>> hi, my name is brian from louisiana. my question is based on the ballot access in what you guys were talking about earlier. the federal election commission is seen in my opinion is one of the biggest carriers for third parties and other candidates to get on the ballot. my question is would you recommend reforming it, abolishing it in a few recommend reforming it, how would she do so? >> you now, during one of our presidential campaigns, we assembled enough information about the democratic party pushiness off ballot, all kinds of unsavory manners in tying the second quarter. we received 24 times in 12 weeks to get us off the ballot in the states in the summer of 2004. our petitioners were arrested and intimidated on and on, so we

compiled this major pre-fast in the federal elections commission to investigate and they turned it down and never sent a brief to in effect the defendant. and if they paralyzed agency because it is three-three enabled break free-three in deadlock. so i would really urge the complete abolition of it and then start new in a much more effective than simpler manner because there are bad behaviors between parties and candidates that have to be dealt with. not the way the fcc has been doing for even been avoiding do anything because they're totally deadlock. any major accusation against one party or the other. >> i will just say this brings up exactly my skepticism. this organization doesn't work.

it's been captured by the powers, so let's scrap to make a new one. it sounds to me like lucy pulled the football away from charlie brown last time, but this time they will hold it. saying it almost suggests the problem with something just in this particular government institution and if we can just wipe it clean and make a new government institution, that one won't be captured by power of the industry and that's always where my skepticism gets picked. they got captured last time, it will be captured this time. it will be, again. >> i always worry about that, too, tim, but i don't associate it with inevitability. i always think that simpler systems they give incentives to go to court instead of going to the fec are very preferable. if you strip people to pursue, all kinds of procedural production so they can never have their day in court on the merit of their complaint.

you've got to give them more right to initiate their grievances in the court of law. and if you do that, a lot of what the fcc is supposed to be doing it doesn't do can be replaced. when you can't have your own day in court, we filed all kinds of cases on what happened to us in pennsylvania. every time we were thrown out, we were thrown out by procedural issue. we never got a single day in court on the merit. so if you block the access to the courts, if you open the access to the courts, you don't get that regulation. >> we're out of time. let me add in closing there is a radio program with you about houseboat and ralph and i are interviewed separately so i heard a segment at the end of his noted they did that ralph

recently marked his 80th birthday and ralph replied that the only real teaching is the erosion of one's ideals, which i thought if someone experiencing lots of apparently unreal age in apparently unreal bg&e stays remarkably inspirational. so on that wonderful now, let's think ralph nader and the commenters on all of you for coming. [applause] go ahead upstairs now for lunch and ralph will be sitting outside to sign books if you'd like one. thanks again. [inaudible conversations]

>> next come wisconsin congressman and former vice presidential candidate paul ryan talking with former governor and presidential candidate mitt

romney about the republican party and conservatism. this is that the union lake edge cocco. it is about 45 minutes. >> thank you. [cheers and applause] thank you, thank you. [cheers and applause] thank you. >> it's great to be here. it's not where we wish they were. [laughter] but it's great to be here and it's wonderful to be with paul again. we had quite an experience and i know a lot of you think it must be just awful running for president because you've got to go every night into a different hotel and you get debate after

debate in the primaries and then the general as well in your head the adoring press always at your heels. [laughter] and yet the truth is, it is a magnificent experience because you get to see the contrary person by person, state-by-state. not the people omit the news. the people make the news are by and large doing something strange or unusual are not good. but the people day in and day out were wonderful people we learned about their life stories and he was very, very touching and maybe more optimistic about her future. so if you get the chance to run for president, do it. it's a great thing. [laughter] >> third time's the charm. [laughter] [applause] >> amid a couple of good decisions in my life. one was who i married and the other was who i chose to be my running eight. there is no better person to be

vice president then paul ryan. [applause] and if you are going to take a shot at me, you wouldn't be a bad president yourself. we have an interesting -- yeah. [applause] but we have some questions about it folks that you have written this year, paul. and i would note that i have read it and i hope some of you have as well so your questions can reflect that. but also, i know paul pretty well and as a writer, i recognize he actually wrote it. most of the books you read that are written by politicians were not actually written by politicians. they would life on trend for politicians by professional writers. but i can tell this is his voice you do this with mikey speaks and that makes it even more touching and personal. i want to begin by asking, the american idea, the subtitle are

the main title of the book is the american idea. we bring down for us what does it mean to you, the american idea? >> it is a way of life and it's a way of life that has been brought to life by some critical ideas and principles that founded this country. in a nutshell, is this idea that the condition of your birth does not determine the outcome of your life in this country, that the matter who you are or how you got started, you can make it in this country. it the land of opportunity. it's a country built on an idea that our rights are as naturally and our government is designed to protect the rights of victims of and freedom. an opportunity and prosperity. no other system is quite like this one. no other country was created on an idea like this one. the reason for writing the vote

in a nutshell is because a lot of people don't see it. they don't think it's fair. they don't think it's going to be there for their kids or grandkids. if you don't like the country the direction is going, which we don't, or the policies in place, which we think is krajina now, displacing that, if leaders we should offer a different route forward. the whole point of this is the american idea of maintaining the legacy of each generation. that for the next generation like our parents did for us. [applause] >> that is without question something we subscribe to. at the same time, there's a lot of people who say that american idea has not worked for them or their life. a lot of people in this country are poor. a lot of people the middle class is harder and harder to make ends meet and they look around

them and they see the rich and famous doing extraordinary things they can't do and ask why is that some people do so much better and i'm not doing as well as i could? have you deal with this growing income inequality, while for an apology and the issue of poverty? he spent time with in a poverty in your book ascribes that. give us your thoughts on dealing with a few of the income gap come of the wealth gap and the extent of poverty in this country. >> this is something i talk a great deal about in my book. my friend is sitting with us tonight because for the last couple of years we've been touring around america, meeting with people who are triumphing over these difficult circumstances, who are fighting poverty ice to lie, person-to-person and doing it successfully. there's some incredible stories in this book about that. to your bigger question, there's

a couple ways of looking at this. you cannot get the status quo, which is as you describe it and a lot of people don't think the opportunity is there for them. they attracted generational poverty or they are in a situational poverty or they are in middle income person running hard on the hands are really just not getting ahead. so what kind of an agenda and what kind of principles you need to reignite the opportunities of upward mobility to help the economy? i go through all that, but at the end of the day with respect to poverty in particular, we are at the 50th anniversary of the war on poverty. he spent trillions of this from the federal government at the highest poverty rate. the highest since we been reporting. i think you could easily argue that success in this one poverty has been measured based on input, how much money are we spending? how many programs are recruiting? .com result.

not on outcomes. how many people are getting out of poverty? how many people are actually getting from where they are two very they want to be in life? i think that requires a systematic review an overhaul of our approach to fighting poverty in these that government is to be respectful of civil society of our communities of those doing a good job of fighting poverty in the federal government is to play a more significant role in mining the supply lines coming out the front lines in so many ways the federal governmentplaces all of those great things actually happening in our communities that can bring people together, stop isolating people and you cannot poverty. in so many ways the effort and casualty on the war on poverty told the common american taxpayer, mrs. government's job to pay your taxes. we'll take care of you. that's not true. it doesn't work like that. everybody needs to get involved. people with faith come without faith, time, money, love,

whatever khmer marina great and so there's a world series reforms that i call forward and i'm not one of these people who think i have it all figured out. believe me, this is a very humbling thing to do to work in research into this. but i want to get the conversation started because if all we do is measure in inputs and about status quo, we will not have the conversation to break the cycle of poverty that would manage it, actually saw the man also means a really strong healthy for an economy in the policies in place today based upon the philosophies triumphing in government today is holding people back. it's hurting economic growth. it looks at sound fix static thing and it governments job to redistributive markle is to remove the barriers so people can blossom and flourish and really have a strong growing economy. and so --

[applause] i won't go through the whole book tonight, but basically what i tried to do is articulate core principles and policies that flow from that to reunite this american idea because i feel it's under duress. i feel we are going in the wrong path, but the good news in this story and i tell the stories with amazing heroic americans from all part of this country that have done incredible things, deceive there they are. the comeback is fair. we cannot. we can have this comeback in this country. we just had to get a few basic things right. i have every bit of confidence we can turn things around and get ourselves in our country back on the right track. [applause] >> for those of you would've read the book, you recognize paul contrasts two cities. detroit and janesville. i would expect detroit and

chicago to be a more natural comparison. i grew up in detroit and in the big red wings -- a couple of detroiters here. red wings fan. ui block oxfam. yeah, yeah, big rivalry, great fun. those are terrific times. they were competitive in some respects, detroit and chicago in the 1950s and 1960s. and yeah, chicago, look at what it's become. look at the city and the hub of activity and industry in innovation and technology in detroit has suffered. you describe in some detail what happened to detroit. the janesville where you grew up, which also went through some tough times and continues to go through tough times. but you compare them. what happened to detroit? why has it gone through what it's gone through and how does

that contrast with janesville or chicago or other places in america that went through tough times found a way out? >> so, it is a confiscated story and it is when the comparisons aren't easy, but the story of detroit is a cautionary story for the country because if you go back and look into a physical autopsy on detroit and see the failures that have occurred, it is because of poor leadership and that government, taxing and borrowing and spending and passing the buck to the point where they couldn't afford the police force. they couldn't afford the fire department for the kids in the schools are getting the worst scores in the country. so it's a cautionary tale of what i would call a philosophy of governing that if we play that out throughout our country federal government, we will have a similar ending. the other side of the detroit stories the comeback that we hope is coming and the seeds that had been planting of the cornerstone school of what dan

gilbert is doing, with citizens in civil society are taking matters into the wrong hands to regenerate their community and the reforms that are happening. it is a tale of what america could become a pokémon direction, but also a detroit can be with the right ideas and principles. .. catholic family. >> is always a riot in the room wherever you are. >> these are the only three on by ryan claim related to. [laughter] [applause] i wish i was related to pat ryan. the don't we all, right? janesville was one of those communities where john and i grew up that is fair for people when they fall down.

the lions club, the optimist, catholic churches, the lutherans , all the social in the civil society. we had a pretty hard knock in our family and my mom and grandma and i went through difficult and challenging times but for janesville, our community, not just turns and relatives, the people we didn't even know the team together and made a difference in getting involved in seeing what it does to support people. when we lost her general smuckers platteville general smuckers plant will militarize the loop. when we lost our general motors plant it was a huge punch to the stomach and hundreds of months of dollars of payroll into a town of $60,000 -- to a ton of 60,000 people. a lot of my buddies from high school, a lot of the people john graduated with worked better on my public appearance at the same career for their life which made a good living, gone. to see the economic havoc in our town and the city come together

and hold people up and we have a ways to go, but to see the civil society and see how people help each other gives me a perfect story of the middle space between ourselves and our government which is where we live our lives. what we commonly call civil society, which is what the lexington toqueville rousseau brilliantly about, and scraping fabric of american life that we need to sustain them revitalize if we are going to get this country back on its tracks. people ask me why you believe what i believe in who i am. it's because of where i come from, my family and my community. >> you call that social capital as i recall. what does it take to regenerate the kind of social capital that tocqueville thought was so unique about this country? >> that is where i do discuss the downside of liberal progressivism, which i believe is a print bowl of governing with no limit.

what it does is seek every problem with a large centralized solution, which ends up displays in a crowded out the civil society. i quote people who have been reading and tracking social capital for a long time. bowling alone is a fantastic book, a harvard economist who's written about social capital. we are not spending our lives together anymore. we are not ignorant h&r communities. we are bowling alone and this is something that has to be revitalize with economic growth. has to be revitalize it not enough economic growth that provides jobs and growth everywhere, but also with a new attitude towards our culture and community where people understand they themselves have to get involved. government has to respect the limits of that can mature and decorah not to me is how you revitalize social capital. so given the way, encourage it, don't crowded out, don't

discourage it, don't our power or overwhelm people. in power. that is the secret sauce of the american life committee affair can idea that has to be revitalize aging everyone of us in our communities and the government has to respect his limits and focus on what is supposed to do and do well to increase our social capital. >> >> [applause] of lot of people would get that whole section they lay out a plan to raid in the success of washington. i know of anybody agrees

100 percent of the commission but of course, it did not deal with entitlements. but nonetheless a wonderful starting point of a bipartisan commission to forecast with the demographic trends to lay out a pathway of stability so we don't have to worry about of future we cannot count on social security or medicare or medicaid. and the president did not pick it up. you were there. what happened? so much fanfare and enthusiasm.

>> as we put it together to have an amendment to balsam said medicaid medicare reform that was the biggest driver. we put this rivlin/ryan plan together had that occurred i would have thought this was. so the weld data simpson-bowles is the will take the good work here of what i would do differently on defense and taxes. we actually past four years in a row.

[applause] >> before you go one want to underscore something that he said. that the house passed important legislation. republicans are not the party of how are you has been passing legislation it has been passed dealing with entitlement reforms getting on stable fiscal footing but it is not picked up by the senate or the white house. so the idea ours is the party of know is wrong. and if people want to see action to deal with education to health care to fiscal needs, people want to see those happen they will have to vote for republican senators and ultimately a republican president as well

[cheers and applause] >> i have enormous respect for simpson-bowles and the thinking at the time was the benchmarks you have to pass for any plan i did not like some parts of what they did i said it was missing a lot as we put our own together to pass it. we had assumed the president would be the same he would put his own plan out there to meet the benchmarks but he chose not to do that either. but by his executive order but then to do our thing for the sake of 2012 instead he jettisoned it to demigod in

did not offer incredible fiscal alternative and meanwhile they have the same fiscal problem over us. but my theory is as i write about this in the book at the moment it was clear the decision was being made. it was more ideological interest front and center of his mind something that was more moderate. digests believe that that moment when he decided not to do simpson-bowles do not offer incredible alternative that is what the administration was about so i concluded we would need a new president. >> i agree. [applause] you might describe how it was unveiled to you with your experience.

>> a personal story that is interesting but yet whether not to read mein. >> the three house republicans and myself that were inviting us to a budget speech and all the media came up to was one day before he and to say he will do reform. he will do the olive branch and do something to reach out. we were conditioned to think he went pretty far left but maybe on the fiscal issues he will move to the middle but we thought for sure that he would embrace simpson-bowles. he was sitting between that column and myself.

giving a speech calling for another round of what they had already done that was not a strategy driven budget but to absolute lead demagogue the work we have been doing. and it became very clear that the demagoguery coming out of his speech was aimed to double down to go hard left. that is when i realized this is not a compromiser someone moving into the middle. we got a text that says you should leave right now. out of respect for the office of the presidency we wouldn't. even though it was off the pale so we got up there and promptly left afterwards.

>> we're almost out of time. but i will ask one more. i happen to think the president has not been as successful. [laughter] [applause] apparently that is the understatement of the evening. [laughter] putting aside foreign policy. [laughter] where his villiers' are most glaring. but domestically an article in of the business week from the former united states senator who calculated what america would be like if the recovery was like the other postwar recovery. approximate 40 million more working and the capita income is $6,000 higher. that is a dramatic difference from the

president's record and what he campaigned on. we would be posed partisan to reach out across the aisle. these things have not succeeded. i wonder why. i have my own view is that why does the president failed to unite tussore failed to get this economy going? the private sector will find no way. did has taken a long time. from your perspective why is it so unsuccessful and why has it taken so long for people to get jobs to be the unity the president campaigned on? >> this is the worst postwar recovery we have had. just with the average of

5410 recoveries since world war ii and it would have those metrics. one thing that is important to make but as if we get another president this is the philosophy of governing and of philosophy we would've had those recoveries. take a look of the enormous amount of uncertainty with a hyper regulatory state. one of the great productions has been canceled in wisconsin for the fda regulations. with tax uncertainty, higher taxes, a federal reserve is out there. priming the pump and the

money is not getting to small businesses. dodd/frank makes big banks bigger and you have obamacare that has an incredible amount of uncertainty with the mandate out there people of not getting hired. even the ceo tells us how many people are out of work because of the disincentives. taxes, regulation the debt is $17 trillion and growing. and i thank you have a political modus operandi that speaks to polarizing and intimidate and divide people based on what that divides them to pray on the deere and anxiety verses' the aspirational system that speaks to people with ideas ideas, unified based on

aspirations, hope, opportuni ty. ronald reagan did it very well and it can be done again. hands in the third obama mid term would keep these things going. this philosophy and the policies that flow from its that believes we need to give our power and decisionmaking to unelected bureaucracy is to run our lives. micromanage society, a the economy, it doesn't work. the whole idea self gun permit -- self-government under the rule of law we don't see the eagles application of rule of law and private sector is shrinking not meeting its potential as a result. [applause] >> we have had fantastic

questions over a lot of issues but one day and we discussed is foreign policy. we see things similarly in the world for the defense program and the states of things now. so first give us the assessment not just a obama form policy but america's foreign policy. what got should we do differently? >> i know you have questions from the audience why would not take much time but we had a foreign policy as the nation frankly since truman that after the world war said the have been dragged into awful things as the world and as a nation. we have to adopt a series of policies. dean acheson talks about the creation of the foreign

policy the basis of persons. that book basically says that we would be involved in the world. that doesn't mean guns but diplomacy, with our economy, our values and ideals for free enterprise. that these things are promoted around the world. that combination and linking arms with our allies to have a strong military and to do so is the foundation of our foreign policy. the president campaigned and adopted a different foreign policy. hillary clinton said something interesting and she was critical basically said he doesn't have one. i said that during the campaign but the true says he does. it is very different of

every president since truman his foreign policy is based that everybody has the same interest and all want the same thing. i don't believe that. i believe some people want to dominate and the press and takeover the nation and people are fundamentally evil and we have seen them on tv. looking at vladimir putin and others to say let's have our reset. although hillary clinton tries to distance herself that would work better she was not secretary of state for four years. [laughter] [applause] >> and she was of pitcher of herself with the big button reset. can you imagine? did they not understand people have different objectives?

maybe it is to rebuild the russian empire. those mistakes combined with tactical mistakes like syria , to draw a red line then say i guess i cannot react without congress's approval but now he is willing to back in iraq without congress's approval but that sent a message to russia and others that is extraordinarily unfortunate for america so we have seen an explosion of very bad thing is because the rest of the world has calculated what has happened. also dramatic reduction of military capability. there is a review that was recently completed reported on by a commission suggest take a gander at the navy or

the air force or the army and a nuclear capability. america will go here. we cannot compete. it can invest heavily but russia is investing with military capability. but they blocked expand the flight. i ask them to think of the president's policy goes out with that charm offensive and believing they all want the same thing and who else besides us? to our the others russia and china? is that to we want to see? i believe in having an america and the economy and diplomacy so strong no one would ever think to test us.

[cheers and applause] >> sort i'd like to return to the principles of harry truman to say we will be involved in the world to keep bad things from happening we had intelligence to come into iraq what do we do? we watched now is difficult to pull out. it is important this group would be a terrible conclusion for the world. return to the ada to be involved and not to pull back but we have to be

involved we are the leader of the free world. with free enterprise coming human rights and then finally we will be strong and military for outline it -- for our allies. we will not waffle about who is our friend or who is not. [applause] i think you have to see for america security that it will have prosperity because extra of links you cannot have one without the other they have to work together i was not expecting them above the second term but it is

even more disappointing than i expected. i am hopeful we will be successful to elect more good colleagues. it needs real leadership. [applause] >> we would like to build a coalition. i have one last question. >> get his answer -- to answer from my perspective. julia's peppers are jared alan? [laughter] >> julie is peppers.

>> now we're ready for audience questions. what is the status of the immigration reform the visibility of compromise between the house and the senate. >> i don't think it is right now. and in so many different areas with the parent's three weeks ago they pass legislation to deal with that. and well we have of border crisis it is first. if the president goes alone

to unilaterally write laws to change immigration laws on the purview of the executive branch but if he does do that that would poison the well to make it far more difficult. and to be supportive of the immigration reform and hope he did not go along within the confines of the of lot and confidence building then maybe we can start talking though we are a long ways from that by now. >>, and you have? [laughter] we want a system where everybody can have access to affordable health care. with pre-existing conditions with the cost of government

takeover. that they are the nucleus of the system. insurance companies compete against each other for our business call the market based system. but it was selective now that surgery is half as much as it cost 14 years ago and three times as good. it is choice and competition and to with the health care system so i played end of book what type of system we ought to go to medicare or medicaid we need the individual based market based system of where we collaborate and the providers have the incentive to innovate.

that will collapse under its own weight in my opinion. [applause] >> how did said to view manage to maintain your sanity with all of the terrible things during the campaign? [laughter] >> more terrible things were said about the ban him. i got good advice and i was running for governor of massachusetts. the political strategist said he had a couple of rules. one is that i was not allowed to read the paper related to my campaign. note articles about the campaign at all. he said we will win on tbs to watch tv but he said no because you'll have a 22 year-old person who doesn't

like you write an article in subconsciously e will reference or refuting it in your comments all day long and he will be off message and it is great advice so i did not see all this stuff said about me in the presidential campaign we were working early in the morning event after each event after yvette and gladdened -- slated i with fund rising -- when freezing and rallies it is exhilarating you cannot go to sleep at the end of the day and you have so much energy. a crowd of 20,000 people cheering and this is important and it is greater at the end of the day thing cavan's for the akkadians in the bible that i could go to sleep. [laughter] but it is a marvelous experience if you don't spend a lot of time worrying ab