tical about google which i want to. it is tough. easier if you're a fiction writer. [inaudible question] >> i am independent. i guess i could start another book. i am fresh out of ideas. clicks these news programs can't do anything controversial. >> is always been a problem. the other way the other model is fiction. a few publishers are trying limited experience where you sort of pay 20 bucks a month can access all to all the books. it is for the heavy reader. personally i will try to keep my stuff off of the model that model for as long as possible. far more profitable for me for you to buy my book it for me license it although i get no money for lessons

of clicks to do publish this book in the traditional way and sell it through an agent? clicks exactly the same way the music industry works. you show up with a proposal proposal for a book so much of good-natured, shop around the publishing house is an option and you get paid in advance against royalties. i have a check in advance. that's the that's the same way that a musicians advance works. you go get your tape and say it's great and break a $3 million deal off. you don't anything until you make enough money to pay back the $3 million. i talk about this in the book. the person he was thinking we should do something else was steve with steve jobs. he tried to hire doug morris with a different proposal. we'll get artists the post their stuff on the platform

and give them nothing in advance but are now what they want with the 50 percent royalty rate. yeah. right. right now for a musician can musician can be more than 8 percent, not much. the publishers of the label is taking an enormous cut that they probably are not entitled to any more clicks doing so well. clicks i love that. clicks getting back to the printing. like 23 overstocked cds or something like that of a certain printing clicks the print, literally millions of pressings of the novel. the have to print 2 million compact discs. they print one million. along the way someone will get a hair the

cd. the inventory management process protocol indicated that oversight risks were supposed to be dropped and destroyed. they question up in a metal cylinder. the employees of the plan figured out various ways. there's no way to know without being fed into it. [inaudible question] clicks and make a difference i understand what your saying. twenty-four cds. [inaudible question] clicks you only get one and then it gets taken home and turned into an mp3 and made into millions of copies. they only need one leak clicks why would they be overstocked to begin with? clicks various errors in the production line. >> why not just released back. >> they overstock it and

sometimes it's more than they need clicks why would it be so different than a consumer kid who buys a cd and uploads it himself clicks they were getting it in weeks and months ahead of the release date. they have digital crews online that would be to be the first to show up with leaked material and you get a lot of credit you were able are able to do that. infiltration of the music industry and the deeper you can get more likely you were to be first. the guys they had inside the plant really deep in and were there for years. clicks to the fbi need to find the actual person doing it to show something like this down? clicks yes. a lot of holes in the chain. in the group had very good counter posts. he was good at what he did. five years the anti-piracy's

client for for trying to put plants inside, sometimes by leaking their own albums to the group just to establish credit. like an fbi agent you can sell drugs legally to give him the bigger drug dealers and you were not able and never succeeded. eventually they had a guy flip. he turned informant and brought down the group the inside. okay. well, this was fantastic. i want to thank my host. [applauding] i want to thank all of you for coming. clicks and-- 50 minutes.

>> ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the national press club. on this very very historic day. this is a milestone. the national press club, is the world's leading professional organization for journalists. today we host the first minister of the cuban government since 1959. it is probably been closer to 70 years if we include previous governments. our speaker today is the

distinguished health minister dr. roberto morales, who arrives now. he will speak on cuba's progress on aids and cuba's contribution to the progress on aids and other sexually transmitted diseases. dr. morales, roberto morales is the health minister. he was born in cuba and holds two medical degrees. he previously served as the vice minister of health and has been a member of the cuban national assembly, a popular power since 2008. we will also have a powerpoint presentation. and the presentation is in spanish but we will be translated.

if you have any questions, please fill out the cards. has been here and the chair of the newsmakers committee, herb perone, will present the questions. we are following the same format we used at lunch, not the regular format we use with newsmakers. i have spoken too long and with that, we turn the program to dr. morales. [applause] >> thank you very much. buenos dias. translator: good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i wish to rank you the work of cuba and the elimination of transmission of hiv and co-genital syphilis.

mother to child. [speaking spanish] >> the triumph of the cuban revolution, the care of sexually transmitted infections was conducted primarily by dermatologists in dispensaries for the treatment of an arial -- of venereal diseases and leprosy. congenital syphilis was a major health problem than and each year, large number of cases were reported. >> speaking [speaking spanish]

>> in 1962 free care was established at all hospitals and case reporting was improved, however, health coverage was insufficient and mpaa illogical control -- epidemiological control actions were nonexistent. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] >> in 1972, the program was brought under review and updated. a different approach was taken. higher priority to the finding of cases, research and

epidemiological analysis all of , which was performed at community clinics under the view they had to be integrated into the community health care model. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] >> it is then, that the mother and child care program was established. the program that has been subjected to continued improvement, and constitutes the platform for the prevention of maternal and congenital syphilis. care at prenatal, delivery, and postpartum levels is conducted by skilled health personnel, and 99.9% of births take place in

health institutions. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: every pregnant woman receives a minimum of 10 prenatal visits by the family doctor and attends consultations with specialists in gynecology and obstetrics. care extends to monitoring the health of the mother including conducting serological tests for syphilis and hiv, which also comprise of the sexual partners. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: annually, about 1.5 million tests for syphilis are performed of which over 300,000 are done to pregnant women surpassing the 95% coverage. since 1980, the annual rate of syphilis has remained below the elimination criteria set forth by the original strategy in 2010. in the past four years, the rate has been between zero and 0.04 percent for births. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: since the beginning of the 1980's by decision of the government, the operational group to fight aids was established. which designs, develops and end -- implement policies based on response to the hiv epidemic. this task force comprises social sectors emma organizations and institutions of civil society, ensuring an inter-sector approach to the response. it works at national provincial, and community levels and is advised by the technical committee on hiv aids. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: the program fort -- for production and control of hiv-aids was developed in 1986 based on known public health programs that have been previously applied in the country for the prevention and control of other diseases. in particular, existing experiences in the control of sexually transmitted diseases were used, and actions were implemented aimed at the early detection of cases. the research, notification, educating the population, and making available prevention, care and treatment services to those affected. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: this gives us accessibility and guarantee research and the training of human resources and the introduction of technology which have ensured access by the population to prevention diagnosis, care, and treatment. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: the educational

component has featured among its core strategies, informational dissemination, raising awareness, communication counseling, the selling of condoms, and inter-sector and community approach. the actions implemented in growing participation by the population, people with hiv and other key groups have had a positive impact on indicators of behavioral change within the cuban population. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: until december 2014, there were 21,922 people diagnosed with hiv. 3652 have died and 18,270 were

living with hiv. prevalence in the population 15-45 years of age is 0.25% dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: males are the most affected, representing 3/4 of those with the disease and men who have sex with other men make 72.8% of all diagnosed cases and 89% of diagnosed males. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: for the prevention of mother to child transmission of hiv, the program applied and adapted to each given moment and in line with the national contexts, the scientifically recommended actions. conducting hiv testing at the first prenatal visit, cesarean delivery in the suspension of breast-feeding were the only preventive measures being applied up to the late 1980's. the transmission rate than -- then exceeded 40%. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: performing quarterly hiv serology through pregnancy screening of sexual partners combined and try to -- retroviral therapy, measurement to monitor its effectiveness cesarean delivery, preventive treatment of the newborn and their clinical and laboratory follow-up make up the preventive strategy we apply. the rate of mother to child transmission of hiv has been at or below 2% during the last three years. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: the care and treatment of people living with hiv is integrated into the network of health care services. it is provided by the family doctor and nurse offices and also involves medical specialist s from the local clinic who have been trained in hiv-aids. with participation by the existing specialized services when individual needs arise including referral to secondary , and tertiary care institutions if necessary. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: in cooperation with the global fight to fight aids tuberculosis and malaria, it has been created to ensure access to special monitoring studies and today we have nine laboratories and five viral load laboratories. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: cuba has made great efforts to ensure access to free retroviral treatment to those requiring it. research, development and local production of drugs, access to care provided by the national

health system, and technical cooperation received have made such results possible. today, 13,075 cubans receive dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: in response to the commitment made at the 50th directing council of the pan-american health council in 2010, cuba began its validation process for the elimination of mother to child transmission of hiv and congenital syphilis in november 20 2013, conveying it in a formal request through the pan-american health organization. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: once the country report was submitted, a process of exchange began between the national team and the original advisory validation committee. a validation visit was organized for the fourth and fifth of december, 2014. during this visit, regional experts assessed the reliability of the report, dated, and views and exchanged these with a local team in the validation visit validate this. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: the original validation committee was made up of experts in different areas and observers belonging to the world health organization and the pan-american health organization, unh, unicef, the international community of women living with hiv, sensors for the control of the united states and others amid visited different provinces. family nurse officers and hospitals in maternity homes and information processing units

laboratories, and they interviewed program managers and beneficiaries of this -- of these services. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: the original advisory committee concluded its visit and expressed its assessment and announced the following steps, a process that concluded yesterday, june 30 with the recognition of cuba having attained the validation regarding the elimination of these diseases. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: thank you very much. [applause] >> you stand up here, sir. thank you very much, minister. we forgot to point out that this

occasion is historic because -- because it is today that we open the embassy in cuba and here. we are especially honored that you decided to speak today. mr. minister. herb perrone will field your questions and ask the questions. i think he can be heard without the microphone. >> let me stand back here so everybody gets the sound. our first question is from our former president. how will the restoration of u.s.-cuba relations lead to cooperation between the u.s. and cuba to advance public health?

dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: we believe that reestablishment of relations with the united states like we do it many other countries with which we have relations in the fields of science and medical science dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: will allow us to exchange experiences and knowledge among us all construct projects that give

response to problems involving the population on both sides of the world. >> do you have an opinion about obama care or the affordable care act? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: we don't have full information that would allow us to provide a view. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: what i can say is for the last few months and years we have been receiving visits by the cdc who have accompanied us on scientific events. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: and other personalities from the field of health care and science in general. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: it will show a high level of commit toward the solution of the problems of the populations. >> how will the reestablishment of diplomatic relations and recognition, mutual recognition, advance the dissemination of cuban knowledge and science here and throughout the world? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: we believe it will allow for the reality behind the

cuban health care system to be better known. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: because many times, the interpretation shows lack of knowledge on this system. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: cuba extends cooperation to more than 80 countries. we today have -- we have more than 50,000 health cooperation workers working abroad. and more than 25,000 of them are doctors. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: we believe cuban health care is free for access to everyone regardless of the color of their skin and no discrimination is made as to their political beliefs. it is based on a principle which is internationalism. that is why we based it on sharing that which we have. indeed, the main resource available for the cuban revolution and medical services are human resources. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: this allows us to say today we have 7.7 doctors per every 1000 inhabitants. which is the same as one doctor every 130 people. with them having the highest value in our society and a high scientific level in these doctors. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: which is why we believe exchanging experiences and cooperating is the right path as shown by how we work towards the ebola epidemic in africa in which cuba was participating and so was the united states and it was working. i believe that is a road we can travel. >> will normalization of relations lead to public/private partnerships? partnerships with u.s. companies to advance health initiatives in cuba and the united states? dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: public health in cuba is free, regionalized, and he will be continuing to be free and regionalized and accessible. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: there is a foreign investment i ever national assembly in 2014. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: which provides opportunities for entities to participate in cuba and we believe with the reestablishment of relations, the u.s. will take advantage of such possibilities

as of course we would help when the u.s. blockade of cuba is eliminated. >> with the reduction in infection and mortality rates from hiv, what is being done in cuba to maintain a high level of public awareness of the risks of risky sexual behavior? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: the cuban health care has its main strength and primary care. with in it, the program of the family doctor and family nurse.

which allows us to have an office for a family doctor and family nurse every 1095 inhabitants. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: we insist that the main contribution can be made by educating the population via mass media. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: so that our population can be aware of the risks.

this has allowed us to have an impact on health indicators. which, as we know, in a 50% level by the living style of the person. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: in raising awareness about health care, we are also promoting self-care of the individual. >> [speaking cuban] translator: not only when it comes to hiv -- sexually-transmitted diseases and hiv, passive hiv. but over and above in the risk factors that lead to

the main causes of death for cubans. today we have a life expectancy of's 78.5 years. we expect to reach 80 years of life expectancy with the expectation of people being able to live their lives normally inserted into society. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: the main causes of death among cubans today is cancer, heart disease is, and vascular diseases. translator: that is why we are working on risk habits like smoking, exercises, a healthy diet, a reduction in the

consumption of alcohol. this will allow us to have a greater impact in the health of cubans. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: in connection with hiv and syphilis -- with these steps, of the validation which has certified that we have eliminated the transmission of mother to child in these diseases. which should position us to continue working so syphilis and hiv cease being a health risk for the cuban population. >> do you have any special programs or special outreach tailored specifically to gay men?

dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: we have a sex education program going on in cuba. which is coordinated by the national health education center which is under our ministry. so that it allows for the cuban population to have an ever greater respect for sexual preferences of people. we have a whole program devoted to these ends. where our core of

actions are implemented especially around weeks that we have in may devoted to these issues. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: when we have a special day devoted to the fight against homophobia. i believe in that respect we have taken important steps. >> how do you explain the fact that in spite of sanctions against cuba, cuba has developed one of the best health care systems in the region? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: cuba has its platform or health care system established from the very moment

of the victory of the cuban revolution in 1959. when we only had 6000 doctors. stationed mostly in the big cities -- of which nearly 50% of these doctors migrated mostly to the united states. we had just one medical faculty the at the university of havana. our priority for our government since 1959 has been the health of the cuban population. which has allowed us to develop our human capital.

today, we have, for instance, 13 medical science universities. translator:two independent medical faculties and the latin american medical school. which has allowed us to train the amount of professionals i mentioned. which in the case of doctors, are 82,000. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: and which has

especially allowing or medical development and research to spearhead health development. we should also point out that we have been able to reap the results that have been due to the development of the pharmaceutical and biotech hologic industry in cuba -- biotechnological industry in cuba. for instance, the vaccination program of 13 vaccines against aids -- against aids vaccines -- these are nationally produced. we can say that out of a basic amount of medications -- made up of 857 medications, 68%

of those medications are nationally produced among which we can mention the retroviral which allows us to provide treatment for all those patients who need the treatment and to have them free of charge. development of human capital. the strengthening of primary care, medical care, via the family doctor and family nurse and the development of cuba biological/pharmaceutical industries. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: with a strong component of inter-sector participation and community participation. based on expressed political will on health care which has become a result of the cuban revolution. >> is the normalization of relations going to help you to advance public health with maybe needed medical supplies are easier access to medications? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: we believe, yes. the effects of the economic, commercial, and

financial blockade to cuba has been higher than $60 billion. regrettably, how it has hurt health care and how much suffering it has caused cannot be calculated. we therefore believe the reestablishment of diplomatic relations and the lifting of the blockade should allow us to buy technology and products that today cannot reach her country and will be to the benefit of the population in cuba. >> how will the normalization of relations lead to greater scientific corporation between

the u.s. and cuba? -- greater scientific cooperation between the u.s. and cuba? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: scientific integration, i believe it will allow us to build proposals as generally happens with peers in the given fields of science. so that we believe it will have an impact on our on problem solving concerning our own population and in the cooperation we extend to other

people and other nations in the world. >> what would you say is the most important benefit to the cuban people of normalization of relations? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: in general, the issues along we could work we have to wait to build the expected steps that will be taken. and then we will see, based on this concrete actions, once implemented, we can do that which is possible. >> what is your agenda here in washington for this visit?

will you meet with congress or other u.s. officials? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: indeed, our visit has been due to an invitation we have received from the director of the pan-american health organization. with the aim of granting cuba the certification and validation of having eliminated mother to child hiv and syphilis. dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: and we, of course, were happy to accept this invitation to speak with you but over the next few hours, we will go back home.

>> do you believe your compliments in the area of reducing std infections will lead to an increase in medical tourism to cuba? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: indeed, the year 2014 as has been publicly announced saw growth in tourism and during the first half of this year, it has continued to grow. so there is no doubt that going to a country where there is the level of safety that is there, that is available in our country

and all that allows for a public health system like ours favors the strategy involving health tourism. >> this would be our final question -- what lessons can cuba teach the u.s. and other nations about advancing public health? dr. morales: [speaking spanish] translator: the first ring that needs to exist is the willingness to push for the health of the population in the different places.

cuban devotes 28% of its budget to health care and welfare and 9.7% of its gross domestic product. that shows the will that has existed and the determination to guarantee the health care of our population. along those lines, it's responsible to promote health care systems that are universal -- that have a universal provision of care. dr. morales: [speaking spanish]

translator: we could say that should include seeing health care from the point of view of the ministries of public health but health care has to be seen from the point of view of life. in that respect, and inter-sector approach and an involvement of the community becomes indispensable. i believe we have our own model for health care and every country observing their own characteristics should have its own proposal. i believe this is also a formula for the building of a better world to which we have all been called for.

also, there is a need to preserve the human species. thank you very much. [applause] >> we at the press club are very grateful for this superb presentation and this very historic presentation. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> we also have a wonderful audience. [applause] >> thank you all very much. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

our complete schedule at c-span.org. >> washington journal" continues. host: steve moore is back at our desk. he is an economic expert whose advice has been much in demand i republican leaders, especially those seeking the 2016 republican presidential nomination. we want to start with your recent piece in the "national review," where you write that president reagan's tax plans have been wrestled as the campaigns get under, even by some republicans. guest: good to be with you

john. and thanks to c-span. well, you are right, his tax plans that were put into place in the 1980's -- hillary calls it the federal trickle-down economics, that also some on the right are wondering what was it that ronald reagan really wanted to do in terms of changing taxes? it is my believe, two things, first of all, when ronald reagan entered office, the highest income tax rate was 70%. that is very high tax rate. for every additional dollar you earn $.70 by definition with the government and you only got to keep $.30. people like jack cap and the "wall street journal" editorial board -- people want investing and people will working less because taxes were so high. when reagan left office, the

highest rate went down 28%. over that time, the share of taxes paid by the rich actually increased. so this goes by the way of john f. kennedy who said if you are more revenue, cut the tax rates, don't raise them. and i just had to clarify that. he also believed that by cutting tax rates, you could make the economy grow faster. obviously, that happened big-time in the 1980's. host: what would be your advice to republican candidates when the democrats say republicans are too focused on cutting taxes for the wealthiest americans? guest: that is the charge, so that is the charge they will make over and over again. let's talk about who will the americans are. those are people who own and operate and invest in small businesses. if you want jobs in this country, you need small businesses. and if you put more money into those businesses, it is pretty

self-evident that businesses will be able to hire more workers. i think republicans have to connect those dots that this isn't about giving warren buffett more money, it is about helping small businesses keep more of their own money so they can invest more in equipment and hire more workers. i think that is the case the republicans have to make. you look throughout history the 1920's when tax rates were cut, the economy boomed. i mentioned kennedy in the 1960's. that was a huge, huge boom to the economy in the 1960's. aunt i would even tell hillary clinton that your husband, or he would -- was president, he cut taxes, too. so i think the history is on the side of those who cut taxes. i don't think anybody is saying -- we have to address also to

help with this failing economy you have to this is the spec is the economy, was the system monetary policies, and all these with something to the effect is our one big component. host: and if our viewers want to join in on the conversation, phone lines are open. we are (202) 748-8000 for talking a democrat -- we are (202) 748-8000 for talking with you more. -- you have a formal role with any of the campaigns right now? guest: so, i have been working the last year informally, not on his payroll or anything, what with rand paul. he is just a fascinating political figure in a think you'll make a big market this race. the kind of libertarian wing of the republican party, which is what he percent to 25% of the

republican electorate. and we put this plan together, we call it the flat and fair tax because it has a flat income tax of 14%. after you make $50,000 of income. your first $50,000 would be tax-free. then on the business side, it is sort of a consumption tax. this would pay essentially a 14.5% consumption tax. and we think this would be rocket fuel for the economy. host: let's let rand paul introduce his own plan. here's a video he put out about the fair and hot taxpayer. [video clip] >> a tax cut for every single american, and the guy with the most lawyers and accountants doesn't matter. you do. my plan will cut taxes for everyone. it will end corporate welfare and special tax breaks. it will create jobs and it will get the irs out of your life. it is the first part of my plan to defeat the washington

machine. this will shake up washington and wall street, no doubt, but i'm not running for their approval. i am running to take our government back. with this plan, it starts today. host: just part of the video of rand paul introducing his fair and flat tax plan. steve moore helped, but that plan. before we get the calls, just some response that has come up about the fair and flat tax plan. dean clancy writes, among the issues that he has with the fair and flat tax plan is that the plan preserves a surprising array of the post and exemptions, including charitable deductions, child credit, the earned income credit, and the tax exclusion for workplace health benefits. retaining these may seem politically prudent, but is also destroys the plan's simplicity. guest: look, there are thousands of loopholes in the tax system.

and we do preserve about four or five of them. and i did want to keep in and income tax credit for low income people who are working. the same thing with charitable. if people make contributions to a charity, the senator believes that to be something that is allowed. but everything else, all of the other thousands of loopholes are gotten rid of. that, by the way, i think is one of the big attractions of this. you just played that tape of senator paul. i think the way to sell this plan to america is to say, look, all the special interest provisions, they were put into effect because of lobbyists because of who has the most political muscle in washington. now we have a tax system that is a disgrace. it does not work for america. some businesses pay nothing some businesses have to pay 35%. if you want to take power away from washington and restore

power to mainstream america take away the power of the structure, which is the tax system. host: let's bring our viewers in. deborah is up first, the line for democrats. caller: good morning. hi. i am calling just because i have been a tax lawyer for four years. doing namely estate planning. i have worked for dozens of wealthy people, many small business owners, and i never met one of them that got up in the morning and work any less hard because the tax rates were up the tax rates are down, or more hard. the taxes were just not a factor. they are motivated by other things and, in fact, one of them told me he would like democrats to be an office because at least he made money under democrats. he didn't mind paying taxes if he was making money, but he would prefer to make money. i think the motivation is, can you sell your products? guest: taxes matter, too

obviously, so if you are texting somebody at 60% or 70%, what happens is because of all these loopholes, as you know, you have been a tax lawyer, you essentially shift resources and investment from the kind of marketplace to what the government is hoping you invest in. we have the most amazingly ridiculous things in the tax code. you can get tax cuts for investing in wind mills and things like that. get rid of that. get rid of all the loopholes and make it really simple. cut those rates down as low as possible. by the way, the estate tax is one of the most evil taxes of all because people have worked their whole life, people like my father who is 92-year-old -- 92 years old but now the government is going to come along and take half of that away from him when he dies?

and not allow that to be passed on to his children. so there are all sorts of -- and by the way, rand paul pot tax system -- rand paul's tax system would get rid of the double taxation. host: the line for republicans new hampshire, kyle is waiting. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is -- back in the 1950's when the high rate was 91%, we had the biggest economic expansion. and because of the high rate, it's made more sense to reinvest your money back into the business and have the government subsidize 91% of it. and it made more sense because they were more inclined to pay their help more money because it was tax deductible and they would rather give it to the help than the government. so why shouldn't we go back to a high rate?

and if you look at how much the corporate people pay in taxes, they paid 700, while working people on income tax paid $1.2 trillion. plus social security paid another $1 trillion. guest: just one point of interest is that under the rand paul affect, there is no payroll tax. the payroll tax is eliminated. when you ask about the issue of fairness, working-class people get a huge tax break under his plan because let's say you make $40,000 of income, you are going to get a $3000 tax cuts on the payroll. i don't think anyone really thinks that we should go back to a 90% tax rate, although bernie sanders may think that. if we had a 90% tax rate, the investment capital of this country would flee out of the united states and it would go to other places. the last two callers have sort

of suggested that it doesn't matter, and the reason i think that is wrong is look at what has happened with our corporate taxes. we have the highest corporate tax of anybody that we compete within the world. what is happening is companies like good king and met tronics and other major fortune -- med tronics and other major fortune 500 companies are moving to other countries. under this plan, we reverse that. one of the things that people who are concerned about the slow economy and unemployment should find very attractive about this plan is if we put into place a 14.5% flat tax, could you imagine how much capital -- we would just soak up capital from all over the world. they would locate in the united states. that means jobs for americans. in other words, this is a tax plan that will in swiss jobs to the united states, rather than what we have done in the last 50

years. host: we are talking with steve moore, a visiting fellow. he is also the subject of this piece from earlier this year -- the ruling of a washington wonk. behind the scenes, every presidential candidate is fighting over a small pool of advisors. he is here taking your calls. julian is waiting in massachusetts. the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. given the rather heavy concentration of wealth at the moment in the top 1% of the population and also given that george h.w. bush, a well-known republican president acknowledges the pragmatic decision why is it part of the republican platform right now to lower taxes? guest: well, you mentioned george h w bush. he did raise taxes and that is why he lost the election in 1992. not very advisable to raise

taxes if you want tuesday in power. that event changed history i think in a way that was very negative for the republicans. the economic point is this. we are -- this is a global economy. we just saw this trade deal past -- pass. we have to compete against every country in the world. if you want to do that, we need a world-class tech system that creates jobs for americans. i don't think there's anyone on the planet that would look at our tax system today and all the loopholes and the incredible power of the lobbyists and say this is a really good tax system. no, we should bring it up, start over, and create something really simple that great jobs for americans. host: truth to power wants to talk history. reagan raised taxes many times. i know, i paid them. guest: he did three or four

times, but overall, the taxes were lower. when reagan came in, the first thing he did was that income taxes 25% to 35% across the board. and then we reformed the entire tax system. got the tax rate down to 50% and 28%. by the way i would say that that 1986 tax act, which cut the top tax rate to 20%, you will not believe this, but it is true , that passed 97-3 in the united states senate. so there was a very star consensus. even people like bill bradley said, yeah, we have to do this. the one thing that concerns me is the democrats don't team to be interested in this issue anymore. they don't seem to want to fix the tax system. they just want to keep raising rates, which i think would be very negative for the country. host: you say we, talking about

president reagan, research director on privatization has held several different roles including how to president -- including founder and president. caller: out of a -- caller: morning on the that taxes are complicated. i have been looking at them since 1975. and so often, they change from year to year. which does make it difficult. i know that some people are talking about flat taxes. maybe that might help. and or the loopholes, but a taxes attacks. if it is taxed, then people will understand that this is attacks. so in general, people will pay

that tax. but time to do change. what my real question is this. why don't we start thinking about tax system compared to health care? if we distribute the health care of the entire company, for example if those 34 governors would take on the health care, that will level out the health care system. also, it would grow companies because of companies have employers that they can hire, the companies can grow. host: steve moore, on the health care system. guest: it is a great question because the health care system in united states has sort of revolved around the tax code. and what you are going to be hearing about the latest of this particular topic of rand paul's

flat tax, but as we think about alternatives to obamacare, then what do we -- -- what do we -- what we put in place of obamacare? and without legacy is a system where whether you are individual tax father or an employee, you get a tax break to buy health insurance. that way, people wouldn't have to get health insurance themselves. if you buy this to the employer, it is tax deductible. so there are also to problems. but we keep changing the tech system every year. it is exactly right. that is exec or what is wrong. there was something like 500 different changes in the tax code in the last five or six years. congress keeps tinkering with this. if you put in place something like the flat tax, it is done it is over. we don't have to tinker with it anymore. you don't put -- hopefully, i'm being hopeful here, but we have a system that can stay in place

for 20 or 30 years. nobody would want to be on the ways and means committee because there is nothing to buy or sell. why do you think so many of these members of congress want to be on the tax writing committee? the cousin that is -- the -- -- because that is how they get lobbyists. host: good morning, mike. caller: good morning. i want to put a couple things out that i think the gentleman is living out and i think a rather important. one of them is that every time a president presided over the reduction of tax rates, not only did it left the country out of a recession, but it also created money for the treasury. it is kind of counterintuitive, but cutting tax rates creates so much more economic activity because the investing class is willing to put capital at risk of loss in business ventures to

a much greater extent. and what creates jobs really is the fact that people are willing to put their money at a risk of loss and ventures. when more businesses are being either bolstered or founded because people are willing to put their money at risk of loss because they think that when they succeed, they are going to keep more of what the investment pays them back, you can only expands the economy. the second thing i want to point out -- i remember the articles that were written during the 1990's when the tax rates have been cut -- excuse me, during the bush administration when the tax rates have been cut and the experts were writing in places like the "new york times" how surprised they were an astounded that the rich were paying more taxes than ever before because the tax rates had been lowered. they couldn't understand it. host: steve moore, i will let

you jump in. guest: that is the point of my "national review" article. every time tax rates have come down, we have actually gotten more growth in the economy. and as this gentleman points out, the share of taxes paid by the rich has actually increased. john f. kennedy said this very eloquently. he said this in, i think, late in 1962 that it is a paradoxical truth that when tax rates are too high, tax revenues are too low. he said the surest winter raise the revenues for the treasury is to cut the tax rates now. that is absolutely true. it is 250 years ago and it is still true today. when the top tax rate was 70% in this country in 1980, the richest 1% pay 90%. when the tax rate was cut to 20%, the richest 1%. almost 30%.

today, they pay almost 40%. when you have 1% of the population paying 40% of the income tax, that is a pretty progressive tax system. but i believe they pay almost more under this type of flat text we are talking about. host: and as you point viewers to that july addition, -- if our viewers want to read the full piece there. lansing, michigan, the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. we at talk? good morning. thank you for letting me speak on your program. i heard you state that talking point, the republican talking point earlier that republicans are committed to the improvement of conditions that will benefit small businesses. if there is such a love for small businesses over

corporations, why is it that subsidies are available to corporations but not too small businesses. bailouts are available to corporations but not small businesses. no big contracts are available to small businesses. grants to cover mergers are available to corporations, but not small businesses. corporations are getting the title, job providers. host: we got your point. guest: i think he is exactly right. i work with rand paul and another faction to eliminate corporate welfare. you're going to have to look at rand paul very closely. he wants to eliminate all the special interest favors and all the programs that benefit corporations and not small

businesses. we need to create an equal playing field. a good example is the program called the export import plan. the big fortune 500 companies -- here is the interesting things. republicans want to get rid of that corporate welfare program. republicans and democrats near to go after corporate welfare. we could save $100 billion a year. we have to give corporate america half the dole. i am 100% with you. we did have been bailouts of insurance companies and banks and i think it was a big mistake. host: you mention the export income bank expiration, we will be talking about that in our next segment. we will be talking about that with a washington post reporter. read is waiting in the union washington. caller: good morning.

thank you c-span. i will have a quick couple of comments. i am a libertarian like you are. every time you're on air, i agree with you. i wish the media would explain this, and rand paul would win the election if they did because i am for that. to point out the circle that crosses over between liberals and republicans. i wanted to touch on that. if he could get that point across, to show liberals on the left, like the michigan caller who i agree with that 100%. it needs to be emphasized. i like to say that people need to understand that if you reduce corporate tax to almost nothing corporations in america would have a choice. for every two dollars that are

produced, one dollar has to go to wages. if they could reduce corporate tax to nothing, the government would realize that the payroll taxes that is offset from that money it would be realized in payroll taxes. it would be produced organically. organically, corporations would have to pay more for every worker. that is my comment. guest: i think that is right. one of the things that is attractive about rand paul is that he is, i am a republican, i want to see the robins win in 2016, rand paul appeals to a base that public's don't normally win. he is treated like a rock star at college campuses.

he believes in civil liberties. he wants to create jobs. he does very well with blacks and hispanics. and to those of the people that if they are going to win the elections, they have to bring those voters to the republican party. i would say this, if republicans want to win this election, if we are going to turn this country around we have technology fact that what we have done for the last 8-10 years isn't working. that is the last couple of bush years, but also this recovery. this has been a healthy recovery for americans but we have less income today than when the recovery started. president obama is saying hello the economy is doing, and people are saying, what economy is he talking about? that is the issue that applicants have to address. host: we have talked about rand paul quite a bit.

what other republican candidates are you advising? guest: -- he has become a superstar on the stage. i started an organization called the committee to unleash prosperity with steve forbes. we're trying to educate candidates. one of the policies we have to put in place to get this economy moving at double the rate of growth we have now. by the way we could do that. this economy could be growing twice as fast. we could be creating twice as many jobs. we have the right monetary policy if you put them in the growth direction, you will see that i am an optimist about the u.s. economy. we have a president who seems to think that -- hillary clinton runs around the country and says

businesses don't create jobs. that's negativity has an impact on the way the economy performs. we need a president who wants our businesses to succeed. i'm not so sure that we have that. host: one more question. do you expect to take a formal role with one campaign? guest: i may do that. i have been working so closely with rand paul, i think he is a superstar. i worked with scott walker, and i think marco rubio has a lot going for him. i meeting in a couple of weeks with jeb bush. it is a wide-open open field right now for the republicans. i don't have a clue who the republican nominee is going to be. host: miriam in alstom, virginia. caller: good morning. i would like to talk about the double taxation that republicans

and you have just talked about on estate tax. i do not understand it. i have tried to understand your perspective and i don't get it, because if i could get $10 million from inheritance and put it in the stock market and over the years, it makes another $10 million, and i only take out $1 million to live on because i have another job, that is $9 million. when i pass it onto my children, it is never going to have been taxed one bit. so how does that double tax work with a person who gets a paycheck every week or month they will be paying taxes every single time. a rich person who has led money making money, that is not being taxed twice. they are getting off scott free. guest: that is a great question.

let's say you have a person who has made a fortune. let's say they have $10 million. they have it through their business. let's say they are 70 years old. one option is to spend every penny. live lavishly, champagne for dinner, and died broke. if you do that, the $10 million you pay no taxes on it. but i think the righteous thing to do good for families and the economy is to continue to save and reinvest that money in the business. if you do that, then the government will take as much as 50% of that away from you. that is when the double taxation comes into it. this limit makes a very important point. we ought to tax that a state the money that is passed on, at the capital gains rate.

but don't tax it at 45% of the estate tax, because that takes it away. do you how much money we get from the estate tax every year? it is an inconsequential tax. if we got rid of it, we would hardly miss it. it raises so little money. but the army of people who do estate tax planning and lawyers, it is just a dumb tax. host: wayne is on from the line from the republicans. caller: how do you do? i would like to have your views on the value of the tax, maybe a liberating -- maybe illuminating the 52 pages of tax regulations. i know mr. huckabee is talking about fair tax, and i'm in a --

i am aware that the best tax except it is a hidden tax, it can be escalated without the public knowing about it. granted, had we started that thing, you would have to have that embedded in the constitution as it could increase over a percentage. guest: you have the story exactly right. on the side of the rand paul tax plan, it is essentially -- host: the 14%? guest: right. a business takes its receipts and the docs the expenses, computers, etc.. and they pay the tax on the difference. and as it goes through the business cycle, they pay that back. here is one element of the tax

that people find interesting. one of the things that is very attractive about the rand paul business tax under our current system, we tax will be export, but we don't tax for import. it is the stupidest system ever devised. we basically encourage corporations to move abroad. let's a toyota builds a car in tokyo. and it brings that car into the united states to sell here. as soon as it hits the border, it would hit a 14.5% tax to come into the united states. now, let's take the car built by general motors in indiana that is sold in japan, there is no tax. so we are not going to tax the things we sell abroad, but if you want to bring in something from outside, it is a consumption tax.

imagine how many more manufacturing jobs are you a be able to have here in the united states. i think rand paul should be going to the unions and saying that this is going to be creating a lot more jobs here because it gives american manufacturers an advantage over those other companies they compete with in china and mexico. so if someone is worried about jobs in the united states, take a close look at the rand paul plan. host: stephen moore held several months to design that plan. he is with us for the next few minutes. we have packed on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i would like to ask how this revised tax plan will affect the huge debts that we need to pay down. guest: that is a great point. rand paul believes we can cut government spending and taxes at the same time.

he thinks american families deserve a tax cut. we looked at a lot of models and asked what happens to the economy if we put this in place. and what we found, this was the tax on nation, it is a nonpartisan organization, they found that this would be like rocket fuel for the economy. over 10 years, the economy would be 10% larger if we put it in place. so if we do that, you have a much bigger economy, more people working, businesses making more money, less people on welfare the debt starts to fall. you have fewer welfare expenditures. and you have more people paying taxes. so that is the best way to bring the deaths down in my opinion. grow the economy much more quickly and by the way, again this happened in the 1960's and

the 1920's. even when clinton cut the tax plan. we had a huge revenue increase. host: will in california, line for independents. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. first of all sir the tax rate for the rich is 34.5%. i have heard warned buffett and mitt romney say that they pay somewhere around 0%-14%. how much does wall street make every day? not a year. every day? if you add that up, take the percentage between a 40%-30 4%. that is 20%. so the 20% that they are not paying, that is where all the money is. if you do the math on it. if we would just make wall

street pay their fair share we wouldn't have any problem. reduce to five years, you have more money than you could shake a stick at. you could pay for everything and you could have jobs. host: do the math for us. guest: this is a great point. at the heritage foundation we have done a lot of analysis of what people want from the tax system. people want jobs and fairness. that is the number one thing that people want associated with the tax system. here is the way that the tax should appeal to people. right now, we have a system that has so many loopholes and special interest favors, that you and i could have the same income and you could pay 3-4 times more than me and taxes. if we get rid of the loopholes and the credits, and everybody

has to pay their fair share, what we found is that the biggest adduction, who takes advantage of it? it is the rich people. the top 1% gets half of the deductions. if you get rid of them, there is nowhere for warren buffett or bill gates or lebron james to shield their income. there will be no where to put it, no loophole to put it in to protect it. there are companies that don't pay tax who are profitable. that is not fair. why? because they use windmills and all this other stuff. if you want them to pay their fair share, take a look at this plan. host: stan from kentucky, on the line for democrats. caller: good morning.

he just covered what i was going to say. the top 1% has 90% of the wealth but isn't paying that amount in taxes. but i am afraid that this hurts the poor more than the wealthy. guest: here is why i would disagree. if you are a family of four and you make less than $50,000 a year or less, you pay zero income tax. so the tax only starts after $50,000 of income. the tax plan a limited the payroll tax. there is no 7.5% that is deducted from a worker's salary. so if you are making $40,000 a year and are just getting by, you have 7.5% that is taken out of your paycheck. that is no longer there, that is a big pay increase for the average american.

so those two things make it beneficial for people with low incomes. the most important way to help poor people or middle-class people is to make the economy grow faster. create better paying jobs for americans. americans want to work high paying jobs. the problem isn't that there aren't enough jobs, there aren't, but we are not creating the high paying jobs that we used to create. if you have a tax system like this you will see wages rise at a more rapid rate than they are now. host: i want to ask you about the club for growth that you helped found. what role do you expect the club to play in the 2016 election? do you think it will endorse in the 2016 race? guest: you know, that will be interesting. i think they will play a useful role helping identify republican

voters, which of these 14-how many candidates are there now? what these candidates are for. who is for free trade? who is for getting rid of regulations? republican voters are going to have to do a lot of compare and contrast. i will just say this on the way out, i believe this sincerely. the american economy is ready to explode. we are ready for one of the biggest booms we have ever seen and the country's history. we just had to the policies right and a president who wants businesses to succeed. my old boss, mitt romney, he used to say that policies love jobs but they hate employers. we need to regard businesses not

as enemies that as the engines of growth. the entrepreneurs in this country who make our economy work, this plan rewards those countries -- those companies. host:that's just a few of the events

this summer on c-span's tv. >> the friedman foundation for education choice yesterday released a survey about public opinion on k-12 education. the group supports expanding charter schools, private school vouchers, and other alternatives to the traditional public school system. from the american enterprise institute, this is one hour and 15 minutes. michael: good afternoon, everybody. great to have you here at the american enterprise institute. for the release of the 2015 schooling in america survey, and this is becoming a little bit of a tradition, i think, between us and the friedman foundation which is headquartered in indianapolis and they released the same poll here last year and we are excited to hear what 2015 has in store. for those of you who are following along at home,

watching us on the live stream here, the hash tag for those of you that would like to participate for today's event following along on twitter #schoolinginamerica. how it's going to work, they will present the initial findings, our i will moderate some questions and we will open up to the crowd. feel free when that happens, you can raise your hand and we will talk about that. those of you following along at home can tweet will stop coming up, we'll have the research director for the freedom -- friedman foundation for educational choice with the findings. >> good afternoon, everybody. i'm the research director at the friedman foundation for educational choice. we are a nonprofit nonpartisan

organization that conducts research on school choice issues. we use our research-based to inform and educate legislators policymakers, advocates at the state levels and around the country. before we get too far, i want to give a special thanks to rick and mike and the education policies study team for hosting today's event will stop it is a great opportunity to share these results and findings. today, we are releasing the latest installment of the schooling in america survey. we have been doing this for a few years now, our wording on various topics, but before we get into the slides we can throw a sea of data with lots of charts and it can be a little overwhelming. i thought we should that back a little bit and get a better

understanding of what some of the social and political developments have been around the past school year. that could signal some of the underlying context for the survey results and findings that we have. i don't know if any of you are fans or watch cbs this morning with charlie rose. i am a big fan and they have this great segment -- in that spirit, why do we call this your k12 america in about 90 seconds. we all know common core is a hot button issue. it is white-hot and has been for some time at state and local levels and is increasingly becoming a nationalist political issue. we will see this as we get into the primaries, moving into the general election, and just

yesterday, we've seen a couple of states, ohio and louisiana take some steps to further distance themselves from the common core state standards initiative. here is a picture of some protesters in the northeast somewhere. this is an opt out protests against standardized testing. we have seen over the past year -- the seeds were planted when no child left behind was first implemented, but then it started to accelerate past couple of years with common core getting more attention, that we have these pockets of resistance sent protest against standardized testing. we will see if that becomes a broader, wider social movement or if we see these isolated flareups around the country. here back in my home state of

indiana, we have governor mike pence, superintendent of instruction sitting side-by-side. this picture and cap's late to the highest level of state politics. the education establishment -- this has been getting a lot of and 10 -- a lot of attention. we will see next year that it's likely the two of them will face off in our gubernatorial election in 2016. education is a high profile issue, particularly not just an indian of other states around the country. here is a picture of nevada governor ryan sandoval. he signed into legislation the

most ambitious school choice program in the country where k-12 students are now eligible to steve -- to receive a state-funded multiuse education savings account. this is a new type of program first enacted in arizona about five years ago and now has been enacted in florida last year and then nevada and a couple other states this year. this will be interesting to see in implementation and how things develop in nevada there. and that was a positive development for those of us who are school choice proponents. yesterday there was a very negative development for school choice advocates. that was the colorado state supreme court that ruled on the douglass county state voucher program. they said it violated the state's constitution particularly the blaine amendment that's in the state constitution. so we'll see in the coming days

and weeks if this case actually gets appealed all the way up to the u.s. supreme court. what's happening here in d.c.? it's kind of, you know, when it comes to no child left behind and reauthorization. we have a picture of secretary arne duncan testifying in front of centers lamar alexander, tom harkin and several others. there's been a lot of bills being introduced around no child left behind reauthorization but it's unlikely, in my views, it's probably unlikely to be reauthorized in the coming year or so. so we'll see how things progress here in washington. so that's in context around the country. some of the social and political developments that have been happening. here's some background for our

survey that we'll talk about. this is a survey profile. basically some of the particular specifications of the survey and how it was conducted and administered. i'd like to give a special shoutout to braun research who has been our data collection partners. for almost seven years. they do a great job with conducting these live telephone interviews, providing the data quality control and the data. the interviews that took place for this national survey occurred the end of april and beginning of may. but -- more than all these specks, i think key ones to look at, and it's a little misaligned there, but let's consider the population sample of the survey. it's a national population of adult americans age 18 and older that took the survey in the 50 states and the district of columbia. more than 1,000 interviews were

conducted. and the margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. when i talk about and we discuss subgroups like republicans democrats, high income, low income, middle income, each of those groups has their own sample size and it's much smaller than the 1,000 for the total. that smaller sample size raises the margin of error. that makes those numbers a little less reliable than the numbers reporting for the total national sample. second quick note is we are not reporting today and releasing the results for african-americans, latinos and other subgroups based on race and ethnicity. we'll be releasing those results later on this summer toward the end of august. so thinking about our survey and the types of measures that you're lookinga and considering,

so there's levels. there are levels of responses. positive/negatives to whatever survey question or item we have. that's pretty basic and what we see most often reported in the news media. we also have and can be more informative in some ways. we look at the margins as well. those are the differences between the aggregate positive responses and aggregate negative. some of them call them gaps, the spread. that can signal the likelihood of that group to go toward -- go lean in towards the positive direction on a question or negative direction. and then there are net intensities and this met rick simply takes the difference but of those strongest held views on both ends. so the strong positive and strong negative. what's the difference between the two? it gives us a sense of the net intensity around a particular

item, when talking about some of these school choice questions, common core, et cetera. with any type of research it's always good to get out there to talk about some of the limitations that come with the research and caveats. first and foremost, this is exploratory, descriptive type of reporting. not meaning to imply any causation or suggest any causal connections, but what we're doing is reporting on the total sample and subgroups, the differences and so forth. there are relatively few data points to establish long trend lines. two, three, four years in some cases worth of data on our items. these are still relatively few for trend lines. as i mentioned before, the subgroups have a smaller sample size in our survey. those numbers will show more volatileity year to year. as with any type of research

design, research program particularly when it comes to surveys and polling, there are challenges of potential for confirmation bias. what we try to do, we work with braun research to build in as many checks and safeguards to guard against that potential confirmation bias. when we think about wording of questions, ordering of questions on the questionnaire, the randomization or rotation of scales or response scales within the questionnaire. so there are things that can be done to be built into the questionnaire to try to safeguard against confirmation bias. some of the general findings i'd like to go over he's for a couple of minutes. americans continue to be negative about the direction of k-12 education in the country. we've seen this the last couple of years. they are even more negative about the federal government's

performance when it comes to handling matterses in k-12. wide gaps between the expressed schooling preferences and phone interviews exist when you compare them to school enrollments out there in the real world. there's a big disconnect. on the questions surrounding school choice reforms, we see large margins of support across though board for vouchers, esas, tax credit scholarships. there's been some change where we've seen a dip for charter schools. 64% to 60%. vouchers remain relatively unchanged. we saw an increase in support of esa from 62% to 64%. and -- it's important to remember, even though there have

been some of these changes generally speaking, american support any of these school choice reforms, 2 to 1, positive to negative. that's an important thing to remember. there are mixed messages that continue to persist around common core. so we do see a positive margin of support for common core. however, the intensity is negative. and that stands in contrast to some of the school choice items we ask about where we see the positive margins as well as the positive intensities. and so then we asked about testing. pluralities, subgroups of school parents say too much time spent on standardized testing. and that is up significantly since last year. here's the outline of the topics we'll cover for the rest of the presentation today. from the more general to the more specific. we'll talk about the direction of k-12, rating the federal government's performance on k-12 education and schooling issues.

school type preferences for the total sample for school parents. why would they choose one particular school type versus another. and then we'll go through some charts about this school choice reforms and then wrap up talking about common core, standardized testing, as well as the state intervention in low-performing schools. here we see some of the trend lines for the general public's views on k-12 education. the red line has been stable. this year 60% of the general public said k-12 is heading off on the right track. 32% said the right direction and we've seen an up tick on the positive response from 26% to 32% over the last three years. it's still 2-1 a negative view of k-12 in the country. when you look at the public's rating of the federal government, 8 out of 10