the 3rd thing, the requirement if the grant says we have to give a grant back we have a boring reality between two gangs on two sides of our church. the state gives us a grant to work with the juveniles trouble because they came from two different counties because of the other county could needed. we have to give you back the written by phd signal, the

neighborhood. the relationship grant fundraising is a skill that most of us just don't have. and so we end up selling pies because you no how to do that, you can control it. [laughter] the audit they grant assumes you have general operating power. if you don't have general operating power you have to get someone to manage. get it out of the grant. then pay the auditor for the grant. ends up being right for the audit. so itso it is -- and then you go to jail. >> absolutely.

[laughter] because your corrupt but because you are underfunded. [laughter] that is why what bothers talking about is more of an enterprise model the way you take idea. you no the venture capitalists. they invest in an idea. you use the capitol to build up the enterprise. if these guys have a business plan that could yield a return on investment in capital they could build a whole different community. billions of dollars that they have invested every week and businesses that people have a financial return. we have to find the resources in this country that bring a return in human capitol. [inaudible conversations] >> this can't be a knew

idea, but it still occur to me if you could demonstrates of the government authority, the success of your interaction with your client saving the state hundred dollars and they give you back 30 for every 100. >> sixty. >> same thing. >> in the city of milwaukee wisconsin the running levels organization operates. they have an interesting relationship with the county for the past ten years they had taken young violent offenders who would otherwise be remanded to the adult facilities spent 20 years, they say they are remanded to custody in there homes, supervised by ex- offenders in that committee at a ratio of six to one. because the people who monitor them are in the same neighborhood they checked and three times a day and are required to go to

training and what not. 80% of the men who completed the program are successful. last year the running levels present of the county a mock check for $63 million that the county determined was the money that they saved by not sending these them in the present. and so they take a portion of that and give it to the running rebels, i think two million, and, and that carries the cost of the program in the future. so even in a situation where we have demonstrated cost-benefit, they're is no rush to embrace it. i think people do not understand how entrench the poverty industry is in maintaining there control. they -- i mean, we have made the case and are violence free zone. wezone.

we were able to show that we can reduce violence in schools by 25 percent three months which means that we reduce cost and expulsions, police service calls kemal that. we have demonstrated it at baylor university, three-year study. you know high up on that. it has been accepted by academic review. and even with that validation where they're is just no rush to come and say okay you have passed it. now here is the investment in this great idea of yours that is what we are fighting against. with that, i want to segue into the panel, butpanel but i see our special guest is arrived, congressman paul ryan. this is a good time. perfect. come on up. i want our town to return. thank them. [applause]

>> i still got it. i still got. >> a. how are you doing? are you going to go? >> one of the 1st times in the city where the principal presenters were practitioners. our thought leaders are here they are going to come to our respondents to our

grassroots leaders. i think we have had a spirited conversation. >> to the grassroots in the average towers. >> or other special guest arrive right away. come on out. i want to -- [applause] >> we got that covered. we just had -- and you have been working with the warren ellis. you know. also, you have been one of the few celebrities for the last time in the hood operating a school operating a sports program. i wish paul, you would talk about why you get this thing going and when we 1st five isu the question that we asked him a video as a

former bp candidate and now chairman of ways and means committee why are you interested in this issue? >> first of all because we can do a lot better than what we have been doing. it is just a simple. if you want to do better you have to figure out what works. and when you get out of the city and get around america you can find people like omar, shirley, paul. you can find things of work. so as policymakers it is our job. that is what the comeback is all about. that is what that is all about,about, showing that they're are amazing things happening. we should learn from them. when we try to do policy at any level of government that

policy out to be respectful of and supportive of what works and that dismissive and displacing of what works as basically what we're trying to accomplish. it is that simple. >> and tell us about your work with omar and why you signed on to come be supportive of the movement. >> it is genuine authentic. genuine, authentic. when you alluded to the word come back all of us dealing with some type of american airlines. every last one of us. that is a commonality that we all share what ties us together. we have all come through trials and tribulations and we are here. solace or so making a comeback. this is real. authentic, and it is where we can. my mother, single mother stepfather, biological father, they would never play the position that i would deem them to be. i would never call the men

that. i am doing with a single mother a school in the city. and it is my heartbeat, my passion to give them away how not a handout but for them to understand, they're are different resources. we just have a phenomenal structure, organization, and structured event this past thursday that we call single but not alone. recall the single parents in the those metroplex to come to this one location we will we brought them healthcare job employment resources for transportation someone stood up and said, i have 14 jobs a you can start today be paid by next friday. that is a resource. that is the way you make a comeback. now i have a check and it will pay this bill. and that's my heartbeat.

we also do we want to help poverty, want to help kids and want to rescue and secure education we are dropping is off to school but not doing nothing for the parents that are dropping him off. so if we build that if we build that young man and woman that are currently making a comeback just like ours now we are putting a stronghold on poverty and helping one person at a time >> i feeli feel sort of underdressed sitting next to him. [laughter] >> conservatives. >> we understand. >> they don't even aware seersucker suits in wisconsin. [laughter] but these strips. tell us about your journey.

what was your biggest surprise, i guess that you did not anticipate. tell me. >> number one, it is important to no we all share the same values and principles and express them differently. what i learned was they're is a lot to learn. what happens as policymakers don't view the human side of policymaking. they do the analytical side, the average towers side, the old thinking, i think the war on poverty kick it upstairs, the federal government and you can be more efficient. and how to deploy resources and fix problems. what you end up doing is you reduce these ties that bind people together which is people together fighting poverty i die person-to-person,, person-to-person, and it is connecting people together in a committee for helping

each other. that isthat is really what matters. you can't get that in some program run by some person over here, and that is one thing i've learned. and so we should not be at odds with each other and the swan poverty or government does this and civil society does that. one should respect the other which is what i kind of learned from a policy standpoint. but from just a human standpoint we need to redeem the idea that redemption is cool. we need to redeem the idea that redemption is the success story in people'sand people's lives in our communities of you want to see more and more and more and more of. and that, to me, is probably the biggest thing i got out of this to see redeem souls and the people who do the redeeming, it is heroic, exciting, infectious exciting, infectious, and we need to do everything that

we can to make that a normal idea and society again. >> well, we just got word. you may kirk in indianapolis. he now has a building in the community, to refund employees, contact with contact with 22 dealerships. he is excited. but we want to see this. the questionthe question was raised little why they're is not an embrace of this idea. and i talked about the resistance are getting from the poverty. >> they're is that. it is is basically the status quo which has in its -- has its adherents. we see this in congress everyday. audi you break that up? the way i look at it focus on outcomes and results. the policy side, if we can focus on what works and not

the status quo i think we can win the argument so that the argument is not republicans or democrats bulwark so does not. if you go out in the committee and make that the outcome it is not a partisan or ideological thing. that is the kind of conversation we ought to have full why patty murray and i are doing is bill to move our measurement system from inputs and efforts on programs and spending a bureaucracy to outcomes, results. is it working? and what that ends up doing is it propels the resources and the power into the hands of local community poverty fighters who are actually succeeding. when they can show what works you can cross pollinate. that is what cna does. you have this great program. perhaps you can share what does.

maybe you can share that with kansas city or dallas. milwaukee. cross pollinate, share ideas that is what we want to see more of instead of some bureaucrat. trying to put rules and regulations that prevent that kind of thing. it is about changing the approach not based on input and top-down but organic grassroots bottom-up and then just show what works. that is the way this debate should involve.

>> i am not a math major. people's wydenwigle support. two plus two is war. zero. >> of the same thing. we're working toward the same goal. that is why from. the people literally doing it person you love. he sees no way up in a way out. is going to work but cannot find employment. it is no one way to do this. people like you to take the initiative.

why do you do this. adequately. i want to provoke change. i want to provoke change. that is what you are doing. it is not even out over. the man i'm sitting by him telling israel. i would not waste my time. i would not waste my time to come here and i thought i no that is trick-or-treating. real, authentic. a lot of what you are doing. provoke change. we're going to get they're. >> part of our challenge is to give the kind of recognition to this movement

and really getting this out. we have seen over 6 million people. look at the series. thisthis is the 1st time we ever have this kind of recognition is the 1st time we take the time. >> maximize the moment. >> had to do had to do. but i really think it is critical to get this word out whether we have this comeback movement will get moved to the kind of scale.

how can we replicate this? they're is a lack of imagination. 60 percent of apples and don't a private did not exist. why can't we take that same level and invest in promoting this kind of comeback movement. the 1st is they're. when you here a homeless man in boston returns over the impact that someone posts his name and face interest to raise money they raise $92,000 in today's because it says they're is a 1st on the part of the american public to support virtual founders. they're are for situations like that the marathon man in detroit that was what the work 230,000 was raised for

him. and so whatand so what i hope this movement will do with the help of you and paul is to promote the actions of our leaders so that they will become household words and the people will begin to invest in them. i think it is the only salvation of this country. >> it is the mindset on what the public thinks is the war on poverty. mistakenly reinforce the notion. i pay my taxes, do my job send only to washington they fix this. isolated and marginalized the poor among us. what you are showing is that it is the opposite. everyone is at stake and can do something. we're trying to break down the mindset. everyone no matter who they

are no matter what there income home where they live can do something positive, can make a difference. nor the fixes they have to. that is what we're trying to do. is not a government responsibility but the responsibility of our communities. reintegrate people and bolster the fact that these homegrown organic bottom-up grassroots efforts of the best of the federal government can provide resources change the way the people look and get behind the solution and give people

more involved and start moving the needle. >> with the country shares is hard. all the different instances began with the backpack is hard. no one wants to be 1st no one wants to be a leader can almost a standalone. willing to do it when someone takes initiative to sound going to fight poverty used in your next to me with another person is propelled the stand. a young, vibrant army, but no one wants to make that 1st initiative. the commonality to this country has worked. we have done cover it.

get back to the heart of who we really are. >> you had a question. >> is the microphone -- >> sorry. [inaudible question]

>> somebody pulls interest. so cynical the question about replication. i would argue that until the

poverty industry is defunded command tell you cannot when my way of federal funds the kind of replication of wars an example of all we arewhat we're talking about cannot take place. it can happen because they are talented, passionate people but the place i was baltimore. one last thing. the thing that struck me thing that struck me no one thought that are faith-based successes, no one thought. that part of the conversation helphow you for the police? moderately evil a very evil? that would be the entire discussion.

and it is a good discussion now if you want to keep the industry in place. don't ask any fundamental questions. >> the way i look at your observation the american works people have the same result getting people on self-sufficiency and out of poverty which is always a matter. do they succeed? if they do this should continue. if they don't, they shouldn't., they shouldn't. a set of technical frontal assault on the status quo making it us against them, republicans against democrats, liberals, conservatives, liberals, conservatives, some big stalemate, it is smarter and better to say why don't we just go with what works. let's agreeworks. let's agree beforehand that from now on we will measure success not based upon effort the measurement of success is effort to how

many programs, how much funding how many people in the program not results. objective metrics being that are not. >> entirely rational. >> but i would say hopscotch is what is a political fight that has been a stalemate for a long long time. if we want to get to the stalemate with all agree command we are getting agreement that we should change the way we measure success based on results and outcomes, not" an effort. if weif we can do that we could far better succeed in changing the status quo that having this fight we have been having for years. >> i don't think we have been having much of the final. new york is gone through this favorite toy five years it succeeded for a while. >> rubber door.

>> what do we as society value more? a person succeeding in life and shaping the destiny or person stuck in poverty and we're telling them hear is something to help you cope. what is the moral high ground. we can achieve that together specifically with grassroots leaders working together to show here is how you save souls. the moral high ground is they're. we should never in my. >> i think your right. >> i am really sorry.

>> sorry. >> thank you. >> some of the most -- the next panel. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> let's get underway. actually hold the title of phd is back. the effort phd's, some of us are guilty. the mudslinging starts. yes, indeed. i have asked pastors or a cystic around as the co- moderator. >> used adaptation. let me quickly introduce the panel and then we will here a little bit from allowing.

professor of economics. the full bios are in your program. professor lowery was one of the 1st academics to write thoughtfully that the program we have been discussing. twenty years ago 30 years ago, is inside the church office aei. his been they're. now that he is counting. clarence page is a syndicated columnist with the chicago tribune and was a winner of the pulitzer for: jerry. mr. pages been a loyal fan

of the grassroots approaches to the problems of the inner-city and as written eloquently with the programs represented. you have all -- editor of national affairs magazine and fellow at the ethics and policy center and he too has written recently. i highly recommend nsa he wrote in the journal long way around taking the long way which is a summary of principles by these programs the senior fellow at the manhattan institute. most recently the author of the comparable to get the masses that in the context of what we have been discussing is the author of a book written in the mid- 90s the future ones happened here talking about

the experience of new york city and the decline of civil society in the face of some of the government programs and cultural changes we have been talking about. of course you met the pastor before. when lowery we asked to talk very briefly and i should add quickly as phd status we used to going i greatly but we have in our for all of this. we're just going to have a free-flowing conversation right after professor lowery talks a bit about this program in the context of a fellow named james c scott who wrote this book seeing like a state which i think we will be a very valuable book for anyone interested in these questions. >> thanks. it is a pleasure to be here.

the earlier panels quite inspiring. the celebrity and political leaders intervention was also quite inspiring. i want to 1st yes i do have a phd and i am the alumnus of a halfway house were recovered from cocaine addiction and it changed my life. a christian dedicated community worker. the not bother me. when he used the n-word asking me what were you doing out they're on the streets of boston like any and showing rss, i could have walked. i could have certainly walked out. i am glad i stayed i did not no the answer that question at that time. at the pauses book of scientists.

he reminds the failure of massive state-sponsored interventions. he points out how they feel and that analyzes why they feel. bottom line some types of knowledge lose track of other kinds of knowledge are absolutely from the middle. make your communities work.

they don't the local knowledge that they need that they would need in order to be able to solve problem in a particular venue. people working on the ground personnel as helpful to have the knowledge. it pushes the letter knowledge of the stage interest in making room for the former. sometimes thatsometimes that can merely fail sometimes amazed massive disasters. it is never a good idea. and i just usually capitulated is your local ivy league professor. i made some notes as i was listening. it is not just the poverty industry.

the ideological stakes are huge. they were capitol relations international trade value of healthcare the credibility of diametrically opposed philosophies are ideologies about how to govern ourselves. this business is political. inescapably, necessarily. that does not mean it has to be partisan. to not see it is political the players are not simply poor people but to some degree they are pawns in a larger game would be to make a big mistake. and you know something is true. ipods. reverend so-and-so, minister paul -- so-and-so.

supposed to be secular. supposed to be not religious supposed to be states that going they're separation. but to actually reach people it would appear you have to go in a medium which does not articulate well with the kind of neutrality in a religiosity. i'm not trying to pick a fight. i'm trying to understand something about the terrain. i have a young man. he. he records it will get caught in the price is too high. i am not the. which one do you think is going to keep him on the straight and narrow? the constant monitoring to make sure he knows the cost of violet knows too high? the inculcation so that he

does not want to steal a candy bar because he is not the. that is an important thing to say to the left and right you have rejectionist materialist conceptions of human nature running rampant all across the political spectrum. finally my committee and my people don't tell me they're is no there there. the subject of your charity must smother them with the bigotry of low expectations. treat them like you would your own communities and people. don't patronize me.

>> a great segue into the question. >> in the world you registered. makes it stands in making bridges across that. >> just an historical note of people talking at the 1st time in washington. >> the enterprise institute in the mid- 70s with the beginning of a became the mediating structures project

also to listen. the theoretical account of the grassroots approach in a summons alive about the house of emotion in philadelphia. what we have, this gap, how can we. the wisdom of the grassroots in the council. >> thank you for extending the honor. my take is simple, education matters. we automaticallywe automatically assume it has to take place in school

building. education is ubiquitous taking place at home, and faith-based centers command halfway houses, and parking lots, takes place all over. the number one line item. k-12 and higher it combined. k-12 alone. we have money command we have money to invest. what can we do to make sure the investment is reaching the people it should meet. education matters and i need to rethink how. >> i we will start with a confession.a confession. i have a phd and worked on capitol hill. one of the things that struck me with the question keeps rising why don't people see this working and

send resources? i was left thinking about the great lakes two of the american constitution who was once asked why they're is such hostility to the american system. the problem with the american system is it works great in practice but never in theory. in a sense we are looking at something similar.similar. what is wrong with the theory? if we asked what is wrong with the theory we would find ourselves looking at different sorts of explanations. with stories like these an incredible people at the ones we heard from today something that a lot of people who work in social science, social work the political sphere implicitly do not believe that social capitol the thing that holds together, draws together, social capitol can be built not just destroyed, again not just spent and it is not only built and gained their

building norms that can be destructive, constructive, for the better or worse. they're always building community. the question is what do you build. sobuild. so much of our conversation is about what we're seeing destroyed them all we need to nourish and protect as if our entire's stock was created at the beginning of time and our job is to nourish it. we're always losing it doing stupid things. at the same time we always building new things. what arewhat are we building, how we will the building it? not nearly enough public policy thinks about the role government can play in creating a space for social capital to be filled in aa positive, nourishing way. it tends to think about how to manage these processes rather than nourishing the circumstances that let it happen.

we are no good at it. this is easily the most bipartisan fact the social policy. everyone agrees about the wrong question. how do we manage this problem. but we are hearing today is a part of the question we have to ask is how we nourish the space so that the people who want to solve the problems and to exist at the level of the problem meeting in face-to-face hand-in-hand can have a chance, have a shot. that does require us not to think about scaling up not to see what all of you are doing and think how we can turn that into a government program. the intentions are good. obviously in our situation they're is a kind of poverty all that is true. there are a a lot of well-meaning people going about trying to

solve these problems in a misguided way. we should be figuring out is how to create this base for people to arrive and help one another. i am not saying i have the answer but that is the question. >> i would like to speak as a token non- phd holder. >> i have a few honorary's. free speech. they give me another one. i am the token medium. some great questions you asked. but i really wanted to get to it. i wanted to ask him why he is not running for president

i have been following him around. bob wilson's guidance doing a great job of going out. let's go out they're before you start telling people listen to them. find out what is on there mind and how they are dealing with these problems. going out into civil society which is a real conservatism you know, developing civil society church, schools institutions bob wouldn't opened up my life back in the 80s can despair in chicago of all the insurmountable problems. in any case before i go on too long one thing the only

tool you have is aa problem to have a number of problems look like nails. how are language fails us in defining and diagnosing. especially true of our political language. i think scaling up and replicating. the policies i have seen. but difficult and conventional journalism. an old mentor of mine says that is what happened things are not going away there supposed to. as a result millions who are

not drug addicted are not in the news. in our. over they're sending hundreds of kids to college. that is not news. that is a major story. kids getting on the bus. a lot of ideas. i love something new. a knew idea showing promise. when it does work it is not news. it is hard to tell your city editor. this really works. we are less hysterical. they must be corruption. exploring all of us. in many cases i would like

to see a paul ryan or somebody else champion this. back in 96 as a running mate unfortunately the way our election campaigns are set up with the top of the ticket compare. deal with it as a journalist. generation public conversation about the. it would be so much easier

if civil society had his donald trump. candidate who is to promote not just themselves but to promote some real ideas the need to be talked about. my buddy said work this week. the same thing. others don't want to talk about it. the same thing talking about my cities and in chicago we had enough grassroots problems here in washington. traffic people interpret things and honest debate

about this we will come. waiting to see that happen. maybe four years from now. and at that age now. in that for years. thank you very much for letting me ramble on. >> thank you. one thing. i think your right about the traditional media that editors obviously are interested in bad news. if i may raise the evil of social media in the context of print journalism indicated that people we will be handed a bit from as much as the press only wants

to tell the bad news people are thirsty. the popularity of tapes that were made the fact that so many people attend and the 1st time command bob and i talked about this and obviously a number of us have the difficulty is always been an academic prose or in written prose or in written prose. the problem was converting stories independent. with social media we have a knew way of telling the story that sounds simple. burns has become an expert taking your stories and telling them in a compelling way of content. having we watched these dates yesterday it is not just inspiring pictures. they're is content.

you all describe your approach and your capacity to change people's lives in a very awful way. they're is as an intermediate platform between what we all deal with in terms of written scholarship and the stories themselves we have all knew way of conveying the good news. >> am glad you mentioned that. a 20th century guy this is why we have kids. this is your century. but i am learning to love twitter. ii understand the social media and the beginning understand. see whatsee what can happen in the last few years. the tea party movement arose largely because of social media. occupy wall street was because of social media. ideas, people can be a

platform now. like you said, they're are a lot of people who do want good news. they won hopeful news, news that shows they're is some prescription, not just a lot of symptoms. and i don't no it's is going butbut i want to live on you have to want to be part of it. whether we're just begin knowing the the value of social media or this sort of thing, to raise stuff like this. >> professor. >> a couple of things. i want to start off talking about cannibalism modifies. the army and california's votes effectively. this polarization. part is based on the fact that in the big cities like to north unit 85 percent vote for one candidate. it creates a difficult

situation. what that was talking about materialism that is right and it is not just marxist the libertarian. libertarians right, marxist left, both stout materialists who simply do not deal with the underlying spiritual moral dimension of life and that is if you get the mechanisms in place and everything else follows. i think they are just wrong. this is all political. butbut it is not just a question of being pawns. if you ask what organization what is most important and we have been the sei you service employees international union and the president of that union whose name i have displayed on the most powerful political force the country. and he is right.

they were and are. his polarization we are so fantastically polarized. we have not been as polarized since 1886. i am. i am a historian of these things seem obvious. 1896 is the year billion jennings bryan rennie is mckinley. mckinley carry the cities the areas of the country. o'brien carried the populist will america. and the polarization was overly dramatic. if anyone tells you somebody like buildable was he was a populist what there telling you is they don't no what the word means. you is a statist. in terms ofin terms of

populism popular support for deblasio why in a landslide according to my friends in the new york times some of the dumbest people i have ever met. he won with a small percentage of the vote since women got the right to vote in 1990 smallest percentage. that was a landslide. populism means it is not ease with germany more. in my work a little better for the tea party but not very well. let me say one thing about twitter. my youngest son who is among other things army ranger an article for the daily beast on twitter fascist. and it did not mean sarcastically. is talking about the people behind the hideous character during the. and it turns out -- donors. >> donors. whatever. obviously hideous character.

he had been following not metaphorical fascism telling your parents their fascist because they tell you you have to go to bed the real honest-to-goodness fascists, have been following the websites i read it. my younger son. >> exactly. it's only they tell me it is important, so i accepted. this was serious. he is deeply interested in fascism and the triumph and the possible triumph fascism based upon race will which was part of why he did what he did. the effect of social media is not only to intensify polarization but to reduce our collective intelligence. ..

>> >> but the grass-roots folks

are dealing with out there with young men in particular drifting off in many different ways. we are in the era of / mob politics with movements san leadership could pop up overnight. >> a question around religion come all of these testimonies with a peel away any of these models with the argument with is a means and not an end. if they come up with a means that is as effective but the

problem we have an is we have hijacked so much of the language. you talked about language but when you say morality with the religious construct here is a moral consensus required for civil society. then they all leave here with a chair because there is no security the assumption of the american model that we cannot control behavior into a consensus the assumption is a viable driving that i will stop. when i buy into that for us

religion helps people come to those so he does not talk about success of the clients but the language embraces the idea something bigger than a church member. that includes the allegiance to the flag under god. they can strike a chord is they can use these digital platforms. >> it is interesting and you are right that so much of the language of morality and

virtue has been kidnapped and incorporated as a weapon would everybody is talking about is recreating virtue and then see all points out it isn't something the we have been living off ever since a lot of these discussions sounds like that wants to have abandoned certain principles are institutions you lose ground all you can do is to send the reseeding borders of the familiar but what these folks have done is recreate a civil society to reinstitute a virtue that the founders principles that we all talk about

intellectually in a scholarly way they are vital to resurrect the allies said is an extraordinary thing. and it produces citizens not just economically productive but people who were viewed with virtue in that commitment to civil society with the american experience but anyway congressman ryan proposed opportunity grants which was a way to a collapse a lot of categorical funding into a voucher i know that is a bad word but i cannot remember what he called it, then that could be taken to any group in that has appealed to the

person indeed seeking help to cash out that categorical programs to put in the voucher. is that a good idea or are there other ways to freeing the a deal is that we have heard about are those experiences into the practice of public policy? and barry in mind it is politically fraught exercise that the professor was talking about. is this the ultimate goal? with the government more

charitable and giving. and that has positive benefits. to go into the meat grinder. >> then my readers told me. [laughter] everybody agrees on nothing. but the etf of a tax cut some more people have money for charity is a good idea

and one way to direct that money for the desirable end was a voucher and then you try to work up to a consensus. that they could then the better sales job with anything he says now he just wants to cut spending and this is another way to do a. >> i want to be cognizant of the gap of the political conversation that is real and the lack of politics. with the mayor and city council and now politics

drives this conversation. i have the code moderator estimate but to implement that policy. but with then rigo to the full conclusion you say it is a better bet you say it is called section 8 is called the housing voucher program with you take state or federal money where they lived as the administrator there should be rules and regulations in place. to make sure taxpayers dollars are invested properly but were you can

influence policy because they are not on his or her pack. when i work for governor rick scott great opportunity to say i live in the district because you have department heads frankly we don't always get together at the same time because it lithos gubernatorial candidates. >> i just want to sound a cautionary note of unintended consequences.

that those service providers are obtuse and then the federal government are in the business of standardizing or recover but that constitutional argument and then to satisfy that federal regulation. but one reason for the great success the work is happening at a human scale. that is why you early short of money and tried to solve

the problem to destroy what works. to say i understand your problem. and generally speaking people looked as successful scenes to wish that had a printing press for many. there is limits to that. and it is the real question true or false. you don't change the fundamental character to allow that to support things

to make sense. if you're spending hundreds of millions of dollars had read of it is working? >> in the most radical form i heard again end again that at the heart of these programs there is a human relationship that is way too bland a term to describe the bond that forms for those that are working here. it is an incredibly close human relationship has as many varieties and forms as

the people they work with. almost every one of these relationships you tailor a plan for each person does this rule out any kind of peaceful intervention? number one. is there nonetheless a role for philanthropy and private charitable giving? but to give to and dollars to the united way but we have substantial wealthy donors who are giving a lot of money and foreign and results from government.

but i'm sure the comes to mind. so for the private sector to bridge the gap? >> with that private sector philanthropies are very good for accountability and to keep better track of that money in my experience than government agencies do. until the u.s. attorney steps in somebody had should have done this sooner than

that and then to break dash up with those philanthropies and secondly with the flexibility. for example, public housing is one. a a great idea initially but then it turns out the highlights of public housing was wonderful for seniors the terrible for families. so we had to learn the hard way. then there was more cooperation between president bush and mayor daley and bill clinton

administration. after the high-rises were torn down and were dispersed throughout when the older gang bangers were in prisons as a result of that. so this is one of the big problems of the government program. that doesn't mean you should not try to house people. so you do that but i am optimistic gone though whole to be public-private partnerships with philanthropy and government together.

>> let me throw na word of caution about philanthropy. three very large philanthropy's. with the experiments of urban reforms also the center in the non-political since they were just as an accountable as government to save not criminally beretta of the edge. not because the people were mean but baltimore is the only city i have ever been to to go to a high-end party there were drug dealers at the party. this is before the wire by the way. [laughter]

plenty of reason the pastors are so important is what people don't recognize. is especially prevalent that with late term abortions and. but it does not produce a the says. and his hard to see in the united states of america. >> you mentioned you have a contract so they have a public-private partnership with the people i your church to invest money giving way to many.

mentioning getting money in different places there is a role for public-private partnership ever like to add the role of a venture capitalist to not only make a profit the justin a different way. >> his church in new jersey is a prime example of of halt any effective grass-roots group can take over rimini to do good things with the. -- with its. but one thing is clear for all of us that there is not that kind of hard core libertarian objection of the

government probe -- programs as such with government funding. if i could make a quick observation. what always surprises me is the most effective grass-roots leaders in the country. you can count on one hand the numbers of foundations. as you have pointed out. [laughter] there are many foundations. with the of modest means to locate a grass-roots group to see pastor surely i have heard of firework i will write a check for $25,000 by

the way i want to talk to you about the replication and program who else in your community is doing work not exactly like yours but operating on similar principles getting similar results in a slightly different area i bet you know, those people and could say to this foundation person you can hold me responsible for the integrity. >> with all the headlines with the children in foster

care called the governor to say we want to help you. for what you should work with but 99 out of 100 times before it looks for effective organizations. >> the foundations of almost complete freedom to do whatever they want to do well as long as it is giving money that can certify rand and yet they follow the same stale old patterns. >> but i point out the

difference to indicate a lot of bad a zest with amazing resources with the lack of ability because they are formal and informal systems with those anecdotal type of reports that is why it was so important that paul ryan would just not to go himself but to establish a model for policy makers to see the other side of the policies. tyrolese have a couple dozen

to do for them that there is potential to create some replication. >> everyone of those have wealthy supporters that have charitable budgets and chances are they write those checks that come to washington to lobby. day cancel out there political spending with charitable spending is what they're doing. and the wealthy person starts to look for those grassroots leaders of course, the first go to the center because the introduced as all.

but the pastor once to ask a question. >> when that government plays a role on a lot to let government off the hook to look anecdotal if you can think of away as fun and entertaining with four or 5 million but what i am saying someone attempts to

replicate that at a level of throw one in at a time and then thought-provoking ideas mallees did is better than a we have now. will no agreements are written for people and we understood. we know this language.

i remember when we were fully incarcerated and the government found a way to twist that idea to the point that ron their particular side of the issue could be funded but it is late but i really only to understand i am being dead serious i don't think he has a shot. i may not be invited back but i don't think it has gotten the shot. we could be wrong. but we have not gotten the

platform on the scale of a level of can this work? if you ever get that opportunity we're always in the bushes with the moonshine to figure that out. if it takes a government agency. >> the challenge we have faced over the years with fundamentalists believed is some most people left and right is the people that we serve when you elect a

republican governor that conservatives to not know how so you go to any welfare office you will see money going to the same so that is why it is important for those of you to do what paul is doing to listen and learn to try and find out how that can change not just dories of people were doing things we just tap them on the head

but they need to understand the feeling in the midst of the crimes and drug infested neighborhoods to have a solution to the empty that they see those that are part of that wealth the community because if they can find remedies then maybe they can help people so to meet white fables of fortune with these people have but you don't want it is an important book because what this demonstrates is there are no limits.

and culturally the file was wealthy but he did not get it and doesn't understand he has a problem. but they were educated that we all have something to learn. if you are poor you can fantasize and if you had money and must be horrible to be rich. [laughter] but if you have all of the resources but then the answer seems to be suicides i hope that this forum for

the low income the challenge that i have learned to be on tap but not always on time. sova to be used when he came to run the gain conferences to transform the results and from one of the grassroots leaders that when we're a vote to bring people together where the common denominator then america has

a chance it is what we saw so we can come together my family are wonderful people that just for this session to spend the day taking a two word -- to work to find out how could they be used more effectively to serve him. >> but went bankrupt and

came back where we develop products to reduce bloodstream infections by 70 percent so in that time i know many wealthy people who are giving back but they give back the infrastructure that this is what happened and in our little saying that we really want to investigate them working on

the plan but i grew up for most of my life as a single mother and i was ashamed of that. it was such a blessing. the only as poor as a little girl also with my children but we came back. but my husband had a mentor who helped us to take the 401k which sounds like a lot

but was not at the time. we started from there and seven of the children are part of the family business. but we will in to give money but we're giving it to the wrong, when i met bob it has to be organic. we can be the foundation to be the support like bob to get the job done. then we're going around washington cop cop -- [applause] that is the truth of what deion was saying earlier to the degree it is felt the

people that are in the authority and power to have the capacity to understand that there on the comeback trail, is in just a full two are here we all have stories we have to be in touch with that story to understand of what these folks are doing. >> of for the pulitzer prize winners were. [laughter] take one last shot. >> whenever anybody wants to do. >> the money that will come from people like you is much better than what is still

true through from government. it is better at the state level but better if not done through government at all. >> one of the things.

>> he is not only standing but i will say this he has been dropped by some of the best politicians in the country. i have come to appreciate this more and more he has worked tirelessly with the politicians to get the resources to tell your stories to them one in share bring new tune the attention of the public and they move

on to something else san they win the election they don't need bob anymore and they dropped him and bob has remained without bitterness throughout the whole thing in a way that amazes me. i would be so angry if i experienced one-third of what bob has experienced from the politicians and intellectuals and the elites who make this public policy it is an extraordinary testament to his character we need to get his autobiography published as soon as possible. with that kind of depth of character. thank you to the panel.

ha

[inaudible conversations] good morning. welcome to the heritage fund asia and. we appreciate you coming out today. i am with the strategic communications here at heritage to sponsor this. i want to introduce our moderator. the director and also the senior fellow from the heritage fund asian rewrites

and speaks on a variety of topics. prior to coming to heritage he would end it served as a law clerk to two federal judges than as an assistant united states attorney and deputy assistant attorney general at the department of justice and is also served as executive vice president and director for anti-piracy operation for the motion picture association of america. and a resident of pepperdine and general counsel at the commission for international please join me too well, john malcolm. [applause] >> i think i will see my comments from here. hello to everybody it is the annual review of the term for the supreme court than whites a chairman was.

last year we said the contradiction that has been a solid term for conservatives but they share is a different story while conservatives cheer the results to experience significant and surprising losses in some of the major cases this term and to the you hear from perceived a discernible left shift on the court judge who have assembled an excellent panel to discuss the major cases of the term and each panelist has argued many cases before the united states supreme court and are considered among the elite group of practitioners. i will mention each from briefly and then time permitting take questions. to my immediate left is my partner where he focuses his

practice on the constitutional appellate civil rights and litigation against the federal government with the reagan administration he served in several positions with the department of justice including deputy assistance and a deputy assistant attorney general. he has argued in front of the high court and virtually every federal appellate court in the country. to his left is john who are geared to cases including the united states where he specializes in appellate litigation and prior to joining he served in a number of significant positions within the justice sippar including an assistant solicitor general and deputy for of legal counsel. while there he received several awards for exceptional service and for

distinguished service. he also curve toward judge daniel mahoney and the kennedy on the supreme court. to his left arguing the williams vs. florida bar case this past term and his partner he focuses on appellate litigation and advocacy for other legislative bodies and regulatory agencies with a variety of policy and legal issues. is serving as assistant solicitor general during the clinton administration serving as general counsel at department of commerce. so let's get right into it. with its talk about one of the most controversial cases of same-sex marriage.

tell us your impression of that case. >> let me know if you cannot hear me. i will give very little with background because i assume you already know if you are here. 1993 the supreme court recognized the right to same-sex marriage a little fuzzy on the details but in response to that in numerous states enacted losses that even explicit marriage was a flawed as i was in one manner one will give people brought challenges in heavy part based on justice kennedy opinion decouple terms ago with the windsor that most car court saw the writing on the wall and that is the way it went down in the supreme court and tell think anybody was surprised.

my thoughts in no particular order comedy opinion by justice kennedy was not a great surprise he had written the majority of opinions to expand the rights of gays. and that course in windsor and like many kennedy opinions on big topics that was long on rhetoric short of our legal analysis. i dunno because there was a term kennedy would say it is said teaching case in chambers said no foul was directed to the public or law students. i wouldn't be surprised because he emphasizes

footnotes and opinions and this is the case period accessible to the layperson i wonder if that is by design. as we were chatting before i said i was at a wedding recently with the officiant actually quoted windsor and this opinion will displace that of the wedding market. [laughter] to talk about different layers of scrutiny very little analysis on case law but is important how it did it because the court is house is officially you define those rights and how rigorous you have to tie the fundamental rights to a historical practice. the highwater mark was footnote number six that was

only joined by two justices. but to the most specifics level to denying protection to be identified so obviously with that case he would have had to have a very specific tradition of same-sex marriage in this case and the physician assisted suicide case that set the standard to emphasize how important it is a toolkit that historical practice that they could be suddenly transformed with the members of the court. there are two primary features with those fundamental rights and liberties that they're deeply rooted in tradition

and and this took a big step back and this is not unusual for kennedy to explicitly overruled. frequently he would ignore conflicts or see them as consistent with prior case law. as there were so fundamental but the heritage is the new favorite pair graf with said june creches the wrote the bill of rights do not know

about the freedom in all of its dimensions so they entrusted future generations with liberty as we learn its meaning. of we mean by that is part of the supreme court. moving on what does this mean for religious liberty? even though justice kennedy himself put some language in their to suggest we have respect for religious liberty i am sure most if you are aware of that argument when the solicitor general was asked the question about that with religious institutions that we don't recognize same-sex relationships to save verite say question about that the

battleground to be interesting to see what happens even though justice kennedy feels it is more than enough he is not worried what this would be used for. justice o'connor a fan of the lucy doozies standards has not been happy for the application and i think justice kennedy just my reaction to what he has written in cases was displeased with the application was applied more liberally than he would have liked when he was working on that joint opinion in that case. it is a very interesting opinion with the significance of the media holding in the implication for the process going forward.

>> i would gsa a couple of things. and may not be a coincidence i am on the left of the panel. [laughter] i do think i totally agree the treatment in space he read is important parts of the opinion and the boldest step justice kennedy has taken in that direction but what is interesting is in that paragraph and the parts that preceded it, he does try to rouge that it regionalism and it has amplified it in the world of scholarship. what was the original intent ? that what were the framers views of t