country we have that. any other questions? yes? >> [inaudible] >> every, every part of the house has to be cleaned. there are times where they don't go on the second floor. that is when the first lady makes it pretty clear that, you know, we want quiet private times. so the housekeepers disappear. the butlers disappear. auto they're right there in case someone wants a cheese sandwich. but, no there is no place whatsoever in the residence that the staff can't go. >> anything else or -- i'm so lucky that you were here tonight. you really have so much to share. really honored. thank you. yes. yes. thank you very much. thank you very much. thank you.

[applause] >> want to sign the books? >> sure absolutely. thank you so much it was a lot of fun, thank you. >> my pleasure. >> this is booktv on c-span2, television for serious readers. here is the prime-time line-up. kate brower describes life inside the white house residence at 7:00 p.m. on booktv. michelle malkin reports on innovators. look at the end of nasa's space shuttle program. at 10:00 eastern, martin ford on the impact of technology on the economy and the rise of the robots. we wrap up our prime-time line-up at 11:15 with the importance of the year 1920 in

american history. that all happens tonight on c-span2's booktv. >> now on booktv's after words program, harvard business school professor rosabeth moss kanters discusses america's transportation infrastructure. she is interviewed by rodney slater former u.s. secretary of transportation from 1997 to 2001. >> professor kanter welcome. >> thank you secretary slater. >> thank you. i'm looking forward to get into this wonderful book and let all of our listening audience have the appreciation i have getting through some of the pages and following the storyline. it is a wonderful storyline. what i found interesting you start out in the preface talking about leadership. now, were you thinking about a book on leadership when you started or how did you get to that? >> leadership is one of my big

topics preoccupations and, and, that was what i was going to do but i kept getting struck by this issue of infrastructure literally, not only the facts and figures about what was happening in america and and the sad state of much of our infrastructure, the need for innovation and change but i was also tripping on potholes like everybody is. i was struck on traffic. i was hearing sad stories of inner-city people who couldn't get to get to jobs, take two or three buses and a subway to get to school. that plus going abroad and riding a maglev train in shanghai where we went to another city, first of all, subway connections to the train. the train was so fast we went to another city in 20 minutes otherwise took hour 1/2 by bus. >> yes. >> so all of those things

together made me feel this is a real important issue. i had already been talking to you. you were such a help in this whole project. >> thank you. >> i had already been talking to you about the need for a new vision for america pause you had been putting forth a vision at the end of the clinton administration when you were leaving office. then unfortunately the world changed in the 2000s. >> yes. >> we had a lot of defense spending. we had a lot of other preokay pageses and a financial crisis. so we haven't made the kind of investments we need to make. i thought this was so important to the future of the country and i am part of the u.s. competitiveness project that harvard business school. we really care about making sure america is strong and american economy and quality of life are as excellent as they could possibly be. that we're once again leaders in the world. so i put aside what i thought

was my leadership book to write this. and then it was really interesting that i ended up concluding, it is all about leadership. >> it is. >> there are many other details but it's all about leadership and that the leadership for innovation collaboration big vision is as important as the engineering. this isn't a technical issue. we could do this. we have the technical skills in america. in fact in technology we lead the world. it is just that we're not always applying our own strengths. >> yes. >> so leader need to step up to this and i started out saying you know the sorry state of our infrastructure but in fact there are many reasons for hope. we see many great projects and, with enough public agitation and discussion which you've also been so active and involved in,

then we could really get leaders to step up. that is why i wrote a book so "move," not only as a title suggests that it is a book about transportation infrastructure but it also suggests what we have to do in america. we have to move. we have to get moving. >> we have to lead again the subtitle of the book talks about putting america back into the leadership position when it comes to infrastructure investment. let me say this i want to come back to this issue of leadership because you've to the a lot to say about that growing forward. let's unpack it a bit. and you do something very interesting in that you talk about transportation as more than concrete, asphalt an steel. you talk about it as, as a family concern. as a business concern. let's do that a little bit but let me also ask you about

allison, natalie and jacob and how you actually dedicated book to them and then you really tell us to think about it, to some degree from their perspective meaning infrastructure investment and its importance. >> so thank you. allison, natalie and jacob are three lovely little children and we need to think about this issue not only for business and the economy but also for the children who are growing now. i have had the privilege of reading books to those children including some of their favorites and some of my favorites. >> yes. >> i think are really great metaphors for what we need to do and i know we'll get to the real industry stuff. >> oh, we'll get to that. >> and the policy and all of that. i want to signal this is a family-friendly issue. >> yes. >> a high proportion of

household budgets up to 20% of household budgets or average family of four is spent on transportation. it's a big deal. allison, natalie, jacob likes books like dr. suess the places you will go, very inspirational. >> yes. >> this middle of that book as i was reading it, i was startled to see that the characters bopping around in dr. suess-like ways and then gets to a place in the middle called the waiting place. >> yes. >> waiting for the trains to go, the bus to come, the planes to go. it was all about transportation. and so the rest of the book says you've got to get out of the waiting place and that it is inspirational for kids. you can do it. well we have to do it for them now. >> exactly. >> other one is the little engine that kid. >> that's my favorite. >> that is truly a metaphor for america. i can't imagine that book having

been written other place, although other places have generosity of spirit like the little engine. the little engine was the one that stepped in to carry toys for kids when all the big engines were too busy, too important. the establishment wasn't listening. and so to me that's a signal that we also have to count on the little engines. >> yes. >> entrepreneurs, community people to push congress and to do some of the work. so that was how -- why i started the book dedicated to them but it is their future we're really talking about. >> and you know it is interesting that you mentioned the congress and the president now we can get a little bit into the policy i know yesterday you were part of the kickoff of infrastructure week with the vice president and also with secretary fox. as we get to the end of the month where congress is once

again extended the transportation bill, this time for the2nd time. if they have to extend it again, it it will be 33 times they extended it for a month or six months, whatever. the clarion call is we need a long-term plan for infrastructure investment. do you think that is important as we think about moving america back into the leadership post? >> we definitely need long term -- i mean i said we'll count on the small engines. >> yes. >> and the small engines will produce many innovations that will help but we do need the big engines and we do need long-term funding. when funding is subject to short-term fixes, then nobody can plan. you can't really plan to upgrade. maybe you can patch some potholes on roads but you can't plan projects that reinvent it.

and for allison natalie and jacob it would be for the long term but for all of us by the way, this is a short-term pain issue because of amount of time we lose productive time stuck in traffic. the frustrations. the first-responders that can't get places quickly enough because they can't move on the roads. so long-term funding would reduce some of the political uncertainty. that would attract more investors that would be helpful to the public sector because if we had more private sector investors it wouldn't all have to come out of public money. >> yes. >> and what they will necessarily invest if they think it is the public side will run out immediately and that there is no public will. they're looking for long-term commitments. this is both u.s. private equity and which is now looking at infrastructure and its sovereign

wealth funds from other countries. infrastructure investment firms. there is money out there. >> yes. >> that would like to invest but is not simply politics. it is the uncertainty when it is short-term fix. >> exactly. >> not something we authorize year by year. i feel the same way about air traffic control. aviation, when that subject in congressional budget cycles they can also make investments long term, just even intellectual investments in new technology that is experimental because it they might start something and then it is cut off. >> sure sure. it is interesting. you mentioned the issue of cost. and i thought immediately about how you started off the book really where you say, stuck on the way to the future. that is the first chapter but this first paragraph i'm not going to read it all, but a couple of sentences are worth reading for sure. the average american commuter

waste as total of 38 hours in traffic per year. now this is the average okay? so some it would even be higher. this amounts to 5.5 billion hours of loss u.s. productivity annually. those are staggering figures. and so you're saying that we all pay a cost when the system is not working effectively? >> we do. and that is just, we all do. and that is just commuters to work. >> yes. >> what about people who are trying to buy groceries or going to health care appointments. or trying to get to school? >> sure. >> school buses get stuck in traffic too. but, when you get to high school students, they often are using the public system so this really is a huge cost and the health care costs because them being stuck in traffic means a lot of

ideling cars burning fuel unnecessarily and pollution from those idling cars there was a study in brooklyn that said 45% of all air pollution is caused by idling cars. or driving around to find parking. >> yes. >> once you're in a city. so, we have adjusted to some of that although people complain, we should complain but there is a way in which the human mind will not realize there is something you can do about it. we'll just kind of call it normalize it. >> go along with it, the new normal. >> the new normal. build an extra hour into the commute. i know and so leave early. come home late. don't see the family. there are some costs and consequences. and so we have to solve. that's an immediate problem that also requires long-term investment because if all we did was repair the roads and repair

the train tracks which really need it we still wouldn't be heading for the future. >> yes. >> because we're growing in population. we need to do something. >> right right. just on in that paragraph i was reading you said that we lose about $121 billion in say, costs for fuel and lost time and just congestion annually. that is over 70 billion for people just stuck in traffic. now, what about the person who says okay, put in a tape, put in a disk, listen to a book on tapes. you know -- >> as i said we're very good at making sense of something or making it seem normal and working around it. but you could listen to that book on tape in your office or at home. >> thank you. at home. >> with the kids. >> exactly. >> so we weren't american to live in our cars but even if we

were, even if we were because cars auto companies might likes to have people, the cars became -- >> henry ford right? he helped to build the middle class with the automobile. >> he did. the cup holder was one of the biggest innovations. cars have become dining rooms for many people. >> yes. >> but we don't want them to become living rooms. >> no. >> so that time, but also the fuel, the time, the frustration and what about bad weather? there was, we've had some really severe weathers, weather, and there was a time i think in 2014 in atlanta where cars couldn't move. >> yes ice storm. >> for 20 hours some people were stuck in their cars. i mean that is really scary. >> yep. >> because from cramped space, the heat, people could die. these are dire stories, dire

consequences. it doesn't have to be that way. that is the other message of "move." we don't have to accept this and that there are solutions. many of them are already in place in some parts of the country. >> yes. it is interesting. you say we don't have to accept it. we actually never really accepted the normal. this is a country that has always thought tomorrow could be better than today. you mentioned the intercontinental railroad. you mentioned the interstate system. it is not like we haven't dreamed big and produced big in the past. what, what do you think of this moment now? i mean, and this is going back to the question of leadership i think but what are your thoughts there? you touch on many of these in book so. >> in the history of rail you have to look at the transcontinental railroad. >> yes. >> and.

many people point to that as the glorious past and why couldn't it be like that today. when i dug into the history which is fascinating it wasn't so glorious because it took decades of discussion and no one really did it until abraham lincoln forced it through. >> even during time of war. >> in the civil war. isn't that amazing? >> yes. >> and that was there were a lot of compromises had to be made. it didn't work perfectly. the tracks started to be laid from the east coast and the west coast and they didn't meet in the middle. so that the took extra money to fix it. >> yes. >> there were tales of corruption. that was how jpmorgan and john d. rockefeller made their fortunes and started monopolies but we could do it. we could envision that big project because we were envisioning the growth of the u.s. >> yes. >> from coast to coast. and how do you use that coast to

coast territory? you're not going to connect it by stagecoach. >> no. >> the railroad connected it. it made it possible for farmers to shift their products east to get foods many. coming back west, it made it possible for settlements to spring up. you know that well as your time as secretary of transportation. >> yes. >> every time you put in a transit stop you get economic growth. >> yes. >> people build around that. so we did it then, as i was going to say, it has lessons for today, it wasn't all that easy. it did take a leader who managed to forge coalitions and get political will. we had other big interstate highways were big, really big. like the transcontinental railroad. it had a defense rationale and it was a big, bold project. it was 41,000 miles of highways and a huge price tag. >> that's right. >> it opened up all kinds of opportunity and --

>> touched every state yes. >> it helped the american economy after the war. it helped settlements because the suburbs were already there but they could grow even more because people could live in bucolic, idyllic green suburbs supposedly and get to work in cities. cities were kind of abandoned at that time. we'll get back to that later. but this defense rationale that we've had for all of our big projects including sputnik the space race, the cold war. >> right. >> are those investments on defense grounds some of them are a little spurious because president eisenhower who wanted the interstate highways said we could move troops and we could evacuate cities. well in hurricane katrina in new orleans in 2005, it was clear you can't evacuate cities by everybody piling in their cars and heading for the interstate. >> right. >> it doesn't work.

while those were really great rationales at the time i also say we're stuck in the past. we haven't had big visions or big enough visions since the 1950s, maybe the early 1960s, about the role that these projects helped play in our future. we have some beautiful infrastructure developments. there is a gorgeous bridge in boston, a signature bridge, we say it is like a piece of sculpture people admire. there are other fantastic bridges. the golden gate bridge. >> oh, yes. i love this discussion. >> they're beautiful works of art but they also are not a vision for what when he need to do to connect people help them move across those bridges. >> yes. >> we needed time for a really big new vision that takes into account the 21st century. that is what you're trying to do in your vision 2,000.

>> yes, it is. you mentioned that earlier and i wanted to come back to it but one thought before we leave here. i think it is very interesting that really fdr actually during his administration thought of this national system of roads. and you're right. it really took a few years of gestation if you will, but then this emphasis on defense during the eisenhower years to really move it forward. i think the question may be is there a way for maybe the issue of competenttiveness in our need to be competitive globally might that replace what has been the driver of defense and security to some degree? >> so i think that is certainly a rational that resonates with the business community. and with i believe ifs. >> yes. >> local, state, federal, et cetera, and we could sell it

a little bit to the american public jobs but i'm not sure that by itself it is enough to sell the public. i mean people know that china is investing a great deal. that japan already invested. it was part of their rebuilding after world war ii but it is a little remote to just say we want to be number one on rankings and indicators if it doesn't translate to things that improve people's lives. what my thought is and what i want to say to the people that are elected leaders i think all can be leaders here i'm trying to be a thought leader. >> exactly. >> what i'm trying to say in "move," we need mobility. mobility is so essential. you talk about transportation as circulatory system.

nation, in mobility we have to move goods we have move ourselves. we have to get where we want to go. other countries are moving faster. we can use it metaphorically to talk about catching up or getting into the lead as we compete with other countries but we also have to continue to be the land of opportunity. i say we've gone from the the land of opportunity to being the state of delays. but we have to get that back. so this is all about building the middle class, restoring the middle class. it is all about reduces inequality because one of the things that keep people poor they can't get to jobs. we have to make things affordable to people accessible to people. i think if we wrap mobility and competitiveness together then we he have a shot. i think we all should be starting a conversation and figuring out a good way to talk about it. because it was all national defense. interstate highways, when i

looked at the history they were never actually called the national defense highway act but everybody referred to them that way. >> yes. >> every one knew sputnik was about beating russia. >> exactly. >> but the space race by itself was also inspiring to people. >> yes. >> astronauts as individuals. >> science and all those sorts of discoveries too. >> this picture of people actually landing on the moon. so -- >> it was powerful. >> powerful. if we don't arouse people's imaginations about the future. this is such an exciting area to excite imaginemation. >> i agree with you. >> we have entrepreneurs dreaming up all kinds of things that sound wild but it is inspiring. >> it is. you mentioned both china and japan. as you know china now is promoting its one belt, one road

initiative where they're trying to sort of bring up-to-date the old silk road. it is all about trade. it is all about participating in the global economy. and then, as you know i recently, you have, you know about this as well, but i was recently in japan and i rode the bullet train and they were celebrating their 50th anniversary now of the bull lit train. and now, they're looking at advanced technology clearly beyond that. and there are some discussions between the u.s. and japan on this for maglev. but that's, that's the future and we've got to be a part of it. >> so in that sense being competitive isn't because we necessarily want to beat them of the we could learn from them. >> yes. >> although we're not always as good at that but yes. i've been in japan and ridden those trains. i landed on a flight in tokyo

and i had a colleague who was going to escort me to osaka and i wasn't sure exactly how we were going to get there. he met me, as i exited from security. we walked, seem ad few steps. we're on the train to osaka faster than you could get from any capital in the any city in the united states to downtown, we're in a city, how far is osaka. may be 100 miles away but we're they're. seamlessly and easily and seamlessly. it is impressive. when i found out the bullet train only on average in the last few years deviated from schedule 32 seconds on average. >> yes. >> on average, try telling that anybody taking amtrak in the northeast corridor. >> i know. >> or a flight.

>> president board man man amtrak is knows this and trying to get that going again. your friend, former governor michael dukakis and vice president of amtrak, hopefully we could get it. >> we should all be interested in amtrak. i know they're trying, and i tell a great story in the book amtrak being innovative and getting the government regulators to be more flexible and nimble raising speed in pennsylvania on the keystone corridor, raising the speed by only a mere 20 miles per hour but it was enough to make a lot of people abandon their cars to take the train to commute instead. it was just enough time saved. so we could start by doing those things. then when people have faith in trains again, that's what i mean about small things. >> yes. >> maybe they will see the power

of big things. and as you know, besides this idea maybe of maglev for -- >> northeast corridor. >> northeast corridor which would take many decades but we could start there are private companies who are investing in high-speed rail. in texas texas central between houston and dallas. in florida all board america. >> yes. >> what is exciting about that, these are private companies with a vision. they certainly would benefit from some federal loans or matching fund but they're willing to invest. in miami where there is a desperate need for light rail for an expansion of what there is but for more there is now talk that hey, if all aboard america is building a terminal on the northern side of the gee, that could be a place where we connect light rail. again the private company would jump-start what would then become a public investment.

that's exciting. then this idea we all love trains in a way even though we may not ride them. we played with the vehicles toys. if you think how many wheels or how many times i've sung the wheels on the bus go round and round. >> that's right. >> this shouldn't excite people's imagination. people have given up and they don't think about it. that is why i wrote a book -- >> we'll change that. >> that tells a story. what i thought was interesting when you told meme that you were growing to the 50th anniversary of the bullet train and i started thinking about you know that was a post-world war. europe already had good trains but they introduced really high-speed rail around 1980. our speed nothing compared to

theirs. we celebrate 100th anniversary of overhead wiring. we have antiques. they work really well. >> we need to improve them. >> we know this from our personal lives. maintenance isn't a vision. we hate maintenance. we put off maintenance. we had a beautiful new shiny house or new shiny apartment. i have friends who every time it needed repainting they would think about moving rather than repaint. a little bit, a little bit, that has been the story of america. you plan done it -- abandon it so now you have hollowed out cities. there should be places where people can ride a bike or walk but they deteriorated so badly. >> you know it is interesting the way we sometimes, as you have noted turned from that which is not quite as spiffy as

it used to be. you referred to some of the work we did during our time in office. a part of that was trying to introduce high-speed rail with the acela service. the good thing we've seen a significant increase in ridership in the northeast corridor but we need to see that across the system and i remember going to new orleans and actually unveiling a vision for high-speed rail corridors around the country. both president clinton vice president gore were very, very interested in that. one reason we actually came forth with the vision piece you mentioned, we called it the changing face of transportation and we looked from the year 2000 to 2025 was because we had been successful in passing the legislation that was before us but the recognition was that with a growing economy, with an opening of our borders and and interface with markets around the globe with peace and prosperity to be enjoyed that

we really needed to think boldly about the future. we attempted that in this work. now i'm excited about secretary fox and his beyond traffic report. you make some reference to that and also your book because you, and this is great you don't say the present has to be accepted. you actually start to needle us and bring everyone into focus what can be. let's talk about that. you talked about these cities hollowing out. you also have a very significant revelation in the book about cities that are prospering and presence of vans -- transit and good infrastructure. tell us about that. >> i would love to and comment on the acela. >> yes. >> that was a great thing and it

has been very important to people in the northeast corridor. the problem is it's limited by aging infrastructure. >> that is exactly right. >> that a lot of the right-of-ways that were purchased 100 years or more ago have curves in them that mean that it can't go up to speed. it has to slow down. and they are aging tracks that need to be repaired. so i would say we do, i want a vision of the future and we'll get to that. >> yes, yes. >> but i believe in the three rs repair, renew and reinvent. i love the reinvent part but we understand repair is needed even to get the benefits we have now. this is known to people in various regions around the u.s. so, and you know, those visions that you had when you were in office, they were really great. i mean it is hard to understand

how we could get so bogged down in partisan gridlock at the national level. for example denver a city that in which fewer than, the statistic i have in the book, exact statistic only something like 6% of the commuters used anything other than a car? it is very car centric yet they're putting in light rail. >> all the way to the airport. >> they refurbished union station, or like union station in washington or union station in chicago is on the way. it hasn't happened yet. but when you do that it becomes a term minute news for other things. -- terminus. city center, easier to get taxis if you happen to use uber, because better access to it. denver has done that. other cities have seen it and

have had plans. consensus, i think you can get collaboration and consensus a lot better at regional level. people see the benefits of the projects to them. it isn't as though everyone is selfish, only want it only for their neighborhood but don't want it in their neighborhood if it will be disruptive. yes, there is that streak in people. with visionary leaders and lots of different parts of the community at the table you can get support. so people think sometimes it is not officials, not the business community. they're against it. whatever. they don't like tax whatever it is. but in fact in houston this was really striking to me. in houston there was a vote several decades ago in favor after light rail system, public transit system, and then a second vote -- that was in general public support.

>> sure. >> but then a second vote was taken about specifics and it was shot down, and it was the poor communities who were against it because they had been left out of the process. >> out of the discussion. >> they didn't feel it was necessarily going to be good for them because of the parking places for it were in the suburban areas. so it was not part of a comprehensive vision about what to do about houston. and it took 20 years, it was 20 years later that houston finally got light rail. so when i say it is all about leadership, you can call that politics but it is leadership. what leaders have to do is understand how many stakeholders they must bring to the table. when they do that, they will get real support. i mean business community would like to see public transportation. it gets their employees to work. and, have often pushed public officials in chicago. they pushed former mayor daley

to think about doing something with o'hare airport a new runway. so, if we can get that support regionally, that doesn't mean that states have to pay for it themselves or cities. these things span states regions are much broader and we need national standards and national vision, a national strategy and national funding which doesn't pay for it all but it jump starts, it is the accelerator. >> it is, it is. >> it is the rationale. so i do believe back to your earlier question in long-term funding and a federal role but we can add the regions as the dreamers and implementers. we can add the private sector as potential investors. and we can add every mode of

transportation into the plan. know a big part of your vision was intermodal connection. >> yes. most people don't care which mode it is as long as they get there safely and efficiently. >> if we did those and did that regionally, then there would be room. then entrepreneurs would get excited, as they already are as they are inhibited and it is too limited. yes there are cities doing great things and there are cities that have real problems trying to fix the problems. that often spans political administrations. in chicago there are three great things going on in chicago, four great things in chicago that i love. one mayor emanuel inherited but wants to accelerate. it is the untangling, this is something everybody who is watching will identify with because everybody has been stuck at a train crossing where the

train tracks cross the road you're on. >> i thought you were going there. >> and you know there are a lot of unnecessary deaths in america. >> oh, yes. >> michael ward of csx gave me a startling new statistic because people in cars don't believe the gates and try to go around them thinking they can beat the train. so aside from, i don't want to talk about only depressing things. aside from suicide by train there is also fatalities that are unnecessary but that is in because the tracks cross the roads because they're old. >> yes. >> and in chicago there has been a particular problem because a quarter of all rail traffic in america goes through chicago and it is an old system. >> right. >> and it also dates back to the time when the u.s. didn't have a system. they had a bunch of separate railroads all putting tracks wherever they wanted. >> wherever they wanted.

>> wherever they wanted. they're all crossing at angles and sometimes multiple and commuter trains are using the same tracks. they have priority. commuter passenger and then well, light rail, commuter passenger, freight. >> freight. >> but a long freight train could tie up traffic for 20 minutes. >> right. >> so, more dire details but chicago is trying to untangle them. >> let me ask you this. there is, i have to, this is what you're talking about. you have a segment called, the slowest six miles in america. so this is in chicago, right. >> in chicago yeah. >> go on. >> a freight train that could get from l.a. to chicago in 30 hours, approximately could take 24 hours just to cross you know short stretch in chicago. well when, and you know, when

there is a problem like there was bad weather this wasn't even our recent bad weather. when there was a problem then the delay in cargo moving affected the whole country for months. >> that's the thing we don't really recognize or appreciate fully appreciate. >> and right now at the tie-up in ports in los angeles, same thing. >> same thing. >> you can't get goods that have been ordered from other places or get our goods out. >> out. >> to sell to other places. so chicago -- >> but the mayor is changing that right? >> the mayor is changing that. he inherited that project because in the late '90s in your administration was noticed. >> yes. create project. >> chicago started create, chicago rail blah, blah. in this field there are so many acronyms so many acronyms. finally started got federal

funding for the first phase, 72 projects to build overpasses. to build underpasses and to straighten this out. and so a number, a lot of them have been completed but there are a lot left to go. >> yes. >> i was there watching a particularly tough one, it is halfway, maybe more and they have done a lot of innovative things. it was near a ford plant and chicago would have lost the plant and all their jobs if they hadn't done that. because the cars go out by rail. >> sure. >> or by trucks, some of them. but, and they're now, because of untangling this, they used instant bridges. there is an instant bridge there. i know that sound like maybe it is flimsy but it is not. it is metal. we did this in massachusetts. we had instant bridges, 14

weekends over 14 weekends, 14 different bridges were rolled into place in a weekend. it was really great. now they're not going to be hugely long bridges but they had that. i saw there would be a park a real green space, develop the nabe hoard nearby which isn't on top of it but it is nearby. it is going to be a more vibrant neighborhood. there are all kinds of suppliers to ford. they have their factories there. a lot of jobs were at stake besides the ford jobs. it is an impressive project. it is you know way. >> but taken a little time. >> taken time. and it will run out of money. >> i know that is the big fear. so. >> because there are still a lot of projects and there are other projects left to go. that is one that is very promising. i believe and that we ought to get rid of every place in america where train tracks cross streets or roads. >> yes.

>> every place. that will take a long time. >> it will, it will. that was a big issue with the federal highway administration and also with the federal railroad administration during my years at the department. >> i mean that is the kind of thing, look at instant bridges as an innovation. >> yes. >> that is the kind of thing, if we had the will, we could make a goal. that is only one. i will go ahead and tell more chicago stories. >> i wanted you to go into some of the other thanks mayor emanuel is doing, innovative financing and infrastructure fund. >> yes. >> tell us a bit more about that. >> infrastructure is on the list for enlightened mayors and governors. >> exactly. >> sometimes they're making speeches and they say infrastructure and everybody starts nodding off in the audience and they go on to something else. it is really quite exciting. the finance thing is a part of

it because this issue of longer term funds that are detached from political decisions. so he created essentially an infrastructure bank for the city of chicago. there has been much talk of a national infrastructure bank. it hasn't gone anywhere in congress. >> right. >> other countries have infrastructure banks, big funds. i mean china has it but also other countries. i think brazil has one. the, in the e.u. there are funds. so it is set aside. it is certainly subject to oversight. >> yes. >> but you can get professional, and the community looking at projects without thinking about political pork barrel stuff or whatever. you can do long term things. you can have loans part of it. doesn't always have to be just giving money. >> right. >> he did that. states have infrastructure

banks, about 36 states but they're not all using them. so that was very visionary. of course he was bringing a national perspective to being mayor of chicago. two other things that i really love in chicago that are happening now one you could call it incremental but it will make a big difference. it is called bus rapid transit. >> i agree. >> it really isn't rapid for anybody really listening. it might save a few seconds here, a few seconds there but it adds up. it is essentially dedicated lanes with platforms. preferlyably platforms. it doesn't caught as rapid transit without the dedicated lanes. what it means that first of all people can wait on the platform and can board at the level of the bus. there is a lot of great things it does. it can go a little faster here and there it can have

implications across the whole line. and this is not a u.s. innovation although many cities now have it. >> that's right. >> this is one where we learned it from other -- i think the first one was in brazil. >> that's right. i actually visited that one. during my tenure now. >> the mayor we had got that in place, had him speak at harvard. >> i remember him. >> he made a green city well before fashionable. >> yes. >> paris has this -- i was in istanbul watching buses speed by as i'm stuck in traffic in a car. this is good and we can be visionary and do great community things wit. so that is something chicago plans. here is the other thing, because they're trying to think comprehensively, they call it complete streets which is also

phrase used by other places, complete streets means they're trying not only to help the buses go faster but open the streets for bike, pedestrians. have them all coexist with cars. and modernize the whole thing. so in digging up some downtown streets, to put in the platforms they're also fixing water pipes. since chicago has some really aging water pipes we heard about some that were hollowed out tree trunks more than 100 years old the wooden. i know because their technology in chicago was using some of the old pipes now that aren't being used, was using them for fiber-optics. >> oh. combination of the old and the new. >> you can do everything. so and so one of the cool things of course. chicago isn't the first but bike

sharing, it has its political moments but bike sharing is really being used. >> that is big in boston, washington d.c. new york. >> yes. i feel in someplaces you're taking your life in your hands to ride a bike. people are wearing all black. how can they do that? what are they thinking? you can't see them. >> yes. >> but i will tell you that is a serious point. >> we have to work on it. >> what we have in america we have a car culture. >> yes. >> i love my cars. we all love our cars but actually the millenials don't love their cars so much. it used to be that every time you would get together in, you know, the guys would always talk about their cars. now the guys all talk about their smartphones. >> that's right. that's right. >> and their technology. millenials are not getting driver's licenses at same rate. they're not owning cars at same rate. that is my modification we love

cars. i would to on because i don't want to talk about cars. >> that's okay. >> to say we've been car centric. >> we have. >> now we have to be, welcome pleat streets. we have to have cars move over. we don't yet have a bike culture. we know how to be polite sort of driver to driver although we do have road rage. >> yes. >> but we don't have a culture of bikes. so what chicago had to do, they put in traffic lights with a bike symbol on it so the bikes would know to stop. sometimes it is bikers fault. cars to know feel you're not wanting to cut off a bike. it takes time to develop that culture. >> exactly. >> when amsterdam which leads the world in bikes and bike sharing, first put in bike sharing, it was a disaster at first because people stole the bikes. they didn't bring them back. but it took a little while for people to learn. so i feel right now, we are on

the cusp of in how we thinktransportation and infrastructure and to do it. >> that exciting part to focus as we move to a close here. as soon as you touched on it i ran to chapter four of the book where it talks about smart roads meet the smartphone and you were just all over that in your comments but let's talk about it a little bit more. let's unwrap it a bit more. you start off this this chapter saying that transportation by road must get smarter. developments in the past deck skate, smartphones sophisticated sensors cloud computing, big data analytics are challenging old business models and causing industry to collide. now that is you putting on your leadership hat and also your

harvard business hat. let's talk a bit more about that. you mentioned millenials. let's face it, they're definitely changing the way we see things and do things. and, frankly the way we're going to have to live going forward. let's talk about it a little bit more. that's very exciting. >> yeah, that's very exciting. even before the smartphone we were already beginning to use sensors for traffic management. >> yes. >> and a lot of stuff, it wasn't really visible to the consumer yet but what the smartphone with you is really not that old. the apple iphone 2007. >> that's right. >> also full disclosure, we both love verizon. verizon wireless networks, verizon as a company is 2000, the name. and the wireless business has been growing dramatically. but as mary barra of general motors pointed out she

said the cell phone was originally referred in america as the car phone. >> that's right. >> i remember having a very clunky car phone. she was right. and she said the auto industry missed a bet by not really jumping on it. they jumped on it a bit with some wireless connected emergency services. >> onstar those sorts of things yes. >> but didn't really jump on it. now i think they're jumping because everybody is now in the transportation business. we're transporting data more than people. google is in the auto business. will google actually build a car? well apple doesn't actually make iphones. they make the software. google is software but google is colliding with nearly every industry. >> they are. >> they're trying to get collaboration because they are -- >> amazon, facebook, they're all -- >> in data. so we don't know.

the, roads are getting smarter because we're putting in sensors permitting things like electronic tolling which -- >> dynamic tolling as well. >> dynamic change the price depending on congestion. >> exactly. >> so people make a decision will i pay a little more to go at this hour or not? and that, it is hard to talk about -- steve goldsmith former deputy mayor of new york. >> he is a great mayor. >> mayor of indianapolis. said to me we can't talk about congestion pricing. puts together two words americans don't like to hear, con guess shun and pricing. but the fact is we do that. it is very handy. we have transponders in cars. we still don't have a national system. so the transponder is only, the northeast states have started cooperating. so i can use my what used to be called fast lane or something in new york city from boston to

new york city. so we need a national system there. i mean this is all happening faster than we can catch up with. roads will sense potholes some there is an app that the city of boston created. the city is working with entrepreneurs, tech entrepeneurs to develop these things. there app called street bump, if it is in your car or you're connected via smartphone, it detects potholes from the vibrations in the car. you don't even have to report it. the car reports it for you. deirdre: -- >> that is amazing. i hope they don't get smarter than we are. that is my only fear. that is the future vision. we have all the new service. >> yes. >> zipcar, sharing cars. such a great idea. and they have had to deal with local permissions, where they can park and stuff. but they're working it out. and that all this is technology

enabled. that is how you get into the car remotely. uber you summon it. uber lyft, other similar services they're going to be more where you summon it on demand or you get information about exactly where to meet the private van that will take a whole bunch of people on a common route in no more than a five minute walk, it will tell you when to be there and how far to walk, this will revolutionize how we get around. it is very exciting. aviation technology will help glide to a under laking. >> it is exciting. >> it is exciting. >> you know, just a couple of things on that i have often said that possibly the most important thing to happen during our term in office meaning during the clinton administration, may not have been the passage of the major pieces of legislation, record level investment in infrastructure. they were significant and big but it was really through an

executive order that president clinton allowed for the commercial and the civilian use of gps in its most sophisticated form. and that's what really enhanced capability of a fedex to basically say, i can have it to you at a certain time. >> right. >> because i know how to get there. i know how much time it is going to take. i can read the congestion maps being developed by a google. all of that is coming into play. it was that executive order that took basically military defense type apparatus technology and applied it to the business community. >> that so right. that made a huge difference. that was defense. internet was