in your good judgment. >> good witnesses. .. witnesses like this every time, this is going to be in play. >> thank you.e)iñçxlw you know let me start by saying i've always been taught that if something works, we should do more of it, and if it doesn't work, we should do less of it. when we look at them9ñ economy, we# can see clinton years focused on education innovation,ími booming times,57%u lots of reasons, but booming timesom' 22 million jobs added. we go to the nextsqqq;qgsz administration, bush administration focused on tax cut íc7cpvpredominantly from the top, it will trickle down.z[y>g funding wars without paying for it, and'> creating massive debt lack of oversight, financial institutions. and we ended up with60 what we now call the great recession.

and so i'm concerned that we dobó what works. and now what we're seeing by+;-- we're not out of it by any means,>#= but we helped save american jobs in theú#6=x?rue auto withi'5ú home equity and 401(k)s and losing jobs, everything happening in the great÷ recession, it's beginning to come back. fewer young people are working. ií áu want to say, the first thought that came to my mind is that's because the folks in theaf taking the jobs now attáñc fast-food restaurants. we've go> >> the yearly deficit and it

seems the challenge is for us to make sure that whoever needs a job that pays well will have one job to raise their family. i am proud henry ford had the right idea that despite every betty's criticism at the time they thought he was crazy to pay folks top dollar what i hear from our manufacturers in michigan and right now with hundreds of jobs they said we need skilled people to match the jobs. the number one issue is job

training and skill development. the president talked about that. so if we talk about how do we capture this to grow the middle income jobs there is lots of things. but if each of you may speak to the desperate need for skill development to match that job not that they are unskilled but just not matched with job training or the cost of college people are coming out of for years schools the british going to the two-year schools to meet with massive debt and cannot buy a house. builders have a terrific concerns about young people not be able to get credit because all of the debt. that is a huge issue we could come together and work together with the business community and the public-private sector. could you speak from your perspective?

>> i think this is an important issue there are 4 million jobs unfilled and it is because people don't have skills certainly not the right skills and in some cases they don't have skills for too long we have the dropout rate that was too high. we invested $700 billion roughly through the case to 12 system and we need a system that can send people to college not needing remediation when they get there but about 40 percent of the people don't go to college but they need a skill that i would say is measured along industry standards so they our work ready and the dropout rate has to be zero. budget yoda biggest mistake a young person can make their work on policies in one area this amasses the labor market analysis we don't know where the jobs

are or enough about the skills that are needed to hold those jobs in industries to do a better job to say these are the competencies' that we require and it needs to be aligned with training. for the federal job trading perspective ready to stop spending money and reward people when they graduate with a mastery of the competencies required to go to work certainly those innovative programs bringing down trading through the k-12 level we can scale people much earlier in there and get rid of the wasted senior year. the scenario where there is tremendous national need and opportunity on a bipartisan basis and i know senator alexander and his members are interested in this issue. i know senator why did has focused on this. giving people the

information they need with labor market analysis it is the dismal status. >> i'd love the a deal we should do more of what works. i would call attention works on a global basis the u.s. economy is 40% higher paychecks than any other country at any of their time and in particular is way ahead of europe. there is some tendency to move in the direction of european institutions which troubles me. countries that specifically said free at the labor market. and then written in german a by far the best experience

after the financial crisis. it touches on what you talked about the failure of secondary education. when kids get to college they are a big disadvantage relative to scandinavian countries we need a major thrust but still whenever it can and do to boost the quality and the appropriateness of what is done to kids in high school would make a huge difference for all the things that you talk about. >> i'm sorry. if i could just get a few seconds he did not have an opportunity.

>> i caution all of us we have a five minute rule. try not to utilize asking each one but if we tried to be brief. >> i will try to be brief. let talking about what works as an example and is precisely right with the '70s and the averages. the american middle-class so there has been a long run the stagnation. butted is because of education in there is a presumption that the government will fund education. it was is absurd that

somebody would need that education and that there is useful to framework of the arguments of greater involvement to push post secondary education to the media gaps to wear a the education. >>. >> i'll look forward to working with you and members on our side as well. >> wages are flat they are not growing now $3,000 in 2009 with labor participation rate at a historically low level it is a big issue in rehab lots of work to do to fix that. with comprehensive tax

reform can unleash economic activity. sova to be a strong advocate for tax reform and the of prt represents larger companies in the country. i uninterested it knowing with regard to tax reform and you may say to south dakota 90 percent of the business is a pastor. but then with the sub chapter s so give these realities that all businesses benefit from a simplified tax code. >> we always talk about reform because we recognize the corporate entity and many more numerous nine corporate entities. also looking at global

competition that our more domestic that they are part of a supply chain that feeds into the supply chain. talk about the two different types of structures about how that might change in the future. and with the realm of the possibility to do something that is fiscally sustainable given the deficit that we just talked about. have you achieved benefits for betty to not ask for

individuals to pay for corporate relief if you can sort through this, there are ways to make it easier the structure is a little different but the passer entities rehab those in the membership as well to think how can make similar progress there? and after the '86 tax reform we saw at people moving because they deem that to be a better position. i would hope regardless of business structure we could improve the competitiveness and is a engaged in the work

with global competitive companies said impacting that. we have seen in hiring but to get that not ignore the domestic side. but to offer theories about what causes that other than and demographic changes associated with baby boomers retiring. because we have limitations what is the single biggest factor that keeps more americans from seeking work? and the specific question with the rise of the number

of eric hands of receiving social security payments and the negative impact on the labor force. could you elaborate? what can congress do about it and how does as social security payment issue contribute? >>. >> the participation rate focuses on young people. so because they're from higher income families it is the dog is to be a federal policy to reverse that. but with respect to participation among older workers, the disability program does call for reform and essentially prohibits

people to even think about working again you lose your benefits instantly if you are found working. this dollars to have looked carefully have been very clear that the right answer is to turn disability into a transition a program where workers are held to re-enter the labor market. to do jobs of there perfectly capable. it was created the people doing very physical work. most people are sitting at desks there is no channel that they can be placed it should be a top priority and

clearly one of the trends that is adverse for participation in the labor market. >> thank you mr. chairman i will stay within the five minute limit. so quickly i will raise a point and ask the three panelists to give a very brief answer because of a bite to have two questions. you stated in your proposal that trade related jobs grew three times faster than average over the last decade paying between 30 and 18% higher all of which suggest trade policy issues we need to deal with. will the round table or in the above you agree with that? that could be a dynamic aspect to the economy and

emphasis should be put on the trade agreements. on the other hand, when he received for it -- reports backed with a slowing down, japan is negative growth at best and europe looks to a negative growth that instability on markets clearly will be a factor. obviously we should go ahead with these trade initiatives should we be concerned about these factors not achieving what we would like to achieve? >> of the numbers that provide source documentation for the increase of wages related to export related jobs and in terms of the job

growth that i am moved by the fact we're we have been emplace the 46% of exports where we have that system in place so a to have that balance their with 28 members of the eu's those two together are 60% of the world gdp. but then it argues to go for word.

but with those directions to the trade negotiator we think the risk is outweighed by the opportunity. >> thereto benefits to opening trade as the governor has indicated but the other thing that is equally important to get cheap goods to the west don't neglect the import side. so with those products that wal-mart and elsewhere in the race is the west's standards of living unambiguously that trade is

great for two reasons. is great when japan is in recession but it is a huge economy. if it were not in recession it would be a huge economy plus 3%. son of matter of the business cycle and second to the extent the world is becoming more chaotic, what does this mean? that raises the returns to trade. with a foreign policy as well when you have deep economic issues used to trade with russia.

>> those are reassuring answers. we hope this to be the essential element i just want to give her thoughts with the trade partners and thank you for that. my time is expired i will withhold my second question. >> thank you. >> i want to do congratulate and working with you my time is only limited to five minutes i appreciate the panel we have made enormous strides since the economic recovery. to see robust job growth and growing gdp but there is still work to do.

in my mind the focus on measures that we should look at to strengthen the middle-class and come to invest in infrastructure to improve educational opportunity. with that in mind most members of this committee believe there is a pressing need to reform and simplify the tax code however opinions begin to diverge when we talk about the goals of reform. talk about accomplishing those goals. and to make it clear where he stands to be focused on measures to help middle-class families instead of keeping in place the tax loopholes cord to special interests - - yr to special interests. was so simply what is more beneficial choosy economy

and individual families? households across the income spectrum as far as helping afford health care or further tax rates for those that the top of the bracket those who don't ask for medications are not getting them. >> i think policies to the middle-class to yield a much bigger dividend. i mean that into respects. there is emerging body of evidence that it will be a drag on the economy. like to make college available to the middle-class. then there is another point with is the point of having economic growth? sundew the extent these policies could do that i

also think there is simple stuff. when someone first explained what the trust fund to pull was my mind boggled and that is true to most economists but also most of the constituency -- constituents with a carried interest people that had no economics behind them with no economic benefit sarah frees up a bunch of money to do something more useful. >> with that educated work force and at the same time to have greater resources to help educate the child to get to work to have the child be taking care of without disposable in, they will have more income to help you will the economy

lot meet ask you as well and teeeighteen about a for structure. while at historic lows with the slack in the construction industry there was a report mr. chairman led by a nonprofit transportation entity that said new jersey's bad roads and bridges costing drivers almost $2,000 and contribute to fatal crashes and goes on to talk about a host developments. talk about the work force and the sales force to sell the product. can you talk about the importance looking at the chance rotation trust fund

also at the ripple effect. can you respond to that? >> i am of there is a restructured investment that there is a great return on investment to be made up front and to be paid off over time. everything from air traffic control and i mentioned the electric grid earlier. water systems, roads and bridges are harder. it is harder to insist on the user pay approach to pay the traditional fuel taxes the efficiency is such that

we have many more miles so that will have to be adjusted over time. was general fund borrowing is not sustainable and rehab a big hole coming up this spring again. what drives all of america crazy is the inability to plan long term for anything other tax provisions, going back two weeks through december you cannot build roads year round cd to be ready to go in the spring. if the trust fund is not funded you cannot budget your money accordingly. so i think phil low interest-rate the environment has a tremendous opportunity to do projects

and if you borrow money you have to pay it back. and many of them have the value proposition to allow that to take place and there's also a public investment that is required. it is center-right and we should fix it. >> congratulations mr. chairman. first question to governor engler, think about the impact of lower the corporate tax rate on job creation has a significant impact also with the tax in versions that ochered. can you comment on research and development with the

income overseas but that is exactly what we have with the current code. part of the change is virtually where the rest of the world is toolhouse although all the foreigners to be brought back home it has to be advantageous. and then the money that is with capital spending or hiring or a question. but at the time it was planned we're not in the top

25 this temporary. so we need permanency in the code and it needs to be competitive so across the entire spectrum but particularly we want to think about anybody with the their status to compete globally because today we have a worse competitive environment. >> dr. hall labor force participation noted with some interest if we use about the same rates that we have through 20,091st is where we are now there are 7 million more in the labor force to be counted it does

not seem like all that can be contributed to retirement. help me to understand the percentage of folks working the that are involved. >> there is the table in my prepared testimony that breaks it down. as i mentioned earlier the big decline of participation is among the young people. there is a theory i will not sponsor this but the entertainment has become quite cheap and that makes a difference how teachers decide how to allocate their time. may be things like that. you should be encouraged to see that they're not primary earners in the most cases

but if you look at people with a peak earning with the decline in their participation it is for people under 35 especially teenagers. rebate figure out and it could reverse it is the possibility but it does not cry out for a policy change until we see how permanent it is. >> final question relating to the president's proposal what impact would that have with the backdrop of dodd/frank? what impact would add half with the job market long-term? >> it pushes up the already high tax.

so they will create the scecorp it pays a corporate income-tax at a high rate by rolled wide standards then make its text again before it goes into the hands of the entrepreneur. i the great need to straighten this out to have an integrated system that is careful to get those rates right instead of the hodgepodge with the topic of a carried interest goes the other direction where should be taxed as ordinary income is only capital gains. so we need to change this to get the rates on entrepreneurial activities down that takes the form of carried interest up and

straighten things out to get reasonable uniform tax rates is a huge step forward. >> my time is up. >> chairman hatch we look forward to working with you as chairman of our committee and we wish you the best. we're looking forward to a very productive time. i want to say to our panelists it has been extremely helpful looking how america can have a stronger economy to create more jobs and increase real wages to keep up with productivity gains. there is a lot of focus on business tax. then talk about the corporate rate and the

individual rate and we hear frequently with the highest marginal income-tax rates and the industrial world. i find that somewhat surprising considering when you look at their reliance on the public sector among the industrial nations of the world the united states is near the bottom. because it relies almost always on income tax or the industrial world has a reliance on the consumption tax. when the organization was developed we thought it was fined for the border just on a consumption tax but in com puts the united states at competitive disadvantage.

i am not sure just by rearranging a vet shares on the deck will make much of a difference to rely heavily on income taxes that are not adjusted where the industrial world relies on a consumption tax is. facially hear from two groups of people. one says we don't want to revenue machine and there are ways to deal with that use some form of automatic rebate if revenues exceed. you can deal with that issue but the other is we don't want them to be more burdensome than they are today. the use of rebates on in, you can deal with that issue. both could be dealt with in a much simpler way with complexities.

my question from the point to view of america's competitiveness, why wouldn't it the vantage our country to take advantage of our natural advantage for revenues? why shouldn't we look at a way to take advantage of that competitively? dr. hall? >> you just listed all the selling points. and in particular the key idea is you could have the rebate to build into which to have the right distribution of burden that excuse is low income from paying at all and and though no great in the middle income as opposed to higher in the com and then to have

the consumption tasks that most think is a great idea but it is easy to come up with that if you like that adjustment economists are not as enthusiastic about that by no politicians like them. so all those vintages that you discuss all combine to make a terrific idea. >> thank you. >> to put my manufacturers hat back on to put everything back into takeoff going out is a day heavy lift like the r&d tax credit permanent in order to get

there. >> is seen as heavier things? to be visionary? >> all i know is that a flat tax type of conversation they you have introduced i would like to talk about these kinds of things with of though with respect to the chair and ranking member we recognize that we have a room of possibilities with certain things to put that on the study committee to look at the long-term structure. is a big change we're willing to do talk about what makes united states more competitive. >> we study things to death then we don't have a consensus this is a greater

need but nothing is new. we know what will happen in the united states would be much more competitive. so i think the panel for their discussions. i look forward to working with you and i want to thank senator hatch and senator wyden and i am pleased to create jobs for the people that is rare they come down. they key for being here for your efforts the economic recession affected everyone including my home state of nevada it was especially harmful.

with the highest and a plenary nearly 14% at the peak i would argue today is north of 9 percent as well as the highest foreclosure rate in the highest personal bankruptcy rates it has been a rough few years. although it has improved the bad is the unemployment rate is highest in the nation thousands of families are still waiting for economic recovery they can see or feel in the pocketbook. america is told the economy is getting better call though the rate has gone down many have dropped out of the workforce entirely. the policies put the barriers to economic growth it has only become more complicated than under obamacare and we have a

health care lot to make it harder to see your doctor to make it more difficult and raises taxes to the american taxpayers and to trim the growth the key factors that deserve the attention of congress americans deserve a the creator tax code to ensure the competitiveness and a growing international market place as members of the floor to working with the chairman in the ranking member to move these issues for word so i have a few questions today. there is an article today that came out and "politico". we have not had reforms since 1986 and there's reasons why it occurs. law makers from the white house are overstated the benefits of the business coterie right. some say any overhaul will

do little. and may even hurt the economy. because for all the complaints about special-interest loopholes and sky-high rates the issue we promote growth so i think that voice will get louder and love louder to improve the corporate tax cut of. is there any truth behind these comments? >> one of the risks of not moving forward is to retain a patchwork temporary tax code to come back every few months it seems to extend it and nobody can plan and advance gore they cannot rely as an individual or business taxpayer. to save certain provisions

have benefits, of course, they are put and to offset the negative effects of the code we have got. that is whole goal since '86 we have seen changes made that what really changed for is what the rest of the world has done in reaction to our code so then we react to that in those provisions are designed to make us more competitive against other regions of the world or another practice out there. a simple flat their tax and had enjoyed the conversation but it is a long way to get there to where he would like to go that we can see a simple tax code in our future if we act now on the things that our doable with this committee. >> we talked about education and i know that brt has a

position by in nevada 30 percent of those going to pose high school education by 202060% of the jobs will the post high-school education. how do you feel about the president's proposal of free community college? civic their spending a lot of time doing what they did not do in the first place in the high school level. i am frustrated with that a little bit and also what is offered as a way to pay for it. nobody has seen the details what he is specifically proposing but we really need to have each student has thrown individual plan to do college work when day arrive

may be into resource industry your gaming industry so what kinds of jobs are skills are needed it and can we start before post 12th grade? lot started grade 10 and over see that those in the real world those that have skills also gain confidence and then once more education and then go back to school and oftentimes they will pay for it because now they are employed. a more virtuous circle and then we and the dropouts because then you drop out the whole economy. >> by time has run out. >> i will be very brief. i will give you a homework assignment. i appreciate what you have

done for the country i am a big fan of the brt somewhere in the bowels of the brt to the tax rate is it a comprehensive reform of c corporation. >> we have a list that works. they're reluctance to flotow's excise tax that next day we find out now would is a proposal to reduce spending so there is a reluctance to put the

cards face up on the table until there is a magic moment. we have done the math. no question in a fiscally responsible way to put together a plan. we're looking at the past and how much can be done so great progress can be done for the we are eager to work with you. >> i would love to see the list. dr. wolfers you made a statement in your verbal testimony recommended triggers for automatic stabilizers that were lower tax rates can you supply was what those triggers are as a professor of economics? >> with that unemployment

rate is seven 1/2%. >> so that unemployment rate verses another? >>. >> the second question payroll tax or income tax what word to trigger. >> guy with paid to think harder about the question so it is an interesting concept so with tax policy to drive economic outlook that any time we raise a lower taxes there are consequences. >> that brings me to

dr. hall as an advocate of the flat tax, with the answers talk about the tax code the name determines the tax rate which is 20% on capital gains. with a carried interest assignment and the testimony for a flat tax is that correct? the mask of a question. if i am correct in my assumption the biggest stumbling block to simplicity is transition from the kobe area in so to have longitudinal tax treatments and appreciation and i can go on and on.

if you woke up with an 80 percent flat tax'' would you grandfather from the previous tax code and what you wouldn't? >>. >> a while ago i went to them whole topic in detail depreciation however it of the proposal there is a first-year write-off but been, that is for the cooking that is easy. but then how do treat the hangover of the previously promised depreciation of deductions? it would cost a lot of money but we could just honor them and that is what i would recommend. there is also personal savings vehicles but that

can be worked out and have been. so what does give into some details i cannot go into this morning but it is something i have thought about and it is doable. you are right. you have to do it right. it is a fairly long list of fair and correct transition and rules to be applied. >> i appreciate your answer i love that you did that paper if you could give it to me so i could read it i get bored watching tv but the reason i raise a point when reagan reform taxes it 86 we've made a mistake we change midstream that set the large segment of the community so you have to be

very careful when you change the treatment mitt investment that is the reason i ask. turning over to the ranking member senator why did. >> i share your concerns as well. to go back to what you and senator soon talked about. you have been kind to know how strongly i feel about bipartisan comprehensive tax reform of big part of this debate will come down to of supply and heart resorb

because the big guys in the multinationals will get the breaks but the small business will not get anything but then when they will get the numbers they may think they have to pick up the cost in order to have the break that is the show stopper into your credit you have indicated you are interested to talk about this site understand there is some discussion in the business community in the effort to try to think this through and given the fact small business is well over 80 percent coming up with the general small business credit to allow the small

business people from date number 12 venture as we do tax reform we want everybody to get ahead in recognizing those small businesses. i know this is not the time to talk specifics but what is the sense of your discussion and where it might go? >> it is unavoidable and as long as they work with the constraints of a fiscally responsible tax reform if you try to bring the rates down that cost revenue, then what offsets that loss? i personally think there is

a fairly dynamic effect there. certainly there is the effect for a tax rates it is a beneficial effect seed with higher revenues but i understand this gory rules that we use. if we say what is fiscally responsible? those of our noncorporate entities? nobody should subsidize the other they should not subsidize corporate relief for vice versa so how did you get them a better tax code? i think we have figured out where we would like to be the other is a little more complex because you point out the need diversity. many are closer to the bottom but the passer entity

are more than $2 billion in revenue. so does we look at this your question about the small business credit? is intriguing every will look at the committee to see but key and be done till we speak of comprehensive tax reform. >> one other quick question. then i will recognize senator corpora one of those most troubling aspects is the huge gap between economic recovery in urban areas and rural areas. the national association of counties recently released a report that only 65 in in economic recovery, no county

in my state has seen a full economic recovery. 23 rural counties in my state have lagged well beyond the populace the county -- counties and clearly in my state i will lot except during those rural communities and to sacrifice soane's to write them off to say that is the way it goes. just before i go to senator crupper -- carter i would be interested in the etf from each of you with real ideas. to. >> is to reject the question. >> fair enough. [laughter]

>> there is a variation between men and women and states we should wait these as real people with dignity and that does not mean favoring one group over the of there. but implicitly i completely agree and we could push down that employment rate something particular role before differences that will help the user groups -- youth groups. >> be urbanization has been going on. exactly what should be given

to people who are still in rural areas? . .areas that are the other extreme. in the urbane area it's 4%. we have a progressive tax system which helps a lot in that respect. we have a social safety net. i'm not sure it would be appropriate to go beyond that to have something specifically aimed. europe one of the main, huge problems in europe is very consistent attempts to prevent pele that's been one of the many drags in europe so again the

europeanization view and we would want to move in that direction but i would say it's pretty robust social safety net. the numbers i matter quite impressive at the bottom end of the income distribution now much help we could get them in particular excuse the people in that area completely from paying taxes so you know i think we are doing a reasonable job. >> i want to go to governor carper. in rural oregon people are first and foremost interested in family wage jobs. they want the opportunity to trade in and trade in improvements to structure and they want a balanced approach of natural resources. nobody this weekend said the answer was a safety net program. governor anything else you want to add him and i want to go to governor carper. >> real quickly i grew up in michigan and one of those communities. i do think technology has a huge role to play in solving that gap and i really felt the idea that

everybody has got high-speed access, we can take the worked where the people are today in many cases i may think doubling down the most strategies, one thing that is simply not negotiable is even in rural schools with technology can have the best education available in the world but you've got to get it. you have to insist upon at any affected bill that. if i'm leaving one of those communities today i'm really putting my emphasis on educational workforce. the skills are donators in terms of opportunity and incomes going forward and it's just going to get more acute. >> governor carper. >> thank you. he knows how to warm me up when he calls me governor. i tell people around the country when they say what you do i say i'm a recovering governor and i am. >> please don't be in recovery. >> i will never fully recover. john and i worked together when we were governors at the same time and worked on a lot of stuff welfare reform.

we had our young families young families until the other kids in the national governors association and got to spend a lot of time together and we share a passion for a particular baseball team. the national should be pretty good this year but we will see. we will see how good are tigers are but i'm hopeful that we still have plenty of points. having said all a bad we also are always interested in how do we foster great growth and whether you were governors or senators or presidents we help create that nurturing environment and i was pleased with the president's speech. he focused on something so they think and help create an even more nurturing environment for job creation and job preservation. one of those is trade in the trade policy and trade

agreements making it easier for us to sell our goods and products into foreign markets. we talked a bit about tax reform and i have a long-time interest in broadening the base and moving towards a territorial tax system and the corporate side. we spent time as cybersecurity and we have a lot of people trying to steal our seed corn from astra seneca and whether it's michigan ohio state delaware you name it. i think we are doing a better job but it's a big job. you spoke to immigration reform. i don't know who was mentioned today immigration reform will reduce budget deficits and foster greater economic growth. the last one is where i'm going transportation investments and transportation infrastructure. governor engler before his current job after being governor one of the things he led the national manufactures.

they have put out work by very smart people looking at what kind of gdp growth do we get if we fully fund the transportation plan for the next six years. they said we got a fair amount of gdp growth and economic boost from putting six or hundred 7000 people to work building roads and highways and bridges across the country but the real growth from gdp from fully funded transportation program comes from an adjusted time economy to be able to move goods and products across the country and into foreign markets and that's where we get the real gdp growth. the big question around here has been how do you pay for this stuff and the last five years we have kicked the can down the road and we end up borrowing money from the general fund which is broke so we borrow money from china and other places around the world.

one of you i think it was you dr. hall made mention user fees. i don't michigan the governor governor steiner, he tried the double gas tax from 39 cents and i think it passed the senate last year not the house and it will have to go to referendum to see if they can pass it that way. i chair until 10 days ago the transportation infrastructure. i survived environmental public works and have a great interest in not and through this committee. here is my question. our ranking member former chairman for me is oregon have been working on something called the road user charge. another way of saying vehicle -- and if you go a you go on monday fave you pay a toll. people can move through expeditiously and if you go south for monday night -- 95

i-95 to the beach there's a user fee but there's a toll. we have a combination of polls and road user charges. we have i think dr. hall you are talking about congestion and charging and i think that makes a lot of sense. two questions. one giving us advice we are going to run out of money in the transportation trust fund yet again. we run out of money at the end of me. what advice would you have for us? my sense is this will become a nation thing that we haven't raised the gas tax at the diesel tax in 20 years. the 24-cent diesel tax today is worth 24 cents and we all know what's going on with the price of gas and diesel. so your recommendations. it's usually about a month or so. what should we do? do you want to lead off governor? >> i'm happy to start. i do think as part of a

comprehensive business tax reform proposal there opportunities to do some things. i don't think they are permanent fixes i think their multiple year fixes in the transportation fund. they would not be as good as if you were to address the overall revenues for the fund from dedicated user fee sources but i do think there are creative ways. chairman camp got some of this and the president endorsed that so i look at that as there is a possibility. there has been also in the press just comments that don't add up where they say let's just repatriate and use that money from a scoring standpoint. that doesn't work but there's a way to do it that camp.add in some of the proposals made in the house in the last congress. there have been also and i won't discuss it right now and i will use up my colleagues find that some of the proposals about how you might even change the way

highway trust funds are administered and at what level. you are completely right. we can make a contribution and it could be very helpful to buy some time but we really need to step it up dramatically from where we are. the deeds that are unmet are pretty staggering. >> thank you. dr. hall please. >> i'm not equipped to deal with these day-to-day problems especially from 2600 miles away. >> where you live? >> in california. midland park. >> i used to live there. i rode was close to the stanford golf course right by my house. i went back there couple of years ago. they have a sign in the front of the house that said tom parker may have slept here. [laughter] >> taking a somewhat longer perspective on infrastructure in

general especially roads, roads should make a profit for the owners of the roads and in some cases the federal government. the government ought to make a profit because this is a lot of land is worth a lot and if you are not making a profit they are not able to use the land. so that shows a different infrastructure policy is today on the way should be because we know we are pouring a lot of money into it. on the gas tax there's a case that we should have the tax as part of the carbon tax. otherwise as it was pointed out earlier the gas tax is an extremely inefficient and ineffective way to deal with recovering fees. we need to recover fees from the transponder easy pass or whatever it's called. >> we do a lot of that in delaware. >> exactly and that's great. >> we also have the gas tax. >> we should have a gas tax

because of the carbon content but that is a mean we should keep raising it all the time. >> we have a race in 21 years. >> than is probably too low. in any case intelligent policy should be very focused on getting the right level of real-time pricing of the users and infrastructure. air travel the same thing, it's scandalous since most people who fly or at least middle income and it's scandalously subsidized airports through infrastructure funds. so we need to get that straightened out. there shouldn't be any federal subsidy to air travel. >> thank you. dr. wolfers. >> i would say three things. >> are you from australia? >> i'm a dual citizen. first i would raise the gas tax and i think you'll find. >> would you say that again? >> raise the gas tax and i think you could take almost any

economist in the united states and they would say the same thing. i can think of two reasons. one at the moment we are effectively subsidizing the dirtiest forms of transport rather than the cleaner ones and there are environmental consequences. there are better things we could do but in the world we live in this is the simplest interest -- instrument we can use. i used to run to work. when i run to work i have to join a gym just a shower. on the days i drive to work i can use tax-exempt money to pay for a parking spot so we are actually subsidizing one form of transportation rather than another and i would argue probably not the right form. my fellow michiganders might disagree. the second is how to get more bang for your buck from the transportation fund. one is to think about spending more when stuff is the cheapest. we have a lot of instruction workers out of work and we have a low interest-rate. now is a great time to spend.

the boom keeps going it will hopefully be a terrible time to spend and we will get more bang for our spending. in the third was you said you begin by saying you would ask economist with the economic growth payoff for better transportation policy would be. i think that's actually the wrong question. the real payoff from good transportation publishes moms and dads to get home and see their kids 15 minutes earlier every day. it's improving standards one that we should take seriously. >> texas a&m. >> texas a&m this is that every year and figures out how much time we just sit in traffic. about two full days and that's a point well taken. mr. chairman how about that? >> governor carper has been our leader on infrastructure. thank thank you all in on behalf of chairman hatch we are adjourned at this time. >> thank you very much.

>> mr. president i send a cloture motion on the pending subsidy to the desk. >> the clerk will report the cloture motion. spin a cloture motion we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring to close the debate on murkowski amendment number two the keystone xl pipeline approval act signed by 17 senators as follows. >> i is concerned that the reading of the names be dispensed with. >> is there objection? without objection. >> i send a cloture motion on the underlying bill to the desk. >> the clerk will report the cloture motion. >> cloture cloture motion beginners and senators in accordance with a purpose and jibril 22 the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring to a close debate on s1 a bill to improve the keystone xl pipeline signed by 17 senators. >> i asked that further reading of the names be dispensed with. >> without objection. >> i has to ask is that at 9:30 a.m. friday tomorrow the

senate to proceed in to vote an amendment in order were listed as seven card and 75 murkowski 98 flake 103 cruz 15 moran 73 gains 132. further that all amendments on that all amendments on the list is subject to a 60 vote affirmative threshold for adoption and that no 2 degrees be in order to the amendments but as consent every two minutes of debate equally divided between each vote and all votes after the first in a series b. ten-minute votes. >> is there objection? >> mr. bersin reserving the right to object. >> the assistant democratic democratic leader. >> cavalier purge the calendar of five of the six democratic amendments the majority leader tells us it's time to vote. it doesn't strike me that this is in the best interest of both we are trying to achieve here and going back and forth in a

bipartisan constructive fashion that i would like to ask the majority leader are you prepared to be in session tomorrow and to consider democratic and republican amendments and work through the list including the ones that you have just tabled? >> does the senator for mel and i intend to object to my consent? >> what i'm asking frankly is to try to amend this so it does have some balance. you mentioned one democratic amendment and at least five or six republican amendments to be considered tomorrow. >> well we just had votes on democratic amendments and your members had offered and didn't want to agree to have a vote on. >> the record reflect the spirit of debate on this amendments when he wouldn't even give me authors 60 seconds to describe what was in the amendment? >> mr. president am i correct that the senator from illinois is going to object to this dissent to create? i suggest the absence of a quorum.

>> du jour panel immigration in the ear. ron brownstein is returning to the stage and we have joining him henry cisneros who is the chairman of cityview former secretary of the u.s. department of housing and urban affairs and cochair the bipartisan policy center is immigration task force and alfonzo aguilar the executive director of the latino partnership at the american principles project. ana navarro a republican strategist was not able to join us today. >> thank you. i'm disappointed that my cna colleague was not able to join us and the only thing that is capable of silencing on is being sick. so that's a very rare thing but we have a lot of firepower here to help us consider these issues. we have been talking to mayors and other experts kind of on the

ground whether its communities and how would be implemented and what the legal issues are. i want to start on a broader dimension about the president's choice to move forward with executive action. was it the right thing for him to do? >> i think it was the only thing he could do. i have been close to the process through the bipartisan policy center of watching the various opportunities that the congress had particularly the republican house beginning with this time last year when there was a moment where there was talk about after the primaries and there was talk about a window in the summer and it just never came. there was no indication that it would. so asking the administration the president and the country to wait longer somehow do something great with materialize in the next year was just not probable. i think he had very little choice. he did the right thing.

>> i think it was the right timing. i've criticized republicans in the past congress for not acting constructively on immigration. they should've done something however you have a new congress and for a person to say well we are not doing anything and there is no hope of anything happening and let's pack our bags and go back home i think that is a new congress. we should give republicans an opportunity. i think he could have waited a year saved by the end of this year. republicans will do something and if they have not done anything than perhaps we could move forward with executive action. why not give -- he is antagonizing republicans are now it's much more difficult i'm not saying impossible but much more difficult to make it happen. >> a couple of quick points.

a lot of people are suffering across the country and this touches people's lives in profound ways just like dr. did. i personally experience with the lives of her changed when students who literally if they had taken a wrong right turn in their car with her headlights were their taillight without they could be arrested and deported. so this impacts real people. secondly the president has said he was going to act and finally i would say in terms of the damage done to the process i think the president threaded the needle almost perfectly. this is probably untouchable from a legal standpoint so it's not going to be derailed that way and at some point the republicans with all due respect and i have great respect for many of the republican leaders and members, they are just going to have to get over all of these objections they keep throwing up and do something that's in their own best interest. >> let's come back to the legal. on the legislative side either

side is there any way that you can see for this congress to stop them from doing this? >> no. they're going to try to do it with the idea of somehow through vhs -- dhs not letting the press use funding for this between executive action. the truth is the agency called to implement the executive action. it's a fee-based agency. they have the money to implement it. even if the house passed the dhs budget there's a way with executive actions that don't melt the senate is going to actually include that in their bill but let's say that it does pass the senate could i think the congress would veto it. but the president veto it so the option they have is 25 states that have sued over executive action saying it's not

constitutional. perhaps the congress could get involved the separation of powers because if they don't have the discretion to do something like that. i've reviewed the federal case law and the recent supreme court decision and the supreme court has recognized that the president has, not the president law enforcement agencies have ample discretion to determine how the process communicates and what charges to file. this is not based on presidential authority but that prosecutorial discretion that law enforcement agencies have. if they go the route of the court i think they're going to lose. >> speaking sense and hope that all of this will sort of pass with time or the republicans simply say this doesn't make any sense and then leaders like diaz-balart who is here today and others that are forming various caucuses and groups will

say they need to do something. they will do it on their terms. it was her with border security move to other things but in due course this is too big an issue. >> is due course before 2016? >> i think you will see action in 15 and 16. that's my opinion. >> 16 is almost going to be impossible with the election cycle in this way. republicans have self-interest. i think the majority of conservatives republicans know that it's very difficult for them to win the white house and do better with voters. immigration is not the most important issue for latinos but it's certainly an important issue. it's a gateway a shoe-in if you don't address that issue it's difficult to get their support. to become competitive. >> i'm not sure that something couldn't happen.

it's hard in a presidential year. we all know the logic of the way the presidential year plays out but it depends on who the nominee is and who is leading and what the nominee wants to accomplish and maybe get this off the table. i think there is some possibility. >> let me ask about the impact you said in the end whether to congress or the courts the opponents are in all likelihood not going to be able to stop this and this is going to stop happening at some point before the 2016 election. >> executive action as it is now to start is the administrative order says. it would start in may this year. >> if people are actually signing up and this does go into effect how does that change the calculus in congress? does it make it more or less likely that something could happen before or after 2016? >> i think it makes it more likely congress will do something because for example has some point reasonable

republicans will recognize you don't do things like trying to do -- undo dachau which is two years into implementation touching lives and to include that is something you want to reverse. it's just almost suicidal as a long-term political strategy. >> i agree politically. the message the latino community right now is frankly one of pennon -- pettiness. i share their frustration. i understand they want to go to the courts and undo the executive actions but at the same time they will propose legislation something constructive that would be more understandable but they're not doing that. they're just saying let's undo the executive actions of the message right now is where are the bills and what are they going to propose something that addresses not only border security at the end document it. and that's a problem. i think the time is running out. i didn't think the next six months are key however on the positive side we have heard

mitch mcconnell the senate republican leader say he believe something should be done on a piecemeal basis. congress and labrador has said he wants and will introduce aid worker bill. congressman boustany said he wants to do a guestworker program. if supported by the bipartisan commission. i think they want to do something. they can't wait. at one point they have to introduce something. >> you said to me in a conversation a few months ago that you thought it was a mistake the president took executive action but the republicans simply ran on repealing the executive actions without having a solution that was tantamount to basically they were not going to be able to win the election. >> i really believe that. if you looked at the electoral map republicans are not competitive in states like

colorado and nevada and mexico. we have to change that around. the only way to do it is to really address this issue and be able to effectively engage latino community. i'm not saying by working on immigration issues all of a sudden things are going to move republican. they sought to do their work to window for latinos but i think republicans to become competitive with latino voters. >> i think it's too easy to say that the presidential election hinges on this issue. i don't know that that's the case. i think obviously republicans have a long way to go in terms of winning over a decent percentage of the latino vote and it does matter in key states. i think the republican nominee in 2016 will pledge to repeal the executive action? >> of its jeb bush you wouldn't do that. >> if he's possibly nominated without pledging to repeal the executive action no matter what

else you say? >> has criticized executive action. >> he has criticized but like most americans they don't like the way the present has proceeded. >> i may be pollyanna-ish but i think the sharpness of this is going to wear down within the congress and in the country at large and as happens sometimes in american politics reasonable people will come around and figure out that they need to take concrete actions. there's a bigger backdrop here which is we are watching countries all over the world struggle with immigration issues. we have done is basically right overall this time. want to be at doubling down and figuring out the things we done right and doing more of those. including circumstances we see in europe today where disaffected immigrants left on the sidelines you just can't do that as policy for the long-haul. even greater vocations in places like japan and spain were the countries are actually going to

decline in population because they have no immigrant strategy. immigration is absolutely a national security and national prosperity issue for the future and the republicans i just have to believe will see it through. >> i will say something to caution because i think sometimes i will problem is just tripodo. i thank is one of the hispanic community. i think both parties have been playing politics with this issue. certainly republicans have in the past congress. a lot of republicans have said things that are very unfortunate and offensive to hispanics but at the end let's remember the president did have a democratic congress the first two years of his demonstrations he chose not to do anything. even if republicans want to get something done in this congress and the house and senate they will support democrats.

let's take a guest worker program. if we legalized the undocumented cuts only dealing with the symptom of a problem. that's not solving the problem. the problem we have is our economy means foreign workers because our population is not growing fast enough. >> in 202013 every senate democrat did vote for the legislation. >> but nell a guestworker program is very limited. in fact someone like rand paul who believes in the guestworker program he voted against it. >> with all due respect i really feel like while this out not to be about politics the president really cleaned himself at the democratic party with the executive action. it wasn't about that. i believe he did it for the right reasons that the perception is fast today.

if you were to pull how the latinos feel democratic versus republican this is a major problem. >> let's put things in perspective and the discussion think executive actions have been overplayed as well. it's an estimate of 5 million people. how many undocumented people do we have? about 11 million. this is putting at risk giving legal status for all of them. includes 6 million people and even the people that would benefit from executive action who don't have legal status to go to their home country they would have to get some sort of of -- every time they leave the country. >> you're absolutely correct. this doesn't solve the entire problem. we know we need comprehensive immigration reform so having served in the bipartisan policy center we had a bipartisan consensus that kept repeating through the worst of times. we prefer legislative action and preferred a conference of solution but it just wasn't.

>> give me full vent to my shallow political side. i want to ask you, you talk a lot about latino voting. they are not the only voters. i'm just wondering if you worry at all about taking this into 2016 for democratic presidential candidate to defend executive action? >> if you pull today and i haven't seen the polls today. >> "the wall street journal" had a slight majority in favor. >> manning they were the executive action. a stronger majorities in favor of integrating immigrants in favor of comprehensive immigration reform and this can be explained as a step in that direction but the congress would enact. i don't think it's anything that any democratic candidate should be fearful of. >> do you think we have to worry about offending the idea of the person acting alone? >> i frankly don't think so. i think this really benefits democrats politically. i agree with that.

that's why i recommend republicans and again i understand the frustration. this is a complex issue that should be resolved legislatively. that is why i support unilateral action. i think the president should have waited but it's time for them to leave. going back to my earlier point saying that republicans propose a path to legal status without a special path the democrats if the republicans introduce a more market-based guestworker program and not the government will democrats go along or will they beato separates? democrats have to be very careful because if they end up killing immigration reform even in a legalization package because it's not to their liking latinos are not going to respond. >> to overcome the differences to have a package that democrats would like. >> when republicans offer

concrete things that make sense. >> security issues and legalization question special industries tech agriculture etc. and the issue of the path to citizenship which of course was in the senate legislation. rigorous long-term 13 year path. who would have imagined that democrats would have accepted that but i think democrats would have under the circumstances? under the circumstances there will be other decisions that have to be made but you will see democrats getting around to supporting it. what does it mean? >> there is a political angle there. if you look at the senate bill is not comprehensive. look at the guestworker program. going to the root of the problem. for the initial five years every year it would provide 20,000 work visas per year for our economy. 20,000 worker visas per year. that's ridiculous and after five years to cap would be 200,000. it's just not big enough.

and that begins the root of the problem. they don't have enough thesis, this is not a problem of -- the problem with the reagan immigration reform of the 80s was that we gave, we legalized trade of many people that we didn't have a mechanism to allow for the legal flows of workers that our economy needed so what happened? >> kept coming in and now we have a population of 11 million undocumented immigrants. we need to address this. i think in the other thing is i don't think you can say i think it's a caricature to say the party to republican delegation in congress is controlled by immigration or they agree with ted cruz and steve king on immigration. i think the majority of republicans want to do something. they need to get courage. they need to act but it's not a problem of substance or policy.

>> let me quickly say if the suggestion somehow that there is union or other impediments i don't see them. i think conference of immigration reform in its faces in pieces would pass and pass the legislature. on the republican side i don't think anyone is suggesting that ted cruz a loner stink -- steve king is the arbiter of what republicans can do but the process is the process is set up has given him a lot of power saying it has to be majority within the caucus. >> there are no obstacles and serious obstacles in the liberal democratic side. you make it sound like all democrats are for reforming compressor perform. >> gig we are not going to do crazy things like keeping people from ever getting a path to citizenship and reasonable solutions there's a vast

democratic majority. >> the way to put that to a test would be to try to pass a bill through the house that democrats in the house can deal with. why can't republicans get to the point of testing the democratic sincerity by passing their own bill? >> i have said this before. this is not the first time i would say this. i think the republicans lack courage. seven or eight years ago when president bush was trying to push immigration reform i was involved in the process. i saw a lot of republicans perhaps the majority that had substandard problems with immigration reform. i don't see that now. i think the problem right now is many are afraid of having their conservative credentials be questioned and they are boxed in in. this false alternative. you are either for obama's

amnesty where you are for enforcing the rule of law. there is a middle they are and there's a third alternative that is now not supporting obama's proposal what the senate did and the third alternative is the conservative alternative that is market-based against worker program is path to legal status that would provide a special path to citizenship that they should feel comfortable that as conservatives they can address their issues but it requires courage. >> i don't know if it's a failure of courage but a failure of the vision of the country misunderstanding of what the composition of the country is today in failure of appreciation of what people who look different and have different last names in different accents can contribute to the future of the country. >> i have to disagree with that wholeheartedly. that is not the problem.

>> for steve king. >> for steve king and i agree with that and i've been very critical of steve king and very critical of ted cruz who is hispanic i guess but they don't represent the majority of the party. they understand the demographics. i think it's a question of courage. and it's going to happen eventually. but just to say they are free to people who are different i wouldn't generalize. >> let me ask one thing before we bring the audience for questions. both of you think in the end the legal and legislative challenges will fail and this will begin to happen at some point probably in 2015. >> about the president threaded the needle perfect than the legal issues. >> how does the political and the legislative environment change if people start signing up in large numbers? does that make it easier to get to conference of reform and does it change the way the issue

plays out and what happens? >> is easier to get to conference of immigration reform because republicans will see all of those retrograde hedge warfare tactics failed and now they're faced with a fundamental reality that they are on the wrong side of the issue and the wrong side of history. >> if people sign up for this one happens? >> the thing is i don't think it's going to hinge on that. think once republicans see in the next couple of months by the beginning of march that legislatively they are not able to do executive action that they are not going to prevail in the courts i think they are going to start moving ahead with regular order and start introducing legislation. the dynamic changes and we will see how democrats will embrace a vision or policy on immigration. again we thought a market-based worker program i don't see how

we are being supportive of immigration to help bring in foreign workers that our economy needs to grow the economy. >> of you have the bad and if they are not able to pass legislation or if they do pass legislation and can't reach agreement with the president a republican comes in 202017 to the end of the executive order without legislation in place? >> i think if republicans pass immigration reform that includes legalization and the president vetoes it i think the tables are turned. and i think the republican candidate will say i would sign that bill into law. this is a very complex issue and i think it's very volatile and things can change. this idea right now we are in a position yes republicans look terrible with latino voters that things can really change once we get into policy discussion. i wouldn't underestimate the policy differences over guestworker program.

>> almost any scenario you can envision there would be no need to cancel the executive orders because any action that you can see republicans could reasonably take would incorporate those things at the outset. i don't think that's going to be the turning point. >> let's bring in the audience. >> henry it's good to see you. it's always a pleasure. let's be real. let's keep it real for couple of things. i think the pressure from the cities i mean we heard mayor's republican and democrat saying we have to do with the situation now. don't i think the pressure from the cities is going to pressure congress into moving in 2015 or 2016 and secondly again henry you were the mayor of san antonio and you were the mayor san antonio. you can't close the border. anybody who isn't preaching border security high wind in the

trees is not reality that i've seen. people want it over here they manage to find a way to do it. >> the cities play a part because they are more diverse as you pointed out on the last panel. they are more diverse and there is some pressure for dealing with the reality of integration and the facts that have to be addressed on the ground. i don't think it will be pressure from any one particular thing. as the keynote of the fact of the tech industry and agricultural industry and the cities as you say and immigrant activists and law enforcement and evangelicals and the churches. i think it's a bigger macro macropressure that will say this is ridiculous, let's get this done. >> just something very briefly. in terms of border security you are absolutely right. we will never be able to -- can make to improve border security? yes. we did it with a fence in

california and arizona. the area that is out of control right now is the rio grande valley. we need strategic venting their peer there were still going to have people coming in illegally? absolutely. that's why guestworker program is so important for border security. we want to have strategic fencing but we want to make sure that people want to come here to work can find her face and come here legally go back to their home country and re-enter legally. so i think that's key to border security. one last point. so far we have had local governments evangelical churches the chamber of commerce very involved. i think those are the dynamics that have to change a little bit. they can't be the business industry lobbying congress. think we need more conservative voices supporting immigration reform who have no ties to

business lobbying republicans. think conservative republicans even the party line conservatives are not going to listen to the chamber of commerce. they need political cover for conservatives and their many conservatives who are supportive of immigration reform. they also need to have courage to provide political cover for the more conservative members to support immigration reform in congress. >> you talk about 2017 scenario. you are saying if there is a republican president they would not feel the need to repeal the order because most anything that would pass on a conference of measure would be included. >> it seems to me entirely plausible scenario do we continue to have a stalemate with republican party possible they are not able to pass anything in the nominee has to pledge to repeal the order and say i will try to do something legislatively. >> i'm kind of an aca environment with a pledge to do something. and they get here and find out their have limited options.

and not even smart to do it. >> it was a republican on the situation no sex was not that different when bush was in office than when obama was in office in the sense of the senate passed it with over 60 posts and the house was unable to build a consensus to act in any direction. they don't want to deal of with that. >> you can see a scenario play out as described in the final analysis when they figure out what to repeal there are real people out there real damage in the neighborhoods in the streets and in the communities. i don't think they will have the stomach to do it. >> over here. >> by bipartisan policy center of the national chamber of commerce center for american progress and one major national conservative has highlighted the economic benefits and the impact that immigration reform and executive action. could you talk about this

economic impact? >> the economic impacts are immense everything from people unleashed to spend money that they have earned but to buy homes. alejandra becerra is an expert who just asked the question are homeownership knows enough business to the greatest percentage of household formations and candidates for homeownership are among immigrant populations. it's hugely effective. it will be unleashed in the country and that's part of why business is so strongly supportive. >> i agree with that but i think the argument we are missing is an economic argument that connects with the average american. and look, our economy is not doing well. the labor participation levels are very low. they are compared to the years

carter was in office. the jobs that are being created are part-time jobs. and it's easy to blame immigrants for that. i think we need to show americans that immigration immigration doesn't take jobs away from american workers like some people think. they actually help create jobs good-paying jobs for americans and that's an argument that resonates with americans. it takes the fairway from the debate. when the business lobby goes to congress they are talking about the need they have for foreign workers to grow their business that they are not making the argument to the american public and i think we need to have a populist economic message to american workers to say look they are helping create jobs for you. if you didn't have people in the kitchen cleaning the dishes they

would be very difficult to create good-paying jobs for waiters that are going to be taking jobs from americans. this is an important message we have failed to make and that's part of the problem we are having with a lot of american workers and middle class americans opposing immigration. >> i think he is completely correct on that point of as i just don't think it's that hard a message to articulate to americans. they inherently get it. they look in their community and see who is doing those jobs. and they see with the work ethic is. a lot of places this is going to go down easier. >> polling consistently asking about jobs americans won't do it comes out. >> i am a latina woman and part of my frustration listening about immigration reform and executive action is that immigration reform has become

more of a topic on hispanics and latinos. i feel that we personally leave out a bunch of communities that are not hispanic not latino who are going to be impacted by immigration reform. how do we address this and how do we become more inclusive? >> it's a very good question. i have an immigrant nonprofit focusing on immigrant immigration working in northwest arkansas right now is of a large latino population that went there to work in the poultry industry with very little support. our focus is large populations with little support but did we find when we get there aside from latinos? largest population of people from the marshall islands in northwest arkansas. all around the country find pockets of ethiopians and people from the pacific islands. it's just an amazing mosaic across the country. we need to do a better job of making this discussion larger than latinos. he confronted issues of language. he confronted cultural mores

within communities that it's a real challenge and we are learning as we go. let me say as an aside quickly the unstated piece of immigration reform that we really haven't focused enough on is the integration of immigrants for the long run. this is the right thing to do. i would argue it's harder for immigrants to be integrated today in society that doesn't have the same cohesiveness of the street level than we did in the last large immigrations where the church is one of parishioners and the unions wanted members and businesses wanted workers and the political organizations and machines wanted voters and they took them turkeys for thanksgiving. that doesn't exist anymore. harder in a country where we need financial literacy and computer literacy to function to integrate. we need to do a much better job of thinking about immigrant integration a matter how. >> you haven't got test questions are really quick.

>> i am with hispanic outlook and i've covered congress for several years. it has become a political thing about a latino vote that is not that big. it's not that big in some states it is. my question is when i have been covering congress for the last two years it seems the battle is between conference of mps know. republicans have passed several bills in the house and master in 2013 i saw, i attended a hearing where republicans suggested the d.r.e.a.m. act passing the traymack called the kids out every single democrat on the panel voted against it because it wasn't comprehensive. so would you say that they are willing and mr. cisneros said they would they be willing to pass the smell does or does it have to be competent for nothing. >> just speaking as one person and i don't speak for my party the inevitability will be

piecemeal if anything is going to get done while republicans control both houses of congress. >> the word comprehensive the president talks about comprehensive. without a market-based guestworker program you don't have immigration reform. you don't have a mechanism to bring enough workers from abroad to satisfy the needs of the labor market you don't have a conference of solution they are going to still come in illegally. i would say procedurally the republican approach would be piecemeal. procedurally but at the end ironically in terms of policy it would be more conferences. >> final question. >> my name is alejandra. i'm a former reporter with cbs in washington. prior to that i was at the rio grande valley abc affiliate from san antonio. >> all over the place.

>> doing immigration stories and human trafficking and whatnot and doing stories that wsa started touching on stories of day laborers stories about the fallen marine in 2009. family as undocumented talking to the family and getting that trust. i was really good at doing those stories. i think what's important is every election cycle talking about the latino vote in which the way they are going to go and i've got to break it to you. we care about homeownership, health care and education the most important thing is respect. i think the immigration narrative gets a little old. are we going to be talking about this 100 years from now? it's a travesty and it's really embarrassing. let's get it worked out. let's break your communities. as leverage with this person can

do in his this office in this organization and this agency. let's bring it all together. somebody said art and former secretary imagined bridging the societal cultural gaps. my uncle jesse is a conservative hispanic and rockwell. san antonio is one of the most segregated cities in the country but it was bridged together in the last 30 years or so. wonderful things can happen. that's all. >> i agree. i must say immigration is not the most important issue for latino voters but it's a gateway issue. it's difficult for republicans to get the support of latinos if they don't address constructive immigration issues. they are earned document from different parts of the world and we can have irish undocumented immigrants in the thousands but

let's also be real the majority of undocumented immigrants the vast majority are from latin america. that's a reality. that's why it's so important to the latin american community and build latino voters. so i think we have to address it and i'm hoping that the political process and the growth of the latino electorate will help republicans see the light and i'm hoping that when republicans end up doing something democrats will play along because we are going to see policy differences. i don't think it's going to be that simple but i'm hoping there'll be enough democrats to field -- to get something done. >> will we be talking about this 100 years? probably. [laughter] >> different people but maybe. >> well it depends on -- depends on the progress in antiaging. it's a very dynamic prod --

process. we are in an interconnected world and the movements of the currents are going to continue forever. i do believe it has everything to do with america's maintaining its place in the world for the long-haul. we have other countries that are declining in population. if you look look at who they are they have been our allies since the end of world war ii. they will have immense problems because they have not been immigrant oriented countries. they will be weaker in many respects not just population size but internal contentiousness because they haven't dealt with this. we are growing. immigrants to keep us growing. they are growing in the right direction. people want to study and learn and contribute and want to be entrepreneurs. it has everything to do with the future, and positive future for the united states so we have to work on this now and keep working on it for the long term. >> join me in thanking henry cisneros and alfonso aguilar. [applause]

.. >> to support infrastructure and talked about the state's economy and