that is the second part of our mandate. it is more challenging i would say which is involving young people in politics which is what we're talking about. in a different way because one way of all people in politics the other issues how to get people involved in everyday politics and taking responsibility. i think it is my experience, first of all that you have to set an example. if you let people your age to vote you have to do the work so conversing in the streets. we opened up shop in the middle of my constituency. >> ..

you are. >> the good thing is that you put yourself into a position to change things. no party asks you to lie. but the main idea that young people have -- if they are volunteers they are asked to lie. so the second lesson that i had to show young people our age that they have the possibility to do things and try out what they are really passionate about so that there can be possibilities and they can have

a possibility of doing things. >> i want to come back and ask, when we were discussing this shift from campaigning with what we experienced in 2008 and what some people may have said was a disappointment and there were not enough things for people to do to help the governor's agenda, are you thinking about this? is the government comes in, and what is your thinking on that remark. >> for sure, that definitely part of it. we are mobilizing more people to get involved in politics and how do we go forth with that and how do we keep people engaged. first because they want to be engaged and also they would help the democratic process continue because people think that we only wanted to engage with them because there is an election and

that is not going to speak well for us and so a lot of the ideas in this stuff was successful because we learn from each other. and we would say we have this, it was very effective, i think we have a lot to learn from our grassroots community and so it's definitely something that has been actively talked about and how do we do that moving forward with their constituents and also other areas where we didn't necessarily win but we engage a lot of people. >> from the research, what is it that people are asking for a rematch when it comes to their involvement. >> we have engaged with them and it is a dialogue. and we are talking about the need for this because it is the

21st century. don't just use it as another form of lecturing. you have to do it properly which is why you need young people in both sides of the discussion who know how to use social media and connect with young people. so when you're asking young people and making suggestions, i think that's a point that we can just touch on, you can't just leave it to a few months or a need for an election to suddenly change because you need to have this genuine dialogue all the time and it needs to be an initiative rather than a campaign. because young people, there needs to be a lot more people creating a very genuine

engagement. and so these are young people that are completely part of the political spectrum. >> opening up to people. i just want to go back to something that you said earlier about doing things, the fact that you and your young colleagues worked together on an employment opportunity. has that changed the perception of young people and the fact that you can collaborate with members of different parties to do things for them? have you seen a change in the way people feel about you, have you managed to show them the more together and actually achieve things?

>> it was really hard, it was a very difficult time. there was a sense of a divide between a grassroots movement and the populist party. but we thought that it was worth a try to try to engage them and we do engage them on specific issues and so it is so terrible especially with young people between the ages of 18 and 29 years old. so we needed to give this response to that. but that does not translate so we have to be honest.

>> let's talk to the gentleman in the front row here. do we have a microphone? >> i would likely asked the issue about climate change. , as is the future. >> i think it's definitely an issue that young people care about, but it is on us as people who are reading these movements and if they want to have a conversation about it to engage them in a productive conversation and work with them. i think working on this perspective why that has been successful is because we kind of have structured a model that is

very much outside of the traditional political system to plug into a movement where they are the agents of change, but i think that it's something that is applicable to any number of climate change concluded. >> i think he you may have just missed something in the five is definitely up there and they're certainly discussion groups. the lady at the back there. >> hello, i'm a junior studying here is part of the program and my question is even that we have representatives from across the transatlantic policy perspective, what would you say is the collaboration that we might need to move the needle and engage millennialist.

[laughter] >> i think that what really struck me is that even in different countries we do have the same challenges with similar solutions. we have successes with young people like the leaders that we spoke about. and we should develop this with young people. and there is a big difference between this and the grassroots movement to revise the whole idea of the process in the which is something that we had in different parts of the european

countries. demonstrating that that process is meaningful today. and so i think that there are some issues, one is climate change and the second one is issues like migration and stability that do require more progressive policies like human trafficking control and a stronger assertion of human rights, i think that these are issues that in my country are part of young people. >> how are people feeling about the refugee crisis. and how does that come out in the research. >> usually there is a big young people movement, helping out in

the street where these people arrive. there is a big personal involvement. it is also respect to those kinds of instances where young people go and do things and we should be there with them to help and that dean in an institution you can do much more so you can be multitasking. >> i think what is also interesting about what you just said is that you are doing kind of something outside of passing legislation that is in the health like delivering food or something. and it's using your position and your giant microphone to engage other people. by making real social change.

>> we have been unfolding as the research has been progressing. we are finding a consistent picture are talking about immigration in a positive way. they enjoy being part of the multicultural surprise. however we found in certain countries that there are certain concerns and i think in general what we have picked up is that younger people are mor frustrated with the lack of initiatives and kind of coming-out and humanitarian and they have began to push for change. and so we have found more resistance and concerned than

earlier on. >> did that play a role in the canadian campaign to . >> it was a uncle's family, but they did have relatives in canada and i think that they started the official immigration process and i think it did play into the election and people were very concerned. at one point of the election that is where partisanship kind of toned down which was nice to see. and so i think that was one of our key campaign promises to have over 25,000 refugees before the end of the year. so i think that one thing the last couple of days is that refugees needs to be an

opportunity and now the government is trying to push forward. >> hello, i'm a policy advisor. what we are experiencing now in europe, we talked about the issue of authenticity and how important it is and of course this is the right way to go. you don't just engage with young people, you have to be doing this and long-term. what we see in the states is politicians being lured by the powers of populism and that is another shiny way of engaging with young people. and in certain countries we see

that this medium is thoughtful, politicians engage with younger people because they found emotional, they found populace. and that is a way to be popular amongst younger generations as well. so i just wanted to get an opinion across the panel on how difficult it is to not go down this road of populism. and appear authentic and this time. it is definitely popular. >> i think we have a strong responsibility. especially in europe we do have a strong request from young

people and they are grounded requests, it's not like it used to be in the past. that includes the possibility of having children is going to be lowered and we do have that responsibility and i think that they are not doing that. they are not using a productive way. this until in the sense younger generations show that it is less politically motivated and a sense been ideologically motivated. they are a lot more realistic and it's up to whoever to be

able to take this out of the request and make this doable. >> are they attracted to the millennial generation? >> yeah, i mean, on your point about having a responsibility to be authentic, i think what is important is to be true to what the angle is and again i'm going to speak about the campaign, which is different than being a candidate in the issue we are organizing around and so it's actually that disillusionment with the institution that even

makes a campaign possible in the first place and that it is operating kind of outside the normal legislative process to make a change here and then bring the politicians in after, you know, making a cultural change and so it is realistic to have an answer to the problem. and so that includes organizing around a specific issue, what is so valuable is to have not just one kind of populist answer but to have a chorus of voices on the same message and i think that it's that kind of mosaic and rich tapestry of voices promoting the same message that increases the likelihood that you are going to relate to one of them and find the message relatable. so in terms of the populism idea, i think that bringing in more people to have different perspectives is what really

brings in a wider swath of people. [inaudible] and so feeling that we need to do a much better job of listening and having that two-way dialogue. i haven't heard you talk about personal entrepreneurship because maybe i missed it. but my sense is that there are smart untransformed governments,

social entrepreneurs, businesses and solutions collaborative way. and so i think the colonials are really less interested in institutions and hierarchy and more interested in being action oriented and that is what you have said as well. so my question is where is the social entrepreneurship in the equation. my feeling is that governments are and politicians are behind the curve. that a lot of the challenges are being addressed globally rather than going out and tackling them and they are led by younger people. and that governments and people are trying to stay up and they are a little bit out of date. i would like to chat about that and get perspective.

>> i think that young people should be involved at every level. and that we should be encouraging systems. >> i think it has come down that 80% of young people would like to start their own business. that's more of an attitude with life rather than just a specific sector of their engagement for their future life. so i do agree that young people have a for sharing attitude and the way that they are and i think that the great challenge is how to integrate this which is a lot more modern and away

from the selection of candidates and of course we had to make it more flexible to accommodate the society that needs individuals to be more empowered to do things. so i think that be able to have young people and express the potential in these sharing ways that they work. >> i think one of the things that we were able to really do is empower people to say that this is who i am and this is what i care about and it's not so much that i want to be me being involved in politics as i would like to bring about change

it wasn't that they really identified with us as a party but maybe as a particular policy that we were pushing for and i think that was really important. i think the challenge for us is to continue the dialogue and make sure that it is a two-way conversation as i said and that it's not just sort of, you know, we said we would do this, so now we are going to do this, but things happen and change and now we always have to keep that conversation going and that's what we have to focus on. >> yes, i think that when i saw the data, almost 20% of young people want to start their own business and take kind of like challenges into their own hands and solve them. i think that one of the western you want to answer is how this government institutions, how do we support that kind of initiative and how do we keep them and the momentum going

while still working towards engaging people more and also kind of fixing this broken system to allow them to thrive. >> i think that politics stands out as a bit of a dinosaur when it comes to this in their a lot of works with industry set or is it have middle managers there as well and very often it is the millennial is it really hold the answers and who people say is this possible, can we do this. so i think that politics may have this image, that if i don't get involved in that light actually be engaged or capable or will i have to start and put my way through this group.

because i think that reflects the figures that we see young people considering being politicians. i think he would've asked that question 10 or 20 years ago it could have been much more exciting. >> i think one thing that was exciting for us is that we ran a data center campaign and we were using databases and technology in terms of management that really sort of took the hierarchy of other things. because people that were younger tended to be more technologically savvy than that really made a difference in engaging young people in the campaign. so i'm going to tell you how to do things just in terms of what we were trying to do and it was more applicable and young people

seemed to take two more quickly. >> we are running out of time, just making one quick comment there. >> hello, i have a question. >> this is needed and it's wonderful what people all over i've been coming to. it demands a fair answer from politics in what has to be done. and my kids are studying at the university and there is no space anymore available because all sports are full of refugees and this is a magnitude of those that demand that the young

generation is doing so much and that we need a european answer. >> i would like if everyone could just join me in thanking our panelists with what i thought would be a wonderful discussion. >> as i said at the beginning, i hope this is the beginning of a conversation, we are really excited about thinking how we as young people can push the institutions that we work with to be more receptive to our generation. so i think that we have a responsibility to think about how we push politics and politicians and i think that example about data being he an equalizer is an incredibly

important one. and we can actually prove that things can be successful, whatever those tactics and tools are that we can share with other campaigns and young people who are engaging in the political process of the day can be more successful and push those institutions both from the inside and outside and i think that pressure of pushing social change and then pushing it from the inside we can actually get to the place where the values and the issues that young people care about her being affected in institutions of power. i look forward to working with you all. ..

>> thank you for your support and for the kids for just saying no. thank you. [applause] >> my hope is that the women of the future will feel truly free to follow whatever paths.

>> i think they thought that the white house was so glamorous and -year-old, what you did was so glamorous layaway -- your life was so glamorous command the parties. and i. and i have to tell you, i never worked harder in my life. >> nancy reagan served as longtime political partner, ferocious protector command ultimately as caretaker for president ronald reagan. she was active with key staff decisions, policymaking command campaigning commission a drug use her signature initiative. sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern. influence and image, examining the public and private lives of the women

who filled the position of first lady and their influence on the presidency. sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv. audience. this is an hour. >> good afternoon and welcome. i am the president of >> good afternoon and welcome.welcome. i am the president of the carnegie endowment for international piece. it is an honor and privilege thus you have had the good fortune are intimately familiar. the misfortune of the ashanti with them.

the house of representatives. bernie is not only one of our nation'snation's most remarkable minds but also a remarkable colleague in public servant and i ami am pleased that he has joined us this afternoon to preview the historic paris climate conference which is later this month. joining us on stage is my friend, steve clemons, the washington editor at large for the atlantic. steve is a dc institution, someone who has followed and shape the most significant policy debates of our time command i cannot think of a more consequential debate

than the one on climate policy and diplomacy. there diplomacy. there is no question when the overarching challenges facing the united states and the world climate change ranks of the top. the facts are as clear as they are compelling. all but one of the ten hottest years in history has occurred in the 21st century. arctic sea ice has lost half its area and three quarters of its volume. sea level has risen presenting a real and present danger to half the world's population that lives on or near coastline. these of when the department of defense to conclude climate change poses an immediate risk. the report argues that climate change as ais a threat multiplier the next nearly all other global challenges more severe and intractable. under president obama's leadership they and their colleagues has spent the

past several years billion international coalition to combat climate change. they look to put that coalition to work insecure concrete action that we will slow and hopefully refers today's dangerous trendlines. we are fortunate he has agreed to make a pitstop at carnegie. [applause] >> mr. secretary. thank you steve, let me make a few remarks. let me think you who is just a fabulous >> first, let me congratulate in many administrations on a number of issues including our favorite shared issue on the rand negotiation. i have to say just last weekend i was in the middle east and it's always, phil burns slept here in every hotel we go to.

it's really fun to work with him. thank you for the opportunity to come here today and actually with this discussion we are releasing a report that i will come back to called revolution now but let me just say a few words about our pathway. it's it's especially the department of energy role that i will focus on today going into paris. i'm going to discuss the very farias issues bill talked about in terms of climate risk and talk about the solutions and our approach, which is not surprising from the department of energy will be very technology focus. we are advancing the theme that energy and technology innovation and the cost reductions are

ultimately key to meeting our challenges in climate change first, lower-cost clean-air solutions enable policy to move forward more quickly. in the context of paris, we are at a pretty remarkable place compared to a year ago. i think the joint announcement in beijing last year changed change the conversation globally. the fact that both countries have moved forward with important national steps of commitment to their targets, the united states with a clean power plant, for example and china with its cap trade announcement has really helped move commitments now by over 160 countries, commitments that are

taken together and are quite reasonably ambitious. commitments that when executed, would really move the needle on our approach to climate change. we also know that nevertheless, these are not 2°c when taken collectively. maybe it's closer to three, however here is where the integration comes in. with continued cost reduction, what we would see is that enabling increasing inhibition as time goes on. that notion has certainly been confirmed by many of our international partners. third, in terms of why this agenda is so important, if we anticipate, going forward -- by

the way i'm not only talking 2025, i'm talking 2050, we are 2050, we are going to have to keep pushing down emissions. we will have to bring everyone along including the least developed countries who have many challenges in providing citizens. we are going to need this cost-reduction to continue. so again, this is a central theme that we will be advocating , and i should say, that will be two stops in paris. as bill mentioned, next week i will have the pleasure of sharing the biannual energy report and then of course that will be followed a week and a half later by the top 21

meanings in paris including december 8, a day that day that the french host have labeled innovation day to continue the theme. we will be advocating this in effect continuously from now until the end of the meetings and then of course next year we get down to the real job of implementing that agenda. i would like to use steve and the rest of our time at the appropriate point to discuss the revolution now report and also talk about some of the technologies we will showcase over there. with your permission, let me show one graph. >> one graph. >> they are cool graphs actually. we won't dwell on this right now but this is the first draft out

of the revolution now report and what it shows is as you can see, the indexed cost reductions over the last six or so years in five technologies, land-based wind, utility scale, distributed, battery cost for electric vehicles and led lights. what you can see is minus 40%, minus 50%, minus 60%, minus 70% and -90% as cost reduction in just a half-dozen years and this technology this technology. it's a remarkable story not well enough known. that's why we are trying to highlight it with this and the kind of story that we need to continue, not only for these five technologies but all of the others as well. >> let me ask you the obvious question with this drop in price reduction. if we in the aggregate have been able to achieve such dramatic scale and drop in price without

pricing carbon, then why do we need to price carbon? >> first of all if there were a carbon price, and i said if there were, were, i didn't say that was our policy, but if there were it would clearly have the advantage of an economy wide approach in terms of the least cost approach probably through the market mechanisms for achieving low carbon. that is still necessary in my view but again, these kinds of cost reductions make that or another policy mechanism going forward easier. some of this is clearly happening in a dramatic way. leds, let's say as the most impressive of those cost

reductions, we have gone from very small deployments a half-dozen years ago when even though the lifecycle costs was in your favor, it was kind of a big barrier to put down 20 bucks for a light fixture. now it has come down to literally months of payback. and we have 80 million deployed. >> you were telling me the other night that india was about to go gangbusters on led. if i didn't get that wrong. >> india is making mass purchases of led. they have a current order for a few hundred million, over three years, and with that they have driven the cost down for them to 1 dollar. amazing. of course their goal, they don't

want to use that to distribute to their rural population where introducing lighting at this time is a game changer, literally a life changer for families and of course the idea is that with leds requiring roughly one sixth of the power it dramatically reduces what they need to pay to get the source of electricity for the lighting. >> many people in the environment energy world see the transition that you are talking about here as big cost to the u.s. economy. they think that will lead to decreased competitiveness. this came up in the gop debate when marco rubio said we just can't go down that path, the costs are too high. without being specific to rubio, is this a response to those critics who think the retrofitting of the u.s. economy around these next generation technologies is not what they

would argue a big part of it. >> it is certainly a big part of it and i do want to emphasize that certainly any of the reliable economic models of the economy suggest that going to low carbon has a very, very small impact on the gdp. so it's kind of a macroeconomic impact that's very smart. however there are distributional effects and that's where i think one gets into the politics, economics, et cetera because clearly any change in a society has some dislocations that society has to adjust to. that's where the administration, we are sensitive to the idea of needing to provide assistance to certain kinds of communities in

area where the distributional impact may be felt. certainly the idea that this is a drain on the overall economy is just incorrect. >> isn't there an issue, not that i want --dash i want to recognize the predecessor here. most of the panelists were talking about whether iran and the nuclear deal and syria and then jessica said we have to focus on climate. it was a very compelling thing and i raised a question about was this climate issue seen as a wishy issue by other more muscular or could it hold its own as a topic? i'm asking a question on urgency and whether you feel this issue that we are preparing for in paris hangs with the other security issues of the day.

>> you should always listen to jessica. >> the answer is yes. if we take 2 degrees, we are pretty much halfway there, however we have cooked in a lot more because it takes quite a while for the atmosphere and the oceans to come into equilibrium. having said that, what are the consequences? well a very simple one is in fact rising sea levels. there we can easily see, putting aside for the moment the drivers of extreme weather, put that aside for a moment, you see the amplification of the impact because of higher sea level. that is one example. secondly, let's not put aside

the extreme weather drivers. again we cannot associate individual events, but we know the amplification effect on extreme weather. we know that the patterns of extreme drought and rainfall are exactly what was predicted decades ago, quite literally. we know that in turn leads to issues like extreme wildfire. we know that leads to disease factors specifically, i will talk about my beloved western forests. we are seeing the impact and other countries are seeing the impact. we know we have already cooked in additional impact. the the minimization of those impacts is absolutely critical. that is why we cannot afford to sit back and expect the characteristics 50 year

timeframe for historical major changes in the energy system. you just can't do it. we don't have the time. by the way, when president obama put out his action plan in june of 2013, he started off by saying look, we would love to work with congress on a legislative approach. something that could have an economy wide impact of the type we discussed earlier, have a market-based optimization, but then he also added we don't have time to wait. in the meantime we are going forward with using whatever administrative authorities we already have for an aggressive program. this is inherently a sector by sector approach using authority rather than the economy wide approach we could have if we can

work with congress on an appropriate legislative solution. >> what is the mathematical equation look like overtime when we have such a dependence today on fossil fuel sources of energy and we were with the leaders of that energy the other night but even with this you are not to reach the scale that displaces the overwhelming dependence on fossil fuel for many decades. how do you deal with that as this dirt of the whole portfolio? what is the equation equipment can go faster because of this or is it simply an incorrect assertion that wind, solar and other cannot achieve a greater scale than predicted question it. >> first of all, by the way on the technology side clearly for solar and wind in particular, the scale, even much more dramatically than we have now does require other solutions whether it's a combination of

grid storage, smart grid, all of these possibilities. let me go back a step. as you know some like the expression and some don't, i personally never tire of it, the all above approach. there are too many people who like the some of the above approach and some mean my favorite technology as the silver bullet. that's not going to work. there is not going to be a single low carbon solution for the world. there won't be a single solution for the united states. we will have a dramatic regional differences. we say all of the above but let me make very clear, all of the above starts out with a commitment to low carbon. now the statement is that we need a certain department of energy responsibility to advance the research and development demonstration for all fuels for a low carbon world.

so for coal, for example, it's very clear. that means advancing and engaging in the same kind of cost reduction or carbon capture utilization sequestration. what about natural gas. it is natural gas part of the problem or part of the solution? the answer is yes. [laughter] right now it is clearly part of the solution. it has a major role in co2 reduction through its market-driven substitution for coal in many places. however, not in this decade or the next decade perhaps, but as we go to a trajectory of ever lower carbon emissions, then natural gas will be to carbon heavy and go to sequestration. in terms of fossil fuels, what

we need to think about is that if you look at solutions to climate change, typically what you find is number one, and again i'm not talking short-term like ten or 15 years, i'm talking going out many, many decades, that the demand side of energy efficiency conservation always have to be a big part of the solution. i don't believe we can supply side our way out of the challenge over the long-term. supply is still important. what is the next sector, if you like, where you will cd urbanization? where you will see

decarbonization? many industrial processes are very, very well tuned, or have processes that are amenable to carbon capture. you have an ethanol plant or a natural gas plant, they tend to have, getting slight in slightly technical, co2 that is slightly cheaper to capture. the transportation sector is likely more challenging. for one thing, you have smaller mobile sources rather than large point sources and the reality is there is no higher energy density per cubic foot than a petroleum-based fuel. that's just a fact of life. that is obviously very

convenient for transportation vehicles. nevertheless, we have a three-pronged strategy to address that. one is efficiency of vehicles. part of that are café standards but a lot of it is standards of efficiency. >> biofuel and electric vehicles. there you go. >> tell us what it was like for you when you heard about the volkswagen scandal. in the end to the epa has to investigate. >> obviously, given the apparent evasion of some of these measurements, it's something we can't tolerate and we won't. i think the epa is correctly moving.

>> how many do you think are out there? >> i hope none, but obviously the epa will move toward mobile testing to do the measurement in real world drive cycles in use. we are driven to that. hell volkswagen resolve that issue with the regulators here --dash but it did take you off? >> well it was not nice. >> i did read a report which i hope folks will pick up and i understand that, i want to go to the audience real quick, but the doe role in this is you know you're working on vehicles and truck efficiencies and there is a fascinating array of things. it's always interesting when i meet people like you, i know you

know the things in the energy field that were not talking about that we don't even know about. you know what the moon shots are that are cool. i like that part of the report that flirted with some of the things that were coming on in the future. can you share with us a little bit about what's not in the report and what's a little further on. >> next week in paris, i mentioned technology showcase, these are technologies, but let me go quickly, how about flying wind turbines. >> i didn't know he was going to do this. >> about a 50-megawatt nuclear reactor that can be built in the factory and just taken over the highways to a site? how about a great efficient outside fuel shell? how about a great driver.

how about, i was looking at the audience, approximately a quarter of you, you should remember this is the 50th anniversary of the shelby core. this is. >> well i'll take you for a ride. >> our laboratory and companies, but this displays a 3d printed car. >> this is an electric vehicle but the point is, things like new manufacturing processes are highly efficient and that's going to part of the light waiting whether it's applied in a cold plant or a nuclear plant, and many thermal plant dramatically increase the

efficiency of the plant. this is a hybrid solar thermal technology. it is an novel thing. those are examples. >> how did you know i was going to ask that question. >> thank you. actually those are going to physically be in paris next week so that we can display to the ministers who are there why ambition is a good thing in addressing climate change and this will be part of the solution. >> that's an amazing thing so when you sort of look at all of that, what is the doe, how does it actually work how does the r&d system function? i do know your role in the

nuclear arena. it's very well described but not very well understood. >> first of all it is highly varied and let me give you a different example to highlight that. let me start by saying this is by no means our full research effort but certainly, we have 17 national laboratories and they play an essential role from everything from energy to nuclear science and our security responsibilities. in terms of how it works it is quite varied. if i start at the very basic research and, we have currently a net worth of 32 energy frontier research centers. this is use inspired basic science. first we bring the community together. 1500 scientists defined the course science challenges that would underpin future technology

breakthroughs. each one of these centers is addressing one of those problems and doing it effectively. our three was created in 2009. rpe was created for higher risk investments. for example that hybrid solar things was one of the rpe projects. i might say we believe that program is underfunded by a factor of three in terms of innovation and american capacity to innovate. let me take other examples. sequestration, we have a set of demonstration projects. they are risky but a a couple of them that are already working

and we will have a cold plant turning on in 2017 with carbon capture, we have an industrial plants and we either use the co2 for enhanced oil production or we put it into a very deep formation. finally one of those technologies that we had at the beginning with the cost reduction was utility scale solar. that fell by 60% in cost over that time period. 2009, this country had zero utility scale meaning greater than a hundred megawatts. now, another mechanism our loan program which has issued over $30 billion in loans and loan guarantees provided debt

financing or backed debt financing for the first five utility scale projects all successes and that's all were doing. that's all we need to do because now there are 21 additional projects with peer lee private financials. you have to get over the hump to show that these projects can get out there and work. that they are finance a bowl and etc. it's everything from basic science to high risk technology and low programs. i'll throw in one more in the solar arena. >> it sounded so much cooler than i thought it was. >> i've already emphasized the technology developments. you know, costs have now fallen so much for modules that the dominant costs are not the modules anymore.

it's really the other stuff you have to do, particularly if you want to put a pv system on your rooftop. labor, material, another very different thing we did is something called, son shot. it's about getting solar costs down to certain targets by 2020. in that program, besides technology it has a program that just works with cities and towns in terms of how do you streamline permitting. how do you get a permit down from a month to a day? it's technical assistance to do that. >> let me ask you a couple quick questions and then i want to go to the audience.

>> how does this play out politically question what you are in a political position. has anybody drove across kansas recently? you get to that wet side of kansas and there are windmills forever. there must be 70 miles of windmills. i had no idea. that is a red state. i happen to be born there. >> you don't have this graph here but that's the coolest graph. i wish i could show it's all view but maybe you should describe it. the point is when you lay that out over there, i was very was very surprised to see such an investment by someone over a vast expanse of land in western kansas. how did that happen? and does kansas know it? first of all the united states has a fabulous wind belt that runs up the middle of the country from texas to the upper great plains.

this is a wind. there may be just a coincidence that at least a large part of that has a rather low population density because it's pretty windy but its enormous wind resource and clearly the major load centers tend to be far away. building up high-voltage transmission is absolutely critical. we are talking about that again. texas has pretty much an isolated grid and they have an enormous wind resource and of course big load centers. if you get from oklahoma up through north dakota, then a big part of the job is moving the winter market. for those of you who can't see it, there are a number number of graphs in this one that i'm showing just demonstrating a

staggering decrease in the wind capacity taking off. it's something i find fascinating. of essentially the same figure is there for all of the technologies. we live in washington which thus far has not proven able to untie the political not that we are in and direction is hard to find. we been working a lot with cities and states and nonfederal players. recently the atlantic can do something called city lab when you bring in mayors from all over the world. they all have their climate plan do you interact at all with this nonfederal level and help give guidance, support and look at him innovation with what similar cities are doing? >> absolutely. just recently i was with mayor garcetti in los angeles. i was helping dedicate a novel solar system being installed in fire stations.

it's emergency power for them but it's also emergency power for the neighborhood. you have to get yourself on charged up. if things are down for a while, the cities are doing a lot of creative things. the mayor's conference, a couple years ago, the former basketball player, they are just innovating tremendously. i cannot underestimate how important that is. not just to the united states, but globally. our mayors are are being very active in partnering with other mayors across the globe. but the globe is going to be 70% urbanized. why do you rob banks which mark that's where the money is. if you want to address these issues you better go where the people are. that requires a big urban focus over the next several decades.

part of that, especially in the united states, were not going to be building a new major metropolitan area. we may be enhancing the ones we have, but in other parts of the world, they are going to be starting closer to scratch. what i hope there is that we also think about it genuinely new solution of how you design an urban environment. i'll just give one example i've always kind of liked. if you think about, imagine a city that is roughly speaking pretty much all electric, the vehicles are electric vehicles, and you say, quite correctly, no tailpipe pollution. but what then we don't say is zero by the way, very different noise levels.

i have very different noise levels and maybe i i don't need this in my buildings. this can actually open up new businesses for integrating our water our water and infrastructure in ways that are good for the environment but also provide a better quality of life. >> what are the oddest moments in the democratic debate was when hillary clinton talked about how she heard the chinese were in the parking lot and then they were over here and there was a scramble to find india and china at the last minute. to think paris will have any fun like that? >> first of all, despite the nature of the copenhagen conference, i want to say that i

believe the copenhagen conference will go down as an important turning point as establishing important principles for the future negotiations. in paris, it's well known that the inverse approaches being taken, that is the leaders will be there at the beginning at the conference charging the conference and their negotiating teams and the rest will be left the negotiating teams. >> let me open it up to the floor. it's been fun. wow, so many, is jim hsu told here? >> about to this gentleman right here. i will bring you the microphone. there are millions of people watching. tell us who you are and make it short. >> i'm a reporter and during the climate negotiations, how do you leverage future innovations?

how do you bring into affect future solutions for current problems and get other countries on board and what should we expect this week? >> in terms of the negotiations, several things, one is we will be looking to make strong commitments in innovation among a set of countries. that will include the opportunity to do more collaborative work. i'll give you one example of a natural, take india, india clearly has a tremendous need toward distributed generation as do we have a tremendous interest in distributed generation. we have more than we can do this. i think the ind c, the targets are pretty much that for this first round. we can talk about how we can

work together on innovation to get more ambition so that when it comes time to revise those targets. that to me is how i am thinking about that. next week it will be about getting the innovation set up to roll just a week and a half later. >> just a quick 32nd follow-up on your question, will other countries bring these ideas themselves #other things other countries are doing that we can learn from or anything you have seen that would be a shocker? >> absolutely. there is is a lot of innovation going on. >> what's the coolest thing you have seen? >> there is a lot of interesting work going on in the electrical vehicle space in other countries. there are also other alternative

fuel vehicles. that is one area that there is quite a bit. we also could have said in our international activities, a lot of country have an interest in our consultations with building an innovative system. there is a lot going on elsewhere but we are viewed as being in the forefront of that. we've done a lot of work in trying to understand what works in our country and a lot of that, research institutions and laboratory networks, we are trying new things. >> why would we give that knowledge to someone else? >> because we have a big global problem to solve.

>> i'm an mit grad and a aaa fellow. my questions dems from what you were just saying as far as consultation. you also said earlier that we need cost-reduction to bring everyone along the i was wondering if you could speak to challenges around intellectual property and technology transfer , especially in regard to developing countries. you also mention so many interesting technologies and i was wondering if you had any thoughts on trans atomic power for nuclear fuel for additional energy. >> trans atomic power, blah blah blah. >> i thought that was a transatlantic pipeline, but anyway, the most, what was the first question? >> intellectual property.

>> that's right, we have worked out some very suitable ip arrangements in our collaborations. for example china, we have significant program and a specific threat of that was working out ip arrangements which worked quite well. we are doing experiments at berkeley. this is a spin in approach in which our laboratory provides essentially investor and inventor opportunities. third, in terms of the trans atomic power, i have been briefed on that at mit but i

won't go into any specific technology, but i will say this thought, a very interesting thing has happened. i show that nuclear reactor scale, but there is something like 50 companies in the united states with private capital looking at innovative nuclear fission and nuclear fusion technologies. we don't need more than one to work. two would be great. it's amazing, it's a new way of innovation looking at nuclear because of its carbon free characteristics. >> the president put out a statement about the importance of nuclear. >> right. there was a nuclear power workshop particularly because of the president's interest in that we have 1 billion people who are hungry in the world, many small

farmers and many in africa who live on marginal lands. how do we get a fraction of them to adopt next generation biofuel crops to put it into the transportation network? >> that's probably, to be honest, a question a question that some of my colleagues in agriculture might be able to answer better. clearly what we are doing, as you know, we are doing the research and development for many different kinds of biomass feedstock and we are looking at, as you said, biomass on marginal lands, salt tolerant because of salt water invasions, etc. cetera in certain areas, we are doing that research.

we have outreach with our renewable laboratory, but i'll be honest, i think the biggest outreach on that happens through other agencies more effectively. we are trying to provide the tools. >> everybody is knotting me and i i will not write back. >> will go between here right here in the front. just make it brief. >> i wish i could. >> it's gotta be brief. >> i know. the issue here first of all, the economist magazine is ruining the closing of nuclear plants. that was interested in that. the recent article is suggesting there are places where if you buy an electric car your actually increasing co2 emissions. can you discuss that. >> bill gates talked about

places we can invest in renewable vehicles but in the process you are actually increasing carbon. >> i think that depends very much, in this transitional phase, it depends very much on what the mix is of fuels. so, for example, this is simpleminded but let's say an electric vehicle in the northwest versus one in the upper midwest is going to have a more positive carbon impact because it's drawing upon hydropower, for example, whereas the marginal benefit, and i'm not arguing against these being deployed everywhere, but the marginal benefit of an efficiency investment will be higher in the upper midwest than in the northwest. it really depends how the technology and fuels are matched to what's going on regionally. now course, i argue that the

electricity sector in particular is going to be pretty much, in my view, the carbonized by the time we get to mid century and some of those geographical affects will not apply. >> in the beginning of your talk you mentioned china. as i observed, when there is a state meeting between the u.s. and china, they have a topic called climate change. people call it, what is it now compared to a few years ago and how have you worked with your chinese counterpart before the paris meeting to ensure the substantial result from the meeting question. >> first of all, again i have

already said the joint announcement last november, about a year ago, was clearly a major turning point and that has now been followed up in just about every meeting with president obama with additional progress here in september. the two presidents basically announced, more or less, the targets for paris at the same time and we are working together on that. at the same time, the announcement last november, if what looks at the background papers points to a significantly expanded role for the department of energy collaboration with china on energy technology, it also added it both enhanced the scope of what we were already doing in some areas like carbon

capture and buildings, etc., but it also added a completely new line of activity in terms of the energy water nexus as a focus area. i might also add even in the areas we were already working together in, like carbon capture, even there we added new focal points, for example, the big utilization right now of captured carbon dioxide, as i said earlier, is to enhance oil efficiency. in the united states we are producing about 300 barrels of oil per day from co2 flooding of mature reservoirs. now what we added, and it's in the document from last november and moving forward, is enhanced water recovery using co2. the idea is there are lots of

uses of water and we are in the middle of selecting a site for our first enhanced water recovery project. >> that is something with china. >> it's kind of an antiquated group, is in a? it sort of leaves china out and other big energy players out. is that a problem that you are going to hang out with the folks that aren't the problem? how does china build in in the weekend coming up question that. >> we are going to hang out with chinese as well because they will be present. so the iea membership by its construction in the 1970s, in response to the oil shocks, however the world looks different today than the 1970s.

the iea is a number of of dimensions looking to do some modernization. that clearly includes, among other things, the idea of welcoming dialogues with the big economies in the big energy companies. we expect china there and india and indonesia, quite a few countries that are not two-day members. and our friends from brazil. >> regarding hydro-policy efficiency act of 2013, what has been done and what is the next status and what comes next? how will that affect the next five, ten or 20 years? >> in the united states? >> yes. >> that's a hard one to answer,

to be honest. i don't see that we are going to build any big maggot dams in the united states. there is a lot of interest in small hydro. this also has a lot about, if i remember, i'll get it wrong, i think this may be incorrect, i think there think there is an order of 100 megawatts of opportunity for powering small unpowered dams. for example a lot of that is with the corps of engineers and those kinds of projects so we can research in some of the novel hydro and also hydrokinetic technologies. >> this gentleman here. >> with the reduction in the cost of production producing

these technologies, our government subsidies still necessary even with consumer demand? >> good idea. what if we took away all subsidies for all energy requirements? what would that look like? we believe that because of necessity of dramatically accelerating low carbon transition, we still think some of these well-placed renewable investment tax credits should continue. now forever? probably not. would that be helped if we had in stead something that internalizes the price of carbon emissions?

yes, but where we are today, today, we think a need those and be there is an issue of continuing major credits in the fossil area which are little bit more difficult to defend. just in closing, i just learned learned recently that you are an avid soccer player. what position do you play and you have any games lined up? >> avid should not confused with good. i play anywhere. our season is over. >> you have anything lined up in paris? >> no. >> ladies and gentlemen, thank

i felt it was important to disavow. >> 8:00 o'clock eastern and pacific on c-span q&a. >> c-span has your coverage of the road to the white house 2016 where you will find candidates, speeches, debates, and your questions. this year we are taking our coverage into classrooms across the country with our student camera contest,

giving students the opportunity to discuss what important issues they want to here the most. follow the road white house coverage 2016 on tv, the radio command online. >> attorneys and civil rights advocates discussed live at a conference hosted by the federalist society. this is two hours. stem by local law enforcement. this is two hours. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. my name is gail herriot and i'm the chairman of the civil rights practice group.

welcome to our outbreak session. we intend to provide you with a safe space. [laughter] safe place for a serious, no holds barred discussion of an important policy question. today's session is entitled ferguson, ferguson, baltimore and criminal justice reform. we have great panelists will be introduced by our moderator. allow me to simply introduce that moderator. the honorable david's trash, associate justice justice of the supreme court of minnesota. you might think this former

lawyer and former law professor looks a little young to be a five year veteran of the minnesota supreme court. well ladies and gentlemen, that's because he was sworn in at the ripe old age of 35. so, with that, justice strasse [applause]. - thank you for that kind introduction. good afternoon. welcome to the panel entitled ferguson, baltimore and criminal justice reform. as you heard, my name is david strasse. i'm currently a member of the minnesota supreme court. i taught classes on criminal law to first year law students. this is a long-term interest of mine as well. i have been asked to moderate the panel which is very timely in light of recent developments.

the current administration is actively engaged in pushing a reform agenda that includes among many other things, greater cooperation among law enforcement agencies, reform related to drug and substance abuse, and changes in community policing as a result of the

we hope to address the most effective methods of policing and whether the threat of personal liability is the best way to promote good law-enforcement practices. now, without further ado we begin with david who is a leading expert on the need for evaluating the effectiveness of federal social programs in the heritage foundation center for data analysis. he testifies before congress on thecien effi and of federal programs and its work on community oriented policing services is noteworthy for many reasons, including its it's nicely with the topic of this panel. in 2001 he published a cops

program to be a waste of taxpayer dollars. his research illustrate that cops neither on the street nor had reduced violent crime. he interestingly served as the manager on a juvenile correctional facility in baltimore. please welcome [applause]. >> i would like to thank you for the kind remarks. i wrote think the federal society for the opportunity to speak today. what i will talk about today is a research technical the bail the veil of darkness. it gives us insight into whether or not the police are discriminatory in traffic stops. the question is, are cops

racist? did it raise influence the police officer's decision for a traffic stop. you have to control for neighborhood characteristics and also what is going on in the officer's mind. why does he or she believe they need to pull over the individual for a stop? one of the things studies do that is very questionable is compare the racial composition of those stops to the racial composition to the neighborhood where the individual a stop. that does not account for individual driving patterns, it is an inadequate benchmark and researchers realize that comparing the percentage of those stopped by police to community demographics is a flawed approach. so, the the veil of darkness, it is basically a term to describe

a national experiment where we exploit changes in daylight to assess whether or not police are treating different groups unfairly, or fairly. so it works under the assumption that police are less likely to identify the race of a driver at nighttime but more likely to identify the the race of a driver during the daytime. if you can take advantage of an experiment with shifts between daylight and night, you would assume please are unfairly targeting minorities and stops during the day when the race of the driver is more easily identified would be higher than the stops at night. one of the things that several studies i will go through tonight that taking advantage of daylight savings time, as you all know we recently had a change in our clocks, we gained an extra hour of sleep and by looking at this the bigger

control of patterns of driver, if you leave work at 530 in the evening, evening, it is pitch black, dark, night. it is very hard to tell the race of the people you are commuting home with. before that change it was light out, you could easily identied the drivers race. so by doing this, by controlling the time of day and that shift of times we can look for driver patterns, driver behaviors, and police deployment assuming the difference between daylight savings time and its effect on whether it is night or day should not affect least behavior police deployment. this research methodology is superior to using community demographics as a benchmark. there are five studies in this area. we examined for cities were

examined the first was oakland, i will concentrate on the ridgeway 2006 study because the results are the same as the word 2004 but it will be brief and cincinnati, syracuse, and minneapolis. in three or four of the city's three shirts shows there is no difference, no racial disparity going on. the one exception is minneapolis. if you look at oakland, we looked at the inter- twilight. , that is five-9:00 p.m. it is when the sun set and it is completely dark. they looked at please stops from june to december 2003. they had over 1100 traffic stops. they controlled for the time of day and the police patrol area.

that's it controls from the neighborhood, if the neighborhood has a higher crime and higher police presence you should actually control for that and it may factor the results of who a stop. what they found was officers were less likely to stop minorities during the day can paired to the day and that's opposite of what you think. what they did was they compared and looked at minority drivers and the% that was stopped during the day compared to the night. and they controlled for the time of day and the police patrol areas, minorities minorities were less likely to be stopped during the day. when they were more easily identified. the next study, and cincinnati, it was more competence of study. study. it was over six years. it exploited not only the difference during the

inter-twilight. but 30 days 30 days before and after daylight savings time. it looked at over 3700 traffic cases and control for time of day, day of week, and neighborhood. they found police officers were no more less likely to stop blacks during the day compared to the night. in syracuse, another well done studied they looked at four years of data. they looked at 3030 days before and after daylight savings time. they also analyze stops by regular traffic control and crime reduction team. the crime reduction team was a division of police officers that were targeting high crime areas and trying to do things to reduce crime. so if they are going to have racial profiling and some bias you would find it among the crime reduction team.

in the study controlled for the day, week and the police patrol area. in over four years they found that blacks were no more or less likely to be stopped. except for in 2008, that single year they found that blacks were 54% more likely to be stopped during the day. that was significant. they offered caution in interpreting that result because it was a difference from the other years and it does not hold when it was analyzed together. they cannot identify any change in pleas in policy or behavior that could account for that for single year. they're cautious in interpreting that is unfair treatment. then they looked at the data by traffic patrol and crime reduction team and found there was no effect, no disparity at

all. thirdly, the study done in minneapolis was one year of data, in 2002 it worked at the inter- twilight. between 5-9:00 p.m. and it looked at 29000 stops. it only control for time of day, it did not control for a day of the week or police beat or neighborhood which i think is an important limitation. from the inter- twilight findings they found that blacks were 70% less likely to be stopped at night than during the day, or and hispanics. >> now when they just do daylight savings time and it that abrupt shift between day and night, compared to whites

and blacks they were no more or less likely to be stopped and blacks were less likely to be stopped. however, white hispanics were more likely to be stopped. the percentage do not go into details they just say we did this analysis that is sort of unfortunate just to conclude, as a natural experience not what i did was when i went to read up on this topic and what i wanted to present to you tonight, i did not pick studies that would have a particular findings. i pick studies studies that would have the strongest methodologies to determine if there is a disparity. by doing that only one of them finds a disparity i also want a

word of caution in this area. these results do not generalize beyond other cities. i am only talking about these cities and studies. it is very hard to generalize what is going on in dallas and washington, d.c. also, this research the message i want to say is these studies seem to be superior to other studies they tend to find their note disparities in traffic stops. [applause]. thank you our next panelist, and

we have a wide variety of panelist. our next one is arthur roby who graduate from the university of law school in 1963, he has been a member been a member of the illinois bar for many years. he resumed practicing law on a full-time basis in 1997, he is a lawyer who has litigated a variety of civil rights claims including those arising under, please welcome him. >> [applause]. >> thank you judge and thank you for including me in this panel. i will be but my resume just site me if i may because i think it is important for participants

to have an understanding of where i am coming from in my remarks. our our firm does almost exclusively civil rights work. stated under section 1983. we sue individual police officers, we sue departments, generally on claims of excessive force we have exonerated people, we have sued for malicious prosecution of departments and for wrongful convictions. i can say we have had a great deal of success over the last ten or 12 years, part of that success is indicated by the fact that many of our cases, if not most of our cases come from defense attorneys, people we have litigated against frequently police officers whose

family members have had problems of their own. also let me say generally, and i say this respectfully to my panel members, based on my experience police work, police officers and what they do, are among the most difficult people in the most difficult area to analyze. please officers obviously are given a responsibility in our domestic society that is not given to any other. they have their arm, they have the right to use force including deadly force against other citizens. with that also comes an extraordinary sense of

responsibility. a lot of litigation and issues that judges indicated will be discussed today have very much to do with police officers and police departments. in my judgment, you cannot really talk about criminal justice in the united states without an understanding of how police departments work and with how police officers work. obviously there is a range among all of us and who we are and how a well educated we are or not, what our political philosophy is in our social philosophy is, how well we adjust to the jobs we're doing. there are certain occurrence that can be generalized. i would like to address some of them today. it might appear somewhat

contrary but i do strongly believe the things i'm going to talk about are not factors that are easily determined on the basis of studies, but can only be determined somewhat anecdotally. i am going to express some of those anecdotes to you in my comments. first of all, i would suggest throughout this country small departments, large departments, urban departments, rule departments, departments that deal with very serious crime, departments that for the most part deal with less serious crimes, the one thing that runs consistently through police departments is there inherent, or maybe learned behavior not to discipline their own.

discipline within police departments is, i don't want to say laughable, that is disrespectful, but the, but the fact is that it is sorely inadequate. let me give you a few examples. in almost every department in the country that we have had experience with the discipline of an officer, if he is accused of wrongdoing, and if he is accused of the wrongdoing and nothing happens as a result of it, and his own department chooses not to exercise discipline, that charge does not become a part of his personnel file. so if the police officer is accused of sexual assault on monday and it is not sisyphus things, using the language of

the department and he is accused by another individual on wednesday, when discipline is being considered in most departments they are not going to look at what happened on monday. if if he is charged again the following week they do not say maybe there is a pattern that is existing here. it is not how police departments discipline. as a result of that, police officers can engage in conduct that is detrimental to their departments, detrimental to the citizens they serve. the way in which citizen complaints are processed within police departments, almost universally, is an adequate and is set up in such a manner as to have the person making the charge in a position of not being successful. now, all of us know that at a

traffic stop or even criminal activity the first reaction might be the cop did it or he pulled me over for the wrong reason. he search me for the wrong reason. and police to be sure suffer a lot from charges that are unfounded that cannot be substantiated and sometimes just to protect the person be in charge. that does not negate the fact that in police departments all over this country the strong assumption is the citizen is wrong, the police officer is right, there is rarely, in any department that i have experience with and that includes most of them, that is not fair, many of them in my

country i've not seen a process that really works the way it is intended. just a quick example we are litigating the case with someone who is wrongfully convicted, slow witted man who was living on the street the time he was convicted of a vicious rate for many factors the conviction was overturned and under section 1983 we are suing on his behalf. now at the time it happened it was almost 20 years later, as a result of our discovery we find that letters from a policeman, very unusual and we know their other policeman because it came through departmental mail, they saw the subject beaten, they saw the subject being given information about the rape which he was accused and after being beaten for a while the fellow

said, i will sign anything, anything you want me to. this to. this was internal. it went to internal affairs, they did not turn it over to the prosecutor, did not turn it over to other investigators. that is an extreme example but anyone who is familiar with the internal affairs department of most big-city department i don't think would be surprised. there is another area to that is difficult but in order, and my judgment to understand the criminal justice system, you have to understand police. sometimes we call it the thin blue line, sometimes sometimes we call it police protecting other police, but it is what happens. in hundreds of cases that we

have had that have involved excessive force, one policeman has never testified against another. recently we had a case of a young man, i'm out of time are ready, i'm i'm sorry, i will finish the story. a young man was beaten in the street, on. of civilian witnesses including some clergymen saw that it happened. he he was accompanied by four other police officers. the policeman denied the bad conduct, the other four police officers were under oath, people who had it testified at other people criminal trials, people that testify and can put you in jail, one of them said g at the

time of the beating he had to type both of his shoes so he walk several feet away and that's where he was. the the second person said, i heard somebody yelling in the crowd so i left the scene and went there. the third person said, you know, i i thought i forgot some keys back in the car and that police officer left the scene to go back. the fourth fourth person said i saw my partner leaving the scene so i thought i would join him. that is how police testify against one another. it is denial, and, or it is i couldn't see couldn't see it because i was doing something else. i do not say anything of this is criticism obviously of the men and women who put their lives in danger and that men and women who serve their communities

well. i will go back to the point which i began, and that is for an understanding of the criminal justice system it takes more than statistics, it takes an understanding of police men, their departments, and the reality of how they operate. thank you very much. [applause]. >> thank you arthur. our next speaker is michael who is a former philadelphia police officer, corporate executive, and now a journalist and writer.

he was an editor and investigative journalist for the philadelphia bulletin, he has written for the philadelphia daily news, pittsburgh philadelphia daily news, pittsburgh tribune review, inside magazine and the washington times. he is the author of a novel, sense of duty drive from his experiences on the police force. in 2008 he started a wrestling club to help the minority and inner-city youth become competitive with suburban athletes. i now welcome you. [applause]. >> good afternoon, i want to tell you a bit about myself and what i have done and what i can contribute to this conversation. before i do i'm going to read to you an account, newspaper account, testimony given at of a trial of a police officer accused of murder after shooting where three to five suspects were killed. the testimony of one suspect. one. one of the officers said through up your hands, three suspects put up their hand and the fourth said he had no gun. at the same instance the officers opened fire. you might want to take a guess it what that incident was?

the newspaper was the tombstone daily nugget, it was october 1881, the incident was known as the gunfire of the okay corral. the testimony was a horse the in the officer on trial was wyatt earp. so the hands up don't shoot did start and ferguson in 2014 but it might have started 133 years earlier tombstone, arizona. the difference, his testimony was discredited by a mutual witnesses much as during johnson's was in ferguson, missouri. herb like darrell wilson was exonerated a grand jury investigation and herb was exonerated by trial. the difference between ferguson

and the gunfight at the okay corral was back in 1881, people pretty much knew the biases of the newspapers on like today where journalists try to pretend to be unbiased and knowledgeable. that is what i want to talk about today the media and law-enforcement. it occurred to him at the right down here that i do not have the report and skills of the other panelists and i don't have their training. i am at a disadvantage here. i am playing rocky balboa with the apollo creed. i was married in the same church as rocky balboa. here think i i can contribute to the symposium. first where i come from. ethnically and religiously diverse neighborhood. i lived in diversity of the most college professors, lawyers and journalists have not lived. the second thing i can bring is i believe i believe i am the only one on this panel that has a master degree in criminal justice but i have also been a white police officer in a black

neighborhood. so unlike the other panelists i would like to talk about antidotes i can give you a few. i know what it's like to look down the barrel of a 12 gauge shotgun, looks about that big. i know what it's like to go to a rape in progress and arrive at the scene to recognize it is a domestic dispute and then to try to arrest the guy who is twice my size only to have the wife hanging all over me because she does not want me to hit her husband. i also know what it is like to get a call at the man with a gun inside a house. and nearly shoot a little kid. that is one of the reasons i'm here today. the third thing i can bring are the facts. as john adams once said, the facts are stubborn in the face. he said that as he was defending

british soldiers using excessive use of force. the media passes moral judgments on days and weeks on police actions that are made in nanoseconds. unfortunately, the perception of racism will drive law-enforcement policy. tactics like stop and frisk are discontinued and leads to increase crime in the minority communities. i know bob will touch on this, this occurs because the media only reports those incidents which follow the template of the trained police, if you don't who he is he was the alabama public safety director who is responsible for arranging to have fire hoses unleashed on african americans who were trying to get their civil

rights. i like to do an expert in it. i will read off names and i want you to raise your hand if you're familiar with them. walter scott. michael brown. eric warner. latonya hegarty. dylan taylor. gil coller, bobby dean. >> nearly everybody knew the first three only one other person in the other five. the first three were black suspect shot and killed killed by white police officers. the next five that only one person knew, they will are armed suspects shot and killed by black or hispanic's but you never heard about them and the national media. latonya latonya hegarty was an honor black the mush on killed by a black female chicago police officer after pursuit.

the incident did not make national news or set of rioting. dylan taylor was a white 20-year-old in salt lake city. he was on arm. he was shot and killed about the same time as ferguson incident. and never got the nor variety he was shot and killed by a hispanic police officer. gilbert was the late 18-year-old university south alabama student who was shot and killed by black university police officer. he was naked so there's no chance that he was reaching for something. [laughter] the national media did not report it. now what do you think would have been a storyline if the officer were white and the man killed black? do you think there would be at least one reference? bobby dean was a 17 old white man shot and killed during a traffic stop by a black south carolina deputy sheriff. there is a video of this, it did not make national news like the

walter scott. did. anthony was a white man shot and killed by a black georgia police officer. members of the local african-american community rallied around because he was considered a pillar of the community. while the victim was a career criminal. this was an interesting point. people in minority communities are tired of living in fear of criminals. so the media about please student shootings are racially. the ferguson was an example of this but not the only example. i will read you a list list of exertions of law enforcement actions or policies by prominent media from both sides of the continuum. these assertions were later proven to be untrue. there's an article in the

st. louis newspaper that set on our blacks are shot every 28 hours. this was reap ported by cnn, and elsewhere but it was not true. an organization issued a report that said killing by police blacks and whites were 21 - one. the report was criticized and even if criminologists put in the article by the name of david klinger said in an interview that the public needs to be shut down. another leaving criminologist said it was substantially wrong. the crime prevention research center said the reporters were pro-public and to and to not understand the data they are using. yet despite the contributions entrée controversy they reported it. articles in in the wall street journal, washington times, weekly standard and others all contained allegations, and you can't make this stuff up, that consumer

product safety commission had a swat team. and the fish and wildlife service had a swat team. it was not true. as far as i know only the wall street journal has printed a retraction. probably one of the more egregious reporting has to do with amnesty international usa and the aclu. amnesty international usa in 2004 report the human rights report said with a city bombing in 1995, timothy mcveigh was able to play while they look for arab terrorists. they also claimed in letter sent to congress urging them to vote in ending racial profile act. oh my time is up. i will i will have some other articles to talk to and other statistics and we can do a roundtable. let me conclude since this is

the federalist society, let me leave you with the quote by john jay. among the many objects of a wise and pre-people find it necessary to direct their attention to that of providing for the safety but seems to be the first. i look forward to a stimulating conversation. thanks. [applause]. will have some time during the question-and-answer to have the panelists ask questions of each other and discuss some of these things in greater detail. our next panelist is tim lynch who is the director of the kale institute on criminal justice. he has become a leading voice in the bill of rights and civil liberties. his research interests include the war on terror, over criminalization, drug war, militarization, militarization of police tactics and gun control. he blogs at the national police

misconduct reporting project and has written very interesting articles on militarization of police forces around the country. please welcome mr. lynch. [applause]. >> thank you, good afternoon everybody. i also want to thank the federalist society for hosting this discussion and for inviting me to participate. this has been an extraordinary year of debate and discussion of police practices and criminal justice reform proposals. according to the associated press there have been more than 50 measures that have been introduced and enacted around the country, pieces of legislation that deal with how the police interact with

citizens. my thesis is is that some of these proposals actually are constructed. what i'm going to do is briefly touch on some of the policy changes i think are worth highlighting. let's start with baltimore. the baltimore sun ran a series of articles about how that city handles civil lawsuits that alleged illegal conduct by the baltimore police. since 2011 millions of dollars have been paid out by the city in court judgments and settle since pursuits involving false arrest and access of force. if you want to include millions of more dollars that have to be paid to the lawyers to handle these suits that are brought. the freddie gray case was settled in september for $6.4 million. some of the incidents that are involved are caught on tape such as the security footage that are founded grocery grocery stores and that sort of thing.

sometimes the conduct is so bad, so blatant that reporters will take the footage to police commanders and say what you make of this? even the police commanders are shocked. they have no explanation for that because when you have officers who are kicking people in the head, it is inconsistent with their training so they have no response to it. these are some of the suits that are brought. what was really interesting and came out was the baltimore sun found something that was very peculiar about how the city was handling these misconduct claims. the attorney for the city would settle matters, they would sit down for negotiation and would say we will settle this case for $200,000. but there is a clause in the settlement papers so when you signed it and to receive the money from the city there is a clause that said you cannot

speak publicly about what had happened to you. not just you cannot talk about the settlement amount, we see we see that from time to time, but the people who agreed to settle their police brutality lawsuit they are not allowed to talk about the underlying conduct. so what we're talking about before, if you are a victim of police misconduct and you see on tv the next or the officer that was out of line in your case, you you cannot speak to a reporterut it. you cannot go to a rally and talk about what had happened to you. you cannot talk to civilian oversight authorities what had happened to your case if you sign on the dotted line. this policy which had been a place for years shielded the scope and impact of misconduct from the public. once it was exposed by the baltimore sun, the bureaucracy and they cannot come for two dependent very, very well, i am

happy to report those clauses in the settlement negotiations are now a thing of the past. it is one positive thing that has come out from baltimore and that media coverage on it. another item from baltimore, last march at mayor stephanie rollings went to the state capital in an annapolis to ask for legislative changes that would allow her police chief more leeway to discipline and get officers who are convicted of crimes to get them off the government payroll. convicted of crimes areas under current laws officers who have been convicted in criminal court of misdemeanor crimes like perjury, assault, they remain on the payroll for many months while they appeal the department disciplinary procedures to

arbitrators. in jurisdictions around the country police chiefs will tell you they already have a good idea of who the problem officers are on their staff. the disciplinary process for holding these officers accountable is broken. in many jurisdictions the police chiefs will save the disciplinary process is a joke. i don't have to explain to this audience the many ways in which teacher unions have put in place obstacles of getting lousy teachers fired and out of our schools. well, we are seeing some of the same problems in this area but it is with the police unions. now to his credit, ohio governor, john case it tried to curtail including police unions in his statement he was unsuccessful. this is a difficult thing to turn around. the death of freddie gray has also wrought attention to the

fact that we do not have data, we are talking about data earlier. we do not have data about the number of people who die each year in police custody. we do not have that number. policing in the united states is decentralized, we have plenty of good departments that make this information transparent. we have many other departments around the country that will not make such information available. governor scott walker in wisconsin, to his credit sign legislation about one year ago after an incident in that state wherever your now there will be an official tally of anybody killed in the custody of police. that will be tallied at the end of the year along with an explanation of what happened and that information will be available to the public. each state should have such a procedure in place. let me now turn to ferguson. police shootings is another area where we do not have solid and accurate information.

this is totally unacceptable. it is absurd that we do not have an accurate tally on the number of people who are killed by the police each year. i know many of them, most of them are justifiable, self-effacing cases, but still but still we should have an accurate tally. several media organizations have been tracking shootings this year, the wall wall street journal, washington post, and other media outlets have been tracking things closely so i expect next month, the end of year and in january we'll see lengthy articles about what their findings are during the year 2015. we can then start to compare and see whether the numbers are going up, down, or holding steady. again, we are talking about action at the state level last night at the governor of texas assigned landmark legislation in that state. all shooting deaths in the state of texas are to be reported to

the attorney general within 30 days. along with an explanation and there will be an annual tally, an annual report put out by the state attorney general in texas, again with the tally and explanation will be available to the public. this is texas, this is america starting model legislation. this is the. this is the type of thing we should have in place. if we don't get more action at the state level there will be pressure to get the federal government more involved. we do not need federal intervention. the state should be taking the lead, these are their police agencies. we should see more actions by governors and state attorney generals along the lines of what governor abbott has done. california enacted a law that said police departments must identify officers involved in shootings. we have seen bills introduce a new jersey that's a special prosecutors will investigate police shootings instead of having the county and instigated itself. these are just a few of the best

practices in place and some local jurisdictions that are now being taken statewide. these are constructive policy changes in my view and we need to see more. the media scrutiny, we have seen some bad things from the media that mike was talking about. the media scrutiny n-uppercase-letter also brought about municipal court reform. the city and county governments in the ferguson area were using citations as a way of generating revenue for the government. the courts were not impersonally administrating injustice, they had come to view themselves as kind of an arm of the treasury where their job was to help budget goals by levying fines on people on the community. i was at a conference last week where they're talking about this, they call it taxation by citation. he said ferguson had turned their police into revenue agents and stirred up community resentment. he said it is imperative we have

municipal court reform around the country for community relations. he was reminded of the audience for those stories back in the bible where the most contested people where the tax collectors. we have to get the police out from b in revenue people .. into investigating violent crimes have been seen as protectors of the community. this is not just happening in missouri. i live in northern virginia and for last month there was a washington post article that ran with the headline, fairfax police ticket cars for needing inception. while they are in line waiting for inspection. it is hard to believe. these are people who are trying to come into compliance with the government rules and they are getting slammed.

when these bureaucratic abuses are exposed we do see the left and right come together to put a stop to it. there is more work that needs to be done. i am almost out of time, let me touch of briefly. these are the laws that allow the police to seize property from people have not been convicted of a crime, not indicted, not arrested. these abuses under these civil portraiture laws have been reported over and over again by newspapers. over the summer there's a story of a young man who is traveling from his home in michigan to los angeles where he was going to start a career. he had been saving his money for three years. he had cash and was heading to l.a. his mother gave him a few thousand dollars kiss that's what mothers do to help them get started on his career. he didn't get far. at the was going from michigan to california. about halfway along his trip police officers came on board, they are going through the cars and searched his belongings and he said sure. they found a lot of cash and

they took his money away. they said he was traveling to a drug hotspot. los angeles. he said if you take all my money, i won't have any way to get home. i don't know anybody in this area. they just shrugged and said that is not our problem. these stories ripple out. two relatives, friends, neighbors. it is one of these reasons why there's growing resentment and communities against what some police departments are doing. george will has made the point that when civil asset forfeiture we are treating people worse than criminals because with criminals we take their stuff away after they have been convicted in court. again, back to the action at the state level. new mexico abolished the

forfeiture this year. other states are trying to reform the laws but are running into lots of opposition in the legislator. the institute for justice has been doing great work on this. they issued a report a few days ago where they do a report card on state laws around the country. one state got an a, there were a few bees, most of the states run the country get c's and d's. so more work needs to be done in this area. there is more to be said about police body cameras, militarized police units, we do a lot of work at that, bill reform measures, governor chris christie put together an interesting coalition in new jersey on bail reform. i see i have run out of time let me stop here so we'll have more time for questions and answer. thank you. [applause]. >> thank you mr. lynch. our final panelist is that bob

who is the founder and president of the center for neighborhood enterprise. he has been instrumental for resident management and ownership of public housing, brought brought together task force of grassroots groups to the congress. the pennsylvania legislation on welfare reform and help violence free zones. he is the only person ever to receive the prestigious awards on both liberal and conservative side, the macarthur genius fellowship in the bradley foundation prize as well as the presidential citizens medal. welcome mr. wilson. >> [applause]. >> well i'm the only nine communists to get the macarthur roared [applause]. thank you so much.

i want to use my time to talk to you from the perspective of the people in low income neighborhoods, particularly low-income black neighborhoods. also part of my resume is that these issues are personal with me because over the course of the last 25 years i have lost three family members to violence, predatory violence. two nephews have been put into intensive care coming home from work. they were not assaulted and killed by white police officers, they were killed by other blacks. so i think that what i find troubling about the testimonial statements i have heard today, there is a drumbeat to vilify the police departments around this country.

i believe that police unions, correction officer unions have too much power and they are not being held accountable. i i believe please, because they are representative of the state have an increased responsibility and obligation to be just in the execution of their duties. but, i represent an organization that has 3000 grassroots and 39 states. most of them most of them are living in those high crime neighborhoods. i am wondering what their response would be to some of the things i have heard today. we are talking about race in it always seems to be the issue that intrudes itself. the problem of always looking at the police through the prism of race means that we discount that

black lives matter only when it is taken by a week, white police officer. it means that when the perpetrators are black we look the other way. geraldo rivera for instance, had a two hour special on the rape on women in prison in this country. for to ours. in each case, the case, the victim was a black woman and the victimizer was a black correctional officer. because the victim and the perpetrators were black it did not generate any large-scale discussion or debate. because we first have to note the race of the victim and the victimizer before we can become animated to take action. it means that if the perpetrator wears a black face and evil reese escapes responsibility. so i really think and just to personalize it, for the past

five years we have had children like this. a five-year-old girl, layla. person, layla. person who is sitting on her grandfathers lap in milwaukee, wisconsin and she was shot through the head. we have had 25 black children under the age of five killed, not by police officers but by other blacks. the black community suffers a 911 every six months. there are 3000 blacks killed by other blacks every six months. so we have a 911 every six every six months. most of the people in those neighborhoods suffer as a consequence of the vilification of the police. thirteen years ago in cincinnati, ohio when a white police officer shot a young black man who turned, he thought

he had a gun, so civil rights leader came and organized a boycott of cincinnati, they also vilified the police so what the police said after that was since we are going to be accused of racism we will not be as aggressive in those high crime black neighborhoods. as a result the murder rate went up 800% in the black community. the low income black communities. it did not affect the neighborhoods where those pastors and civil rights leaders lived. >> ..

all of these encounters over the years, the never with threatened violence, only demonstrators who came in and wanted to chastise them for supporting community-based efforts. my point is that solutions to the violence and the black community, but we have done over the past ten years is, we go into the community , identify indigenous grassroots leaders that have the moral authority to command change from within the community and they are the ones who

become empowered. fifty-three murders in a five square block area 18 years ago. the police were afraid to intervene. we organized local, grassroots leaders that have the same cultural and geographic zip code as those experiencing the problem, many of which were ex- offenders whose lives have been transformed every deemed, and the witnesses to their peers the transformation as possible and redemption is available. so rather than spending money on detectors we spent money on these young leaders to pay them full-time with the consequence that terrorists went from 53 murders in two years down to zero gang deaths in 12 years. rather than the system investing in other

indigenous efforts that have the consequence of transforming the attitudes and behaviors, we have taken the solution from milwaukee, about 60 young adults are employed full-time as moral mentors and character jet to a character coaches by investing in interventions that are indigenous to this committee rather than vilifying, they need the cooperation and support of the police. what we are experiencing now is police nullification. as long as we come the forms like this has become of militarization of the police talking about the vilification of police, they will do what they are doing now, they will not be aggressive in those communities because of the fear of being called racist. people who attend conferences like this suffer

the consequences. grassroots lowconsequences. grassroots low income mothers and fathers such as the parents of this young lady who will suffer the consequence. i think we need to be a little careful and spend some time talking about how we can reduce the violence within these communities and not spend all of our time vilifying the police who are trying to work with low income parents to bring about change. thank you. [applause] [applause] [applause]

>> i know mr. lonely wanted to respond. i will open it up to others. >> let me make some general observations. for people that care about what is going on in this country, there is no one that i heard on this panel that has vilified police. to hold please responsible, to ask that they be held responsible for what happens in every community come our sons, grandsons, daughters, granddaughters does not mean that they are being vilified. big difference between being held responsible and vilification. i feel strongly about that because these are issues that we have dealt with,

both me and my family and our law firm deals with all of the time. to criticize is not to vilified. task of things can be done better by police officers and by police departments, that part of our world can be done, and it can be accomplished. it cannot be accomplished if every time that a police officer engages in an unlawful or a wrongful act that he is automatically and without thinking told that he is right when he has done the wrong thing. policemen and departments make mistakes, too. our job as citizens is to do much of what has been spoken of, but ourof, but our job also is to see the policeman and police departments operate in such a manner as to be responsible to the communities and citizens who may serve. >> can i respond?

a couple of things, and i did not get a chance to read of the statement i have prepared. i started to talk about amnesty international. worldwide, they are considered the gold standard command ii started to talk about an oklahoma after the oklahoma city bombing command this was nine years later in a human rights report. they talked about timothy mcveigh being allowed to flee. aclu said the same thing. what they did was repeated media claims, newspaper reports. they were not facts. the facts were an fbi profiler immediately had profiled the bomber as aa white male with military experience, probably a militia member. within 24 hours the fbi had

identified mcveigh. forty-eight hours, he was in custody, taken into custody on a minor traffic violation , driving down the road without a license. he was stopped on a minor traffic violation. the officer noticed he had a glock and suicide vest. his one thatas one that has a big flap and is called such because military reach over and open it and draw you will get call five killed. he had already been taken into custody. the fbi and 48 hours had arranged an airbase in oklahoma, but nine years later the aclu and amnesty international, the premier civil liberties organizations or repeating false assertions.

so the idea that police are vilified, well, and the sense just by putting out false data. i no people who insisted even after darren wilson have been exonerated, grand juries are sympathetic to police, how do you know this? i could just as easily say that the reason why cities get sued and there are high dollar judgments because you find jurors who are sympathetic to plaintiffs. they call it the bronx jury effect. plaintiffs lawyers are trial lawyers go out and find a sympathetic jury. so i could just as easily say that is someone could say the grand juries are sympathetic to police. i work with people who are indicted, so i know better than anyone how bad police officers can be. google the name stevie reaching or grover glenn whitty and you will see guys who i worked with who wound up going to jail.

in fact, my cousin made the case against one of. what do you think of him? is a nice guy. okay. i just want to get an idea. and he told me. now, for all those who don't know, number writer is a bookie who takes bets on lotteries. i know there is an effort. no one wants about officer. they are brutal. nobody in my family like them. nobody wants them. they are bad, bad for us, but for the police. no one likes them.

i'll be the 1st one to help you doing that. but i believe people are interested in criminal justice reform and trial lawyers start suing rapists on behalf of rape victims which is not seem to happen. i will be happy when they are websites about parole that release violent criminals, murderers even because 9 percent of all people on death row have a prior homicide conviction. 9 percent have a prior homicide conviction. you get to murderers. when people start having websites say, let's take a look at how many violent felons, murderers who have been paroled to kill again, that is what i believe there is criminal justice reform. you get sick and tired of locking up the same people over and over again. my wife does not have the

philadelphia accident. if you misunderstand me, asked me to repeat myself because i have a heavy accent. when i get emotional it happens. but that is when i will believe that people are interested in reform. they start doing those types of things. >> just a quick comment. what bothers me, i guess, i guess, in terms of the outrage and the lawsuits, very selective, the very fact that newark has been under justice department supervision for the last five years for police misconduct, but we talk about ferguson in the '90s under eric holder when he was a us attorney we had more police officers shooting citizens in washington than any other city in the country, but no

lawsuits, no public condemnation. evil has. evil has to where a white face before it finds his challenge, and that is detrimental to the people that we serve. that is mythat is my point. always has to be our racial dimension. >> can i just comment? i understand what you're saying. we all no about the crime going on there. but the statistics are sometimes very surprising. because in the black community the same level has been going on for many years. the really big difference in my generation used to be an african-american child was murdered in chicago, killed by gunfire, you are lucky if you get two lines on the 20th page. what has happened, and it is a better thing, is that african-americans getting

killed is now newsworthy. i grew up in an era where it was not, or to the extent that it was it was just a blurb. now at least there is public attention being called to it solutions are complex. i admire what you are doing in terms of trying to get the solution. there is publicity given. >> let me give you some statistics. numerous studies dating back 40 years of determined the best predictor of use of force is the attitude of the suspect. in general if the suspect is acting nastily he will be treated nastily. a study by robert brown at

the university of cincinnati , likely to arrest suspects them black officers, black suspects were likely to be taken. statistics, 76 and 98, young black males murdered police officers ata rate almost six times higher than white males. according to fbi data there were 40%40 percent of the known killers during 2004 to 2013. according to the congressionally mandated report, there was the later convicted. excuse me. and said that nearly 2/3 of

two thirds of police shootings in 1980 and until 20 adr interracial. black officer black suspect, white officer white suspect. justifiable homicide by civilians are also interracial. a white person defending himself. a criminal. so then this is another interesting statistic. if you are a social scientist you are used to that report. 12.8% of americans don't think police officers should defend themselves even when being assaulted. think about that. this figure has increased dramatically. for 200864 percent of justifiable homicides and all the officer being assaulted. those involving citizens 41 percent. and another report which is

congressionally mandated think is back to the '90s, the bureau of justice statistics said the deaths from 2,003 to 2,009, six and ten were classified as homicide by law enforcement personnel. 60.9% of60.9 percent of whites and 61.3 percent of blacks were killed by being arrested. state and local law enforcement. three out of every 100,000 arrests result in someone being killed by police. you have a four times greater chance of being electrocuted than being killed by police. now, one final thing, despite all the negative media the bureau of justice statistics determine 93 percent of persons requesting police assistance

of the officers acted properly. no statistical difference between the percentage of hispanics, blacks, whites. so going back, the average person does not believe the misinformation campaign. it is important to note that benefits a certain narrative , that is what you're getting. you're not getting all of the information. you can debated, refuted, debated, refuted, do anything that you want with it. you can argue it, say what i am saying is incorrect or incomplete, but the fact is it is not known. and there is too much misinformation, and i would suggest in some cases this information that is out there about police work. >> i want to turn to specifics.

one i was her slanted conference for state supreme court justices. we saw program on the use of body. infrared technology the proliferation. >> well, it is not a panacea. it will be a big improvement in police work. they are the ones who will be able to show the stop was legitimate, the detention was legitimate, and the use of force the maybe necessary was legitimate. it will be the enemy to the bad officers were abusing power. we just published a study on

police body cameras, identifying best practices because what we are hearing the past few months is spending money, but the issues get more complicated about what you will do with the footage was the police department is holding the information, disclose in all circumstances, some, and it can be expensive if you blurt out the faces of certain witnesses who may have been in public near the person getting arrested. these are the complicating issues, but the politics are all over the. it is there 1st go to reform, spend money on body cameras. they want to move all of the discussion. we're moving into an era

where people have their cell phones at the ready. catching more and more police interactions with the public, and this is a big difference from a generation ago. in the past we don't know what to make of it. now that more and more footage is becoming available we can reach our own conclusions. this is kind of like the new thing that is going on, and is not going to stop. police wearing body cameras. >> just a quick note.

itis not a single perspective on this. they occur because people talked to the police and report to the police officer something embarrassing. provide evidence that allows them to make an arrest. they are not going to want to cooperate. i think we need to balance the accountability issue against law enforcement effectiveness and closing homicides and crime. >> i agree, iti agree, it is a complicated issue that is more nuanced than people are knowledge and. >> but we need to discuss it on both sides of it.

it's always how can we prevent bad people from doing bad things? that is the message that keeps coming across. >> to the filter of attention just media that is really only out to crucify a police officer, it generates controversy, they sell papers, whatever the motivations are, that is the other thing you have to look at. this may be the only thing tonight. police cameras are good, but if it is going to intimidate people, be used by a change in just media or scholars only to justify what they want to present, which is a racist white killer cop, it will not be any good. i alluded to an arrest are made of a guy that was twice my size who is basically trying to pound his wife's head into the sidewalk. i guy came out.

i realized it was just a domestica domestic dispute and not a rape. i had to dislodge this guy. i try to push them, and that didn't work. i got my nightstick and put it under his chin command we both went out and fell back and recovered. i'm ready to hit them with my stick and the wife grabs my nightstick. supposing in that arrest i would have crushed his larynx or something, suppose i would have killed him, did not intend to, but do you think the wife who probably would probably contact somebody like mr. loewe and sue for millions and millions of dollars, do you think she could say she was in danger? no. she did not even want me to hit him after our rescued her from having multiple concussions or contusions.

that is the type of thing that goes on. and what exits will you see on the news? anything that led to this? what motivated my actions to get this guy and do what i did to try to dislodge? i don't think so sometimes. >> i am disappointed to here the only thing that we can agree on is the police camera issue. but i played out six or seven policy proposals that says victims can speak out, municipal court reform. keeping a tally, we should know. you heard him.

>> just to hear you say that. >> just really quickly. they can be helpful. and share the opinion that it has to be used at the discretion of those who want when the cameras came in its anecdotal, to be sure. nine out of ten accusations that we felt where the violence took place the camera.

that would be broken in the back of the station. happened to not be able to fix it and will probably be the same reality. >> you are not vilifying. >> if you believe that, i have some oceanfront property in omaha, nebraska to sell you had a really cheap price. >> body cameras need to be done i would urge caution in adopting nationwide. we want to give you an example. a mandatory arrest for domestic violence. for years in a police officer would show up at a household where is domestic violence, you let it be a family affair. they did research in minneapolis the found that

we instituted mandatory arrest. what you found was the individual who was arrested was less likely to engage in domestic violence in the future. i was a positive effect. all across the country, cities and towns instituted mandatory harassment policies. back in omaha, nebraska and charlotte, north carolina we found that after the individual is arrested the person was more likely to assault his partner. he knew he was going to go to jail once the call was made. he decided to beat his spouse or girlfriend even more even though he was going to spend the night in jail now matter what.

these changes in policing, you mentioned an experiment that we have going on. i was you tell me that. they should not rush to judgment and adopt body cameras and all police departments because i don't think that it will happen, but we need to look at it and empirically join with the assesses. and whether a change in policy or program is actually having a result as well as the research, emerging caution because sometimes policies backfire and cause more harm than good. >> thank you. i feel a bit like a referee.

>> no one is throwing any chairs yet. >> yet. >> but i want to ask the audience members. make sure they have an opportunity as well. >> yes. the cato institute. your brief against vilification of the police misidentifies the issue. he and his colleague you are calling for prosecution of criminals and the communities in which you work. this is exactly what these other people are calling for , prosecution of police criminals.criminals. that is not the same thing as vilification. offered a comment that 90 percent of the police cameras mounted on the car

suddenly weren't working, what is that? >> a statement ofa statement of fact, as i understand it. >> that is vilification. that is an example of what i'm talking about. >> but it's true. >> wait a minute. you are implying that this is done purposefully. the cato institute row that it remains to be seen whether officer wilson will be held accountable at some future date. accountable for what? talk about vilification. why? >> is right beside you. >> that is what i want to find out. >> and thefrom the justice department report was issued immediately update all of our stories. >> november 2014 after he was exonerated by the grand jury that the man, in your opinion, was still guilty.

>> don't attribute that to me. >> you talk about vilification, that's why. >> let him answer. >> mike is from philadelphia. again, his chief john timothy, he and his book wrote that when he took over the philadelphia police department he said, the disciplinary process. >> the disciplinary process in place in the philadelphia police department was a joke that is in his memoir. he is not vilifying police but identifying problems in the police department up their standards. >> i'm saying, talk about criticism of police department procedures is not vilification. >> you were saying this man was still guilty after he was exonerated. >> no, when he was exonerated by the department of justice would probably --

>> by the grand jury. you are the distraction. you don't want to answer the question. >> let's move on to the fellow right here. >> i hesitate to jump in. >> me, too. >> my apologies. >> the point i want to make is that the most important thing from the standpoint of my work,work, policing free people is a challenging job, but it is important that people have faith in the integrity of that effort. and i have been a working constitutional lawyer for 15 years and what i found surprising is the massive and inexplicable double standard between what other practitioners -- i swear i can be sued. the only location in this country where is virtually impossible to sue as law enforcement. prosecutors of absolute immunity and it makes it difficult to sue them.

there is an article that came out last year, 99.98 percent of all damage awards that are found are actually paid for by taxpayers, nottaxpayers, not even the police officers. i have a concrete policy proposal. what if we had police do what every other vocation does, self-insure against lawsuits so that the cost is internalized. as you work with police officers who are constantly causing damage judgments to come in your premium will be higher and there will be a natural tendency to self-correcting control. that money will come out of your pocket instead of the taxpayer'staxpayers pocket. the bad police officers will be forced off of the job, and the good ones will continue to get the respect they are entitled to. >> i have a better idea. if you get a bad cop from put him put him in jail. that is all there is to it.

this idea of suing people and letting the insurance companies been the brunt is not touch anybody. if you have someone who is bad, you put him in jail. >> the double standard were law enforcement is the only location. >> ceos escape free. the stockholder has to pay for lawsuits. beside happen in 2,007/eight. they were not held accountable. >> i have a feeling he will want to respond. >> by the way, i thought the idea advanced from the floor is a good one. but what mike says is,is, really what identifies the problem, i think, has clearly as anyone could, he says if it is a bad police officer put them in jail. there are all kinds of bad unconstitutional conduct that police officers or others can engage in, do engage in that is short of

criminal conduct, but nevertheless, for the benefit of the citizenry they need to be corrected. that is what civil law does, that is what they indicated. most police departments reach exactly that conclusion. either it's something so criminal you go to jail, otherwise your off the hook. therehook. there is a huge middleground that needs to be addressed in order to make policemen and police departments more responsible. >> and i hopei hope everyone saw the front-page "washington post" story about two weeks ago were local prosecutors indicted in officer for murder, and his attorneys went to court and said, well, he was part of a federal task force, and his status as a federal officer made them immune, legally immune from state

homicide statutes. the prosecutor said that they will appeal the ruling, so that is one to watch. it is not as easy as saying you broke the law. there are legal barriers in place, some of which are dubious and unjustified. >> can they be changed? >> is go to the back of the room for another question. >> i am always struck and conversations like this. i would like to imagine they are taking place in the late 20s around the time of prohibition. we are all talking about the practices. focusing too much. too much discussion as to how many barrels to destroy. and his dead, the problem

was prohibition. so i don't know if it is beyond the scope of the conversation, but we are in this classic situation where will we have done is in creating this enormous pocket, we have cultivated a scenario where police are naturally going to be in terrible situations they engage in bad behavior. and right down to the argument right in front of us on the panel. talking about smaller activity here and there is important to be sure, but it would seem to me that the far bigger problem is the drug war itself that i have not heard mentioned. >> we have a question. anyone want to respond? >> well, i agree that it is the root of many problems

but beyond the scope of this particular panel discussion. >> all right. >> i would like to thank you for your diverse perspectives but especially the german's spoke about vilification of the police. i understand there are recent articles not only in the cities you mentioned, but throughout the country trying to sign up. i want to think about it possible, people think of a possible reform that i have not heard mentioned today, which is better police training and things like some of the deaths that occurred due to please not recognizing medical issues. perhaps we need better training recognizing when someone is in medical distress. i also have a friend on the police force who says the

police need better training in martial arts. so that is a possible reform that it seems that could be very helpful and everyone could agree to. i also want to ask you about the people behind these anti- police demonstrations and the total lawlessness of this. policemen have been killed. it is really unbelievable. i have been involved in organizing protests on other matters in new york city. you have to get permits, work with the police, restricted to certain areas. however, the anti- police protest were just lawless, running through the streets, closing downstreets, closing down traffic, people cannot go anywhere for hours.

obviously the baltimore situation was worse than it was, and who was behind this? it seems like some of these lawless protests were well-organized. ferguson and so on, and there were other groups involved. we noticed anti- semitic posters in these protests. to anyprotests. to any of you have an idea of who is behind financing and inciting some of these protests which have been completely lawless and resulted in violence and property damage and so on? >> let's take the negligent training. >> just a quick reform that we have been advocating. a lot of police officers are promoted if they make a felony arrest which a lot of times these violent encounters, but there are police officers who prevent violence by positive interactions.

somehow that person, that should count for promotion and elevation as well. >> if i can makei can make a brief comment. i agree, of course, about training. we are litigating a case now in which a 97 -year-old world war ii veteran in a nursing home had a knife in his hand and was shot and killed by the police when they arrived. what really needs to be done was the police needed better training on how to disengage , talk someone down. obviously no policemen should not be able to protect himself when he or she is in danger, but there is a skill that in our judgment should have been used to talk down the 97 -year-old man that was in a nursing home in his kitchen

and when there are other mental health people on the premises. so training is a factor. most police departments realize that there is a lot that could be done. >> it is very difficult to establish a training regiment that would cover just about every situation. i hear martial arts a lot. i have studied brazilian jujitsu. used to coach wrestling. even if i would have applied some of those techniques it would have caused an injury to the person i was trying to apprehend. itis no one silver bullet that would solve every situation, especially when you are dealing with the

mentally ill command it is difficult to do. i just don't know what the answer is there. >> maybe beyond the scope of the panel, what ipanel, what i want to give you a chance to respond. protests occurring. does anyone want to respond? >> black lives matters has been one of the most destructive forces. it has no purpose but to protest. we had goals. what is the solution? again, black lives seems to only matter when the white person is taking a black life and not when a little girl a shot through the head sitting on her grandfather's lap. when they can rise up in protest when that occurs, then i will join them. >> is go to the back of the room.

>> i know that you have been talking about how it feels like the police have together facts. i'm wondering to what extent the judiciary have the policeman's back. to what extent do we end up shielding municipal entities and counties that should have made some really good decisions on the front-end from continuing to make bad decisions because we're basically shielding them from liability. >> the judicial process at play, questions about policing. >> well, in some ways as one of the speakers pointed out, policeman have immunity from being sued. it is a qualified immunity. prosecutors, judges have an absolute immunity. they can never be sued. part of the problem is municipalities andensure

themselves. part of the problem is, the municipalities can pay a judgment even for an errant police officer when they know they have done wrong, criminal conduct, even when they have engage in criminal conduct, what happens is, they pay the compensatory damages. a policeman can be sued punitively. they can't engage in the same kind of conduct. they can punish them for bad acts. and i am speaking anecdotally. every time we get punitive damage against a police officer, the department puts pressure on the municipality to say, as part of the settlement, the person you

are suing, you can get all that money as long as you don't collected directly from the police. it is very unusual in civil litigation for a policeman ever to pay anything out of his own pocket. what happens is the municipality steps up. quite often it is a supervisory personnel in the department that are really responsibl by the instructions they have given. everybody falls on the sword butbut in most of the litigation the patrolman takes responsibility for the sergeant for the sergeant forsergeant for lieutenant, lieutenant for the captain, and the and from the chief, knowing that the end of the day they will never really

be hurt by it. i hope that answers the question. >> i'm going to take the moderators prerogative and ask a question that i hope was going to be asked but has not been asked yet. there are different views about the need for reform, but, but i want to ask a more fundamental federalist question. where is the reform need to come from if reform is necessary? the federal government, government, state government, local government, all of the above? >> i would say all of the above. >> i think that policing is inherently a state and local issue that must be governed by the jurisdictions responsible for providing the services. the federal government is more likely to impose a one system fits all solution that may not work across this land that we live in.

and so i would stress that we need a outdated but being at this is federalism means that there are certain responsibilities are entirely reserved for state and local government. i see this as a local issue. in terms of the federal government, they play very little role, if any. i agree and think that we should look for reforms. camden, new jersey used to have a most corrupt. it has made major reforms are police officers are living in the community they are surveying and there has just been positive community interaction. violence is down, police relationships, franklin township in new jersey. there is an incident involving a police, the call does not go to new york to demonstrators but to some local leaders who are able

to convene and explained to citizens what happened. happened. so there are positive models of reform, but we ought to have somebody spend some of the time, particularly some research institutes on what works in terms of community police reform. where are the studies of successful police community interaction? >> in your opinion do you feel that because of the nature of the politics between city and state that sometimes you do need the federal government? >> i think it should be extremely rare occasions. >> there are some cases the broadly speaking the federal government should not play a major role in. and i think that for those of you who are interested in looking at what the available research says about topics in policing, i am not affiliated with this

organization, but the center for evidence-based policing evidence -based policing at george mason university does excellent research that i highly recommend looking at what works in policing. >> i'm sorry. >> with our existing federal law and law as section 1983 and the way that it has been interpreted by the supreme court, without those laws they're would be virtually -- let me put it differently. it would be extremely difficult for a citizen, an individual citizen to get regress from police misconduct. the very viable remedy that is available to them is available under federal law. without federal law citizens would be dependent upon state court remedies and historically they have been inadequate.

so the federal government does have a role to play. section 1983, 1988 on the books for a long time, and i think that they have provided an effective watchdog, effective oversight on police misconduct. >> in the weeks after the death of freddy gray when baltimore was all over the news, pressure began to build to bring in the department of justice and eventually the mayor of baltimore did invite loretta lynch and the department of justice to come in and investigate the city police department. and so that investigation is now ongoing, and i expect in

a few weeks, it could be two weeks, it might be three more months, but the department of justice, i expect, will issue a report saying there's a pattern and saying there is a pattern and practice of problems in the baltimore police department. it is not going to be any surprise, but asurprise, but a lot of people are surprised when i say that was a mistake to bring in the department of justice. justice. when there was all that national attention there was no better time for her to make the corrections that a lot of people thought were necessary in that city police department. the environment will never be better than it was back then when there was so much attention and scrutiny on the department. the department will issue a report in a couple of months , and i'm sure the mayor will hold a pressa press conference with the police chief and pledge cooperation and follow through with reform command we will see what happens. sometimes local officials shift off responsibility for cleaning out their own police department by inviting the department of justice and and saying let them handle it and make the tough decisions. it should be done by the mayor and chief of police.

>> thank you. let's go back to the front of the room for another question. >> adjunct professor of law. thethe question has been raised by the panel with the police misconduct sparks distrust of the police and that that distrust law enforcement. the question whether the police and other major public institutions enjoy the public trust has actually been pulled by gallup polls. in the most recent poll last month, poll of 15 institutions. the leading to where the military and small business. number three where the police with 52 percent trust by contrast, the president enjoyed 32 percent trust. the supreme court 31, mtv news 21. in otherin other words, the principal organizations that you hear calling for police

reform enjoy about half of the trust of the police themselves. the reason that they enjoy that level of trust is that they have largely adopted what has been the model of the anti- police movement. hands up, don't shoot. it is no longer news that hands of don't shoot is false. his hands were not up and he was not trying to surrender. what is news is that the media, and, and anti- police organizations continue to adopt what they know is a false motto as the anthem of the movement, and a movement that takes root in a knowing falsehood deserves all the amount of trust that we would give, for example, to something like if you like your insurance you can keep your insurance. [applause] [laughter] ..

in high crime communities there is an intense distrust in the police because the police in high crime communities do the stop and frisk, their issue is not only to reduce crime, it is to make and this is what is really going on, it is to make a social statement, much like a social statement that the last paper just may. you have to respect me, you have

to respect authority, you have to be in a position that if a policeman tells you to do someone, tells you to do something, can exercise even a constitutional right, you, the police are someone who has to be listened to. law-abiding, decent people in high crime communities will not talk to the police. it is not because they're being intimidated by gang members and other bad people. it is because the police and those community have not been trade very well if they have the exact same kind of attitude some have represented we can do it we want because we represent justice and the citizens do not. that is what is going on. >> the data doesn't bear that.

there is a 2011 study where the majority of people of people doing their jobs and there is no difference between hispanics and whites. there is other surveys as well. >> it should not be a majority should be 99%. >> it was 93%. >> the point is, people in those high crime communities want increased police. if you if you look at any study of those community they want increase. they wanted and it's just not true what you're saying. the survey of people in the high crime areas more of them desire increased police presence because that is what the demand is. >> from the chiefs of police to the officers on the street, their biggest complaint and

trying to solve crime is people are not coming forward to help us. >> let me finish that was the same issue a hundred years ago. >> now look, there's no doubt in my mind there is more interaction with police on use of force either nonfatal or fatal use of force by police in the african-american community. there's no doubt about it. the question is why? the people who are interested in true criminal justice reform need to answer that question. if i say to you, what ethnic group if i say to the term organized crime and what ethnic group would you associate if you say anything under i tally and, i'm a telling, the question is

why were they so involved in organized crime? no one answers that question. these need to be answered and you cannot have reform until you have some kind of idea of what you want to reform and why and what causes things. to have anecdotal information, blackstone talk to the cops because they're free to please that's your experience that's not mine as a police officer, and guess that it's not bob's and guess what bob is african-american. >> we need to wrap it up. >> you spoke over me. what i said was please complain regularly to the chief and the guy on the street that communities, high crime communities do not have sufficient cooperation from the citizens in those communities. what i was was about to say was we can disagree about the reasons. one of those reasons, not the

only reason, one of those reasons is the fact that police in many high crime communities have abused their power. you can deny that takes place but it is an element. i believe that very truly. >> i'm told that we need to wrap up. i apologize for those standing at the microphone that we do not have time for your question. please give a nice ride of of applause to these very passionate panelists. [applause]. [inaudible conversa

follow the contest and wrote to the white house coverage on tv, radio, and online at c-span.org.

>> now, a discussion discussion about engaging young people in politics run the world. activism politicians from britain, canada, and italy talk about what they're doing to get millennial voters involved in the political process. from the center from american progress in washington, this is one and a half hours. >> hello everyone, thank you for being here today. my name my name is and johnson, i am the executive director we are excited about the conversation starting today about young people in civic engagement and social change in here in the u.s. and around the world. generation progress as an organization that works with the millennial generation here in the u.s.

the millennial's are defined as people born between 1980 and 2000. although it depends on who is to find it. the millennial generation generation is the largest generation in our history. there are in the year 2020 millennial's will make up 20% 20% of the voting age population in the u.s. there is conversation about what is going on with young people in the united states and their political participation. as an organization we focus on engaging young people around the issues that matter to them. so we talk about economy count and other topics important to them. we've had an opportunity over the past years to meet young people around the world who are doing similar work and engaging young people in social change in their country. what we have learned is a lot of the issues are very similar.

the issues that are important to young people. if you think about jobs in the economy that makes sense. young people are unemployed and underemployed at higher rates than other people. so there's a big big question about jobs and the economy. there are issues around access to high-quality, affordable education for young people. in the united states going to debt is a huge issue, access to to higher education is an issue around the world. there are issues related to violence, gun violence in the united states one of the things i have found is when i talk about our problem with gun violence in the united states, it is absolutely shocking to young people in other parts of the world. how bad this issue is in the u.s. there are issues we are dealing with, with police violence and police killings of young people which is something other people around the world are dealing

with violence what the states itself. there are also important things about the role of government that young people are struggling with in the u.s. and around the world. one thing that was surprising to me as i was having conversation was young people in other parts of the world would say, there is a corruption problem with the way our political system works. it is corrupt. in the united states young people talk about being frustrated by money and politics. when you really boil it down it is the same iss. it's about influence that goes to the very rich and powerful and it takes away from people at large. i think think their similarities in that issue as well. issues are similar that young people are dealing with. i think some of the structural challenges are somewhat similar. their progressive institutions here and around the world that are trying to figure out how to

engage the millennial generation into the progressive institution. whether that is labor union, advocacy organization, or political parties, or think tanks. organizations are trying to figure out how to engage this generation to make them a part of the fabric of the progressive movement in that country. obviously political participation is an issue, so actually voting. young people are not voting in the numbers of previous generations. they are not exercising the power in that way. that is something here and around the world political parties and candidates are trying to figure out. we're talking about this earlier, there is also earl lot of social movements that are happening around the world that are trying to figure out young people leading the social movements are trying to figure

out how to move that social movement of organizing activism into political power. if you think about the occupy movement in the united states it was powerful around income equality but i think a lot of folks and occupy movement would actually say moving into institutional power was a challenge. other organizing efforts around the world are experiencing similar powers. after the protest, what is the next step? how do you institutionalize your power to create long-term change? that is something people are thinking about. with this global conversation we want to start, we want to address the issues and say what is the research that we need to do on this? we are excited to have our friends here from the foundation for european progressive studies to talk about the millennial dialogue project they have kicked off around the world. so what does the research tell us and what do we know about young people in the united states and around the world?

what are some of the issues that are engaging young people here and what our young issues engaging young people in other countries? what can we learn from those? what is working here, for example that is working in other parts of the world? those are the kind of things we want to talk about with issue organizing campaigns. we want to talk about what is working in an electrical engagement. what are models and successes we can share with each other to make electoral politics more welcoming to young people around the world? what good public policy are actually passing? what policies are impacting young people and how are they getting through the legislative bodies that young people are engaged in? so, what's working, how, how are we electing good candidates, how are we getting young people to run for office, and how are we

building social movements that move into institutionalize powers. these are the questions we want to ask over the course of the next hour and a half and over the course of the next months and years as what as we build this millennial conversation. we want to connect young organizers and activists around the world together. as as we move forward together these relationships being built and best practices being shared will impact ten or 20, or 30 years out when these people are running their government. with that, i will turn it over to ernst, if you want to come up we are thrilled to be working with the foundation for european progressive studies on this research project. it is a very busy meeting with d.c. this week. thank you for joining us and tell us about the work.

>> thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to address this conference and before stopping i would like to say a big thank you that it was possible to build up the kind of common dialogue for the centers of making progress and all of the related institutions. i think what we discussed today is not only a timely discussion but very important issue of our times and the challenges we are living and the millennial's are facing. not least important for today's debate is the issue of some up worn-out story of younger generation that you mention. it features disenchanted, or disengage young people who have turned their back on the political system. this is at least what we can say from the european level. people are saying in your political appeals they distance themselves from political

campaigns and they failed to appear at belt boxes. however, their absence their absence within the framework of institutionalize political conversation make them a target of political -- that is why we have lunch together a generation progress at global initiative and i mention that already, called the millennial dialogue. it seeks to shed light on this growing phenomena of u.s. withdrawal. it is is crucial that we as progressives take assertive step to understand the youth and a very good indicator of what the future will look like and how progressives will proceed by this generation. in addition, and most importantly, we should enable ourselves to analyze what are the real challenges for the upcoming years. to reconnect with with this generation and what are possible solutions that would bring progressives out.

i am firmly convinced that the millennial dialogue project is a steady step in this direction. this is a project that aims to give an extract and include in the progressive priorities. with that respect, we have a project, being positive, being participatory, and being progressive. it is to be positive because it is it to change the terms of the current debate. it is to be participatory because it is a gift of the youth and it is to be progressive because it is to support the progressive and social democratic family and acquiring a new connection with the younger generation. what has been done so far, we have conducted so far, until

this month more than ten countries report with a number of indications on what the younger generation is expecting for from its politics and political system. the approach has been welcomed and recognized as an innovative one and entrusting more partners within the european union and beyond. it has allowed us to cover the majority of the european states and indeed go global. we have so far conducted research in the united states, canada, european union and nearly all european countries, we have now contracted with some countries in latin america like chile and brazil. we have some of the service in africa, especially south africa, inc. kenya, and others, we

haven't debate in indian partners to work with younger generations in india. it really is a global conversation and global initiative is going on. it is very needed that politicians in politics are looking at this. with that, i would like to conclude with four core questions which i think david lewis from our agency who is doing this research will explain a bit more to you in detail than what has come out so far. the first question question we have to tackle is, how to prove that progressives understand the approach of the millennial's. while responding with the physical program and organize the economy to a political rule and make politics remain in society. the second question we need to tackle is how to create a political project that will

appeal to young people's idealistic belief that it another world is possible. the third question how to reestablish the link between politics, political culture and culture itself. the fourth question, how to renew the movement so that it presents itself as a real, serious alternative and not a part of a system of the mainstream political consensus. if we work on these on such a positive, progressive, participatory debate i'm convinced the progressive movement, especially in europe can convince again a large part of that younger millennial generation to participate more actively more engaged to its politics. thank thank you very much for your attention. i'd like to introduce david lewis, a london based opinion

poll station and they have worked with tremendous results already on the table. they will continue also working together on that issue. thank you very much. [applause]. think very much my name is david , and the founder of research company which until recently had a background in music and political research has come about because technology we use to engage with people in the music entertainment industry resonate well with young people. so we start with statistical measurements of thousands of people to on my consumer panels which are managed by networking and we have a global reach of consumers. i'm just explaining that we have this global reach.

there's an segmentation and identify core groups to speak with. in the case of politics we have gone out to 1000 people in each country other than the u.s., that was 1600 people, and conducted research of 13-34 -year-olds. we are able to bring in on my community represented of the key segments. people who are actively politically engaged in one segment, the the disengaged millennial and another segment, and another people in the middle in the mainstream. we were able to establish a 247 dialogue. 224-seven. to start up a three country project in germany and poland.

another project was built from there. so much so that the technology that we use for record companies in technology, sports, all of those industries that resonates with politics and we now have a political research department headed up by david kitchen. i just after use of doing research in the music entertainment it is the most fastening project because it is applying technology to really make a difference in people's lives. so you can see on the screen how it works. it is hard for me, i will walk around. we have rigorous research methodology combined with connected technology to engage communities for 24/seven insights.

we are actually building up a database of millennial's because soon we'll completed up to 20 countries in all continents. will break that down into granular detail. what is most significant finding is that is it interesting cluster of countries were commonality between hungry on certain aspects and canada and germany. there are interesting clusters and interesting cultural differences but the most important, most exciting thing is the strength of commonality and talking to young people around the globe about politics and political engagement. because we have spoken to people in depth for an entire weekend doing questionnaires there is rich data of the survey. i will concentrate on the numbers of what has come out

over the 12,000 people have talked to. i will concentrate on the u.s. and how it compares and how it is similar different of different territories. we'll start by taking one quote from each of six countries to give you a flavor of the sort of things that is coming out of the study. i think the rich data is in the engagement. in germany, the internet the internet is gaining in popularity and recently with was watches instead of being used to inform young people we are playing apps like dub smash. in italy is been quite common area been without a job for three years and with that my dreams to buy house. i was living at home with my parents and i my partners not even working, at what age will we have children? never, we seem to be looking for work in order to start a family in a family in the years pass. in poland, one of my favorite quotes and poland were to explode in revolution would soon have lots of lights on facebook but no revolution is in the

street. something that comes out every territory is this where people will like or agree with it, and they feel like they have done something. young people are very self-effacing to recognize that that is not politically active. in bulgaria, politics is a dirty business. bulgaria politicians seek to fill their pockets to fill their own interest and don't care about society. census lines i can i'm member corrupt politicians to have arose and i see no difference in the future. people are not interested in politics because there is nothing that excite them. in hungary, i would like to take part in politics but i'd like to see it has an effect two. if by some wonder and average person gets into an influential person they will be driven away

in no time. and from an american, but nicely sums up, don't mistake the force of political system with lack of caring about public affairs. what you'll see as we go through the top findings and see how can system america on the same level with other territories and countries. young people are concerned about their future. there really engage with their future and their lives and have a serious interest in politics. they're not engaging with the political systems. political systems for young people across the research seem badly damaged if not completely broken. what is reassuring is that young people really serious about the light. the most impactful discussion i witnessed since we have been running this survey wasn't hungry where young people started to discuss in online

communities, the ethics of having children. there is a serious discussion in hungary about the problems they're having. is is it morally sensible to have children? that is a horribly bleak picture but it has been something they are starting to have a discussion. what will see as young people have an interest in their lives and making a difference, it's about how we change systems to reflect young people. it has been a huge cognitive shift amongst young people from the digital age away from the way of viewing the world in social media and social platform integration. i will go through the data, i am rushing because we have so much here and i'm conscious of the time. america, when we ask people what

they're interested and they did not know to start the survey that it was mainly about politics because i thought i was about life in your country and area. so we start talking about your interest. you can see here this picture in america from first to last is very similar across territories with music popping up in every country we researched and new technology coming up thereabouts and that broader social media and higher for people. another thing to look at is politics, that is the low-scoring interest, not just in the u.s. but in the research in its entirety. political engagement, political america we look at the segments in our discussion 16% of america millennial's say they're very interested in politics which is lower than 23% say they are not at all interested in politics. we consider those to be

politically disengaged. as for other questions on trend countries, looking at america in comparison it is alongside the u.k., just behind in germany, the politics and hungry was particularly pronounced as it was in bulgaria. let me ask, what is important in life? what are the important things in your life? being happy, being a good health, being free to do and say what i want, they are high up on the list. as you'll see the significant thing there taken an interest in politics is the least important factor in the research. throughout all of the territories we talked to taking an interest in politics was 16th or 17th. so very low. interestingly, in america it is the only country where we found a slight uplift among 15 -

17-year-olds who are very interested in politics. and the other countries we find the younger you go down the scale the less interest there is in politics. in italy of 1000 people we talked to we do not find one respondent of the 15 - 17-year-old said they were very interested in politics. in hungary there were only 20. this is an interesting question, we would have to choose one option. what would you rather be, in your life? in all countries but germany business owner or founder he came top of what people would like to be. entrepreneurial concerned with business, concerned with success, that was the top answer everywhere else except germany. in germany we found being a sportsman was number one aspiration. it was interesting in germany we

found a greater sense of stability going forward. german economy, german education system people were comfortable that and confident that they were going to have a nice life and maybe an entrepreneur may be. america is supposed to be the biggest laboratory country in the world where being a famous celebrity was coming in second. the interesting thing here is again only 4% of americans say they would like to be a politician, and all of the countries across europe and north america, chile, no one wants to be a politician or very few. happiness with life right now, lots of very serious conversation about and what i

refer to and hungry, the optimism of the youth. 89% of 15 - of 15-34-year-old millennial's in the state say they are happy. that compares favorably with other countries. hungary was at the bottom. another interesting finding and i found it particularly interesting because before i started this project i assumed that it would be a huge influence young people, constantly connecting with their peers. when you say seriously what the biggest influence of your day to day life, parents and every country has come out way ahead of friends, siblings, but in america, they're more influenced by family compared to the norm and other countries. let me look at data analysis, we

are picking out active interest, what you actively have an interest in. team sports, one third of people in that compares to taking part of political meetings and protester demonstrations. it is way down there. what factors will affect the quality of your life? the number one factor that america millennial's feel is the u.s. economic situation. what is interesting in the data is despite a lack of personal interest in politics and the political system, americans will use decisions made by politicians is a key thing of their life. they are aware of how influential and important politics will be in effect in their lives but they are not engaging in the system. one interesting thing of the data compared with countries is decisions made by politicians and the u.s. is high where u.s.

international decisions is low. again, optimism about the future, how, how optimistic are you about your future? this is something you find with young people, my might not be great but there's a determination and energy that life will be good. 8585% are optimistic about their future in the u.s. generation gap, did you you want to say something about the generation gap involvement in politics in their parents and grandparents be met yes will put some historical context on the historic gold generation gap. with regard to politics and culture, and the surveys we found there is a perception

among millennial's that we do not have the same things to fight for that our parents or grandparents generation had. in germany, or pulling, there is about communist legacy sub millennial parents were young with the berlin wall existed, those reasonable organization. there is movements around the vietnam war and a greater sense of need to mobilize around politics. there was not really satisfaction about the case that there are issues to fight for. there is a wide rate of alienation and polarization and were commonalities, their stark contrast in specific areas. we noticed a significant rise in jenna phobia and hungry for example. there is a link and how the

economic so for example in countries you think was a aaa credit rating there was some more interest in politics. there's very much evident hierarchy of need and how millennial's view politics and what is important for them. >> think we isolated the people who said they had no interest in voting, one of the key reasons for not wanting to vote, in the u.s., it was no interest in politics ahead of lack of trust in politicians. that was a difference across countries because they're tended to be a lack of politicians was the number one factor. key factors that might encourage u.s. millennial's to vote if my vote really made a difference, that contrast was out of the country.

a grin with these statements 60% of u.s. millennial thing politicians ignore the views of young people. 62% of young americans feel politicians are more concerned about older people than younger. over half feel politicians want to control and restrict young people. the fact contributing to voting decisions in the u.s., what was interesting here when you ask young people what you think would actually affect your decision of who to vote for if you're going to vote? it's it's traditional media, all the things you think about in the way the arguments for political campaigns had to pan out. we look at how young person will begin to engage with their peers it is a different picture, is about use of social media and connectivity. we'll see that in a moment.

one thing a trend that comes out that people are interested in issues that have a link to politics. this is in translation to political participation. there is a jaundiced view towards parties and institutions that seem to be inaccessible, they seem to be favorable to older generation it's more hierarchy. or single issue campaigns that have a direct linear relationship from start to finish and you can see the success that is achieved. there is a challenge in translating this, we have used two cultural change. , one is really mobilize using

the means that millennial's identified as something they would use the campaign. the other is the marriage equality campaign and which made use of everything from local organization and mobilization at community level through celebrity. then to make sure everyone knew about it so it would want others to go vote two. there some speculation as to what will attract more preservation with justin trudeau becoming prime minister in canada and younger charismatic leaders in leadership. president obama is an example of it.

but among a lot of the respondents in our survey is not specifically just these boxes that they want to have checked. it is a feeling and desire of authenticity in politics. it is not specifically the age of the leaders that matter. it is the projection of related ability of off the intensity. >> it is interesting in britain the two most popular politicians are young people, the two who could not be more politically apart but they have charisma and honesty that young people find they can engage with because they think they are who they say they are. it is fascinating that young people think that. young people in terms of political structures and system just want transparency. they went to a dialogue that is

now possible through social media. >> so coming to that point what things would be extremely useful to you, as young people for building your political campaign? they are not expecting that in electoral campaigns particularly, if they're are starting a political campaign social media would be up there alongside powerful media, tv, et cetera. and the quality of research we got young people building and what kind of messaging you would use. what we are finding in the research is the answers to engaging young people come from young people they need to write the script. we need to get politicians involved in listening in a two-way dialogue. that dialogue needs to involve young people in terms of calling people to political action.

we talk about high-priority spending in the u.s. was very consistent with the other countries in terms of actual things that come to the top, education, healthcare, there are central issues. did you central issues. did you want to say something about? >> this goes again to the focus of the quality of the economy and socialist in the country. it is reflective in our research , if there is a stable label market there are more issues than jobs. only one third of americans felt they could have their opinion heard if they wanted to. young young people generally don't feel empowered to be heard.

next few if any politicians encourage young people to get involved in politics. what should politicians work for an to what extent should they deliver what they're working for? in every country we found the number one thing from a young person's perspective a politician should be doing is ensuring the best possible future for young people. as you can see most of the other things the politicians are doing is perceived as to how well politicians are doing. the only place it was great where's germany where there is more praise of what politicians achieve. other countries we see this lack of ensuring of a future for young people be in the key thing. the only thing is building and maintaining strong military focus and that is what

politicians seem to do better. in terms of gender and sexual orientation without huge support for gender and sexual equality. norway was the highest, u.s. 80%. hungary was the lowest of the country. from from young person perspective that is an important issue. in the research we are building communication, how would young people begin to message the importance of racism. it's not a creative suggestion for campaign but an essential messaging that young people should hear. young people need to vote, as their future. this is what comes out at the top of the message. we also say, in america there is

definitely a call for more women in politics. the gender balance is important. finally, and i'm conscious of time, the fact fact that it would encourage more millennial's to vote. first about the ability to vote on my, i know there has been problems with online voting in holly, their things texted and shelved for security issues. there are debates about whether it is right for voting to bmi. from a young person's perspective and perspective and across the research is just a matter of when. it has to happen, if their problems they need to fix them because because we need to be able to vote online. what about the ability to vote more places, would that help? shopping malls, airports, train stations, and just be able to go to cast your vote more widely, young people are saying they'll

be irrelevant once we could vote on my because that's how we would vote. those eligible to vote who are you register, and the u.s. 70% have registered. the ability to vote in advance, what, what about if you could vote several weeks or months in a dance with that encourage more young people to vote? we found there is support other than in hungry for longer. to vote. will he talked about this in the research if we excluded the idea of months it would be higher. people think you should be up to vote for weeks but not months. should voting be be compulsory by law? definitely not that does not seem to fit with democracy. that was was widely rejected in all countries. should 16 and 17-year-olds be given the opportunity to vote. note was note was the answer and every country.

you have 52% of people saying they should not be able to vote they were concerned about whether they knew enough or were experienced enough to vote. in the u.k. we did research not long after we had a referendum where 16 and 17 -year-olds could vote. that got a lot of media attention. generally people feel that 16 and 17 is too young. that is the headlines of the research. i think where 1010 minutes behind schedule, thank you very much. [applause]. thank you so much i would like to introduce matt brown who is going to facilitate this panel discussion. matt is a senior fellow for the

american progress and runs the global progress program which works with institutions around the world on developing progressive governments and progressive. thank you matt for doing this. that has also been a thought partner in this process. i appreciate his guidance as we go through this, i will turn it over to. >> thank you for the passing presentation. i will quickly introduce the three new panelists that we have joining us, we have a member of parliament from the democratic party in italy, also we have hillary who is the lead for the volunteer mobilization and liberal party of canada.

we have layla who is the communication director at generation progress that leaves a variety of campaigns including a trip. this has been a hugely successful campaign that you rrelated with the white house but it is not a political campaign. if you can explain to us what is the source of that success, will how do you run a campaign that involves high-level politicians yet transcends political divides? what is the secret to success. >> so thank you matt, i think we can all agree the issue of

campus sexual assault is a tremendous problem. we have one in five women will be sexually assaulted by the time she graduates. one and 16 men, and most of most of the time it is by someone they know. the scope of the problem is huge which is why the white house launched a passport to investigate the growing number of incidents on campus. one of the things the task force found was by standard intervention. training people to feel empowered to step in and do something if they saw something happening. we partnered with them and others to launch the campaign which is about that really. empowering people to think about campus sexual assault is something they have a responsibility to do something about. if you see something happening and you don't do something to stop at your are part of the problem as well. we want to make sure were giving you tools to be part of the solution. we are fortunate to work with the white house on this. is very much a cultural change campaign and not with

legislative agenda. again trying to reframe this idea of making it your responsibility to do something about campus sexual assault. >> i think we reach out to a lot of cultural influencers to first broadcast that message and so anyone from kerry washington to the president and vice president are supporters of the campaign. we have had millions of views on our psa's, to say the reach of the message has been huge. we also have an intense focus on making sure people are embracing the message and it is not just a psa campaign. it is something we want people to take in use and implement on their campus. to empower each other to step in

and do something. working with these cultural influencers has allowed us to spread the message far and wide. we put the toolkit online, we made the local downloadable, we gave the tools to the people we want to run the campaigns on their campus entrusted them with the tools. given that trust to the young people has empowered them to take the campaign and run with it. that is what made it successful. >> what is the definition of success for you? how do you measure success if it is a cultural change? >> to be honest, it is hard to measure the success of cultural change. we have great numbers in terms of how far the message has been reaching. at the end of the day the campaign is about stopping campus sexual assault. if nobody ever gets raped again that we have succeeded and it is

great. to dial it back a bit, we like to normalize by standard and it is something a given on college campuses. outside of college campuses as well. i think i think of the example of a designated driver. twenty or 30 years ago that was not really a thing that people thought about if you're going to go on have drinks and socialize you didn't think about having a designated driver. and out now through work and campaigning that is a given. if you're going to be drinking with your friends you have a designated driver. that is a similar parallel with what we're trying to do it by standard intervention and empowering people to read praying the issue of campus sexual assault. secondly working with people to continue the grassroots movement as they continue to have conversations on campuses and

engage each other. making sure the schools are responding well and institutionalizing that from a university level. i would say that would definitely be a success. >> thank you. looking at the campaigns towards the political campaigns, the research presented say the younger generation of millennial's are becoming much less affiliated with a political party. when when you're looking at this, i remember a poll that came out just before an election and they basically set up young people vote justin trudeau wins. those essentially the message. what technique did you use in canada with the liberal party to encourage people to come out and vote? >> a lot of what was done in the presentation is that we relied upon.

it was more of the issues and about identity. people were were coming to the liberal party because of the platform policies that laid out, that is what we use to connect with people. one of the things that is important to take away is that youth is not a special interest group. they are diverse groups. there's a youth with young families, youth and school, there is there is no secret sauce to mobilizing youth. it is based on real relationships, not not transactional relationships that only come around once an election. we started building prior campaign about a year and a half out and we really mobilized people around issues that matter to them. started by talking to people in finding out what they are interested in. what issues concern them, and then talking about how different

policies could impact their lives. one of the things that made it, they opened up special voting centers on college campuses to advance the polls for early voting. and made it easier for young people and mostly on university campuses and so that's a group that generally has a low participation in the pole. so not making making it about a liberal, conservative, democrat, so just talking about what you care about and using personal stories and giving people tools to mobilize their own community. >> can we dig deeper into that last point you made about the tools. the strategies, techniques, tactics or particular forms that allow people to organize better than others?

or could you not generalize there either? >> i think it's about doing the real work and having conversations with people being authentic and honest. being in places where young people are. prime minister trudeau did the talk and i think that was something that a lot of people were interested in. they went to that force for a lot of their news and their interests. i don't think you can generalize because it is a diverse audience and it is about making candidates making sure they are accessible and open and having conversations with people once before hand. >> from a candidates point, david mention is that a lot of people who are successful are the young charismatic leaders.

yet obama and zero eight, you you have trudeau now, do you think that is a factor and partly of your success? >> i think both. i think think people want to see themselves reflected in their leadership, that plays a part. if people are not the centric and people don't believe this person will do it they say or is not a real person, that trickles down to the candidates, the volunteers, the people who are doing the organizing. everyone has to find their own voice and reason for becoming involved in politics. that authenticity says what that person cares maybe i should care to. >> you are a real person a politician. at least you seem to be from where i'm sitting. what is a light from the inside? how? how does it feel to run?

>> the kind of experience is a big difference from what you spoke until now. we were elected with a strong mandate from all people to crash all politics. so we were not elected by young people i would say. when we compare, we have to be honest, when we comparing 2013 we are not so gray heads, young people did not vote like the democratic party. they went but we ended up with a very young parliament is the youngest parliament elected in italy since the beginning of the republic so since the end of the

world war. we do have a mandate to respond to the quotes that we had. let's say two and half million young people in italy do not work, do not not study, and are not in training. we were elected to change politics. i think this is our challenge. so more than complaining, i think we have to look at the work we do, to ace, on the one side what are the issues that move us? we come from different parties and we did a lot of work on unemployment. we strongly felt that was our mandate so we have a problem in italy certainly so as you see young people do not vote because

of what government delivered. also they feel involved. that is the second part of our mandate. it is more challenging i would say which is involving young people in politics which is what we're talking about. in a different way because one way of all people in politics the other issues how to get people involved in everyday politics and taking responsibility. i think it is my experience, first of all that you have to set an example. if you let people your age to vote you have to do the work so conversing in the streets. we opened up shop in the middle of my constituency.

>> ..

you are. >> the good thing is that you put yourself into a position to change things. no party asks you to lie. but the main idea that young people have -- if they are volunteers they are asked to lie. so the second lesson that i had to show young people our age that they have the possibility to do things and try out what they are really passionate about so that there can be possibilities and they can have

a possibility of doing things. >> i want to come back and ask, when we were discussing this shift from campaigning with what we experienced in 2008 and what some people may have said was a disappointment and there were not enough things for people to do to help the governor's agenda, are you thinking about this? is the government comes in, and what is your thinking on that remark. >> for sure, that definitely part of it. we are mobilizing more people to get involved in politics and how do we go forth with that and how do we keep people engaged. first because they want to be engaged and also they would help the democratic process continue

because people think that we only wanted to engage with them because there is an election and that is not going to speak well for us and so a lot of the ideas in this stuff was successful because we learn from each other. and we would say we have this, it was very effective, i think we have a lot to learn from our grassroots community and so it's definitely something that has been actively talked about and how do we do that moving forward with their constituents and also other areas where we didn't necessarily win but we engage a lot of people. >> from the research, what is it that people are asking for a rematch when it comes to their involvement. >> we have engaged with them and it is a dialogue.

and we are talking about the need for this because it is the 21st century. don't just use it as another form of lecturing. you have to do it properly which is why you need young people in both sides of the discussion who know how to use social media and connect with young people. so when you're asking young people and making suggestions, i think that's a point that we can just touch on, you can't just leave it to a few months or a need for an election to suddenly change because you need to have this genuine dialogue all the time and it needs to be an initiative rather than a campaign. because young people, there needs to be a lot more people

creating a very genuine engagement. and so these are young people that are completely part of the political spectrum. >> opening up to people. i just want to go back to something that you said earlier about doing things, the fact that you and your young colleagues worked together on an employment opportunity. has that changed the perception of young people and the fact that you can collaborate with members of different parties to do things for them? have you seen a change in the way people feel about you, have you managed to show them the

more together and actually achieve things? >> it was really hard, it was a very difficult time. there was a sense of a divide between a grassroots movement and the populist party. but we thought that it was worth a try to try to engage them and we do engage them on specific issues and so it is so terrible especially with young people between the ages of 18 and 29 years old. so we needed to give this response to that. but that does not translate so we have to be honest.

>> let's talk to the gentleman in the front row here. do we have a microphone? >> i would likely asked the issue about climate change. , as is the future. >> i think it's definitely an issue that young people care about, but it is on us as people who are reading these movements and if they want to have a conversation about it to engage them in a productive conversation and work with them. i think working on this

perspective why that has been successful is because we kind of have structured a model that is very much outside of the traditional political system to plug into a movement where they are the agents of change, but i think that it's something that is applicable to any number of climate change concluded. >> i think he you may have just missed something in the five is definitely up there and they're certainly discussion groups. the lady at the back there. >> hello, i'm a junior studying here is part of the program and my question is even that we have representatives from across the transatlantic policy perspective, what would you say is the collaboration that we might need to move the needle and engage millennialist.

[laughter] >> i think that what really struck me is that even in different countries we do have the same challenges with similar solutions. we have successes with young people like the leaders that we spoke about. and we should develop this with young people. and there is a big difference between this and the grassroots movement to revise the whole idea of the process in the which is something that we had in

different parts of the european countries. demonstrating that that process is meaningful today. and so i think that there are some issues, one is climate change and the second one is issues like migration and stability that do require more progressive policies like human trafficking control and a stronger assertion of human rights, i think that these are issues that in my country are part of young people. >> how are people feeling about the refugee crisis. and how does that come out in the research.

>> usually there is a big young people movement, helping out in the street where these people arrive. there is a big personal involvement. it is also respect to those kinds of instances where young people go and do things and we should be there with them to help and that dean in an institution you can do much more so you can be multitasking. >> i think what is also interesting about what you just said is that you are doing kind of something outside of passing legislation that is in the health like delivering food or something. and it's using your position and your giant microphone to engage other people.

by making real social change. >> we have been unfolding as the research has been progressing. we are finding a consistent picture are talking about immigration in a positive way. they enjoy being part of the multicultural surprise. however we found in certain countries that there are certain concerns and i think in general what we have picked up is that younger people are more frustrated with the lack of initiatives and kind of coming-out and humanitarian and they have began to push for change.

and so we have found more resistance and concerned than earlier on. >> did that play a role in the canadian campaign to . >> it was a uncle's family, but they did have relatives in canada and i think that they started the official immigration process and i think it did play into the election and people were very concerned. at one point of the election that is where partisanship kind of toned down which was nice to see. and so i think that was one of our key campaign promises to have over 25,000 refugees before the end of the year. so i think that one thing the last couple of days is that

refugees needs to be an opportunity and now the government is trying to push forward. >> hello, i'm a policy advisor. what we are experiencing now in europe, we talked about the issue of authenticity and how important it is and of course this is the right way to go. you don't just engage with young people, you have to be doing this and long-term. what we see in the states is politicians being lured by the powers of populism and that is another shiny way of engaging with young people.

and in certain countries we see that this medium is thoughtful, politicians engage with younger people because they found emotional, they found populace. and that is a way to be popular amongst younger generations as well. so i just wanted to get an opinion across the panel on how difficult it is to not go down this road of populism. and appear authentic and this time. it is definitely popular. >> i think we have a strong responsibility. especially in europe we do have

a strong request from young people and they are grounded requests, it's not like it used to be in the past. that includes the possibility of having children is going to be lowered and we do have that responsibility and i think that they are not doing that. they are not using a productive way. this until in the sense younger generations show that it is less politically motivated and a sense been ideologically motivated. they are a lot more realistic

and it's up to whoever to be able to take this out of the request and make this doable. >> are they attracted to the millennial generation? >> yeah, i mean, on your point about having a responsibility to be authentic, i think what is important is to be true to what the angle is and again i'm going to speak about the campaign, which is different than being a candidate in the issue we are organizing around and so it's

actually that disillusionment with the institution that even makes a campaign possible in the first place and that it is operating kind of outside the normal legislative process to make a change here and then bring the politicians in after, you know, making a cultural change and so it is realistic to have an answer to the problem. and so that includes organizing around a specific issue, what is so valuable is to have not just one kind of populist answer but to have a chorus of voices on the same message and i think that it's that kind of mosaic and rich tapestry of voices promoting the same message that increases the likelihood that you are going to relate to one of them and find the message relatable. so in terms of the populism

idea, i think that bringing in more people to have different perspectives is what really brings in a wider swath of people. [inaudible] and so feeling that we need to do a much better job of listening and having that two-way dialogue. i haven't heard you talk about personal entrepreneurship because maybe i missed it. but my sense is that there are

smart untransformed governments, social entrepreneurs, businesses and solutions collaborative way. and so i think the colonials are really less interested in institutions and hierarchy and more interested in being action oriented and that is what you have said as well. so my question is where is the social entrepreneurship in the equation. my feeling is that governments are and politicians are behind the curve. that a lot of the challenges are being addressed globally rather than going out and tackling them and they are led by younger people. and that governments and people are trying to stay up and they are a little bit out of date. i would like to chat about that and get perspective.

>> i think that young people should be involved at every level. and that we should be encouraging systems. >> i think it has come down that 80% of young people would like to start their own business. that's more of an attitude with life rather than just a specific sector of their engagement for their future life. so i do agree that young people have a for sharing attitude and the way that they are and i think that the great challenge is how to integrate this which is a lot more modern and away

from the selection of candidates and of course we had to make it more flexible to accommodate the society that needs individuals to be more empowered to do things. so i think that be able to have young people and express the potential in these sharing ways that they work. >> i think one of the things that we were able to really do is empower people to say that this is who i am and this is what i care about and it's not so much that i want to be me being involved in politics as i

would like to bring about change it wasn't that they really identified with us as a party but maybe as a particular policy that we were pushing for and i think that was really important. i think the challenge for us is to continue the dialogue and make sure that it is a two-way conversation as i said and that it's not just sort of, you know, we said we would do this, so now we are going to do this, but things happen and change and now we always have to keep that conversation going and that's what we have to focus on. >> yes, i think that when i saw the data, almost 20% of young people want to start their own business and take kind of like challenges into their own hands and solve them. i think that one of the western you want to answer is how this government institutions, how do we support that kind of

initiative and how do we keep them and the momentum going while still working towards engaging people more and also kind of fixing this broken system to allow them to thrive. >> i think that politics stands out as a bit of a dinosaur when it comes to this in their a lot of works with industry set or is it have middle managers there as well and very often it is the millennial is it really hold the answers and who people say is this possible, can we do this. so i think that politics may have this image, that if i don't get involved in that light actually be engaged or capable or will i have to start and put

my way through this group. because i think that reflects the figures that we see young people considering being politicians. i think he would've asked that question 10 or 20 years ago it could have been much more exciting. >> i think one thing that was exciting for us is that we ran a data center campaign and we were using databases and technology in terms of management that really sort of took the hierarchy of other things. because people that were younger tended to be more technologically savvy than that really made a difference in engaging young people in the campaign. so i'm going to tell you how to do things just in terms of what we were trying to do and it was more applicable and young people

seemed to take two more quickly. >> we are running out of time, just making one quick comment there. >> hello, i have a question. >> this is needed and it's wonderful what people all over i've been coming to. it demands a fair answer from politics in what has to be done. and my kids are studying at the university and there is no space anymore available because all sports are full of refugees and this is a magnitude of those

that demand that the young generation is doing so much and that we need a european answer. >> i would like if everyone could just join me in thanking our panelists with what i thought would be a wonderful discussion. >> as i said at the beginning, i hope this is the beginning of a conversation, we are really excited about thinking how we as young people can push the institutions that we work with to be more receptive to our generation. so i think that we have a responsibility to think about how we push politics and politicians and i think that

example about data being he an equalizer is an incredibly important one. and we can actually prove that things can be successful, whatever those tactics and tools are that we can share with other campaigns and young people who are engaging in the political process of the day can be more successful and push those institutions both from the inside and outside and i think that pressure of pushing social change and then pushing it from the inside we can actually get to the place where the values and the issues that young people care about her being affected in institutions of power. i look forward to working with you all. .. for strategic studies.

it is about one hour. >> welcome. an in-depth conversation on isis. we are here primarily to avoid andconfusion about isis iiss. i have actually been asked about that. we have memorable guests. one, who has published a memorable book. from theournalist washington post to join the staff in 1996. securityvered national and currently writes about the environment, where he won the pulitzer prize, years ago, i

believe. his previous best-selling book, "the trouble agent," helped inspire this book. i think it is in the introduction or knowledge mins. an associate professor at the department of social sciences at west point. thenior associate at terrorism center at west point. more importantly, she will be joining us as a senior research iiss in bahrain next month. i'm told to warn you, her views in no way reflect anything about

the military or the army. we are going to have a discussion here for about 20 minutes. and then i will turn it over to the audience for q and a. first, i will ask about your book. it is focused on a number of individuals. especially zarqawi and his rise in jordan. his release. his time in northern iraq. iraq.tely his demise in it also tells the story of a who try toey figures

find him. the story of how he led the insurgency in iraq. i am wondering if you did this, took this approach for narrative reasons as a journalist, or if you feel the rise of isis is really the story of individuals and their own contingencies. in other words, could isis have been presented if he was still in a jordanian prison? >> thank you and thanks again to for hosting this event and been such a great resource. members of the public over the years. it is nice to meet you for the first time.

also to add to the they have thes -- problem of trying to explain they are not the bad isis. good going on rearranging your letters. me, as aing point for journalist i am a storyteller by nature. zarqawi familiar with when he was still active in iraq. his importance as a terrorist leader was underrecognized and read what he was able to create was unique. built in organization that became a problem form us.

he did it deliberately, even is probably the least suited or qualified person to lead a terrorist movement. he never finished high school. .e was a street hoodlum he went off to fight the jihad and did not do especially well. he missed a chance to fight the russians because he got there too late he had some unique ideas that al qaeda rejected. following, arful core group that he formed around himself. he became a powerful and strategic force. there is an important story that needed to be told and broken down and understood. it became more important under the isis context. theree without zarqawi, was no isis. he was the innovator of

everything we see today. the focus on building the caliphate. it was something he decided in iraq had to be done immediately as a short-term proposition. thesing on building caliphate as a field of dreams. declare it, it will happen. his successors did it more overly but he was doing it as early as 2005 or 2006. he was the innovator of by sheer objectives brutality. he did not want to be liked, he wanted to be feared and respected. he wanted to make things happen. he innovated the idea of parading men before a camera and cutting their heads off. an important story and one we need to understand if we want to understand isis. the other thing that is that --t to me, i argue

would not have existed without a series of missteps. to help general readers, not just people in our world of being saturated with this. help them to understand all these points we are familiar with. how it came together in an extraordinary way with circumstances, to form zarqawi. and the organization that followed, isis. scientists doial not like to focus on individuals. in your mind, what were the main circumstances that led to the rise of isis?

ideological, reaction to the the authoritarian regimes? first, thank you for inviting me to this event. and to me meeting joby. something about his book, and from the book at the one of the things that joby tells us, the bombing that was carried out initially group, they try to target an adult cinema. bomber was so film, he forgot

about his mission and lost his legs in the process. book is somewhat similar for me. i started reading his book on the train. there were mechanical difficulties. to change we needed trains and everybody lost except me, i was too engrossed in the book until a conductor said, you need to leave. i found myself really enjoying many of these stories and aspects i had not read before. i want to commend you beyond taking us past the early time or i.s. or the group that calls islamic state.wa

we have had so many books that flooded the market. --many of them begin with personalities do matter. what we have found through zarqawi is a different brand of jihad isism. we had become accustomed to the jihadism dominated by al qaeda. perhaps the personalities of ourgeoisll we say bo jihadis. the dangerous dreamers as they are called. thatw a kind of jihadism

was about ideals. sacrifice. the need to die for a cause. seeing aawi, we are particular, a different kind of jihadism. they decided they wanted to be jihadis. we see some of those differences brand, at qaeda's least on the narrative side, and what we are seeing with zarqawi today. fillst respect, the book an important gap. i want to say also, there were , we still have gaps in understanding the foundation of i.s. there was a serious gap in the

2011.from 2006- there is my bias here. studying the leadership of the islamicled isi, state of iraq from 2006-2010. i do think there is something that has been underestimated about this time. , that islamic state was declared by another person. phase i wouldther like us to focus on. you describe him in your book, when zarqawi emerges.

of -- thisame part is a very important time. we saw many groups in iraq. umbrella,d under the and zarqawi's group was one of many. we saw many serious divides. some of the groups appealing to bin laden. saying, why don't you dissociate yourself from these groups? if there was one report -- i don't know about its authenticity -- it suggests it al-bagdadi who was the

leader. when i read his statement, he provides almost, if you like, the theorize asian of what he calls the beheading. what heheorizing of calls the beheading. we may say there was no state, but the hierarchy and infrastructure, at least on paper. all the suicide operations and other operations mounted and era. this was during this , wonder why the several years 2.5 pages in the book.

benjamin: because that is your book. i would like to ask you about your time in jordan. it is what helped inspire this book. it is clear you went to remote places outside of him on. mman. a i wonder if you can talk about the g ijid. ise the people you met from th m organization. their role in the security establishment and how they can committed positively or negatively to the rise of isis. joby: i think jordan is an

essential character. zarqawi was a jordanian. at the same time, as i understand, his real influence was outside the country. it was not part of the jordanian movement. it did not come out of the muslim brotherhood. he was more influenced by his mujahedinng -- experiences. he did not have a single successful attack ever. the one that was the most famous was just described by nelly. what came out of the story, role and containment of these groups. they recognized they had a serious problem.

these afghanth fighters coming back to the country. being radicalized. having military training. getting into trouble. sophisticated containment operation began. they had dealt with factions of palestinians, but this was a homegrown terrorist problem they had to deal with. quite brutally at times. there was a combination of two things. whichely good nutrition, is easier to do in a small country. -- penetration, which is easier to do in a small country. i have always been impressed whatthey have a grasp of is going on the country. the old organization, the headquarters, has a hard reputation. nickname used -- to be the fingernail factory. they have become a little less

rough around the edges but they do what they need to do including keeping people in prison for a long time if they feel there is a threat. the ideological partner to born -- was a core 80 kuwaiti born palestinian who had the philosophy that started this movement in prison. zarqawi was released in the general amnesty in 1999. they saw him as a threat and kept him in prison -- this other man as a threat and kept him in prison until a few months ago. they have been very good and effective at controlling some of these groups. they have a bigger problem now. it is not just the jordanian population but huge numbers of outsiders, especially syrians.

refugee camps. problem ofave the isis, literally on two sides of the border in iraq and syria. their problems have amplified in the last couple of years. they continued to complain to me , noti speak to them about just a resource problem, they feel disadvantaged and shortchanged. they are fighting a challenge that is unique in the region. they are essential to keep isis from progressing further and do not feel they have nearly the support they need to. they come out as being cassandra and also, a tragic element of what is happening to the country. benjamin: from your time in jordan, do you pick up any blowback among the population

about the treatment of prisoners? radicalization? that was made,ke and i think the jordanians would it this, they kept the jihadists together. they had an overcrowded prison population. were hard-core guys infecting the other guys. they put them all together. it opens up with a group of 50 radicals in prison together in a gel that has been abandoned. jihadime kind of a university. there are stories of torture and and it is hard to get a true version of what happened in many cases. it helped drive these guys together and create a more

radical collection that existed before. beforan existed before. i think there is more effort, they are good not just that penetration but human intelligence. you talk to officers, i guess the equivalent of almost more thethen cia, dealing with families of young men going into the jihadist camp. working with parents, siblings. street-level care and attention being paid to potential problems coming up. that is what makes them remarkably, if you look at the region, stable compared to their neighbors. going back toy, isis today, can you help us situate them in the spectrum of

islamist groups and talk a little bit more about their difference with al qaeda? nelly: sure. joby mention the one-time mentor of zarqawi. landscape,he jihadi i prefer to call them jihadi's. s are groups that use islam as part of their political agenda, but they are willing to have political elections and so on. s upend theadi political process altogether. groups thatncounter came to form isis or i.s.

through the lens of the writings , or thee the person who ideologue whose writings provided the foundation of that brand of jihadism. the jihadism of bin laden and al ofda is the jihadism pragmatism of sorts. one of the early books that became popular among the the religion of abraham." he provides the seeds for that kind of sectarianism that zarqawi would adapt and run with. said zarqawi and others abused his writings. they didn't really abuse them.

you go back and read his writings, human night on his thoughts that they did not abuse them. not to get into too much technicalities about this, but the main difference, and this is a difference that was very clear whenn laden and zarqawi they first met sir, we back in 1999, they did not want anything to do with him because of differences in the concepts of -- these are the social contract, if you wil like, the social contract. with whom you want to associate in terms of believers. and bin laden, they wanted to focus and emphasize the thought you of this. bringing people together.

-- the value of this. ringing people together. zarqawi, they were concerned about who to dissociate from. f.ey did not share your believ s they rejected the shiites. for those who emphasized that on the basis of police, they were disposed to resorting -- when a muslim declares fellow muslims to be unbelievers. mainstream muslims, and even people like bin laden, were careful about that. they would not utilize it. mainstream muslims will tell you what is theides

believer's intention. only god knows it. whereas our car we -- zarqawi knew better. he thought they wanted to cleanse and purify the faith from those believes they disapproved of. on the ideological spectrum, the rootsere we see of that sectarian ideology emerging. out of his writings. the arm thates advances it. disciples, one of the people who was fighting along zarqawi.

he died in iraq. he was furious with zarqawi, howard dare you send him to the battlefield. you sent him to the battlefield. from that respect, we see a clear difference between the strategically oriented to jihadis and those who weresectarian, prepared to sacrifice strategic objectives to appear if i be the tension was always probable. faith.urify the the tension was always palpable.

they said they had refused to to the trainingk in camps. that is why zarqawi did not want to join al qaeda. on, bin laden and others were more pragmatic. him in when he became more mellow bowl. the issues, it is not that the regime only used him. he was also using the machine. jihadis whog the followed his views. it seems, if you look at the prison,ry in and out of

it is one where he was willing to make concessions. soon thereafter, we see him being released from prison. >> you want to add anything? question tone more joby. you described in depth in the book, i think quite well, about the military advance and development of these cells under general mcchrystal. they were highly mobile. they included special forces. intelligence analysis and resources. against thekthrough insurgency provoked by al qaeda in iraq. mind, do you see anything we can learn from isis

now? is the air war, that has been going on for more unwinnable without that kind of action on the ground? certainly 40 special operators in syria are not enough. heading inthat trend any direction because of general success?l's or was that apples and oranges? joby: the united states developed a pretty good operational strategy against to read itovement took them three years to get it up and running, through trial and error. boneheaded mistakes. what brought the movement on its heels was two things. whichbar awakening, coincided with improved tactics.

intelligence/special operations group that ran out of mcchrystal 's operation. what was successful about it was bombing at aom distance or large troop operations to high tempo intelligence capture and kill, and then kill capture. nightafter al qaeda every . i talked to the guys involved in the program, tough guys that you are glad are on our side. they would have breakfast for dinner and go out at night. houses, three or four times a night, night after night. as soon as they hit one, they would collect intelligence and go after another immediately. high tempo, never giving the enemy a chance to regroup or regather. they were effective at taking out second or third tier commanders and eventually killing zarqawi.

a couple of problems. had full control over iraq. of the airspace. cooperative government with significant resources. was relatively small groups could make a big difference, ultimately, in the defeat of zarqawi. i remember sitting with 8 wholigence folks in 200 are convinced al qaeda had been defeated. that didn't happen. they became isis. of special groups operations into the theater. there is some indication they hope to reprise that successful formula using friendly forces like kurds but hopefully with advisers, instructors, that can

help locate that experiment. -- replicate that experiment. whether they can do that in syria without full control over her space and the kind of intelligence network we had is a good question. benjamin: nelly, you are trying to answer that. for q&a.e self andentify your keep your question as short as possible. the gentleman in the front. the microphone will come to you. thank you for your discussion. i want to preface my question with a cynical observation. with the current condition of the u.s. political process, if it were in existence in 1941, we would be speaking japanese and german.

since september 11, two administrations have made strategic errors that range from catastrophic to ludicrous. mr. bush failed to ask and what next question. how do you account for that? is this in our dna? are the problems to tough, or is the political process to difficult th -- too difficult? joe b: that is a million-dollar question. all i can offer is, it is instructive to look at the strategic side. that happen again and again, often because we did not ask the question, what comes next or did not have the strategic vision to see what was i think incorner, the case of the obama administration, they were caught

by the arab spring movement that nobody knew what to do with. seeing our allies toppled. we were pretty hopeful that we could see what would come out behind it, but in every case it has been a disaster. how we can get ahead of it? that is a tough one. i remembered talking to senior folks here. they were convinced it was going to fall. have ase we are going to stable government in this notical place and it did begin to happen. even with all the iranians and americans and everyone there, where does this end? -- we don't know where

it is going. we cannot come up with good answers on how to solve it. >> thank you john craig from the center for american progress. joby, you said at the end that the centers for zarqawi transitioned into isis. i want to ask a question about why zarqawi. both men and joby described the disbandment of the iraqi military is tragic mistakes, but in fact they were in of the neocon agenda. i think they were very deliberate policies pursued by the administration at the time. iraqis thatd to the were affected? why was his r. kelly, not even if an iraqi, and where were all

peoplee iraqi military while's r. kelly was organizing military people while is r. kelly was organizing? wase zarqawi organizing? joby: he was destined to have this fight. the iraq war was going to happen and he was going to be there on the ground. but he dropped it these jihadists who had this vision for fighting the superpower, infidel out of iraq.

he very quickly joined forces the locals. suddenly, unemployed military who did not really share the bizarre calories envision us saw a strategic opportunity to join forces. professional iraqis, bureaucrats and military officers with these fanatical jihadists. that was the combination that made bizarre calories movement so powerful. you have these guys -- that's movement so's powerful. , veryideological views much see the value of isis as a weapon for going after the shiite government in baghdad and reclaiming glory.

i think that is the innovation began what does it is today. you are absolutely right as the mistakes. everyone of those decisions was deliberate, including the one i described in some detail in the book. turn as of trying to our calorie, an unknown jihadist figure in 2000 2003 to the connection. the cia was pretty convinced at the time that's our kelly had no connection to saddam hussein. that zarqawi had no connection to saddam hussein. that became part of the justification for the invasion. iraq priority 2003, most

people, whether they believed it or not, it was part of the kind to get intou needed university or to do things. had tremendous influence on those who did not like saddam but who had to be part of the party. that is why the new regime lost many talents who could have been part of the new government. they were excluded. because they were just baptist. bathist. and of them are fighting forming groups, it natural to fight a long with his zarqawi. once they started getting to know him better, we find there was an enormous divide between

his zarqawi and the former bathi sts and others. it was one of obama's first statements. ists toed on the bath join. particularly those in the military, he called on them to join the islamic state of a rock is so long as they could have actually, some basic knowledge of koranic verses and so on. he is the one who did the outreach. he reached out to the kurds in his public statements. that earlyear outreach by czar callery did amazing things early on. the first big attack in 2003 against the u.n. compound, the

jordanian embassy, the major shiite facilities, were all using improvised bombs made from iraqi aircraft munitions. there was help providing equipment, intelligence. here is a guy able to have intelligence that worked pretty quickly. to plan coordinated attacks and have powerful, locally produced munitions to attack. points to participation and attack from well-placed iraqi sources. [indiscernible]

in the recent years we have seen the increasing islamic activity and afghanistan and other areas outside the region. what evidence did you see of the isil, are they providing money,ple or is there leadership advisors? do you see evidence of a greater link than just being a and example? joby: i have been convinced it is mostly by inspiration and example. sometimes they communicate with propaganda and speak to each other through their own facebook postings and tweets and things like that, evening and encouragement from the sibling organizations throughout the region. it will be interesting to see

what happens. turns out to be bomb, theoduced question is, is that something a local isis affiliate would together or was it something that was directed and somehow equipment, supplies, no-how came from central isis? i do not know the answer but it will be telling to see the answer and the extent to which centralizes has command responsibility to some of these organizations. i think right now you see the beheadings and placing flytrap afghanistan a couple days ago, in libya, you see echoing going on but it is not impossible to logistics. >> let us take three questions from the back.

.> ken meyer the prevailing opinion among the syrians and iraqis is that the united states is behind the islamic state. the u.s. treasury decided to look into how the islamic state received those hundreds of toyotas that used in the takeover of northern iraq? what do you think they're going to find? >> in the corner? >> sorry. >> british embassy. it strikes me, when dealing with an adversarial or enemy the idea of giving them credibility is dangerous. by calling them the islamic state or isis whiffed on that. have we reached the point of no return and how they are branded and how that gives them the credibility they desire?

>> far corner? >> hello. sorry. thank you for being here. i wanted to ask if you could talk a little bit about recruitment. jihadist recruitment. how isis has influenced al qaeda's ability to recruit jihadists and how their recruitment processes have changed as a result. >> nelly, i will ask you to start with the question. islamist-isis the branding, talk about perhaps who communityamic world has some credibility about condemning, and kobe writes about the efforts to get various clerics to speak up against

them, but how is that working? where is that going? i will ask joby and general about the u.s.-iraqi contribution to the rise of isis which i think stems more from they have taken over a lot of basis and equipment that are from the iraqi army. we thought they were better trained and motivated then and turns out to be. so, let's start with you. nelly: that let me start with this question about what we call them in the issue on that ability. , one issue to do with naming and using religion, i think when we analyze groups is and so on, it is

important to understand how religion matters and, more importantly, when it does not matter. this is lacking in the analysis. because sometimes we see religion as paying a medium for a position. something different than theological issues. this is where theology and the efforts to bring in the clerics and give us a three-hour lecture on the islamic tradition and so on is not going to appeal to the young person who is not to motivated simply because of spiritual reasons, but because they really want to do something. this really talks about the recruitment part. here, -- you know, i to work outneed

really what is behind that to recruitment strategy and to understand the phenomenon. my colleagues are doing a broad study of out foreign fighters, looking at a very large database on open source and hopefully that will give us, at some point, some meaningful answers so on.hy people join and roughly, we are seeing, for my own perspective, we are seeing a different kind of people who are is.ing to begy does not seem critical. many young people are converting to join is. ask, isn't islam? is it a ticket to become becoming jihadi rather than jihadi teeing a ticket to become

muslim? this is very important and cannot be stressed enough. say, whatcall it, you do we call them? it is not up to us. the islamicgroups, states, is best described by al announce it.ey al qaeda called it, the group that called itself the islamic state. is a group that is not in and of itself a state. this is a more accurate description. i am cynical about isis, isil. they all contain the islamic state. it does not do it. i would rather call them, the group that calls itself the islamic state. the sensea state in it is not seeking a seat at the united stations, nor does it want it, nor is it going to have

a seat on the united nations. is onthink, you know, it some of these things we need to knowledge how groups define themselves. we cannot decide how they define themselves. when we study them, we have to of knowledge that hard. at the same time, we have to stress the other aspects as well. leave the army, you can create a new acronym that they are quite successful at. joby, final words? iny: you can forgive people e region for having conspiracy theories, including the notion that isis is somehow u.s.-funded or backed in some way. i am always amazed at some pervasive -- at how pervasive some of these theories are. there are educated people, people who follow the news, who are convinced that isis is a

creation of iran. others who think the united states is backing isis in some way. it is a pickup argument. it is remarkable that western equipment, in this case, , all of thisks, left behind by american contractors who imported these toyota trucks. it turns out the security contractors who ran the bases, did the food preparation, did -- this legit -- just logistical stuff, did not take it with them. there was a huge parking lot left. isis liberated them and took them for themselves. you have old divisions worth a of humvees, jeeps, tanks, you name it. best armed,ly the best equipped terrorist organization the world has ever seen. we had this money because we wanted so much as a country about giving arms to syrian

rebels, because god for bid of some of those would fall into the hand of isis, instead, what they did was they raided our own former bases in iraq and took the things for themselves. >> any other burning questions? last one. >> thank you for this discussion. i am alex him and is. i work for the voice of america. my question is about the foreign actors. west too came from the join isis. my question is whether or not you have any information on the possible connection between isis and radical organizations in the west. othersome rightist or medical organizations. i do not know about this.

i mean, in terms of trying to suggest they are infiltrating is from the far right, i think, ideologically that would be very, very difficult unless they s, i doing to penetrate i not see how there could be any kind of ideological sympathy between far-right groups in the west and i.s. i cannot see any sympathies. it at that.eave i think this has been a productive discussion and i have closing recommendations. book and follow nelly on various social media.

2015; the runoff.

>> good evening, i am beth courtney. thank you for joining us. we have a 40 year tradition of contributing to the democratic process and we continue that through the debate and other public forums. we welcome the entire audience this evening. thank you. >> i am berry erwin, president of the council for better louisiana and thank you for joining us. our debate features candidates in the runoff for louisiana governor. first state representative john bel edwards and state senator david vitter. thank you for joining us. >> kelly spires is one of the questioners and jeremy is here from editor and publish of lawpolitics.com. >> tonight we will dive into issues and topics of great

importance to the citizens of louisiana. a drawing was held earlier to determine the order of questions and closing statements. the format is to encourage a dialogue between the candidates. >> we will talk about the governoring style of the candidates, element and second educati education, the budget and taxes, workforce development, health care, infrastructure, and issues related to each candidate's campaign. our panelist provide background on a topic and pose a question to start the conversation. then candidates will have a turn to ask each other questions. the panelist ask follow-up questions to insure clarity and responsiveness in the answers. >> we will begin with exploring the governoring styles of the candidat candidates. kelly starts it off. >> one of the two of you will be

the next ceo of the state. what experience have you had in executive management? mr. vitter? >> i managed my senate office for several years and if you talk to folks who interact on a number of issues, particularly louisiana residents, they will say it is a responsive center office. i am hands-on. that is my style and different than jindel who has been said to be aloof. hundreds of thousands have my personal cellphone number. i am completely accessible and get into the weeds of important issues. i have great staff to help me. i help direct them. but i get in the weeds and lead them. again, the proof is in the pudding and i think in that, i built a solidht pbte -- a solid

background to get it right. >> second air born division. that is an ex executive position as commander. when we go to the field and train that number grows to 250. i worked being a chairman in the committee requiring me to call

meetings and issue the agenda whether it was the military and veteran's special committee in the house of representatives, which i reserected that committee. i worked with veterans from strengthening homes to making sure cemeteries were open and para officers were in place and the veterans could access the services they were entitled to. >> mr. vitter you will ask mr. edwards a question and mr. edwards you have a minute to respond and mr. vitter gets a 30 second review. the topic is governing style. >> john bel, you talk about shared sacrifice given the enormous challenges we face as a state. but when i look at your concrete

record, and others look, i don't see the shared sacrifice from yourself and other insiders. i see something different. after coming into office, you voted for yourself getting 123% pay raise. you noted for yourself to get a per diem increase. you opposed a bill to mandate governments and illegal gifts. you expressed opposition to the concept of term limits. this really does go to governing style. what real sacrifice will you ask of political insiders and politicians? not just hard working taxpayers who have to pay more and more for government. >> senator vitter, you have been lying sideways to the public.

you make $40,000 more a year now than when you got elected to the senate. that is more than i make -- you make more per month than i make into year. so i am not taking a back-seat to you on any of the issues you raised. in fact, i voted for every single bill in the first ethics reform special session we had in 2008. so shared sacrifice, absolutely, there is shared sacrifice. i have led my example. i am very proud of the work i have done in the legislature on a whole range of issues. and you know, you asked so many different things there rather than one question. but i will tell you as it relates to term limits, i believe that there are term limits already. every office has a certain term whether it is four or six years. and the voters are able to decide if you stay in the office or not. they are able, when they want to, to turn someone out of

office. and i think you will experience that pretty soon. >> well, again, i think this illustrates big differences between us in terms of philosophy about governing. i have always fought against the political establishment because quite frankly i think the political establishment is way too isolated from normal voters. they don't understand normal voters every day lives. that is why i fought automatic pay raises, that is why i never joined the congressional retirement system and will never get a penny. that is why i fought the obamacare exemption and don't get that subsidy. and led the fight to establish term limits in louisiana. i believe in that concept and think we need to return to citizen legislatures not politics as a profession. >> thank you, mr. vitter. now mr. edwards, it is your turn to pose a question.

>> david, in the past 16 years you only passed five of 566 bills you authored. you have been called the most corrupt member of congress and been named the least effective member of both parties and don't show up to work. the best indicator of what someone does tomorrow is what they did yesterday. and you show you are more concerned with helping your friends than being accountable to voters and taxpayers. how is it you don't represent a third bobby jindel term? >> you are completely misrepresenting my record. you talk about bills you introduced that passed. you have to look at things i fought for and worked with others on on a bipartisan bases or was a prime author on that did pass. that record of bipartisan accomplishment i will put next to anybody certainly including

yours. a water resources bill i co-wrote with barbara boxer of california is important for coastal measures. fixing the flood insurance crisis, i helped lead that effort, yes with others on a bipartisan bases. coastal restoration i have been involved in that and making huge progress made in the last several years to fund the work we need to do. hurricane recovery. i worked non-stop with our delegation, with others, to pull us out of the dark time in terms of recovery from katrina and rita. i have a full record of bipartisan accomplishment. >> your rebuttal. >> 5-565 bills does speak for itself. you have been named the least effective members of congress.

you have one of the worst att d attendance record of all hundred members in the united states state senate and you said you endorse bobby three times. i like him and respect his leadership and agree with all of this political values is your record. >> follow-up questions, reporters. >> i would like to bring it back to the state legislature and how you will interact with lawmakers. would you all have a plan to testify in front of committees or would you not? >> i would as i said a few minutes ago. i am a very hands-on person. i would be interacting with individual legislatures as i do now. most have my personal cell and i interact with them constantly. i would be on the floor or off the floor in committees. that is a different governing style we have seen in the last several years. i exhibited that governor style

in the u.s. senate with real effectiveness. >> mr. edwards, would you like to continue? >> i will testify i lead from the front. i lead by example. i will testify in support of the bills i am proposing to the legislature. i will meet with the leadership, and rank and file members of the legislature in the house and senate. i will tell you i have not had a meeting with bobby jindel in many months. >> we need to move on to the next topic. >> k-12 education. jeremy, you have the question. >> we have seen significant reforms and changes over the last 20 years including school accountability measures for teachers and students, growth in the recovery school districts, charter schools, and this is in addition to vouchers and school choice mechanisms. aside from common core, could you pick a couple you would keep or strengthen or get rid of from

the list i just went through. mr. edwards? >> i will support charter schools. when charter schools help the perishes and the perishes are in need of help. however, i believe in local control of education. i believe that local taxpayers and voters and parents ought to be able to hold their school board members accountable for how dollars are spent and children are educated. if a district has an a or b better grade, i believe they should have the final decision of a new charter school opening in that district or not. if the letter grade is a c, d, or f, i think it is probably appropriate for the board to have the opportunity to review and perhaps reverse the denial of that charter application. i also have no plans to end the voucher system. it was unconstitutional when it was passed. i voted against it for that reason and the supreme court held it was unconstitutional.

i will not end it but i will confirm to its stated purpose which is to give parents of kids trapped in failing schools a choice. >> jeremy, this is a huge issue where john bel and i have different records. on all of the reform efforts i have been an active leader for charter and voucher scholarships. choice empowers parents particularly from poor families. accountability, i have been in support of that. john bel's record is consistent in the opposite direction against charters. he would limit those opportunities as we just admitted voting against the voucher scholarship proposal when it first came up. voting consistently against accou accountability over and over again because fundamentally he

has been doing the work and charting the course of the teacher's union not parents, not empowering parents who need it the most. >> thank you, mr. edwards. it is now your opportunity to pose a question to mr. vitter on the education topic. >> just like bobby jindel, you were for common core before being against it. you were a strong supporter and then against it in a fundrais g fundraisinging letter, then for it again, and you now flip-flopped again and want people to believe you are against it. you have put your personal interest ahead of the common interest and when the political winds change so do you. just like bobby jindel you put personal ambition over what is best for students and teachers. on this issue, why should louisiana parents trust you today? >> you are talking about common core first of all. it is you who said at the press club, with the respect to the

common core standards you were okay with the sarntands. in the advocate you said in 2014 quote the standards are fine close quote. you said there is no conspiracy about common core and this is not a federal takeover of education. you said that about common core. not me. i have a specific plan to get us out of common core and the park test. it has been part of my plan in the race. it is all at davidvitter.com and part of my detailed plan on the challenges we face. >> senator, i have been voting against common core since brought to the legislature in 2014. that is my record. 2014 and in 2015. i did make statements such that the standards themselves are not a communist conspiracy but i never said the standards should

be adopted without being vetted by parents and educators and made the changes where necessary. that is my record from the beginning. i have been against common core. my voting record is hundred percent consistent on that. i have never flip-flopped. you flip-flopped and flip-flopped again. >> mr. vitter, it is your turn to ask a question on k-12 education. >> i want to go back to the choice in education because i think it is premier civil right issue of time. whether every child in louisiana has the right to a great education. as discussed before, you were in favor of limiting the opportunity to establish charter schools and you would not allow it unless an entire system is drf. that would cut out 6800 students in lafayette perish for example who are in d or f schools from

being able to enjoy new charter schools. state-wide that is 170,000 kids who are in d or f schools. >> your question? >> you are limiting those charter opportunities. what do you say to those poor families who are not going to get the full charter opportunities because of your specific legislation? >> first of all, when it comes to voucher, i voted against this because it was unconstitutional. my oath of office means something to me. when it says you will support the constitution of the united states and the laws of the state of louisiana i take it seriously. my decision was affirmed by the supreme court. money stolen from the local school districts had to be returned so the students could receive the services they were entitled. i believe in local control of education. when a school district is performing well it ought to be in control of the decision of a new charter school opening.

otherwise, the creation of a charter school diverts funding away from the programs that made that school district successfully to begin with. i believe that is the right thing to do. because if parent and leaders don't have the ability to hold them accountability it is only a matter of time until they stop authorizing new taxes. >> there are failing schools in the districts you are talking about. you will limit and trap the students without more choices and voucher scholarships would give them. the record is the record. you can try to talk a good game but on education you have fought all of these reforms every step of the way. you fought the voucher scholarships. you tried to limit charters. you co-authored at least four

different bills to curtail charter schools. certainly accountability. you have not consistently opposed common core but you have opposed accountability and that is what you are trying to point to in terms of supposed opposition of common more. >> thank you. we are out of time on this topic but we go to the next one with kelly and posed to mr. vitter >> louisiana has been dealing with significant budget cuts. the legislature raised more than $700 million in new revenue yet another huge shortfall looms. given where we stand today, do we solve the problem by shrinking state government or should we better match revenue with spending? >> kelly, quite frankly we need to do both. i have a balanced approach on both sides of the equation. i laid out the approach months ago in our detailed plan on our website at davidvitter.com.

the first thing i would do is call a special legislation session focused on this. i would start on the spending side and have reforms to undedicate most areas of the budget so we can roll up the sleeves and cut the spending in those areas we cannot afford or are wasteful and off limits. that is why higher-ed has cuts that are not porportioniate. and we need to get rid of certain exemptions and credits that don't produce for the economy or taxpayers. i think as opposed to john bel i would have a balanced approach that looks at both sides of the equation. >> mr. edwards? >> kelly, we have to do both. you look for new ways to create efficiency and deliver state

services with a cost savings. you have to expand the flexibility to allocate cuts across a broader spectrum of the budget so you are not focusing on higher education and health care. you do that by looking at the statutory dedications. but also the constitutional dedications. but those are harder and take longer because you have to get two 3rds vote in the legislature and approvaled by the voters themselves. we will september federal dollars back into the louisiana as well. when they help meet obligations to the people and save us we will do that with the medicaid expansi expansion. we will focus on growing the economy and not incentivising the government where there is no growth. the biggest thing is reduce or eliminate tax gave aways that cost too much or don't return. we can create savings to reallocate to high rer priority

items >> you may ask the question on budget and tax. >> john bel talks about a balanced approach but his record is different. it is another area where we have completely different records which suggest would lead in different directions. this past year in the legislative session you voted for $2.1 billion in taxes. you have a plan on your website you are touting that is a $1.5 billion tax increase on the 165,000 families involved. you have never specifically authored a single piece of legislation to undedicate any area of the budget. you have never authored a singleal piece of legislation to cut in those areas. that is not a balanced record. why should voters believe you in saying that you are going to

take a balanced approach when the concreate record is very, very different. it is all taxes -- concrete -- >> the voters shouldn't believe you and the ridiculous question you asked with figures you made up. my record is clear. i did vote for the things i talked about. reducing tax give aways that cost too much and don't produce enough return on investment to create savings that we then reallocate to higher priorities like saving lsu, like making sure the safety net hospital system stayed open, making sure the medical school in sheave port had the money to continue to operate. those were the hard choices we had to make. i did vote for those measures because they were the right thing to do and consistent with what i said i will continue to do as our governor. we will not stay in this ditch

we are in under jindel. we will roll up the sleeves and pull ourselves out and finance our priorities. that is my commitment. >> i asked about a balanced approach and what is on the saving and reform of government side. you talked about a tax measure: getting rid of an exemption. >> your record is all taxes, no budget reform, and no savings. that is the record. you have not authored a single bill to undedicate any part of the budget. if i can missing, name the bill. you have not authored a single bill to go into the areas and cut the budget. you have never proposed or led in that effort. but you voted for $2.1 billion in taxes this year and you are

proposing more. >> your pledge to out of state interest cause you to repeatedly to vote to send our jobs overseas. jobs of louisiana residents and americans. bobby caused the state's dodge budget to employed. you have been unfaithful to use taxpayers and why should they believe you changed? >> i have taken no pledge to glover nor quest in dealing with challenges in the state budget and laid out a truly balanced approach in terms of doing that. you refer to bobby jindel constantly but the fact of the matter is i have on several occasions publically fought, butted heads, and disagreed with bobby on things. his use of one-time money to

plug the budget hole, you voted a lot for that, but i opposed him in 2012. i led the charge to stop abusive legacy lutawsuits. i dragged him kicking and screaming to propose and pass that reform. in contrast when have you every publically disagreed strongly with your party leader barack obama? when did you stand up at the 2012 national democratic convention and say he is wrong on this? he is wrong on obamacare or gay marriage or anything else? it has never happened in any public way. >> mr. edwards? >> you are wrong. you signed the glover anti-tax reform. you said you have not signed it but you lied. you signed the pledge in

washington, d.c. and in fact, i have stood up against the president with respect to the moratorium. i voted for a resolution calling on him to direct the secretary of interior to take that moratorium down. just the other day, i stood up and opposed the decision not to go forward with the keystone pipeline because that is the wrong decision for our country and our state. it would create jobs, allow for energy independence and if you believe sitting here tonight that the president poses the biggest threat to our future in louisiana, you need to stay in wash and deal with that. >> time is over for this topic, we need to move on. >> we can continue that conversation because in the next topic we are talking about and that is workforce development. jeremy, your question. >> we have been told there is an industrial boom coming for qualified workers particularly

in the technology field. in southwest louisiana there is a need of 35,000 jobs over the next five years. me century link in monroe is trying to bring in engineers and technical workers to fill jobs but are finding it difficult. can you give two or three examples of what you will do to address the need over the next four years? >> this is critically important -- and one generation's time we are going from a time when 25% of people needed education beyond high school to get a good job and now that number is two thirds of the people. you have to invest in higher education, four year university and community and technical colleges. the straight of louisiana has cut state support for higher education more than any other state in the nation over the last eight years and raised tuition on its kids more than any other state in the nation in the same time period.

that is the perfect recipe for disaster. we have to do better and align the workforce needs with job creation opportunities out there so that kids are getting the education that allows them to have the certified skills and training necessary to land the jobs. we have to do it around the state. you were talking about century ling in monroe. since the end of the session in 2010, job creation is positive but when you get to alexandria and north to is zero. a key to address this is invest in the higher education around the state. >> jeremy, i have a lot of proposals on my website. our mari skare -- maritime

sector it very important. i proposed structural reform so we would focus on ports, maritime and have leaders built into led and dot to help me do that. a subcabinet focused on growing those jobs. secondly, we need to be more effective in terms of addressing the burden of litigation. we need litigation reform because we are hurting because of abusive lawsuits led by trial lawyers, who by the way are funding vitter's campaign. i laid out reforms for this like texas did in the 1990's and that was a major factor leading to their very robust economy. there are other detail proposals in the plan. >> mr. edwards, question for mr. vitter. >> david, you have consistently voted against job training

against louisiana's veterans many who are seeking employment after their dedication and service. what kind of plan is it if you not dedicate your time to this? >> i have a strong record in terms of supporting our veterans. it starts with individual cases. helping them get the proper treatment and benefits they need. i spend a lot of time personally, along with my great staff, helping veterans on those issues with great results. talk to the veterans who have interacted with my office. talk to them and ask them how they feel about my representation of them. we are getting community-based

clinics >> the question is about job training. >> job training at the va. i sponsored legislation as the chair of the small business community to put increased fluence through the va specifically for veterans as they make the transition from war time to work. i helped lead that effort. >> david, your record is you voted against the gi's educational bill for veterans moving it from $1100 to $1500 in 2008. in 2012 you voted no on the veteran's job core act that would have invested 1 billion in veterans. you voted no on the national defense appropriation act to help prepare members of the armed forces for civilian employment. your record is horrible.

it is your turn mr. vitter. >> economic development and workforce development is critical. you are trying to portray this myth that you are a conservative or moderate. you are in the middle. you are going to unite and you have a mainstream record. but if you look at the record it is different. leading pro-business groups and economic development groups give you a low score. national federation of independent business, 23% rating. the top economic development group in the state, louisiana association of business and industry, 25% lifetime rating. that is lower than mitch and mary landry and bill jefferson. that is the bottom 10% of shh legislature. why should voters think that is a pro-economic, workforce development record, that will grow jobs and the economy? >> theluti louisiana associatio

businesses gave 90 legislatures f grades and i was one because it didn't like the way we supported the universities, hospitals and people of louisiana. i will tell you the louisiana association of business and industry is headed by someone who is a very strong supporter and former executive council and chief of staff to bobby jindel. today they endorsed you because they want a third jindel term except they would like to have it on steroids. when it comes to voting records, i don't intend to give anybody a hundred percent except for my wife. >> again, john bel, you try to portray yourself as a conservative. the record is the report -- record and it suggests something different. i am not talking about this year

giving these f's this year. i am talking about a lifetime rating of 25%. i am talking about comparing that life time rating to mitch landrieu and they all score higher. i am talking about the fact you are in the bottom 10% in terms of ratings about jobs and economic development. that is not conservative or moderate or anything of the like. >> time to move on to another topic and kelly will talk about health care. >> yes, in the realm of education, similary our state has seen changes in the way public health care is delivered. would you keep the policies we have now and work out the issues we face or go into different direction all together? mr. vitter? >> you mentioned a few things. the public-private partnerships are a good reform but need work. i specifically have been proactive leading the charge to

improve the pub linebacker partnership in louisiana. i support log chip and thing it is important and needs to be in the mix. medicaid expans is a huge issue in this area. we have strong differences on that. john bel would immediately lunge into the medicaid expansion under obamacare and barack obama's terms. i would only consider it under louisiana's terms. kentucky's cost soared beyond anything they projected. kentucky's cost are double what they projected. they are facing a budget crisis and just elected a new republican governor largely on that issue. those are the differences. >> i support the move for the

public-private partnerships and we have to make it work. the state owes the federal government $190 million because of the plan being illegal to draw down dollars we were not entitled to. we have to strengthen that. we went to a manage care plan administered by five insurance companies. we are going to expand the medical program when i am governor. it is the louisiana plan we already reformed it. they would have saved $52 million this year alone. that is how it was scored. 30 states have done it. 13 with republican governors.

this isn't right versus left. this is right versus wrong and i will do it as governor. >> the biggest issue around health care is obamacare. the core of obamacare and medicaid expansion. john bel, you have supported all of that including the core m mandates of obamacare. hb-429, clear vote. and that fundamental mandate is what through 98,000 louisiana residents off the health care plans they had and wanted to keep. obamacare said no, we are not allowing that. we know better and that is not good enough. that fundamental mandate led to increased in cost. folks are getting their premiums now and they are soaring. what do you say to middle class louisiana families who got thrown off a plan they wanted to keep and face the soaring

premiums >> i say the affordable care act came from congress and that is where you sit. we are not voting in louisiana on mandates for obamacare. you are making that up. if you are worried about health insurance premiums going up you should support medicaid expansion. every family with private insurance is paying $1,000 a year extra to pay for the private care and because the hospitals are not getting compensated they are building it into the contracts and that results in higher premiums. we are paying the taxes to the federal government and not accepting them back so that 250,000 of the worker poor get the benefit of health care coverage with our tax dollars that are instead going to other states that did that we are paying more in terms of private insurance. that is a disaster for this state. we need to do better by our people. we need to bring those dollars home. we need to save the tax dollars in the process.

it is just the right thing to do. it is called putting louisiana first and i know that is foreign, david, but we need to do that. >> the record is the record. it is all at lagovernorfacts.com in case you want to look. very specific vote in 2014. hb-429. it was a vote by you and you sided with the president. that is siding with the people of louisiana. that is what through 98,000 louisiana residents off the health care they wanted to keep. they used a model i am proposing. they didn't say we will do it under our terms. they negotiated their own terms. you have a chance to pose a question. >> while in congress, you voteded to end medicare for 70,000 louisiana seniors.

that has no place in government. the seniors deserve to know whether you plan to balance our budget on their backs as well. how can you justify ending one of the most successful insurance programs in history and ask the seniors to pay more. >> john bel, you know i am for medicaid and have voted to end it as you know it. you know that is the case. this attack is exactly what we hear from the national democrats. i hear this from harry reid over and over on the senate floor. i hear it from barack obama over and over. i never said i want to end made care as we know it. i never voted that way. one of several reasons i voted against obamacare is it stole from medicare. it stole $750 billion to create a new entightment and weakened medicare. that is why record on medicare.

-- entitlement -- i am proud of my record. you are spreading the old fears and lies of national democrats. we hear it all of the time from harry reid, barack obama and all of the rest. >> you hear it all of the time because it is your record in. in 2013 and 2014 you voted budgets that would turn medicare into voucher system and increased the cost on seniors and made them pay the difference. that is your record. that is the paul ryan budget you have supported. the people of louisiana need to know that you will treat them better. they deserve better retirement plans and need a governor who will not budget the balance on their back. >> if we are moving from one thorny topic to another one and that is the state's

infrastructure; roads, highways, ports and everything questioned. jeremy? >> i am sure you know what number i am going to say which is $12 billion. the back log of projects in louisiana. there is not enough to address the larger problem. how would you generate more money or is it time to concede this is too big of an issue to deal with? how do we break the tradition? >> until you fix the trust fund, it is premature to ask the people of louisiana to pay more whether that is a toll or additional gasoline tax. up to $60 million has been leaving the transportation trust fund not paying for roads and

bridges but going to the state police. that is wrong and not the expectation of the taxpayers when they paid the gas taxpayer. i will get the trust fund under control in the first year. i will wean the state police out of the trust fund and that is $60 million. i am increase by 25% the amount of the capital bill and that is an additional $75 million per year. as soon as we do that, we will double the investment in the port priority program from 20 million to 40 million overnight. that is the right thing to do. once we clean it up and see we don't have enough revenue to go forward and maintain the system we have in terms of highways then and only then will we consider tol tolls or other revenue measures. >> we cannot ask the hard working citizens of louisiana to put more money in the bucket

whether there are gaping holes at the bottom of the bucket. that is the situation now and john bell voted for that situation. that is the situation now. last year only 11 cents of every dollar of revenue associated with the state transportation trust fund went to roads and bridges. went to concrete and asphalt. that is ridiculous. i have a detailed plan to change that. it is all at davidvitter.com. i have a second plan to lead an effort among chambers, business groups, and leading legislatures to develop a high priority building program. high priority projects in key areas of the state to spur economic development linked to new revenue, tied to that. go to the voters and citizens and say this is what we will build in a finite amount of time. if you support it we will not spend the money any other way.

it would go to voters and citizens to earn their approval. >> a question on infrastructure, mr. vitter. >> david, you have been rated the least effective member of congress, the fifth highest absence rate among 554 peers and nowhere does it show in any other area than transportation. you have not helped finish i-49 or back up the projects jeremy asked us about. you even worked against securing loan forgiveness after hurricane katrina for local governments. >> why don't you talk to local leaders and officials about my record. you will hear a different story. >> no, i didn't. >> i have been a leader on i-49

including as a high ranking republican on that committee. we have brought significant money to virtually finish i-49 north and to start i-49 south in a major way. through that work on that committee i have helped turn louisiana from a donor state. we were spending more money through federal gas tax to the federal government than we received back whether i went to congress it was about 93 cents on the dollar. we are no longer a donor state. we are getting more back than we send to the federal government because of the reforms and the work i did with others. and there are lots of specific projects. la-1, i-49, many critical projects around louisiana, relief in baton rouge and greater new orleans that have benefited as a result. we need to go farther and i am working on a federal highway bill. >> david, the fact of the matter

is you have been ineffective in the senate and worked against the local government in louisiana when they sought loan forgiveness after hurricane rita and katrina. >> i secured the loan forgi forgiveness. >> i get my information from the local people who lead the municipalities and perishes. >> mr. vitter, you can continue the conversation with the question. >> john bel is misrepresenting the record. i helped secure the loan forgiveness. talk to the leaders who received it in key perishes. but john bel, you are always talking about fighting the former governor, in fact, there have been eight budgets you voted for and supported five of them. on this critical issue of infrastructure they were

horrendous and stole from the transportation trust fund. you voted for 5-8 budgets. hundreds of millions and voted for the very budget i was referring to under which only 11 cents of every dollar of that revenue goes to roads and bridges and steel and concrete. why should voters believe as governor you will do something different? lagovernorfacts.com. that is your record. >> i have voted for five budgets and that means i voted more budgets than the vast majority of my colleagues. the reason it is different is because i am going to be the governor. i am going to set the priorities. if you don't vote for the budget you don't pass a budget and nothing gets funded. but as governor, i will be able to control the process and make sure with that line item veto we will do the things i am talking

about. just the most recent years we voted for revenue to take it clear that the state police can get out of the transportation trust fund. that is going to happen in the first year. zero dollars are going to be aappropriated to the police. that is my commitment to the people of louisiana. we have the revenue in place to make sure that happens. i did support that revenue because i want to be in a position to make sure that we can restore faith and confidence to the people of louisiana in the trust fund. >> again, john bel, there is an enormous gap between your rhetoric and the vote. you talk about battling bobby jindel but supported 5-8 of his budgets. you voted for the state fund and it was rated over and over, hundreds of millions, and you

voted for the budget under which 11 cents of every dollar, only 11 cents goes to transportation, and everything else is rated. that is the record. your red -- rhetoric is different. >> gentlemen, we have come to the last topic of the evening. time constraints say let's each do 30 second response on the first question. i give it to the reporters. >> gentlemen, both of you in recent forums have discussed trackers following you and your family with video camera and the media in louisiana is writing about private investigators. have you and your campaign hired professionals to carry out the such behavior? if so, have they done anything you regret? >> it is the reality of campaigns i have lived with for

years. i have lived with the trackers for many years and they associated witevery campaign. we have not directly hired them. but others in support of my campai campaign. it is a free country. in terms of negative campaigns. there is nobody who has been the target of more negative campaigning than me. there are eight different entities attacking me. three in the primary, three of their assoc aceationsation -- association. >> the short answer is no. senator vitter spent $156,000 on private investigation and lied saying the money was spent on

legal fees. he said it is free country and he is sending private investigators to spy on the sheriff. louisiana doesn't need more scandal. i urge everybody to go to www.ltv.com and watch the cferee given. >> a question for mr. edwards. >> john bel, follow up on this. you never hired the parts but the state democratic party does it on your behalf. you say you don't do negative campaigning but you have the most vicious negative ad up that veterans have been offended by and asked you to take at a down. you have nothing to do with the trial lawyer pac that has been running negative campaigns in the millions of dollars for months. isn't that disingenuine?

you are not living by the honor code. you are living by the lawyers' code trying to parse words. >> mr. vitter, a question. >> nors -- my campaign has not played for a tracker or private investigator. i have not seen any footage of you anywhere from a tracker. i understand you don't like it. it hits you where you live. >> i am not talking about me saying anything.

you have missing out on your deals in congress in order to engage extra curriculum activities. >> >> you said the trial lawyers were working for jay garden. now it is benefiting you to say they are working for me. >> let's each one of you who have had a chance to ask a question we are almost to the closing comments. why don't you get 30 seconds and you get 30 seconds. 30 seconds, vitter. >> again, john bel, you are being dis-in genuine to suggest

the trial lawyers are not doing your dirty work. you are living by on honor code of technicality. >> i am not suggesting anything. i am not looking at video foot null from you. have haven't hired a private investigator to go after you. the last part of the honor code is i will not tolerate those who do. you are a liar. and a cheater >> what have you said -- >> i don't tolerate that. >> if you don't agree with tlar behavior why are you tolerating and benefiting from their behavior? what we will do now is go to closing remarks. we are just about out of time for the hour debate. we thank you for your candid and energetic commentary. we will go to the closing

remarks. >> this is certainly an important election. we have two candidates for governor. john bel edwards and myself who could not offer more starkly different voting records and political philosophy and therefore directions in which we would lead the state. it is pretty clear that john bel edwards wants to talk about anything but the future. he wants to talk about anything about those records and philosophies and where we would lead the state. that is because his campaign is built on a myth that he is some sort of conservative and we don't differ much on the issues when we absolutely do. so, i humbly ask for your vote and support and ask you look on the key issues and how we differ on job creation. his ranking is at the bottom of the barrel. on education my support of

charter and accountability and reforms and john bel has the opposite record supporting the teachers's unions not parents, families and children. >> thank you. mr. edwards? >> i want to thank the veterans. we are on the eve of veteran's day and i want to thank them for the service of the country. when i decided to serve the country nobody asked if was a democrat or republican. which candidate is best able to lead the state right now after eight years of miserable failed poliauolicie policies? leadership to bring the people together, performance agreement, and tackle the biggest problems and challenges and provide real opportunity for our children in louisiana. that is my record in the legislature as a leader. i will fight against anyone of any party when they do harm to

use. and i will find along the side of anyone of any party when they want to do our state od. ... early voting ends november 14th, the election is nov. 21st. ago andof vote.com. >> and behalf of the council for better louisiana we thank you so much for joining us. have a great evening. [applause] >> all of you, thank you for your support for just saying no, thank you. my hope is the women of the