candidate m-60 seconds for closing statement. by random selection rick allen make the first closing statement. allen: thank you so much and i think the atlanta press club for having us again. ..

i think the last thing we need to do is replace one of the mosby partisan members of congress, one of the mosby partisan candidates around. look i believe in creating jobs and i believe in accountability and accessibility, if you want a congressman that will vote for you and put your interests above both parties in washington. i would ask for your vote and be proud to have your support. >> moderator: that concludes our debate. we like to remind all voters that the general election will be held tuesday, november 4th, and early vote something already underway. our thanks to the candidates and to our panel tonight. great questions for the journalist and i like to thank the atlanta press club for arranging debate. for all the information about the atlanta press club and all the debates they're hosting this election season, visit atlanta

press club.org. the debate will be archived there. it will be available on demand apbg.org. the louder milk young debate series is a made available by a donation from charles louder milk. stay here for the debate among the united states senate. thank you for joining us for the atlanta press club-loudermilk debate series. ♪ >> we're live this morning for the washington ideas forum. presented by the aspen institute

and atlantic entrepreneurs business visionaries, education officials, politicians and names in science and technology for sharing ideas today and discussing some of the ideas and key issues that are directly affecting americans national identity, politics and core values. this is just getting underway. >> this morning will be a captivating blend showcasing people from inside and outside washington, people at the forefront changing the world and the way we live. we have cabinet members, catalysts, creators, cake makers and so much more. before we kick things off, it's really important to note that none of this would be possible without the generous support of our sponsors and i'd like to name them. at the presenting level we have comcast nbc-universal, hitachi, nestle and the walton family foundation. at the supporting level able to, aft, american federation of teachers, national council for behavioral health and google. contributing underwriters,

allstate, gsk and shinola and makenzie are knowledge underwriters. editorial director margaret carlson and atlantic editor-at-large steve clemons are the mastermind behind this enterprise. the two will lead us through this morning. steve is here first to get us rolling. >> thank you very much, margaret. good morning, everyone. good morning. thank you so much for being here. thanks for being here. let's jump right in. hashtag writer forum. penny pritzker around hyatt hotel heiress can outrun you. she is avid triathlete. finished hawaii "iron man" in 12 hours. she runs meetings throughout the business community. since becoming members of commerce, penny pritzker conferred with 1300 business leaders. we're please odd have penny pritzker to join "the new york times" and cnbc's john harwood on stage to open the washington

ideas forum. [applause] >> thank you, madam secretary, for being with is. thank you, guys, for being here to listen. let me start by asking you to clear something up that i've been confused about since i heard from another madam secretary over the weekend. do corporations create jobs? >> yes. the private sector creates jobs. >> and what is government's role? >> our job is to set the conditions so the private sector can create jobs and so what we're working on and what we're focused on are things like making sure there is good infrastructure in this country. making sure there is a skilled workforce in this country. making sure that, that there's a good environment for investment. >> now is there a difference between the two parties on that score? you know when she made her comment at a campaign rally, i'm sure you saw it over the

weekend, you had immediately reaction from people on the right saying, ah-ha, she just moved to the left and said what president obama said in 2012, you didn't build that, corporations don't create jobs. what, where does that come from and what is the difference between the two parties on that score, on the role of the private sector? >> well you know, when i was confirmed in the senate both senators on both sides of the aisle have told me, you know, commerce is a bipartisan issue. so the way i look at it is, you know, our job at the department of commerce is to really focus on serving america's businesses and creating conditions so that they can thrive and therefore they can create jobs some there is not a huge, from where i stand, there is not a huge amount of difference. we know what we have to do. we know we have to invest in infrastructure to support business. that is everything from

broadband to roads to bridges, to our internet. >> if we have to and there is no difference between the two parties why have not we done it? >> i don't know. that's a good question because to me, when i go and talk on the hill everybody's excited about the potential for what we can do. trade, trade agreements. you know, whether i'm in portland, oregon, talking to a bicycle manufacturer or in new york city talking to a large corporation, you will, all of them want trade agreements because everyone knows that their supply chains are now intertwined. that is another thing we need to focus on. so these are kind of things that we have to do in government to create the conditions. tax policy. our corporate tax policy is not competitive globally. we need to address that. these are the kind of things that should be happening. and i'm, you know, i'm an optimist, once we get election season behind us, whenever that is, then, we can move forward and address these issues. but in the meantime, let's look

at what we've accomplished. i mean a lot has happened. over, and president obama deserves a lot of credit for the kind of momentum that we're seeing in our economy. you have seen job creation. longest streak of job creation ever in the history of the country. more jobs created in the united states than in japan, europe and the oecd countries combined, or developed countries combined. so you see gdp up. you see manufacturing. we're having, first time in decade we have manufacturing, not only creating manufacturing jobs, but manufacturing output is up. i mean there's a lot going on that is really exciting in our economy. >> is that why the american public is so happy right now? >> well i think one of the reasons, you know, what the work that needs to be done is around, you know, what are we doing about incomes? i think that's a big part of the frustration. now the good news is yesterday

consumer confidence is at a seven-year high. so i think that attitudes are changing. but we have to address income. income disparity. it's a real problem and it is also something that, at this point now where you're seeing unemployment down below 6%. it is time to really focus on, you know, how do we address income disparity. and you know, what is interesting to me on the minimum wage is, i've talked, as steve said, i talked to 1300 business leaders since i've been in this job. no one has said to me that they object to the minimum wage proposal, federal minimum wage. in fact, privately a number of businesses, leaders said to me the problem they're facing is the fact that we have different policies state by state. and they would rather see it uniform policy. so -- you. >> mentioned businesses said that to you privately.

privately business seems to agree with a lot of things the administration is talking about but they don't seem to have any clout. >> well, i think that, i think it is a question of clout with whom and when but i think the most important thing is, what i have talked to business leaders about, is you need to talk to your employees. we live in a day and age where you know, every person, now is empowered, right? we have a phone and a twitter account and instagram, et cetera and so we have to speak to everyone, not just a business leader, but, in my job i speak to the business leaders and talk to them, then talk to their employees but also frankly that is who our customer is at the department of commerce is the american business. so i'm focused on what do they need, what's the conditions they need to grow and create jobs in america. >> you mentioned that you're an optimist. i read the polls. it appears you may be the only optimist in the entire country

at the moment. >> well -- >> i'm wondering, as you, look at the situation in the country, how people are feeling, if you had a far-flung relative who was out of it in terms of contemporary u.s. politics and explain to them why you're party is about to get hammered in the election in a week, how would you explain it? >> for me it is hard to explain because when i look at, look, i'm a numbers person. as i have told the folks. i've done more reading in this job every day, lots of reading but i'm a numbers person. if you look at the statistics our economy is doing great. we've got 4.6% gdp growth. we're creating, as i said job growth, 55 months of consecutive job growth but i think it has to do with the fact, i think one of the challenges is what i said, we've got work to do on income disparity and i think people want to see not only that they

have a job, they want to have more confidence in the job they have got and want to have confidence that their incomes are growing. so that is something that we need to focus and you hear it, whether it is from janet yellen or the president of the united states. and so that's where we need, you know -- >> let me ask you about incomes because i did a panel the other day with pat caddel, you all may remember, president carter's pollster and strategist. he is saying the reason is the public is so unhappy because economic policies of both democrats and republicans have failed the country. and i wonder from your perspective in the -- if the underlying reality is the reason they failed is the united states is now lost a commanding position it once had in the world economy after the second world war, and we're now, and will be for as long as the i can see in competition with hundreds of millions of people in asia and elsewhere who's living

standards are lower than ours. why should anybody believe we can raise incomes of average people which haven't gone up for 30 years or so? >> so, john i disagree with your fundamental premise first of all. >> hit me. >> i think this country is in a terrific position. carney would say, the number one place in the world to invest. we are, imf came out and said, strongest economy in the world. so, i think, let me throw it back at you. how about all this negativity you guys in the press are talking about? talk about good news as opposed to the bad news. [applause] >> have you checked our approval ratings in the press? when you think about the last two years of the obama presidency, which are looking forward, obviously there are a lot of things you can do as commerce secretary, that president obama can do on his own authority with executive authority. there are some things you need congress for. do you have a plan a, if we have

a democratic senate and a plan b if we have a republican senate and what is the difference between the two? >> no. there is one plan and the plan is, everybody knows what we have to do. i keep coming back to the same things. we have to invest in our infrastructure, right? we all know that we have depreciation occurring in our infrastructure. so we've got to make investments there. we're out looking to how to bring more private sector money to the table but at the same time the public sector has to do its part in terms -- we can't do, we can't do things for six months. you can't make the kind of investments that are necessary with six months of funding. you need to acknowledge that we should be investing in our country. we need to pass, trade promotion authority and i think we're close to getting tpp done. this is really important. free trade is really important. i was just got back from japan and korea and you realize that

if we can get tpp finished, which i have all the confidence in the world in our u.s. trade representative and the teams that include a number of members from the department of commerce in the negotiation that will get this done, that's 40% of the world's gdp where you're taking away non-tariff barriers, where you're taking away tariffs, where you're really creating a much greater level playing field for our companies which ultimately translates into jobs here and we have to realize, these trade agreements, the united states, we're pretty much open for trade today. it is not like we have big tariffs in place and a lot of our sectors. the rest of the world there is a lot of barriers to our companies. so these are really important agreements for us to get done but they're also important for the rest of the world to get done. infrastructure, trade, tax reform. we need, we want to make, we need to be competitive with the rest of the world. we also need to invest in innovation. >> wait, isn't this the point, when you say tax reform which

everybody in both parties are saying for couple years, isn't this the point where everyone should not often realize this is a great idea but not actually going to happen anytime soon? >> well it takes leadership, right? it means that we need leadership, the president called for corporate tax reform over the last several years but he needs partners, right, to do that. so we need heads of various committees that would take a leadership. he needs partners there to get that done and i think that, i think that we have to do a good job of explaining to the average person what, how that translates into a benefit and job creation here in america. >> or explain together national association of manufacturers why you're going to take away domestic manufacturing credit in order to give a, lower the tax rate for companies that don't have credits like that? >> yeah, it is definitely, there are tradeoffs and that's where, that is the kind of work that has to be done but it's important to do in order to, you

know, so that american businesses can be competitive globally. let's also talk about innovation and investment and in innovation. the president has called for a network of manufacturing hubs around the united states. we've done five of them so far and there will be eight in operation by the end of next year. we need to stay competitive. so further to your question or statement about our position, is it's important that the united states stay on the cutting-edge of innovation. so the manufacturing hubs the federal government puts up, by mere mortal standards, 50, $70 million. that is significant taxpayer dollars but in the context of what we're trying to accomplish not huge dollars. that serves as a catalyst to bring together universities, the private sector, the community colleges, supply chain around innovative technologies that we should be leading the world in.

3d printing. composite materials, lightweight materials. design, you know, internet design, photonics. these are areas we should be leading the world in. that's a huge part of our gdp growth since 2009 and our employment growth has been in these areas where we're leading the world. so we have the capacity to do that. so this is another area we should be creating opportunities. >> our time is short so i have to go on offense again and, i want to -- >> i know you're a sports guy so i'm ready for you. >> i remember a conversation with your friend bill daly when weighs white house chief of staff a number of years ago. we're doing a study. some people think we need to reorganize government. commerce department gets folded into tsr and government reform. my overall question why should the commerce department exist? you see a big push among

republicans who say that is crony capitalism. that is picking winners and losers? >> do you know what the commerce department does? we give you your patent -- >> pick winners and losers. >> no. we pick, give you a patent or a trademark. we run the census. we are the national weather service. we, you know, we manage the economy of the coastlines of the country. we are the international trade administration. so we help companies who want to sell their goods overseas. we help them export and we help companies that want to invest in the united states, invest in the united states. those are among, and we do economic statistics. >> so the charges of crony capitalism, you say what? >> i say we're a service organization and our customer is the business community and these are services that business need. i go out and talk to, as i said, i have talked to 1300 business leaders around the country. they want our services. they need the data that we put together in order to do what they do which is, ultimately,

create jobs. >> last question before we get the hook, one of the by-products of discontent over incomes not rising is occupy wall street, movements of that kind, criticism of the 1% and i wonder, you're a 1%er, i wonder how you react when you hear some of your fellow 1%ers, and there are some, who said this over and over the last couple of years, that obama hates business, he is hostile to successful people. some have even said, america is becoming like nazi germany with the persecution of the top 1%. what do you say when you hear this? >> first of all i think all of what you just said is crazy, right? the president -- [applause] this is a great country and it is still a country of opportunity and the president is a terrific leader and the president is, you know, the

president works with, his job is to work with all constituencies and he works with the business -- i mean there are more business leaders in and out of the white house giving advice or working with people like me or throughout the administration anyone ever talks b we keep track at department of commerce of number of business leaders coming in and out. that is people seeing me. >> he doesn't pay people with money. >> no. this is crazy. he works with all kinds of constituents. his job is to try to find the best path forward for the country in a very difficult second quarter tans were the rhetoric is very negative. >> would you all join me in thanking penny pritzker. >> thank you. [applause]

>> that was good thank you. >> thank thank you, john and ams top ceo. i'm margaret carlson. i'm codirector of washington ideas. i'm delighted to present our next panel. first tuesday of november is less than a week away with many races still up in the air we're happy to provide a group of bipartisan group of. >> democratic republican senator john barasso, democratic senator joe manchin. democratic congressman chris van hollen and the "national journal" amy walter will lead the discussion. thank you, amy. >> thank you. thanks everyone. we're less than a week away from the election which makes me very happy. maybe makes a lot of people on this couch happy. i feel like we're at the point right now where it's a little

bit before christmas and the presents are under the tree and i spend a whole lot of my day shaking those presents with bows on them saying things, iowa senate and colorado governor, wondering what is inside. but i'm going to take us a little bit away from the present piece of this and what is going to happen on wednesday and look sort of a little bit beyond that as well. and we talk a lot about, hear a lot about these numbers getting thrown around. prognosticators talking about these models that they have. that there is a 68% or 62% chance or 73% chance of the senate taking over, first question i want to throw to you all is a different number and that is the number of 68%. that is the percentage of people who said they're paying attention to this election, which is down 10 points from 2010. down even further from where we were in 2006. that people said they're just not keyed into this election. and, fewer people now than in the last two midterm elections say they're growing to vote.

so we start this way. but i have my theories about why people are not engaged in this election but i'm curious what you think about it and why that's happening and what it tells us about both this election and what to expect going forward? >> i think it is largely a result of cynicism in the electorate. as you indicated you always have lower turnout in midterm elections but the fact you have even fewer people engaged than in normal midterm elections i think is a function of the fact, they look at washington, d.c., they look at congress and they see nothing getting done. and a lot of them are concluding it doesn't make a difference. you're especially seeing this among independent voters where the intensity of independent voters, likelihood of vote of independent voters dropped significantly from previous midterm elections. those are the voters that are hoping for, you know, compromise, hoping for solution. i think all voters are hoping for solution but they're the people especially turned off as a result of what they see as

inaction. i'm happy to talk more about the causes of inaction in washington but that is the perception of inability to get things done has reduced the focus in this midterm election. >> governor, you're obviously, you were the chair of the nga, right, for a year. this is two years ago. >> right. >> governors are supposed to be different. they're not part of this mess in washington but, are you, is there a sense that the governors races are different, that they are not as much a referendum on inaction? or is it still frustration going on that statehouses seem to be even more polarized than they have been in the recent past? >> i think governors are different. i think senator manchin would probably agree with that from his own experience. and i think we're different because we're generally, we're not measured so much based on whether we give a great speech or quality of our rhetoric. we're measured on pretty simple things like are we making economy better and improving schools and the like. that being said, i think what the congressman said about

cynicism is right, in the sense not only are people frustrated that washington is not getting anything done, i think people feel more and more their voice doesn't really count. they're drowned out by big money and that the appeals of so many elected officials that candidates make to them have absolutely nothing to do with their own lives and have to do with this neavitt triol about the other person. degg neavitt triol. people are more interested in themselves than the candidates. what will candidates to make their lives better. they're not hearing anything compelling in that regard. >> you're on the trail. you must hear a lot about this speak to the point the fact is a lot of people who would be compromisers, so-called moderates you're campaigning for, they're the most vulnerable and, if they lose, who is sort of left? >> john here, we work together a lot and you have to have people in the middle. right now we've got core of our

middle, middle of our party in the senate is right up for election and everybody is on the bubble right now. so, it will make it much more difficult if they're not successful to try to get anything done no matter who is leadership. you have to have that moderate middle to work with. i think people are upset from this standpoint. in west virginia, when you spend this much money trying to tell us who we should be for and why we should be against somebody and most of it is negative, why we should be against somebody, they like to think, if you care that much about my state, why don't you invest something, do something, show me you really care. don't scorch the earth and thinking t turn ad lot of people off thinking all i'm see something negative. no human being could be that bad nobody could be as bad as -- and i think the people are just fed up with it and also that they think it has been taken out of their hands. they have very little to do with the outcome anymore, so much money, so much control by so

few. >> let me ask you all this too. i would love for to you weigh in. we know in 2016 it is more moderate republicans that are up in the senate. folks from blue states, not just, these aren't democrats in red states, republicans defending blue states. is expectation we'll see same thing? will you go out on the trail this person here says they're moderate, they're really not, they're a terrible person? >> i don't do that. i know the ones i work with. and republicans i work with, you've got susan collins should get reelected. you have basically down in, lindsey graham should get reelected. lamar alexander should get reelected. i'm a democrat saying this. these are good people. you have to have that certain core. i also think mark begich should get reelected and mary landrieu should get reelected. mark pryor should get reelected. these are all solid people. you can work with them. you can come to some agreement. when you lose the ability to have conversation, i said this

so much, i came, most of us come from an area where guilt by association. if somebody did something wrong, they see you talking to them they think you must agree with them. this town is guilt by conversation. john and i sometimes can't even have a conversation with both side thinking we might be conspiring. when you can't have people willing to say we're going to talk about these issues, and that is what is really at stake right now and it's scary. >> i know you penned an op ed the other day what happened if republicans took control of congress. you seem to be addressing this whole issue and focus on competence and getting something done that the public wants to see done. is that really, truly possible, given the way that these campaigns have been run, first of all, vitriolic, a lot of negatives. the fact that the middle more likely than not to be gone. you will have really conservative and really liberal, and seems to be a culture where one side says it is our way or the highway, there is no compromise?

how can that work? >> i think it is critical we get things done. i'm optimistic about the future. joe and i work together on a lot of issues. we serve in the energy committee together. we work on energy and i address some of that in the op-ed. interesting you mentioned 68% number about, "washington post," 6%, dan's column, people think is country is seriously, 6% of the americans think the country is seriously heading in the wrong direction. i've been in 17 states with all our candidates, that is what i'm hearing across the country we're concerned we're ahead evidencing in the wrong direction. we need to get something done. say say in this editorial, look at bills that passed house with significant numbers of democrats voting along with republicans on energy, on changes to the health care law. on education, on jobs and economy, stuff that penny pritzker was talking about to get done for the country, get people back to work, to put people with more money in their own pockets. >> one thing you mentioned,

republicans willfully repeal obamacare. that seems like nonstarter we start with compromise. that is issue, beyond the fact that you know the president will not go along with that democrats will not go along with it, 60% of the public says we don't want a full repeal, we want fixes but we don't want a full repeal. we'll start, if we start from that premise i don't know how -- >> there will be a vote on that. >> then what happens? >> the parts of the health care law that have been so damaging. secretary of commerce was out here talking about people's take-home pay. when the president and health care law defined the work week as 30-hour week, that has hurt so many workers across the country, as school districts, universities, cut their hours, to below 30 hours a week. that is cutting into people's paychecks. this whole employer mandate, health care part of the law. i think over 30 democrats voted to delay or repeal the employer mandate because they know it is

hurting the economy, it is hurting people's ability to get back to work. so i'm looking at things that passed the house with overwhelming bipartisan support and get those to the president's desk. >> this guy is in the house. >> let me just say i think the.you suggested is absolutely true. how you run a campaign determines in part your ability to governor en. whether you're willing to make compromises necessary and right now we zoo a lot of scorched earth campaigns against a lot of moderate democrats as senator manchin indicated. what disturbs me most about the polling data, if you ask democrats in polls whether they're interested in compromising to get things done for the country, you have about 60% who say yes, we do want to compromise even if we don't get everything we want. when you ask that same question of republicans and certainly tea party republicans, you get very different answers, much less interest in compromise. so that is why you have a lot of candidates who are running on

republican side who are saying, we're not going to compromise on these issues. when in fact they get elected, if you will deliver no compromise, it means you deliver continued stalemate. senator raised issue of those that have lots of bipartisan support, we have a bipartisan immigration bill, passed by the senate with a bigby partisan vote. we haven't even had a vote on that in the house of representatives. that is an issue that majorities in the country support. >> now the incoming majority leader in the house, kevin mccarthy, quoted other day saying we have to prove we can govern. we'll reach out. sounds like he has a different approach, much like senator barrasso here. are you optimistic about that? i think -- >> i'm a natural optimist. >> we have one muscular united agenda. we'll bridge both chambers. >> i saw kevin mccarthy's comment. i welcome that. >> do you believe them?

>> i believe his intention. the question is whether he can deliver his intention given the fact so many people in his caucus, especially on tea party side, they're making gains, in the house, a number of the current incumbent republicans who are already very much on the right being replaced by people even further on the right and more invested in no compromise. so, again, i welcome the intention. there are lots of things that the public clearly supports moving forward on. we'd like to at least get a vote on in the house. >> this is why i'm glad to be a governor. >> i know. you don't have to deal with that. >> no that it is not politics is perfect in my state or any other state but to, we can at least get stuff done. and that is exactly what people are looking for and it is what they hold us accountable to. >> what we're seeing at legislative level, at one point it was, that congress may be dysfunctional but at least at

the legislative level governors would, in most states have to deal with one body or maybe both that were of a different party. now you have more one party controlled legislatures than we've in certainly in recent history. so, tell me though about how that works? i think we're seeing some backlash. we're seeing a lot of states where there is an agenda, both on the left and the right, that is much more partisan and where we're seeing voters feeling as frustrated with their state government as they are with what is happening with washington? >> this is all i've known as governor. i was elected in 2008. before i was, i'm a democrat. democrats were in the minority in the house. since i was elected we had a majority in both chambers. and so that brings with its own blessings and its own difficulties for sure. part of what we always have to do is make sure we're focused on where people want us to be focused and not to ever overinterpret any particular mandate. so most of the things that we

have to deal with as a governor are not particularly partisan. creating more and better jobs, improving schools, make sure we're doing what we ought to do for health care and transportation and the environment. these are not democratic or republican issues. one of my responsibilities i think, the responsibility of every governor is to keep the ledge you're focused on what actually matters to the people. >> that is what i was going to ask. how does a governor do that? seems like some of these states, colorado on democratic side and north carolina, the republican side, where legislature, new legislature, one party control decided they wanted to push governor and push the agenda and governor seemed to go along with it. now they're feeling backlash of that. >> yes. >> how do you as governor say to the legislature, i know you guys have the vote, maybe enough votes to override my veto, how do you do that? you. >> use the bully pulpit and remind people of history. what happens, these things tend to go in cycle. i remind the legislature in delaware for example, there were two times last 40 years when

democrats had a supermajority in both chambers as well as having governors office, within two years or four years it was totally reversed. that actually happened a couple of times. voters tend to keep us honest over a long period of time. i think our job is to make sure we all stay honest and focus on what people expect in the near term. >> okay. >> i can speak from both sides. i was a governor of the state of west virginia from 2004 to 2010 and now coming to the senate. when i decided to leave early after senator byrd died, as a leader you never put opposing side in embarrassing position where you can never go home and defend themselves. you give one shot. you mislead them panned put them in the position where they can go home and defend themselves, they will never be with you again. i had supermajority of democrats in house and state senate when i was governor. i had a group of republicans very closely with because i needed them all at times to get some things done. with that being said i would

never let democrats beat up on republicans. the other thing i wouldn't let republicans take cheap shots at democrats. i have could control that. i had the budget. they all wanted something. so i could say we'll all play and play as a family here. we'll have a lot of fun with politics but take care of state of west virginia first. i thought that would be same. i'm not seeing that. i'm being respectful i can from leadership all across the board. democrats and republicans from the top, white house all the way down on house and senate side. i haven't seen for the sake of country we're going to do this. you want to take a tough vote, john. joe, you take a tough vote to help the country. i haven't seen anybody -- that bothers me. >> that is where i want to get to. i don't want to pick on what the republican leadership is doing, but democratic leadership harry reid. >> yeah. >> in terms of lack of votes, right? i think cq came out the other day and found that there were 18 legislative votes, 18. in entire year. >> it is wrong.

>> so how do you change that. >> well here's the thing -- >> do you i that, and we'll get jim to answer about whether that changes under republican control? >> the democrats right now in the senate are believing no matter what we do, with intentions from the leader of the republican party we're going to destroy this president. our main objection is, everything they do is premised on that, okay? right, wrong or indifferent, forget about that. that was two, three, four years ago. if their intention is to filibuster everything we ought to give them the right to do that. as senators we ought to have, we have earned right to make a fool of ourselves. [laughter]. we have. so if i'm saying john will do these things, let's give john a chance to filibuster all night long if he wants to and let american public. on other hand, harry, easier for me to go home and explain what i voted for than what i didn't vote at all or what i voted against. harry, keep us there 24/7, let's

vote, wear each other out. let process work. vote on keystone pipeline whether you like them or not. i can at least explain that and john can filibuster it. [applause] >> so, do you think this is what a republican-controlled senate would look like? if pat toomey says, you know what? i know this is not the agenda necessarily of the republican leadership but i want to put an amendment out there. i know have democrats to support it. i like to see the amendment, you think that would happen? >> we need regular order. barbara mikulski passed many appropriations bills out of the appropriations committee. harry reid did not allow a vote on one of those on the united states senate. there have been 2,000 amendments introduced last year, 1,000 from democrats and 1,000 from republicans there have been 20 votes. mark begich in alaska, been in the senate in six years, never in six years had a roll call vote on amendment with his name on it on the floor of the united

states senate. no democrat senator elected in 2012, two years ago, none of them, elizabeth warren, has not had a single vote on a single amendment on the floor of the united states senate with her name on it. so, these are senators who offered hundreds and hundreds of amendments and harry reid says, no. i think it was hill or "roll call" yesterday says he tied the senate in knots to protect his members from taking votes on anything of substance. so when the president comes out and says, it is my policies that are on the ballot, and they vote with me 98 or 97 or 99% of the time, that to me make this is a referendum much more on the president and his policies and the fact that nothing gets done with a democrat-controlled senate which is why i penned editorial time to put republicans in charge, back to regular order where we actually have votes onments up or down and deal with budgetary issues,

appropriations and even nominations. you have secretary of commerce out here a few minutes ago. she got confirmed 98-1. so, silvia burrwell, never can get a health and services nominee again, from west virginia, capable, competent, all of those three, knew what she was doing, over 08 votes. so there is bipartisan support for mainstream people as penny said. they have one agenda for the country. get some trade going. harry reid after the state of the union when the president now five years in row said we need trade, next day harry reid says not in this senate you're not. so there are things where the president need to work together. >> real quickly, basically, as a parent, you take care of your children at adolescent age. they become teenage, find their own identity, go to college, they're 30 or 40 years old now. let them make decisions. they will make them. >> harry reid is not your paint.

>> to be very fair to harry reid, harry reid would accept the following deal in a second. >> which? >> up or down majority on anything in the senate. up or down on majority vote anything in the house. in the house we have not had vote on minimum wage increase. vote on immigration reform bill, vote or equal pay for equal work, haven't had a vote on lots of things that american public overwhelming supports. majority vote in the senate. majority wins. majority rote vote in the house. harry reid would -- >> even on bills that would embarass the white house? whether something on obamacare? something on keystone pipeline? >> 53 times on keystone. >> president would veto bill. >> would he allow a bill allowed would embraer asker the white house democrats would vote for would get majority? >> i think he would accept the deal i just talked about, which is speaker boehner agrees to majority votes in the house.

majority votes in the senate. so -- >> part of this is way constitution is written. history of the country. senate was set in a way with 60-vote thresholds so people asked to vote in the senate do so for proposals that need bipartisan support, to keep things getting done in the things that mainstream america would look for. not things on one extreme or other. why for treaties you need 67 votes. why you need 60. idea of nomination was supposed to be 3/5 so you got nominees like the secretary of commerce, like -- >> senator you made a perfect argument. >> we haven't had a vote yet on surgeon general who was nominated 13 months ago during the ebola crisis. we don't have a surgeon general because even with 55 democrats in the senate, harry reid can't get 51 because this nominee is so off the mainstream and so wrong for the job. >> senator, you must, you made the best argument why the house should vote on every bill that

comes out of the senate. because the bills that come out of the senate, as you say, they have to get that supermajority vote. whereas the bills you mentioned in the house, yes you had some democrats but we don't have the supermajority requirement. so they don't meet that same test. so the immigration reform is exhibit a. it met all the tests you just said. speaker boehner won't let it come to a vote. so because of the differences between the senate and house, which you described, there is no excuse not to have a vote in the house on bills that passed the senate. >> i know we can go back and forth but let me just say -- >> can we end with one positive thing? time is almost up. everyone will say for all those people, this election doesn't matter, i feel frustrated, washington is broken, can you give us optimism whether the straight or whether from anywhere? very quickly anyone wants to stand up and say this is why i'm glad i'm in congress, this is why everybody should vote?

>> i think most underreported story around health care, most overreported story the affordable care act. most underreported story is incredible progress being made in states across the country to transform the way we deliver and pay for health care, moving away from fee-for-service model. and i just, i think the implications are going to be profound and i think in the end, in terms of what really matters to people in their home communities, is that work and think it is incredibly positive. lots of states are laboratories of democracy. lots of different experiments going on in states across the country. we'll learn from each other. we don't care by the way if good idea is from democratic governor or republican governor. we care about what works. >> we're still the hope of the world. only country can fix what is wrong in a democracy and work together and can do that. >> my dad was in the battle of bulge. had to quit at ninth grade because of the depression. he always said, john, thank god

you live in america. you don't know how fortunate you are. >> thank you very much you all. >> thank you, amy. >> thank you guys. i particularly want to thank john barasso, who flew like incredible schedule to get here. i will not let the three dems have their way on stage alone. good to see you, sir. >> thank you, senator. chad dickerson's first job after graduating from duke with a degree in english was at pizza hut. he struggled with that job at entry level position until he found his way to silicon valley and yahoo!. he returned east six years ago to join the e-commerce team at etcy where global artisans sell their wares online. etcy changed lives around the world around never easier to find jewelry made out of for example. we call him atlantic national correspondent but really the pope at the atlantic, the great james fta. llows. well come to the stage.

[applause] >> thanks very much, steve. refer to me as his holiness, from now on, okay. real delight to be here with chad dickerson. here is transition between what we've been hearing so far this morning, what i hope we hear in the next 19 minutes. we heard very intelligent discussions why things are difficult to do in national politics combined with assertions that in general united states still works and still has resilience. we'll hear illustrations of that actual resill sense, what it means. kinds of things we're doing. how many people here have shopped with etcy? a lot of people have? how many people have sold for etcy? a smaller number. maybe that will change. tell us for people who haven't sold on it yet, people in the audience watching, what is etcy, and why does it matter? >> sure. etcy is a marketplace for unique goods, vintage items and craft supplies. we've been around since 2005. just to give you some numbers, there are a million sellers

around the world, selling in 200 countries. last year there was $1.35 billion with a b sold on etcy. we zietcy as leading indicator for new new economy about self-determination and self-reliance. i said to jim, it is antidote what you're seeing with politics. about people in local communities doing what americans and others have always done, making beautiful things. >> i will spend 10 seconds saying this is kind of thing that my wife deb and i have been seeing around the country, traveling for the american future series of cities where people are starting up businesses. we're meeting in d.c. with a largely policy oriented crowd. we're used to seeing of job creation here, of economic trend in the largest scale, a giant factory that opens or closes,

factories that go to china or brazil or whatever. why does the sort of small enterprise you are connecting and representing, why should we care about it? >> sure. i mean, number one, we're seeing a large number of people making a living on etsy working full time. 18% of sellers on etsy work full time. we are seeing reemergence of manufacturing in a way thaw may not think about. i should tell some stories. >> we have -- this part is real interesting. >> go to the slide. so, these cufflinks are from a shop, brass and chain, which is based in ohio. i'm actually wearing some right now. they make customized cufflinks from vintage maps. so i've got, i'm wearing some right now. you can't see them. but on my left, i have berkeley, which is appropriate for the left. i moved to brooklyn from berkeley. on my right i have brooklyn. they built a very successful

business creating these custom cufflinks. so this, i think an important theme here is that there are so many new markets that you may not think about. this is little hero capes, a shop by allison fonts. she makes superhero capes for kids. this is really amazing. i have one for my son. the real amazing story, why i think there is hope for america, allison was scaling her business and was working 18 hours a day and she notices there was factory across town in fall river, massachusetts. she went to the factory, literally knocked on the door. talked to the owner of the factory. the factory had been a huge employer in the area in the '80s but was really not going very well. she talked to jimmy, the owner, and he started helping her make these superhero capes to scale up her business. sew started hiring people, her

salesmen up. this is happening in the united states here in america. when you think about the apple revolution, the iphone revolution, you need a place to put your iphone for charging and such. so there is an entire economy on etsy of hand made iphone cases and chargers and that sort of thing. so the shop here is mag sill la, and it is run out of pasadena california, have really amazing business making these items. i have one on my desk. policy. >> creeps in. >> a lot of things intersect here. this is shop called milk and honey luxuries based out of virginia. there the proprietor makes what you see here, silverware with stamped images on them or stamped messages. we reached out to our sellers. we're very pro-net neutrality and to make goods to show congress and policymakers and

fcc we really believed in the open internet. sara was in nursing school to do this on the side as stress relief. her business grew so much, she quit nursing school. got a wholesale deal with nordstrom. her husband who works with finance quit to help her do her job. we're building a beautiful world where women making things are pulling their husbands out of finance jobs to -- yeah. that is the world i want to live in. this is the world i am living in and, finally, this is a shop, urban wood goods. the proprietor, a woman named erin and her husband in chicago started making these desks from reclaimed wood which you can see here. the baskets here which you might recognize from, high school lockers and that sort of thing, they were sourcing them from secondhand stores. the demand got so high, they couldn't source enough of these baskets. so they called up the original

manufacturer in chicago to ask them make a run of these baskets to spin up more production. in chicago we're seeing something that started out as hobby contributed to manufacturing jobs and supporting in this case, a manufacturing outfit 100 years old and need more business. this is really the economy we knee. when we look at the internet or look at the political challenges in the united states and all the issues and all the sniping, what we see is when people self-organize they use the internet to connect with each other. and they work with each other. then the economy works. >> great. so i think people can envision transformation when it affects them and they have a hard time when it doesn't. people in d.c. understand the transforming political effect of raising money online. a recent conference here we had travis from uber. people in washington understand uber because they take it often. maker movement, many people in big service sector cities like this have a hard time taking

seriously why should the maker movement, what is it and why should it be taken seriously? >> i will make annalgy here. how many of you heard from the home brew computer club? great. so the home brew computer club was a group that met in the bay area in the '70s. it was a group of people who traded supplies and tips and they were, basically making computers, home brew computer club. people that went to the meeting included people like steve jobs and steve wozniak t was kind of a subculture. if you are outside of the subculture and look at it to think it was somewhat trivial. they were doing phone freaking and hacker stuff. it was a little bit of a fringe movement buts that was home brew computer club was the seed of the personal computing revolution. what we're seeing today is that there are literally tens of thousands of home brew computer clubs. they're called etsy teams. these are self-organized groups of sellers who meet together and in communities all around the

world. they do things very much like the home brew computer club. they trade tips about making -- from the outside it may look like a hobby but when you look at the stories i told you, we're seeing it is emerging as a real vocation and a real way for people to make money. anything that looks like a hobby in the beginning often turns into a bigger movement and i think that's what we're seeing. >> there is analogy with the craft brew movement. >> yes. >> literally home brew brewing movement. >> indeed. >> a genuine business. you've written about the etsy economy on your site. if things go the way you hope and think they should over the next five or 10 years, what would the etsy economy look like and mean? >> so our mission is to reimagine commerce in ways that build a more fulfilling and lasting world and so it is not just about the buying and selling of things. it is about bringing that personal connection back to commerce. so when you look at the broader landscape and traditional retail landscape, it is all about price and convenience and next day

delivery and many of the companies who are successful in that ecosystem are all about squeezing suppliers, going to the lowest cost labor, that sort of thing. the etsy economy we see is really about creating an economy where everyone wins at every step of the way. so the way etsy works we're obviously an internet platform, but when you sell something on etsy, etsy's cut is 3 1/2%, the artist cut is 96 1/2%. all the money is going back to communities everywhere. there is not a great sucking sound to bentonville, arkansas, for example. not to names. we really see this, our 3 1/2%, as etsy become more successful, we have, that fee has not been raised really since the company started. so the etsy economy sees a really fair economist. where it is also getting into off-line retail. so i mentioned sara and milk and

honey luxuries. we have also built a wholesale program. boutiques and retailers are now buying from etsy sellers and we're brokering the wholesale deal and again, 3 1/2%. so. 9 etsy economy is really about looking at economy zero sum way, how can i win, how can etsy win, it is how can etsy do well and suppliers do well and everyone take a fair cut and every win do well. that is a different view you. >> written about ways virtual communications of internet age can facilitate localism and real connections between people. >> yes. >> tell us how you think that can work. >> sure. i mentioned briefly etsy teams. the thing to understand about etsy, it is real people on the ground. you know in new york there are dozens of these etsy teams who meet. to give you kind of a vision all sense how -- visual sense, there are more etsy sellers in the

five boroughs in new york than they are yellow cabs. so a lot, a lot of people and we've done things, you know i think a lot of internet companies out there kind of fighting regulation, fighting government, very adversarial, we really look at government as another opportunity to partner, again fulfilling and lasting world. so we worked with local, local civic organizations, local government in a program that we called, craft entrepreneurship. where we're working with our etsy teams, again etsy sellers on the ground, to teach disadvantaged communities how to start businesses on etsy. those classes again being taught by the sellers in our community, not by etsy. they're meeting in places like the dallas public library, the chattanooga public library. so we're an internet company that cares about libraries and civic institutions and think, to the earlier question about the etsy economy, that is really, that is really what we envision and what we're seeing happen.

we think it is possible and it's a great alternative to things like cable news and politics. >> so i have to ask you one other policy question before some more transdental one. when organizations are growing, businesses are growing like yours their view to the government, somehow to support them. >> yes. >> somehow to stop oppressing or hindering them or to get out of their way. >> right. >> in what is your view towards government in general of those three? >> so, we're not, it is a little bit of each. i think it is more, i had a fourth option. i think more of a plea for understanding. we, we want government and media and everyone to understand that the work that these largely women are doing, 88% of sellers on etsy are women, is legitimate. it is not just a hob bit. these are real businesses. . .

and thereby of lessons from the two of them to other parts of the country? >> this is my personal point of view. in my intro, you heard i was in a wishlist nature that focused on shakespeare. i went to work at the raleigh observer in 93 which is the first paper and then i got

interested in the internet and i taught myself how to do code and so on a personal level i think that it is really important but also liberal arts. taking a big step back at the lasting ideas in the world program languages people are learning in 1993 are mostly forgotten. next back to the code -- mac beth is still remembered. [applause] >> thank you. what does this have to do i enjoy new york because i think it is a balanced culture. i don't believe that technology and software .-full-stop all of the worlds problems. working in a creative company that serves people i think working in a place where you have everything from theater to art to the opera i think the

cultural environment is second to none and for that reason i prefer building a company like etsy in new york. silicon valley is a one industry town, but it's a big industry. on a personal level it's a really diverse company. >> both new york, proclaimed brooklyn are seen as a class of people as an expense of many others. will these regions are billed in and raising middle-class economy? how does that factor into your concerns? >> we look at etsy into the platform is bringing opportunity to a diverse group of people. so the proof is in the pudding. we are seeing in the cities that

i've mentioned in the entrepreneurship program we have liberal teams supporting people in those communities with the urban goods for example we have the seller is that they scale up and they are making more money into doing well but they are also set batting orders to smaller manufacturing and area creating jobs. so, i think that everything we do is because it is based on the principle of fairness that i talked about, everything we do is intended to build a healthy economy, and again, the mission about more fulfilling and lusting growth we are not saying that it is a place to sell more stuff. we want all of the mechanisms in the country to make the world better. not in the silicon valley make the world better come of that can be overused. but, you know, making things and selling things, promoting the communities, those are things that do make the world better.

>> what is the part of it is difficult that is difficult but nobody from the outside appreciates? >> i think it is talent. there is so much happening a new application launches every day like hundreds of applications into their are people building those things. so assembling a company when everybody is looking for the same talent and running the campaign is difficult. i think because my background was in technology, i know how the internet works and all that kind of thing there are some days i wake up and i'm surprised that the internet actually works the hard part of the job is is every day 24/mexican making the company work. >> we are here in dc and we've heard about all the things that are difficult.

in some governmental organizations to apply what you've learned to making things from shin jim better what would it be? >> i have to pause for a moment even though we only have a minute. i think that it is too -- it's about addressing fear in washington that i've seen. there is a superstructure of government contractors handle this sort of thing. what i would do is change the way the software is built in the government to be more like what we are doing in new new york in silicone valley. and i think it is notable to me that i hate to bring up healthcare .gov dot it took a group of silicon valley people to come in and fix it. >> with those encouraging words, please join me in thanking chad.

[applause] >> i were my etsy necklace. next we of the editor-in-chief of have the editor-in-chief of america itself claimed finest news source the onion. before he began submitting pieces to the online publication a few years ago after he graduated from college after he sent in a headline that caught the attention, he became a contributing writer. he may be the only federal reserve bank economist with a cutting sense of humor. he's here to share his uncensored ideas with "the new york times" magazine national correspondent who is also the author of the number one bestseller in this town. [applause]

hello, everyone. thanks for having us. when they asked me if i wanted to interview the editor of the onion, i said not only yes immediately that i could see that this would be a networking opportunity perhaps we can exchange cards. >> i didn't know that it was going to go distraction. i can't think of a more consistently excellent brand and publication over so many years and right now as we have this incredible coalition between reality and self-parody, the onion fields feels a lot of times the news media around the world is mistaking stories for

real stories. >> in the sexiest man alive issue for 2012 they took that and ran it in the newspaper and actually had a 55 spread that went with it. one of the more famous ones actually was back in the '90s when we said that the congress was going to leave washington, d.c. unless the new capital was built and they wanted one of the the tractable domes and the chinese nukes paper printed about saying look at these capitalist pigs. then when they found out that the onion is a satire organization instead of actually attracting it or apologizing the rotating that said american newspapers are allowed to tell lies. [laughter]

>> i can tell you that is absolutely not true. i want to focus on what i think is the most important political coverage that the onion has done and hasn't been noticed in the mainstream media very much. we have a series of photos. it would be inappropriate but there was a big story that ran last year and it got a lot of discussion in washington but nobody dared follow up on it. it's headline is obama is fed grapes while inviting to join orgy. my colleagues were coming back from the briefing room and they were stunned by what had gone on. the onion wrote about it. standing before members of the white house press corps

wednesday afternoon they lowered a bunch of grapes into his mouth president obama encouraged everyone gathered to abandon their inhibitions and rebel in a wild drunken orgy. obama that called the conference to discuss the infrastructure development bill requested everyone in the room to strip off their clothing and strongly urged nbc todd and the cnn to take the festivities off by engaging in oral sex in front of the podium. we had a discussion backstage about how many more i could read. maybe i will just stop there. first of all how did you get this story? >> think more people would have covered it, but people were pretty drunk and there was a lot going around in particular. so people probably didn't have good memories of that one. but we usually have a lot of exclusive scoops because we are like a juggernaut in the media

and in about 800 countries. so when people see that we cover stories, when we cover a story they stayed away from it. >> we are not worthy but congratulations on this. it was a great story. let's go to some of the other stories. [laughter] >> we have some very busy washington correspondents. this is a heavily debated measure. republicans said it was a job killer and some were eager to compromise some of the provisions, but it ultimately went nowhere. >> let me ask the journalist

question in response to the question like this. >> i think that the american people lose in this situation because it was s. 000 on hundred 45 pages of absolutely nothing that should have gone through but it was just gridlock. it's coverage of the middle east >> i learned so much in this story and a deepened my appreciation for it. in that level of analysis, how -- who wrote that? >> this was correspondents all over the middle east. we had people in the white house believe they got president bush at the time saying the situation in the white house. >> one of his more memorable

lines. let's go to the next one. >> coal went to harvard. >> i can't get it together. there we go. was it a 5-4 decision? >> this was two years ago i believed in the roberts court. this is a long-standing president to be completely overturned. it was a major moment. i'm not sure why other outlets didn't cover this one. it was a landmark case. >> the deeper question is should the supreme court of the end of danish use i will leave that

open. >> this is after the supreme court overturned by the way. after that of the supreme court ruled. [laughter] >> this is interesting. is that scott brown in the photograph? it looks like scott brown. >> this was the initiative for the preservation of the political middle. very good organization. it didn't work out too well. they had a few successes in the capitol a few years ago and they tranquilized which daniels and i think they were able to successfully with one or maybe two senators at the time. >> really? >> yes. and by this time they may have gone extinct. >> the t. hardy cutoff of

funding urszula cut off the funding. [laughter] >> remember, i remember reading this at the time and it was so spot on you have no idea how many people that you go out and interview but our invoking the constitution in some way. >> this is one of my favorites. he has all these things that he believes are enshrined in the constitution. and then his daughter is like how can you believe those things it says explicitly that the separation of church and state. i assume he carries around eight copy. is that the last one? >> there are a couple more.

>> i thought that was an amazing scoop. again, very public. you would think the media would gravitate. >> he was working every night after work after leaving the department of education he would go to the gentle man's club and perform his routine. i think that he was one of the favorites actually. very selfless trying to put 30 million kids through school, triangulate a little extra cash to do this. >> if you are taking your clothes off in front of strangers isn't for everybody but regardless i need to get the money somehow. he performs under the stage name velvet. i'm not planning on doing this forever just until all kids in the public elementary and secondary schools schools congratulate him and i can go

back to my other job. again i thought that it was very self revelatory. we have any others? >> there maybe a few more. may be a few more. >> okay. keep flipping. john kerry. >> i think he's speaking tomorrow. i think -- [laughter] >> they are all laughing. this is a selfless man who does whatever he needs to do for the country. he gets a little bit of slack for being stiff sometimes. people say he might be a little boring. but whenever he goes out and does diplomatic missions he gets into the scenarios on behalf of the country. there's another story about how she got lost in the desert for a while and he had to drink his

own fountain pen to survive. but he is just doing what he can but he wants to help out to the united states of america. >> let me ask you -- more serious do you see your self as a canadian, social commentary person? i was a canadian first and foremost. i think when people see us they think we have a big social agenda and we do like standing up for the little guy. we really enjoy when we hit the issues in that angle but we do completely absurd stuff as well in our main goal was to make people laugh. people ask me do i laugh when people take the onion for real

does that give me pleasure and a sort of does when it's a huge country like china if something got lost in translation or we had a u.s. congressman that will go unnamed who a few years ago posted on his facebook page planned parenthood opens 8 billion-dollar abortion plaques. but that was on the comments that at the time people were saying it was 3% of their actual outlay so we thought this is a good thing to do. we actually don't really like it when regular people think it's real. we want them to get the joke and laugh. we put a lot of effort into making jokes we hope people will laugh at so that when they think it is a news story they are kind of upset. and it says a lot about the reader. [laughter] >> of the media is one of the

biggest butts in the joke and the passive construction and so forth. what degree do you like you're holding the media accountable >> we try to mimic everything as we can for example. but we also like taking down what is deceptive to the readers. last year cnn post on the front page something about miley cyrus and had a big feature and we wrote on the op-ed over the managing editor was like let me explain to you why miley cyrus was our number one story today and it was a very dry explanation of why they wanted page views. it was one of the most popular things that captured something

people were frustrated by. >> do you ever go too far? >> better. [laughter] there is a lot of discussion about the angle of the jokes. we try to make sure that we are not making fun of the victims and that we are punching up, not down and there is nothing off limits as long as we find the right angle. >> are you inundated by people that think they are funny? >> it's funny but it doesn't and partly with godlike powers which i enjoy. it's okay. i got my start by just sending stuff and people noticed it. >> so you created a hope for people and now when they do the same thing you will crush it.

>> i will crush their dreams. >> if you can explained is it dry, ironic? >> i think that it's all of the above. we are able to do the format that is unique. we can do today to satirical things that are up here, we can do the cultural satire and the sort of concerns of the everyday americans and at the same time do something completely absurd. and the format itself is kind of a unique way to approach the jokes and we can use the headline itself just as a bearded vehicle to stand up. one example would be like jurisprudence on a technicality. the jokes really doesn't work in

any other media mix just you encapsulate it in a headline. >> it's probably about two thirds of the room that didn't get the joke. [laughter] i could tell. so, to what degree is the u.s. the face of the onion are the institutional ambassador -- you've been editor for how long? 's >> not that long. >> how has that changed your life lacks >> i'm very tired all the time. you get to put your stamp on it but maybe i have a little bit more band towards the political economic stories that we've done a touch more. >> your economic coverage has been terrific. your health care, just the whole economics. you have a personal favorite?

>> i like the jurisprudence fetishes on a technicality joke. ones that i have written, there was another thing that we could do which are usually very stupid but one that i wrote earlier or two years ago maybe was obama receives visiting which was a particularly fun one for me. then there was like an extremist cell on the tranquility list which is another one. >> so the clock is at 20 seconds. what do you want to do when you grow up to lacks >> i want to be one of these people in the audience right here. that would be great. you are all doing wonderful. a big hand for you. [applause] 's >> i guess we are good. this was fun. thanks. [applause]

>> now for something completely different not to that of the undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence david cohen doesn't have a fine sense of humor but he is busy disrupting the channels of funding for terrorists and trying to make us safer. david is going to be joined onstage by steve clemons of the atlantic. >> how is everybody doing? [applause] david, thank you for joining us. we will get into you are and what you do but let's just say that you did a lot of dark things. it is taught to come after the onion. is there any there any way that the onion has affected your life in life into john and tourism, finance, going after bad guys about the world? >> they have not.

there was one story after the 2008 election that the onion ran about how president mahmoud ahmadinejad was more popular than president obama and that the agency picked up and thought that it was real. a true story. just everybody in the united states along those lines but what could the onion do for you to make your job much better. i'm sure that you read it this past week every morning david cohen descends into a cavelike complex in the treasury department to pour through hundreds of pages from the raw intelligence to the threats that you can tell that the movie is coming about his life to try to penetrate the vast and opaque finances of the islamic state

the terrorist group capable of producing 50,000 barrels of oil today. they call in the finance batman. i'm wondering before we get into the depths of what you're doing with isis and other bad guys around the world are there other people in the state department that are jealous of your back like cave? i'm going to ask john kerry tomorrow. but on a more serious front when you look at the issues you're trying to do, isis is a phenomenon out there. they were an unwanted collaborator trying to unseat to some degree -- are all solid and -- bishara al-assad. they dislike as best as we can tell publicly that they get a ton of money. how do they do it lacks >> they were never anywhere close to being our allies.

in fact we had many years ago gone after now ten or so years ago identified the predecessor of isis, al qaeda and iraq as a terrorist organization and had been working hard to disrupt their activities in iraq throughout the last decade as well as for some period of time they were a line and with the al qaeda spinoff in series and we also designated interesting notions so they were never close to the allies and we always supported the moderate opposition to serious, not the extremist. in terms of how they are getting their money, there are four sources. they get what the u.s. made about a billion dollars a day although i think that we have been reducing that somewhat recently from this smuggled oil into turkey. >> into the kurdish region in iran.

>> they are buying this black market or only allow the same time that isis is taking on. >> essentially what they have done is inherited long-standing smuggling groups that have been in existence for centuries including oil. before the emergence, there were those that were smuggling out a theory and iraq into the kurdish region in iraq and into turkey and they are feeding these smuggling groups. the difference now is in the past of the people involved in the groups could sort of turn a blind eye where the oil was coming from. if you are involved in one of the smuggling operations, you have to know that the ultimate beneficiary is this terrible

terrorist organization and it is no longer tenable. >> you sound like the guy from the cia or the state department. perhaps a dod to the national security council. i think what is interesting is that you have been identified as someone more lethal and your stack at the treasury department where hamilton is on the one side tell us how the treasury got into the game. >> be transformed the way that we apply the financial economic pressure. the traditional model had been broad trade embargoes in the foreign-policy goals. what we have done over the last ten years is focused on the

conduct so whether it is the funding of terrorist organizations or those who are involved in the wmd proliferation, transnational criminal organizations focused on the conduct it is heavily driven and not part of the cia that -- we do have a shot in the treasury department we are the only finance ministry in the world with an in-house intelligence analytical operation. so i had to people who day in and day out helped to manage these networks that allow us to target our activities. for the most part but we try to do this focus on the illicit conduct and that allows us to do a couple of things that make what we do more effective. in part we are able to disrupt the access to financing. they all need money to operate and we can target that but it also allows us to go to others

around the world and say look this guy is involved in the terrorist financing and supporting the nuclear program. you don't want to have anything -- >> and you see that individual in the city, do you let those governments now? >> we try to. >> do they shut them down? >> the answer is sometimes and it depends on the context and on what we are able to share. but one of the reasons we have been effective is that we have made a lot of progress whether it is in the golf or elsewhere in persuading the governments but the governments but this is in their interest and also the private sector that it is in their interest. the bank does not want to be involved in the transaction for a financier. it's not that the profit is essentially nil. the reputational harm or worse,

what we can do in terms of the sanction is far greater and so what we've been able to do is align our interests in pursuing the illicit actors with private interests in protecting the reputation. >> one of the other things, the reason i was enthusiastic about you being here today is we are in the prospect of either a potential pivot or continuation of history but what everyone up their national security business says is that you created the conditions and changed the calculations by which the government operated and i'm interested because it is easy to talk about the broad national sanctions but it's more complicated for the individuals and firms. can you give a glimpse how you've changed the game with the

iranians? >> this has been a project we've been engaged in since the treasury department. we have applied these conduct sanctions so we've been designating for sanctions those that have been supporting iran's nuclear program over the years so the brokers got the financial institutions, the individuals that have been involved in helping to feed the program. >> how many have a bank account? over time they were somewhat broader measures and what we have used too freely affected the economy in iran that has had

an influence on how iran has approached the negotiations are ongoing as we have used their access to the international financial system and have reduced the ability of iran to access the international financial system and so that means the banks that are trying to transact outside of iran have sounded increasingly found it increasingly -- >> and to the country that matters. most importantly we used the financial sanctions as a way to drive down the ability to sell. if you want to continue to buy from iran you have to reduce how much you are buying from them otherwise if you try to pay them

above this limit, we will sanction your financial institutions that are involved in the transaction. whatever the country as that's buying it is typically one of the largest banks involved in the payment. >> is that a similar framework >> we use them but in a different way. in the russia context what we've been trying to do in a deliberate and powerful way is ratchet up the pressure on vladimir putin without causing massive turmoil and also to be as closely aligned with europe

as possible because the extent of the russian financial economic activity is far greater than the u.s. so we have devised a different way to go after the russian banks to limit their ability to find capital to finance their operations and that has started to squeeze those banks rolling out in the russian economy. >> what if i wanted to run a cry in the network and i dream about this now and then and i -- he says what is your up at night issue and all the tools that you have and i was looking at ways to move the money and resources the coolest thing out there is

bitcoin. when you look at isis the other question i have, isis is out there and you outlined recently in a wonderful speech that i would recommend it to people that just in one year it's taken $20 million but the other thing they do to ease cape reaches the market antiquities and this is a medieval group beheading hoax and whatnot but they somehow have the internal knowledge to know about the tastes. i'm interested in knowing about the movement that don't typically fall into treasury tools. so just take the bitcoin and antiquity. >> on bitcoin, we are on the one hand is hand fully supportive of the development of the e-commerce.

there is a lot that is helpful in the economic development here and internationally. but our fundamental objective is is to ensure that whatever the value transfer mechanism is whether it is through traditional banks and money services businesses and the currency that the basic alliance of the financial transparency applied and that is the people that are involved in the transactions no for their customers are and able to identify this suspicious transactions and report those transactions to the treasury department, to require the compliance. and so we have regulations that affect how -- >> if i do not want to comply is isis keeping the price high? >> we try to regulate the financial sector so that these principles in the financial transparency are part of what they do and they help us make

the financial system and hospitable -- inhospitable and we worked internationally through the organizations and through the financial action task force that helps promote the financial transparency around the world and then with the governments they put into place similar regulatory systems so that it is more difficult for the bad guys to get after the financial system which gets to the antiquities question. on the one hand what people try to do to figure out who is involved in these networks we work with partner nations we will look for the way that they may be accessing the financial system because someone biting this antiquity ultimately --

>> these are old items if they are big and can't be moved they are destroying it. >> someone in the chain has a bank account and what we will try to do is figure out who is, who is the focal point and then through the application of our own tools and working with partners around the world try to disrupt the ability to transact. >> you had a line in your speech the other day of the other funding mechanisms as it is that i so spotted from other activities they rob banks and the civilization in theory of i selling antiquities committee steel livestock and crops and they sell girls and women as sex slaves. that is a powerful outline. this is a nasty outfit and i would imagine that it would take some batman to figure out how you shut them down.

in the minutes that we have left, if you had more power or capacity than you do today to lead this and bring collaborative what would you say would be another strategic leap for your capacity to shut something down? >> one thing that we were gone as replicate what we do at the international. we have fused the intel authorities, policymaking authorities in the treasury department as a way to constrain the ability of the a-list actors to use the financial system. when we go overseas to try to have our partners work with us we often confront this sort of in governments that are working on this sort of balkanized situation where it's in the

finance ministry, the foreign ministry command here year ministry but we found is that it's hugely effective to have this all in one department. the finance ministry in particular because we think we have particular expertise and credibility in pursuing efforts to make the financial system work better. i would love to have other countries around the world have a similar operation. >> do you have lessons for an online course? >> we do try to work with our partners to help them develop these tools. >> ladies and gentlemen, david cohen. thank you so much. secretary, thank you so much for joining us. i hope everybody is having a good time. i'm looking forward to that

onion piece that we do. i now want to bring to the stage my friends amy and david crane a recent pentagon report on climate change represents an essential switch in the way the department of defense thinks about climate change as a phenomenon whose effects have started to impact the environment and destabilize life. no longer just a long-term threat if the government is beginning to recognize the that carbon emissions where no closer to a solution president and ceo who promote a plan to mitigate the change to the private sector or in power the consumers to make energy choices to combat climate change. joined on stage by amy. [applause] >> thanks for that introduction. [applause] >> i am going to dive right into the questions. you said the energy industry should emulate the practices of some of the biggest companies in the world. amazon and google but between

that industry and the energy industry people don't notice or care about energy and climate change until energy prices are high or even worse if it goes away altogether so how do you make people care about climate change and energy like they do their iphone? >> you hurt my feelings by saying people don't care what i worked my whole career on but it's true that fundamental difference if you think about energy in particular the part of the energy sector that i come from much of the electricity sector there is nothing more fundamental to the modern life that the population is more in difference to. electricity may be water so how do you make people aware. one statistic said the average american spends six minutes a year thinking about their energy decisions and so -- >> unfair to some studies how

people check their code 60 times a day. >> i heard that a specific two. a person picks up their phone 1500 times a week. 97% of people sleep within 3 feet of their phone and it's on. we don't have that level of engagement in the energy sector and part of it is the nature of the industry. we've been a command and control industry. the consumer has no choice particularly on the electricity side. your provider is given a monopoly and whatever geographical area but that's all changing. and so, we need to just make people more aware. fortunately there is a series of products coming along that are at least somewhat more interesting. more people are interested in the prospects of making their own electricity with solar power. people talk about solar power since the 60s but now the

price point is where it needs to be. electric cars are obviously interesting. so the technology exists and the keys to get it out of the 15% of the population that sort of falls into the innovator in the early adopter and into the 70% of the population that serves sometimes to date myself what was called and the vietnam war the silent majority to get the population to embrace clean energy and then we would be on our way. >> you spend a lot of time talking about this clean energy and renewable energy and addressing climate change. it was somewhat of an anomaly i would say that ominously fossil fuel based. but of course your company is actually almost 95% made up of oil, coal and natural gas. the generation is renewable energy. is it, do you have a specific target in mind going out and looking into the future that you want to get that 5% number up to

and decrease the fossil fuels and if you don't, do you want to make one up right here and share? >> one of the things that isn't a part of the job description is how do you mitigate the risk of store company from description. there's a lot of. descriptive change we have seen. it's shocking. but in the 1970s, the telecom industry was often referred to in the same breath of the electric industry. these are the two utilities in the united states and the telecom gets broken up and now it's basically in the it industry. we are still working our way out i don't have a specific target and i would say i am not even hostile to fossil fuel. one of the technologies that has come along that has to work if you are going to do something

about climate change, and this is classic. it's called a post-combustion carbon and capture technology. clearly the name wasn't thought of by a marketing person. >> you came up with the word fracking i think. >> that's right, the f. word. there are fossil fuels and then there is coal. usually it's been 50% of the united states because the natural gas price it's more like 40%. but it's twice as carbon intensive as natural gas. the average age of the plant is 40-years-old. does that mean that they were built from the 1970s clicks in the 1970s they built the plans to last 30 or 40 years, because in the 1970s they thought that nuclear power would be so cheap that we wouldn't need the plans and so we see how well people predict the future but the

average age is less than 10-years-old and while with certainty be operating in 2050. so, if we want to do something about climate change we will be using coal and natural gas and we need to get the carbon out of that and that's why we just announced the largest carbon capture project in the world which is being built with support in texas. >> at the obama administration has the goal of the climate change rules to cut 40% based on the 2005 levels by 2030. i mean, do you think that a given how important the climate and energy is to your company have to thought about creating some sort of goal lacks >> we have thought about creating the goal for the company, yes, we have. but i think that the thing that is a little bit unnerving about the administration's ice or as where do we need to be by 2050

because that seems to be the year that the world of scientists focus on. and 2030 is a little bit of a convenient here to serve to say look how great we are because from now until 2030 natural gas displaces coal and you sort of naturally get as carbon reduction but the reason you picked 2030 instead of 2050 is between 2050 if we stay on the present course, natural gas will dislodge nuclear. every nuclear plant in the country will retire between the year 2030 and 2050 because we haven't built a new nuclear plant in the country to read the last one of the last almost 1979. you reduce the carbon and when they displace nuclear, you go in the wrong direction and that isn't what we can afford to do. so we have to figure out and

look at the path to the glide path down from 2030 to 2050. >> on that note, maybe even 500 years going forward from that there's been a lot of talk about the natural gas being so good for climate. i think people close to the administration say that it is a century the climate policy right now because you mentioned that they are coming naturally because of the power and the renewable energy. do you think that on the net benefit it's going at 100 years it won't be good for the efforts to address or the next negative? >> if it is handled properly, it is definitely on the positive side. and first of all of course you've got to create the responsible fracking and that means making sure that you are getting the same. >> do you think it's being done quickly now? >> 90% of the companies that are fracking come at the bigger

companies tend to do it in a responsible way that they are doing it because no one is requiring them to do it and whether you are talking about the future of the methane they don't exercise the same level of control. so certainly i would support what i would call the responsible fracking but the key is to make sure the world doesn't get hooked on the natural gas. if we go to what people call the natural gas world by 2050, you're talking about a 4-degree increase pledges and anything that any of us want to see. so the key is that if you use natural gas as bridge fuel -- >> i think that it has a long dated about a short bridge to a very long road. do you think that the oil oriole

and the natural gas is can help our efforts? or make it more difficult? >> if you think about it, energy energy is the one sort of infrastructure, critical infrastructure in the united states but for whatever reason has always been in private hands as opposed to the public sector. but what i love about fracking if i think of we would all like to have a framework established by washington for what does the united states want to be in two of our biggest market for california and texas area to california and texas have a different view on climate change but both of them have a pretty definitive view on where they want to be as a state so we can respond to what you want but what i like about the energy independence you have been w.

shuttle. it's not even possible. but the mystic oil production has increased from 4 million barrels a day to 8 million. natural gas, now we are in exporter where we were building the import facilities five years ago. so, when i like to think from the political perspective it's actually probably going to the entrance of achieving energy independence and creating the domestic jobs because of those things will happen but the oriole and gas industry and the solar industry have to stop thinking of it as a zero-sum game and actually working together to as you know i think natural gas is what enabled solar power. 43 million american homes are tied to the natural gas system. solar power on the roof doesn't work at night. if you have a device in the basement that can turn natural

gas into electricity plus to solar the solar power on the roof coming you would be sent. >> maybe you should start at should've started the national gas association. >> how important on a scale of one to ten how important are the public policies such as the climate change will come energy department loan guarantee program, how important are those policies to getting this to clean energy? tend being incredibly important in the sensual central and is somewhat irrelevant. >> i would say people do not get a sense of how big the energy industry is. >> can you pick a number? >> the government support to get over what the people called the valley of death is important on an eight to ten once the industry is more mature i think it drops to three or four. was i supposed to give to members?

would you say that the sequestration is more eight to ten level? >> if he were allocating the money right now and we were recipients of a solar projects to do things that have made it cheap around the world is germany and everyone should think germany because the population is paying an enormous amount that they created a market and now the stimulus created a domestic market that has caused the price to drop by 70% since the beginning of the obama administration so now it's affordable. carbon capture technology as long as you don't have a price on carbon i'm a big deal either

the private sector can leave the social movement with the private sector is coming you know, it is profit driven. the sector will not solve something for which there is no price and so the carbon capture, the only way that we have made this billion-dollar carbon capture project is because where the plant is located we can turn it into oil. >> that sort of defeats the whole purpose. >> we could get into the philosophical but there is definitely the argument they use it to get the oriole on the ground. we would say that it substitutes the domestic production. it doesn't affect the american demand for gas at all. >> do you think that they can alter mystically then? the >> i think that what you see right now, and we would like to encourage this. they are concerned that the

sustainability of large and one of the messages is that in this is the inability movement in the 70s the only thing the public could really do to show that they wanted it to assemble is to recycle. but now you can embrace clean energy and by alternative energy vehicles. there's so many things you can do, and i think that the big brand-name companies like coca-cola, the mcdonald's of the world, they view it because of their brand and also because their employees. employees are demanding. ..