day in the hallways of our headquarters. but "circle of treason" is not just a story about how we identified a spy. it's much more than that. for the first time gene and i are able to tell the history of the cia's contacts with his victims. many of their stories are ours as well. we participated in the handling in the number of these cases and we watched as those we knew were

arrested and executed. always concerned that we might have made a mistake which led to their deaths is a burden no one wants to carry but i have to be completely honest. that is what a number of us in the cia had to do for the next eight years until our mole was identified. you may have noticed i have yet to mention his name. we all know it's aldrich ames or rick as he is known to us and yes he was a colleague and for me personally he and i were carpool partners in the mid-1970s. and on april 16, 1985 rick ames decided to walk through the front door of the soviet embassy downtown washington d.c. 16

street and volunteer his services to the soviet union. two months later he also decided to provide his kgb handlers with the names of or identifying information on every single one of our human sources reporting on the soviet union. those who are currently reporting, those who are long retired and those who were dormant. and in doing so he knew full well what fate awaited them. they would be arrested, they would be interrogated, they would face a trial, they would be convicted and they would be executed. a bullet to the back of the head now it's 1985 and our nightmare

begins. late may gru asset handling in athens greece receives a cable from his headquarters saying you are to return to moscow. he decides to defect and we bring him safely to the u.s.. early august our kgb asset and legos nigeria is arrested in moscow during a home leave. sometime between late august and late -- early october our gru asset in lisbon portugal is also arrested in moscow also during a home raids. november 6, our kgb asset here in washington d.c. boards a flight at dulles bound for moscow, over and back, short trip. we never see him again.

again early november our kgb asset and bond west germany travels to east berlin for a three-day conference. he disappears and into 1986, february our kgb asset in moscow is arrested. june or july as best as we can tell our gru asset in moscow is arrested. july 7, 1986 hour long retired gru asset general dimitri poliakoff is arrested in moscow one day after 65th birthday. he's the highest ranking soviet intelligence officer this government has ever run.

and unfortunately in june 1987 our kgb asset also in moscow also long retired is arrested. so here we are. it's the end of 1985 and obviously something is seriously wrong. two possible explanations. we either had a human penetration of cia or our communications have been compromised. in other words they are reading our traffic. what did we do? our first action was taken in response to a new volunteer. in january of 1986, a soviet intelligence officer volunteered to cia. our goal was simple.

we have to try to keep this one alive. we have no idea whether it is a traitor or a technical penetration so we have to guard against each possibility. with respect to the traitor side of the equation we institute what we still to this day affectionally call draconian security measures to simply eliminate almost everybody from those who are aware of our new asset. now we have got to address the technical side with respect to our staff communications and the possibility that they are reading our traffic on our soviet cases. ..