the bad news is that we have a choice to make. ..

front of us. what we have outlined is a path towards of american harness energy resources, develop potential, grow our economy. one of the most concerning things to me about the obama administration -- well, a lot of things concern me. our incoherent formant -- foreign policy, obamacare, and many others. one of the most troubling things is this new normal. we are expecting about 2 percent economic growth. in a normal where we have been near record low work-force participation. you have to go back to 1978 to see these record lows. more and more people think this is the best that we can do, becoming more and more dependent on government instead of paying -- creating good paying jobs are missing america's energy resources, one very specific and big step toward providing the kind of strong economy that we need so that our kids can pursue

the american dream. this is an important policy. there are others to work on this report. wanted thank you for inviting me to come speak and will be happy to questions. >> one or two. you have a lot of experience on health issues. today president obama will be at the center for disease control and prevention where he will announce according to what the administration has been saying additional measure -- measures in response to the ebola epidemic. the ap says he will assign 3,000 military personnel to the affected region, training to 500 health care workers a week, iraq 17 health care facilities 100 beds each and set up a joint command in liberia. so what is your assessment of the u.s. response to the ebola outbreak? >> i'd say a couple of things.

i think it is appropriate that we are stepping up our efforts direct and indirect to countries that are hardest hit. the widespread epidemic compared to what your seeing overseas, i think we have got certainly both the humanitarian basis as low as a vested interest in wanting to help countries in africa that are hardest hit. when you think of the impact, the economic stability, the potential impact on the entire region and ultimately the world it is important but we leaned forward. it does not surprise me that america is the first among all nations offering assistance. more can be done. the world of the organization could have been more effective. other countries could have been more aggressive. this is an epidemic clearly overwhelming the limited resources and the worst hit countries who simply do not have the training, the medical personnel, the basic containment

equipment. you can see it in terms of the spread of the disease and the difficulty of providing treatment and anything as simple as cremated bodies. as a good thing that our government is leaning forward, american charities have been leaning forward and providing assistance as well. it is a part of who we are. we're the most generous people in the world to respond to humanitarian crises. whether or not there were a direct strategical interest or impact on our country. in this case i happen to think there will be if we don't act, but i think it is the right thing to do regardless. it is a good thing that we are stepping up our assistance. not enough has been done by the who and other countries. i think it has been -- unfortunately it does show gaps in the ability of the who to respond which needs to be addressed. this will be the last potential epidemic that we need to confront. we need to fix what did not work

and relieve human suffering. >> you told them as nbc last month that you were speaking in praying about 2016 but would not decide until november. how are you thinking and planning, affected by the new poll of new hampshire voters showing among the potential republican presidential hopefuls what does that say about the effectiveness of rolling mills position papers cards i don't have as many readers as i thought. [laughter] >> another nail in the coffin. >> basically dead. [laughter] >> we are doing that later today, by the way. but. [laughter] >> a couple things. >> impeding you as well. >> you're not.

>> that's right. you did. a couple of things. it is true that there is a reason to be coy. and thinking about whether i will run in 2016. i won't make a decision until after november. i do not like it pulls the first time i ran for office i was pulling within the margin of error which means a loss of zero at that point in all honesty. at this point polls are measuring a mighty but if i were to decide to run every time i run for office the reason i decided to run had nothing to do with poll numbers or fund-raising but i made the decision to run for governor in the this is to run for congress because i felt like a man something to offer to buy unique perspective, offered to a server solutions or experiences that i did not feel other candidates were offering at that time. iran for governor i felt like we have to make big changes. the only state in the south where we have more people leaving and coming. we needed to make big changes.

that is what i got elected to do i will not bore you with a long rest of what we have done. after 25 years of out migration we have had six years of immigration. our economy has grown two times the national gdp. a higher per-capita income, more people living in louisiana than ever before. $80 billion of capital investment and private development projects. over 50,000 new jobs. it is the best economy we had in over a generation of the louisiana. we did that by making big changes. it was not easy. we cut our state budget 26%. the largest cut in our state history. the point of all that if i were to decide to run for office, it would have nothing to do with polls or fund-raising but simply be based upon the same calculation that i made when i ran, the same decision making progress robbers out of where i would run for congress or governor, do i think i could

make a difference for maps of the unique to offer in terms of specific areas and experience, is is a progressive supposed to be doing. lester focus on winning this in the back. thirty-six governors races. of the campaigning with governors and gubernatorial candidates. we have other elections between now and then. >> a good segue. [inaudible question] >> a couple of things. we absolutely have to be merry land group ppg is double down on failed policies and harry reid and the president well over 90 percent of the tide, a double down on a vote for obamacare. even though she is now chairman of the senate energy committee she is not been able to do anything like getting the keystone pipeline approved, an

action that would create thousands of construction jobs in our country. yanase the canadian prime minister calling obama's -- obama frustrated in chief. canadians a looking to send their oral toward the chinese instead of the preferred customers, us, the united states. it makes no sense. whitney to replace her. i think that it is going to happen this year. it is possible we could have a december runoff. we have an open primary in november. we used to do it before november, run off. now our first elections to our runoff if necessary. it happened in 2002. she has multiple opponents. it is possible. i look for to seeing everyone of you in my state in the weeks between november and december. i think it would be bad piece she is trying to hide from our record to win harry reid, president obama. she cannot hide in a december runoff of the entire focus of

the country is on an election. the runoff as possible energy is an important part of alysian and economy. the leading or real and gas producer. we have many companies are support industry and are involved in other aspects of energy production. and last couple weeks ironists to major capital investments from companies using sugar cane waste products to convert into energy. we have complete -- significant companies that work in the nuclear and other industries as well. back-to-back that barry will certainly despite her position and seniority of the senate in d.c. she is not been able to actually produce policy results the beneficial to our energy, economy, energy industries back home to bed don't think that her experience and time will be an advantage. if anything it is a disadvantage

. she will be one of the senators we will remove it as part of taking the majority this year. >> you were the originator of the new republican position on birth control, over-the-counter birth control. i am wondering, if you see races were candid it's have adopted this position and do you think that insurance companies should be required to cover over the counter birth control because they don't do that now? >> a couple of things. one, i do see this becoming more common in many different ways. colorado and north carolina in particular. i think the left as reacted so loudly says it is working. this is no longer a tactic that they can use.

when i originally offered this idea we wrote following the recommendations, the recent recommendations of the medical societies themselves. it think this is a safe product that should be offered over the counter. a lawyer with the product to be offered over the counter does not stop a woman from being and would still be covered. sandra kranz are trying to attack republican senatorial candidates. we're not saying that it cannot still be offered with a prescription through the doctor. there would still be covered by insurance. nothing removes their obligation to pay for it. a patient can still have an insurance company pay for it if they get a prescription. nothing takes that away. in terms of over-the-counter, not just about over the counter drugs and general, not in favor one-size-fits-all mandate

insurance companies will continue to pay for it. under current law they have to pay for it as a prescription product. it would be cheaper for them to pay for it over the counter instead of requiring customers to go through doctors and pay for the doctor's visit. secondly, there will respond. insurance companies tend to view things in terms of dollars and cents. it will make the calculation that the birth control would be cheaper than paying for the pregnancies just for my dollars and sense perspective. they view it as an expense. it would be in our economic interest to pay for it over the counter. to be clear, over-the-counter does not take away the woman's ability to get the product with a prescription from a doctor where it would be covered under current law. we are giving additional options, not taking away if i hope. >> right now it's totally hypothetical. do you know of any plans by any company to do that?

is this just a good political answer to the war on women? >> i think you see any collusion right now. right now you have these big companies and government benefiting from the current system. you have big pharmaceutical companies to make more money when it is a product requires prescription. parks offer over the counter. it does lower-cost but we have seen drug companies resistant previously to offering drugs over the counter. they have done this to protect patents when it will losing patent protection to protect their assets and sales were they did not have exclusive rights. it then in general the drug companies have not necessarily done this eagerly or aggressively. right now you have a government and big farmers. his water wrote in the op-ed. these are products that have been adamant used for decades.

would you like and other products that have been used as safely the have come over the counter. there is no reason a woman should have to go to an insurance company. no reason her employer should have to be involved in the decision. again, making it available over-the-counter does not stop her ability to get it written through a prescription is to limit pay for a bickering of. in this hypothetical when it is offered over-the-counter insurance companies will still pay for it. it might be cheaper over the counter. in the think unfortunately look at it in terms of dollars and serbs. cheaper relevant to pay for this over-the-counter drug and the number of births there would otherwise prevent poor reader think it will. finally there respond to consumer pressure. >> regard to your next.

>> a wanted to go back from an. a number of fairly harsh things to say regarding plan to change. your recommendation on the subject seems to be to overturn the massachusetts verses epa supreme court decision which allow the epa to regulate withdrawing from the international negotiating process and then in terms of dealing with the problem funding more university research in approving force management to cut down on forest fires and tinkering with the air traffic control system. my question is, can your party succeed or writing off voters

regard this as an urgent issue? >> i recommend doing more than that. when i say withdrawal -- he simply said i said withdraw from the international negotiating system. i said withdraw from a specific system, the you in kyoto protocol which i think has become corrupted even some people who are concerned about climate change has said it is not an effective system. i do think that the united states should engage in realistic international discussions with our major trading partners and major economic competitors in the report saying that one does not have to be -- and he says it better than our when terms of one does not have to be a believer organizer to be also convinced it is a good thing to control emissions car reduce emissions and to be seeking to be more efficient. and expressly said let's define it.

my point is that unilaterally hurting our economy will do nothing to help the environment and will end up destroying millions of get paying american jobs, especially when you look at the fact that china has added more new coal production capacity and our entire country. the majority of the growth in emissions is coming from the developing countries. china in its more co2 and american and all the countries of the western hemisphere put together. if we simply take unilateral action now we will do is drive energy intensive companies overseas, manufacturing processes to other countries. that does nothing for the environment. i give you a practical example. in my state one of the largest steel companies a few years ago was thinking of where to put the most modern steel plant ever. and we were competing with that project we were competing with brazil.

they wanted to go to brazil. there are able to persuade them to build in st. james parish. if they do all five phases, the 4800 iraq jobs this deal with chairman severe building a steel plant as part of the integrated operations. the only question is whether they build it here or overseas. if we unilaterally hurt the economy companies will shift capital and investment overseas creating jobs elsewhere. absolutely let's listen to the scientists, our job creators and work with our major trading partners and competitors, have china and europe at the table and work together to address these issues and not to sell away unilaterally hurts our economy. there are no regret policies.

there are regulations or policies that actually reduce the amount of energy we use. the cheapest energy but you have is the energy you don't need. we encourage the use of sustainable renewal will. we just want to address for those that have concerns american do repairs on sound science. a stronger economy and a strong protective environment are not mutually exclusive. a weak economy makes it harder. we can do both. part of it is carnage in our own energy resources and our major trading partners and competitors one of a fixed amount manage sporting over 10 percent of our coal and other countries. affordable energy, or simply sending it to china and other countries.

there's simply exporting our energy resources as hamas energy intensive manufacturing jobs. that's bad for the environment and i come. [inaudible question] >> i have said this and a service several months ago when bill made some comments at the beginning of the year. he is perfectly capable of explaining and defending his own words. i said that the time he certainly could have used -- he sent some times i would not of necessarily serve.

a stand up for his right to speak. or the people agree with him or not he is a right to say when he once. people that want him to be signed -- silenced. hours by saying that they had to kill the show. there are private company. he had every right to suspend or cancel. replan was wrong to try to silence some relevance of the series was a channel and did not agree and i do not necessarily agree with everything he says. in terms of the bigger issue of the cultural -- i will say in terms of those with aids and would certainly think as governor and husband and father are more everybody to be treated with compassion. i think officer major slide we would treat somebody with cancer or any other illness we should

do everything we can to help to recover and lead a fulfilling and productive life and everything we can to ease would ever challenges they face. bob barr was born with heart defect. any imminent. anyone from row of forms of an account of physical and mental the illness or how to challenge we want them to it and would not treat someone with aids in it differently than i would someone who have heart disease and cancer returned user meeting owls to be ready to continue research and it provided compassionate care to those in the house challenge again the speech of the reagan library and liberty university. of the biggest challenge or it comes to the social perspective

it's a war or religious liberty. right down there is now something in our society. and it feels like they seem to confine it to be her will to her religious views as opposed to living area religious views the real assault is on religious liberty. correctly decided when it was five to four. this is violators example of assault. the cases cited 90. a lutheran school.

no ministerial exemption that has been long recognized in the employment cost did you think about that. it did not have to claim that the government was claiming that there is no protection for churches to selected is to teach him the minister of the gospel. it did not even have to argue that. it was a dangerous it was decided 9-0 against the of restoration. a recent print court justice. it was worrisome to the administration should not have made that argument. those clavichord turned it down. the bigger issue was the assault on religious liberty. it did in the homes of to heyman

for many of us it was shocking to hear and speak so eloquently about what happened overseas while ignoring what was happening and how to read religiously rigid not create the united states to firms are trimming the united states did not create religious liberty. it is the reason the agree to for our country -- or of the fundamental reasons why our country was founded and is the foundation -- without religious freedom there is no freedom of speech. there's a growing issue. my hope would be even those that may not share conservative -- conservative social views of those who happen to be right now of the forefront of the religious liberty fight, help would be that even if they disagreed with the particular views it would still far for the ability of those individuals to live their views and so we may

not agree with your views on marriage but we think in this country it is right that you have be blended to live your life according to your views. we have helped as the country. i would hope this is something he bubble was across the political spectrum but would not be an issue for conservatives and republicans but there would be a bipartisan consensus that we live of a country divided as religious liberty for all. they just happen to be the ones that field of their rights are being infringed upon. religious liberty is an important issue cards receive the our reporter in medicare is spending more outlined plans to cut the cost of retirement these entitlement reforms being nursery. >> part of the challenge of

reforming programs, five-year or ten years. the gingrich being done to a charity give too far to make policies and really don't long term impact trajectory of the program, the trust fund insolvency date, the actuarial report, not just a short-term report. he still our program but as in credible distress. and who want to continue and sustain and preserve the program for a are her parents and grandparents future generations. he did a lot of band-aids. you never address the real problem. the costs are growing faster

begun to retire, they're not yet become or guidance of the race as a cohort were there will be consuming their medical resources. in the future you will see baby bell rushed consuming more medical resources. rare at the front of this tidal wave that will change the print room. so it's certainly good news? sure. you still face a trust fund the will run out of money long before the baby the wars are finished. a program where the costs are rising more quickly in of a program that is not efficient in responding to the needs of its members cannot nimble and adapting new technology or procedures, responsive and provided the best quality care. this is important to continue

and improve the program. the specific description would allow both taxpayers and beneficiaries. at the the urgency is there in do will be important for leaders of both parties to come. did you go back to the 90's there was a bipartisan willingness to work across party lines. you have senators working together on legislation, some others, the republican colleagues to offer its endorsing premier support, willing to work across the aisle of the time. republicans -- there were willing to add prescription charge of the program. democrats were trying to have support.

their is a path toward. they will require the use of both parties to work together. [inaudible question] >> a couple finds. the report, the a ministrations report for funding as well as the use of strikes, their in the process of approving a request to r solicitors tricks are was critical and very critical of the president's rhetoric and policy.

his delay has allowed his group together strength and it made america weaker in the world more dangerous. after the barbaric beheading he was eloquent in expressing grief but unfortunately the president's as he always is his very eloquent but grief is not a strategy. he talked about containing isis, iraq expellant isis. order wanted to your answer was we would hunt them down and kill them allowed them to gather land and resources and this was a greater threat is speeches with the same as results who would have the best president in the history of the country. we would have the best foreign policy in a generation. unfortunately we do not. the president has been eloquent. in terms of where we are to very

it is incumbent and he has the authority to do limited attacks and strikes to defend our country. it's right for him to go to congress to make his case to get proper authority. nobody's doing that. it is incumbent upon him to share his trench you with the congress and the american people about how we will eliminate this threat, how we will hunt them down and kill the. their is a discussion about the international coalition to read hansard would think it is better to have a coalition and not commit better to have allies helping us, especially when you look at the financing element and controlling the borders and providing resources. the end of the day america needs to be able to lead. the challenge we have with this

administration's approach to foreign policy as our friends don't trust us. there is no doubt in my mind that russia would not be meddling in the ukraine if they truly feared, respected the folks in the white house. there is no data in my mind that it had an impact. in his first year the president unilaterally withdrew missile receptors that would be based in poland and would not allow georgia ascension into nato and offered their recent to russia and the president later drew the red line and there were not consequences, not the promised consequences he had threatened. with this administration did not wholeheartedly and unequivocally support his rule all of them has consequences. our allies and enemies are watching. the greatest concern is what take away message iran takes.

it is an existential threat to us, our allies, the world. we cannot allow up to happen. what risk reward carburetion of a making based upon our unwillingness to follow through. america must lead a stronger america least of your appointments of american troops. his actually true. eleusis of ministration would believe it practice that. the support of congress, the strikes on targets, against isis , they should approve the funding in the resolution. >> i want to ask you a couple of science questions. i thought you said at the beginning, and a biology major.

did you say that the administration or science tonight? >> i did. >> what did you mean? >> there are several examples of their approach to energy policy. over five years since the keystone pipeline, the state department says there would be no material impact, yet they keep delaying and denying approval to one of our closest allies who simply wants to sell as crude oil and then buybacks some of that has refined product topping our respective economies there is no scientific factual basis for this to continue rather than politics. when you look at their approach to funding -- the conservatives used to like to say the government picks winners and losers. you look at solyndra and some of the other companies that they have found it, they have an awful record as the venture

capitalist. the only type of energy sources they want to fund of those that are expensive and will once exceed. you look at the approach to the epa and the recent corona extra rules. the massachusetts supreme court ruling, look and louisiana. a 40% reduction from power plants. when you look louisiana, our biggest source of electricity and natural gas, 20 percent nuclear. we are not a high coal burning state. when we asked where they came up with 40% would go one of the intelsat rejections. they could not explain the rationale. it is not like we have low hanging fruit, plans that we could replace to modernize, or upgrade. we significantly relied. there is no basis. when you look at their approach, simply shifting under this

demonstrations policy rihanna exporting. it does nothing to help the environment. hell is that a science based approach to addressing even if you believe the premise that what they are addressing these to be addressed? >> with you personally believe that human activity -- do you think that the earth is changing and human activity has something to do with that? >> the client is absolutely changing. there are question is how much and what of the consequences. it is not controversial decision of human activity is contributing. in terms of how much and how serious, of the scientists decide. you don't have to be climate

change believer organizer to believe that it cannot be get for us to be -- there is nothing wrong in terms of wanting to reduce emissions coming out of our economy and industry. >> to you personally believe that human activity is leading to changes? >> i hope it is not. i am sure human activity is having an impact on the climate. i would leave it to the scientists to decide how much, what that means, what are the consequences. >> isn't that pretty much the consensus? >> i'm not trying to litigate. to the extent we are addressing it we should be doing it in concert with international partners and competitors. the action this administration is taking don't improve the environment and hurt our economy . exporting coal does not change even if you accept everything they believe, simply exporting

coal does not do anything. you are actually going to be making it in countries with looser environmental laws. my point is, let the scientists to be configured and of. the policy perspective should be that we should address that in concert with international competitors in trading partners. he made more co2 in america and all the other countries combined how does it make sense for us to export more jobs? it is going to make the environment wars. >> to you personally believe that the theory of evolution explains the presence of complex life on the earth. >> i was not an evolutionary biologist.

local schools should make decisions on how they teach. we can talk about common core and why i don't believe in a national curriculum. local school districts should make decisions. what my kids to be exposed to the best critical thinking whether evolution, and evolutionary biology. >> t think that is the best scientific thinking on the development of complex life on earth? >> has a far more mike is to be taught about evolution. but local school districts should make the decision. >> what you think. >> i told you what i think. local school districts, the federal government should make the decision of how they treat topics. want my kids to be taught about evolution and other theories. >> go ahead. >> i'm trying to get in a couple more. we have about seven minutes left

sphere physicians. >> the scientists decide. have to take a position at some point. when is enough in of to make you move one way or the other? are you need a believer or denier? >> two things. the most important and full political perspective, the policies we adopt. the policies we are adopting our bad for the economy in the running clean-up and for the internment. forcing him to consider going overseas and does nothing to help the environment. of a problem that the left has, the left los energy than is scarce and expensive.

there have the fracking revolution, natural gas. all of a sudden, wait a minute. we're not so sure reelected. we have got to stop with the radical left, stop with his almost religious approach towards energy to be scarce and expensive. a policy perspective, the important thing is that we cannot protect our internal and rorer economy. there are not mutually exclusive we should want energy intensive manufacturing jobs. many do not require college degrees. to the extent we are pursuing these policies, the job creators and consultation in concert with the country's that the competing against. otherwise it would unilaterally shut down our industry in shift more of it. it does nothing for the internment.

>> please. >> could you tell us. [inaudible question] >> and stuff. i barely got three choices. president carter, clinton, and obama. i have already rolled to of the mouth. but since president obama was the worst of my life time since jimmy carter. then i had to apologize to jimmy carter. i would say president when for a couple of reasons. he was a former governor which gave him more practical experience. believed in american exceptional some. in nothing president obama's

competence. just incumbents. i don't think he was very critical to the illogically. he did believe in american exceptional as a permanent just don't think his policies were competent. this administration's energy policies with a lot like carter's, based on abundance. i do think though clinton, that was better. and he had to balance the budget will work with the legislature, set priorities. based on the republican congress a from a good piece of legislation to no one of the more successful modern pieces of legislation in terms of decreasing poverty rates is well as helping folks into the economy republicans in the congress. the greatest missed opportunity,

he had the opportunity. i was not in the room. he was on the verge of doing it and then changed his mind because of the impeachment. i do know that two of his appointees were close to endorsing the commission's product and at the last minute change their mind. they later testified that he regretted that. that was one of his greatest best opportunities. so up to three. i think that he was the better of the three. in part because his experience was formed by being governor. the last six years or better than his first two. the republican congress forcing the come to the table and compromise. >> the people who still want to

question. we only have about two minutes left. >> this seems the experiment in that state suffered some backlash. >> i think sam will win his election. i applaud him the easy thing to do for elected leaders and politicians is take a poll. there is an old saying that politicians, basically a mob marching on city hall. he did not do that. welling the spend political capital to cut taxes and restrict the size of government which will help the economy. i think that we need leaders that are willing to use the political capital to implement pulled strategies. a think he will be rewarded.

as people see the results you will see poll numbers improve. we need more of that. we have too many politicians only paying attention to short-term pools of but i'm willing to do things to address the escalating debt. we have one of the world's highest tax rates, seeing companies toward overseas, seeing an anemic economic growth i think the lesson to be taken his eye when need bold leaders willing to debate things. the poll numbers were lonely. >> your competitive curatorial race. >> even when he was in the united states senate he took positions based upon principle and some times was a fierce advocate for human rights of the international stage, surprised a lot of folks. i think that's great.

in principle, conservative leader. fortunate to have him as their governor. and it did that when you're willing to lead some times you have to make tough decisions. when people see their results that will see poll numbers come back and the popular support come back. the thing that people really crave is someone to look them in the face into with the sooner we're going to do and be honest with them. every voter knows what he stands for and what he will do. the look of the president. against the mandate. you can keep your doctor and your health care plan. turns out not to be true. he cut premiums. we would have obamacare if it had not been finalized and were told. willing to let the voters in the face. he has made tough choices. people will exactly what he stands for.

it of voters who do not agree with him all respect him for being honest up front and saying exactly what he was going to do in this support will grow. the safest thing to do, a conservative state. he could have sent back and done nothing. i know him and the reason he ran for office was to make a difference. too many people run for office to get the title and the perks. and we don't need those with some office. i am pervious fighting hard. >> i apologize. thank you for coming. appreciate it. >> i look forward to coming back >> up next on c-span2 house democratic leader nancy pelosi

talks about her career in congress. president obama introduces a new initiative to fight the spread of ebola. more about the outbreak with a senate health committee hearing.

>> the secretary of state testifies wednesday at two hearings looking at the administration's strategy to combat isis. live coverage at 2:30 p.m. eastern. >> this weekend on the c-span network's our campaign 2014 debate coverage continues. live coverage of the arkansas governor debate with former u.s. house manner -- member debating former administrator of the da and former u.s. congressman. saturday night live coverage of the iowa governor's debate.

>> house democratic leader nancy pelosi spoke to students at new york law school about her congressional career at the current political climate in washington. her remarks were an hour. >> we want to welcome everyone. it is a great honor for us to be hosting the sidney shainwald public interest featuring house to mccracken in nancy pelosi. [applause] as many of you know, one of the premier events. each one has featured a moment as national leader including

supreme court justice sandra day o'connor, former senators and current cabinet members and the late senator ted kidney. that tradition continues. his lecture series was founded by the alumni and a steamed a trustee of new york law school in honor of her late husband to let an incredibly dynamic life. this series provides a unique form for social and intellectual discussion featuring the most prominent leaders in public and judicial service. groundbreaking legal pioneer, a visionary who has made fighting for women's health her unrelenting mission for the last three decades. she received her law degree from new york law school in 1976 launching her legal practice after a successful career as a consumer advocate making her

accomplishments the bunch more remarkable. she has litigated on behalf of women over dangers and/or ugly used contraceptive and of products and has transformed the class-action litigation. her lead is inspirational to all and especially an example to normal female students and the first woman to receive the president's medal. [applause] in a year when new york law school and celebrant the achievements of women in all her impact has been global.

[applause] united states district court judge and it a former lecturer speaker. [applause] the york state appellate judge freedman. [applause] new york city deputy mayor. [applause] corporation counsel's zachary carter. [applause] former city comptroller. [applause] the former new york state attorney general. [applause] former appellate division judge. [applause]

former appellant and is a judge in new york law school alumnus and board member. [applause] last but not least arthur abbey. halfback of course there are many and others who could easily be acknowledged. we will move to our program. it is an honor. such a treasure to member of this community. proud to be led by such an inspirational leader. thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> at any rate i am honored and pleased to have really the first woman speaker of the house of representatives here today. [applause] and to have carolyn, my great representative. i welcome you. i'm going to tell you something. could not be a better congressman. first elected to cars in 1992. the program is short. everyone has to go back to washington to vote on.

[inaudible] that me tell you, the current ratings by various interest groups, the american association of university woman gives her 100 percent. pro-choice america gives her 100. planned parenthood gives her 100. the human rights campaign gives her a hundred. the reliance for retired americans gives her 100. the voters give for an 96. what happens to the other four points? [laughter] human rights campaign gives her 100. the american public health association cancer hundred. the afl-cio gives her a hundred. the humane society, degrading campaign. the in l.a. gives her and a

half. [laughter] [applause] it is my great pleasure to have my friend and one of the most excellent congress people we can have. [applause] >> thank you for that wonderful introduction. wonderful to see so many old friends here. thank-you. new york law school. my heartfelt thanks for establishing this lecture series of course an extraordinary attorney in her own right, a heroine for thousands of women across the world in this special friend and mentor who has fought for justice on behalf of women

his health was compromised, advocated for consumers, victims of fraud, and those exposed to an vermeil toxins. a brilliant and determined that ticket who made sure their side was heard. it is a pleasure and an honor to introduce today is on a speaker. by any measure nancy pelosi is the most accomplished woman ever to serve in the united states congress. [applause] she has been a trailblazer, seeming breaker, and history maker. when she became the first woman speaker of the united states house of representatives she became the highest-ranking and most powerful woman in the 238 year history of our great

country. she made history. what now seems like an amazing accomplishment. she actually got things down. she grew up in baltimore where she learned about great political leaders from her father, the mayor. she demanded equality and fought to create a purchase it for millions for more than 26 years in congress. she became the ranking democrat on the intelligence committee, the first will into service democratic minority whip, the first woman to serve as, the first woman to lead the democratic party in congress and the first woman in history to hold the speaker's gavel. in a panic.

>> and after nearly 400 years of people just talking about the need for health care, republican than democratic president she linden was at the helm in congress when we finally passed a health care reform bill indeed some of the most abusive practices and billing millions more americans the ability to see a doctor when they is sick. she let us in the recovery that put americans back to work playing a critical role in passing the credit card holders bill of rights. saves consumers as much as 20 billion the year. and she was absolutely crucial in passing the health and compensation act which gave health care to heroes and heroines, a bill that i offered them was a top priority of the new york delegation for eight

years, and chickens the house open through the hard day's run the gamut of its and making sure she was doing right by our heroes. believe me. the elections make a difference. the bill would never have passed if you or not speaker at the time. [applause] on top of all of that she is a wonderful wife, mother of five remarkable socked, successful, and loving children which is an accomplishment. and when you look up multitasking in the dictionary you should see a picture of into pelosi. she was recently inducted into the national women's hall of fame in seneca falls, new york. when we build the national women's history museum i think she ought to have a whole wing. [applause]

the are extremely fortunate to have our moderator. he is a ground breaking scholar of american political history, widely acclaimed author and biographer whose work has been called retting, accessible, and genius. please give a warm welcome to james s. simon and the democratic leader of the house of representatives, the first speaker in history, the remarkable nancy pelosi. [applause]

>> this is a wonderful honor for me. we are going to have a conversation for a little while and then open it up to questions from the floor. i will start with this. a leader pelosi, in your book you did speak of three important influences in your life growing up in baltimore, your family, the catholic church, and the democratic party. and i would like to start with the question about your family. your mind wanted you to be in them. [laughter] how did you, a devoted daughter, tell your mother is that you had other plans? [laughter] >> thank you.

reading the book it is really just a puff piece, unless hearing that people were saying since sheila's five years old she wanted to be speaker of the house. i was a teenager in the fifties, interested in el expressly, rock around the clock, no interest in politics and never intended to run for public office. i think my parents would say that they never really wanted that for me. in and high will answer your question. thinking all of you for the option in the to be here today. honored to receive the invitation.

[applause] >> to be sought -- to be part of something. the great man. we all benefit, and i will talk more about that as we get into the conversation. my mother never wanted me to get married. this was the whole thing. it you can pray all the time, do good seats, and what could be easier. i do not know that i ever told her, but i said i would check out the world and see what was out there anyway. when i was at the dominican college in san francisco when i had written the book and had a big advance, it is not too late. in. [laughter] >> let me ask you, you are a

devout catholic. early in your political career you took very strong positions in support of gay rights and women's reproductive rights. how did you -- were you able to reconcile that with the teachings of the catholic church ? >> the church is important to me i may be less important to them. in but i think what we were taught, to assess the dignity of every person in part of that was to have a free well and take responsibility for people's lives and for a heroin lives and that the responsibility was something that women knew how to do best. whenever my thoughts might be on the subject what business is it of my to insist upon that on

someone else and how they are their responsibilities in life. as far as gay-rights are concerned, that was such a natural thing where i was raised miller people. you love them. there are all god's children. it was not even a question. attributes at to my upbringing in. when i went away to college he was still the manner of baltimore. catholic teachings. some people may have a different view, but some catholics may have had a different view of that, but i never saw that as a contradiction. i would hope that as time goes by people will see

respecting a woman's right to choose is respecting. it did not hear my he were know why i had to be so vocal about it, but i knew. >> in the book you describe yourself as a happy, young housewife. having given birth to five children in six years. your life revolves around changing diapers, feeding schedules, time in the park and saw one. your political career came later. what advice would you give to young who aspired to have a carrier and a family at the same time? >> since you were talking,

when i bought by -- brought my baby home from the hospital is that week my oldest daughter of five was having her sixth with the. when the church wants to talk to me about these issues and i think i have some standing. my colleague has this debate about how right they are about this, i think i have some standing. can tell you that at one point in the course of the debate sheathing she's knows more.

she has been a champion in congress. oliver has to happen, the health issues she is the top democrat on the joint economic committee. a very important place. [applause] >> as a young mother. co-parented was aspirational is it realistic today? >> of course. i have had children, as you know. ica completely different world. my four daughters are married to my son is not. but to get back to your other question, enabling

women to do more and my advice, give a lot of advice she knows the challenges being faced. i would say, the environment committee cool rights, fairness in the economy, issues that relate to peace, whenever it is that it tracks, you have to -- it is not about politics but values and priorities for our country and the world. ..

>> >> to enable women to run the show of power in the economy. success of women in our economy. when i look at what is happening in japan or latin

america other places in the world. people leap this initiative that we have we went on a bus trip all over the mideast women succeed america succeeds and for women to succeed in politics ever running for office it is important for us to do everything in our power with citizens united. [applause] >> we have a plan to do that in order to reduce money but this secret undisclosed special interest and public interests and special interest money is destructive to our democracy if we reduce the role of money and increase stability in politics, i guarantee

this year will increase the number of women in politics and that is the most wholesome thing we can do. yoga people and minorities and the rest of the people in america something that we must do. it is inevitable to happen for give before partisan words they say the problem is not money but that we don't have enough money. can you imagine they would say that? >> whatever time it takes it is inevitable if we have to shorten the distance between the two. that is what we are determined to do. >> alaska couple of questions about current legislation. last week president obama

announced the coalition to ultimately defeats isis. what are your views on the latest proposal? >> it is a consequence of going into iraq in the first place. this is going down in history as one of the most serious mistakes our country ever made a and it was a decision to free the american people. i was telling a senior democrat i have seen at all because of that gain of four or gain debate. so if they had anything else

they would make the case and and the intelligence it would not support the threat it just is not there. and of course, i voted against the war and many of my colleagues in the house voted against it because i said the intelligence does not pose the threat but it was a misrepresentation how would be eight created and hello would be interpreted it was a stunning misrepresentation and it to a daylong time and hundreds of thousands of iraqis. said now we have to deal with those consequences but the president has the authority to do what he is doing now we said we will

vita future reauthorization depending on what actions the president takes. but i will not go to for boots on the ground. i will say it another way combat troops we cannot go down that path but i salute the president for choosing diplomacy also the vice president to make sure a new government was established that is more inclusive now that the sudanese had taken over we will make up for it could curb but this would be inclusive government respected of all interest. but with the diplomacy and the politics to build a coalition but to assist in

what we do there is not just the united states but though for rolled and those nato countries in addition to those powers in the region to help is there a need with combat troops on the ground there should not be combat troops united states of america. the president is asking kiev they trade? that combat training a syrian opposition to fight isis is very discreet we have to know what we are doing and i believe congress will give the president that legislation for that authority. whether rigo to another phase or cross that threshold which over 300

members voted if the president goes to a certain place beyond where he is now we will have to have a vote of congress. the misrepresentation of the war in iraq and especially afghanistan we had the taliban on the run but they headed for the hills and they came back down. what strategic thinking is that? i know you have written about roosevelt and the justices of the court i would be interested in your perspective as lincoln said public sentiment is everything and how that was avoided if you read that authorization you think saddam hussein was right

there for 9/11. it is the misrepresentation that is astounding. >> one more question that i will open up the floor. immigration reform. the president reportedly wants to postpone that until after the midterm election. do you agree with that? what are the chances of the immigration reform after the midterm elections? >> we have the votes on the floor for immigration reform. people don't understand the power of this speaker it is a job that i held to influence to get it done but the votes are there for

immigration reform. for the background checks the votes are there for the voting rights act there is there on so many subjects and the discrimination but they just will not bring up the bow 11 million people and lead the legalization hundreds are being deported but there is one person standing in the way of that. but he said his caucus would not let him. i said i would rather pass immigration reform and lose the election that that was more important because that would be transformative to

our country affecting people here on our soil what it means to who we are as a people so i and disappointed they would not give us the boat for years at the senate passed in june of last year they said we will bring it to the floor but they never did and that was unfortunate it would be better if we had a long rather than the executive order that is the best we will get. they can try to use discretion to minimize the deportation for a period of time but that will make much of a difference it was a downer.

i do think the president did it for political reasons but in the way to successfully get it done. but i will just say this. as indicated earlier talking about the woman's right to choose the republicans are in their camp on the subject so they are like this for getting to the rest of the catholic agenda. republicans passed two bills before we left on immigration. wear their best friends in though world said it dishonored america it was so horrible with that legislation we see immigration as the constant reinvigoration of america

hopes and dreams and aspirations the determination people wanting here coming for a better life. all that makes america a more american in my view. [applause] >> i have about 20 more questions. [laughter] >> let me open to the floor. >> [inaudible] with all of these bills that

have the votes. is there of possibility of that? >> it is that question how you practice the speaker is the speaker of the house when we had the speakership we've never said to president bush from nothing is our agenda but when bush was president we worked with him we opposed the war in iraq and privatizing social security but everything else was open season for by wanted an energy bill he said i want nuclear we pass the biggest energy bills in the history of the country we did things over africa so the practice of it is more

the issue we have never seen anything like this where they say anything you want we're not interested and never is the timetable so it is more the practice of it we did so many things we would never know that i know what changes you could make except public opinion the public sentiment is everything. for example, with violence against women act we had that 20th anniversary last week. it needed reauthorization when they had the majority. a couple years ago they had the majority. but if you don't reauthorize

women don't have the protection so we told the speaker bring the bill to the floor. no, no, no. 600 days went by. 600 days. nearly two years went by before there would finally bring the bill up because we've made it too hot to handle in the public and thank you to so many of you for being part of that drumbeats. they finally brought it to the floor but guess how? they said you could have your vote on violence against women but we have our own bill they had the majority. their bill was violence against women unless a native american been in a

grantor lgbt community than it does not apply to you. can you imagine that? and 135 voted against the bill but we had enough to join us that was all inclusive. so the biggest force for anything is public opinion. and if i may thank you to all of you in to the unions and the wisdom that you play to pass the affordable care act. that is the promise of life as a healthier life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness for your health but. when we would pass the bill. how could you pass it?

and the war which was self-serving i said to the press at the time we will not let anything steven the the way we will put a show with the gate if it doesn't open we will climb the fence if that doesn't work we will use the helicopter but we will not allow anything to stand in the way for having quality affordable health care for all. [applause] so after it was over the press said which did you do? i said we pushed open the gate that was adjusted 200 members of congress it was everybody outside help the to solve the need and that

was an important part not only instructing what consumers needed but trading advocates for the passage but how people could side up so we could not push open the gate for any of you that were witnesses to take personal satisfaction in the role that you. it in life liberty the pursuit of happiness but that public opinion really makes a tremendous difference and that has the biggest impact on some behavior's. now with endless special interest money representing what is happening in washington and that is the challenge as a deterrent to

communication to voting as well. >> [inaudible] so much of what fuels the ability to cause trouble is the proliferation of money in that part of the world have the money comes from stuff coming out of the ground. people said if the price of oil were to go down substantially because of other ways to create power with that power putin has over gas and whale and their proliferation of money in

all of those countries that causes such trouble that is something people don't talk about with the ability or the amount of money spent. so what you see in the future to curb that appetite? it is only 70 years since the end of world war ii when tens of millions of people died. now in a situation where innocent people are dying left and right. it seems to happen every 50 or 70 years but so much is due to the change in the middle east for what oil has brought to them. >> thank you. yes. let me just say the role of money in natural resources

play in the dynamic is important. even water is a political issue because of a limitation on the commodity. the initiative that we have today al gore is starting at us 24 our climate reality project to show how dependence have fossil fuels. and then to pass that on two generations and to reduce the dependence it is clear

in europe. for one like norway. for the timing and enthusiasm for recognition is something that is essential. some of these countries realize they don't want their face to be tied to their dependence on russian whale. because the numbers have gone up in the polls. but this week to thursday if

you speak to the europeans that we cannot allow the innovation of crimea so we say the only option we have is syria that dependence is another scenario. water and energy all of that to minimize the impact on those decisions because that is a very uncivilized way to resolve conflict it should not exist. but yet there it is we

cannot allow the aggression and to stand. and then take it with community involvement. and that is the responsibility. and the time is ticking as sold relates. the fed's sixth anniversary of you use the word, as six years. i am in my office.

december 18, almost 3:00 in the afternoon. i say to the leadership the secretary of the treasury with the bond market and the global markets on a regular basis. i had not heard for a couple weeks the we have even brothers and merrill lynch and that day aig. asking to speak to the denver pratique leadership so we could be helpful not to undermine a the confidence of the market's but secretary paulson i looked at his watch 3:00 king to be here tomorrow morning at 9:00? he says madam speaker

tomorrow morning will be to lay. why am i calling you? right? [laughter] so 5:00. i said i will be right over. the white house finds out they are furious they did not want us to no. but seven weeks from today. they were trying to hold on for barack obama to be elected. his secretary describes the scenario from hell.

to the chair read what you think what the secretary has told us? chairman bernanke said if you do not act immediately we will plan have an economy by monday. and economy, a commercial paper, and nothing. this is where the policies took us to the brink they kept us secret because of the election in six weeks away but then all hell broke loose. but to talk about bad economy and the policies.

and we will not have the economies. i may have to write a book on this. i am not sure but obama takes office that january unemployment at 10 percent now 6.1% the national deficit was 1.$3 trillion now is 500 million as of 2014 it is still too high but 60 percent lower than when we took office we just enjoyed 54 straight months of private sector job creation, a 10 million jobs. it is also a tribute to the policy to take place.

but 50 million have health insurance would not have had it in that takes down the cost that is part of the reduction of the deficit so now they want to overturn that with wall street reform to go back to the policy that goddess there is the first place and if our members had not made that a boat for tarp and one of the most important but the general public did not see that wall street over main street and did not see that connection with the issue as

serious. but the president's party took a walk it never cave near the amount of votes. that we had to bailout. so what we talk about a are you better off? you did that have an economy. there would not be an economy unless the democrats bailed us out. we all have to be very attentive. we don't be bred to anyone their success. the whole disparity of become is under by a but we don't beebread to anyone there is excess but we do resent that exploitation of working people and consumers and the rest one that springs from something

unfair in our economy so there are reasons. they want to prevent emigrants and native americans from the voting rights act to turn back the problem within recent memory, six years ago. can you of magic and? the economy has of meltdown like that? there is a lot of politics that goes on. we have to be optimistic and positive and do what we believe is right. that is why i am so proud to have the invitation to be here today. for what you do in the new york law school and the of

values that you have a and respect for other opinions. i always say this and it gets on their nerves. they ran this time was -- a love one another. love thy a neighbor is easy because he is over there but of love one another? let other versions exist. respect other people's opinions even if you think they are wrong they represent people. how can we find our common ground? we have to have that optimism. they have an attitude toward this president they will never support anything he puts forth they celebrate

when they shut down government they are anti-scions so that evidence is anti-governance and anti- barack obama so the agenda is nothing and a timetable is never. so i say take back your party. when carol lynn talked about 100 years sellout as a republican wanting to have health care? but e we away on the income-tax. the republican party has been a tremendous asset in is still hijacked by those who have a different value

system but it represents the people and we have to find common ground. so thank you for the public interest and the people's interests that you are committed to. if you keep our eyes focused film remake the right decisions. there are so many challenges out there. the mp should be working together. that was a vision and the plan. thank you. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> i have been asked to make a few closing remarks. when i graduated that class of 1959 we were 85 students and i am not so proud to say in the class there were 84 men and one woman. >> goal my gosh. >> this year 54 percent of graduates or those coming to the law school for women.

[applause] so the opportunities for women in this world are growing and are so important and what you have done to be about their larger them life it should energize with it all over the place to see that they could be at the very head of what is going on in this country. listening to your speech i think law firms have specialties of the tax work than securities working and litigation but you and people in congress have a general practice and you have to deal with international law as well as all domestic staff the brett the flight you do and how you keep up with all of that

is remarkable. you talk about the economy so it is mind-boggling you can't keep up and you have to be so talented to deal with that and we're so lucky to have you. i say to myself even though these problems exist and we always have than in the world, how long ago was it when in france you accepted way of killing people was the guillotine? but the point is what of wonderful time to be in government even though the problems cease -- seem sold

in surmountable i think it is out wonderful place for any of our students the idea i hate government is the place to be and you are lucky to be where you are. the ec on the back cover of the program those who have calmed it has been honored buy you and reads like a who's who into onerous with your presence. thank you. [applause] [inaudible]

>> also told think you for the invitation and his leadership you are an icon. who could say no? and also a gm for his patience listening to my long answers it already has done. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> i the of your program buy you change the of writing on the bottom and is so small i have to get up out of bet and walk over to see it it is one-third smaller wish you would change it back to the other formats. >> c-span to have a republican colin but then a democrat says something they are cut off c-span is not fair. >> i will not think c-span because the cable industry pays for your existence but it is pretty obvious to me

they are totally liberal even though they try to mask it. >> but to see a specially on the weekends if to see who brian lamb will talk to every week than a the myriad of things that are covered i just saw you will now have on our genes love letters? i want to miss that but i just find c-span delightful and i am an advocate about the marvelous conversations we have had.

piraeus so animated? so like the mississippi delta. what did they do decades ago? it is like a little kid from heaven

>> . .