and it was between bill clinton's administration and the chicago city hall. but it got done. unfortunate after these high rises were torn down, the street gangs that had inhabited them were dispersed throughout our communities and took the truck trafficking in guns with them. the elder gang bangers were in prison so it was anarchy on the street and we're still living with the high homicide surge as a result of that. so again unintended consequences. so this is one of the big problems with big government programs. but it does mean you should not try to house people but it just means you change the program, maybe housing vouchers will work better than high prices famously do that. i'm optimistic on the whole but i find the best programs tend to be public-private partnerships where you mix corporate, philanthropy and government

together at all keep an eye on each other. >> let me throw in a word of caution about philanthropies. baltimore is the home of several, three very large philanthropies, also the scent of innumerable experiments in urban reform since the great society. is also the center of in the nonpolitical sense after another to those philanthropies were just as unaccountable as government. it turned out they went from failure to failure. sometimes not criminally but right on the edge of criminally. not intentionally enough because people were mean characters, just because they were to get things done in baltimore. baltimore is the only city i've ever been in i went to a high-end party and there were drug dealers at the party. this was before the wire, by the way. finally, i just want to say part

of the reason that pastors are so important in terms of citizenship is that we have some in the country would you don't think people recognize, and that's not just non-religion can not just people not being religious the kind of neopaganism, especially prevalent in the big cities. you can go a long way with many aspects of neopaganism, you know, late-term abortion has elements of, et cetera, et cetera. but whatever neopaganism does come it doesn't produce citizens. and without citizens it's very hard to see how we have a united states of america. >> brother omar mentioned jeddah contract with k-12, so there's a public-private partnership working there. i think pastor paul mentioned the people at your church are actually investing money,

probably giving away too many bunkbeds. but still interesting money. the sister mentioned she is getting money in different places. there's a role that already exist for public-private partnerships. the one thing i would like to add is the role of venture capitalist. that are venture capitalists who can see what you have not only to make profit but to great the next generation of profits the vicious markets it -- marketed in a different way. >> pastor soaries, his church in new jersey is a prime example of how an effective grassroots group can take government money and do good things with it, make a government look really good in the course of that spin and pay it back by the way. >> right, sure. but you know, i think one thing that's clear for all of us is that there isn't that kind of

hard-core libertarian objection to government programs as such your folks have done good things, right, with government funding and that's been a useful -- on the philanthropy question if i could just make a quick observation about that. what always surprises me is we have here some of the most effective grassroots leaders in the country, and i bet you could count on the fingers of one hand the numbers of foundations that have been involved with them, right? as you pointed out, mr. siegel, -- >> don't put it that way last night. >> but the are many, many foundations. to our hundreds come well, a lot of foundations in the country. many of modest means, many of which could simply locate a grassroots group. they could go to pastor shirley as a pastor shirley, you know, i've heard about your work. i could write your check for

$25,000. and by the way, i want to be in touch with you. i want to talk to you about who else, talking about the replication program. i want to talk to you, pastor shirley, who else in your community is doing work not exactly like yours because no one does anything exactly like you do, but operating on similar principles, getting similar results, right, maybe in a slightly different area but the same general idea. i bet you know those people. i bet you could say to this foundation person, yeah, let me give you the names of three people. i will take you to meet these folks. you can hold me responsible for their performance and their integrity. >> the foundations don't call charlie. >> i know that. >> the foundation leaders call the political leaders. when i was in state government in new jersey and all the headlines covered the children

in foster care who are dying, one of your foundations in baltimore called the governor and sent to the governor, we want to help you. and so you direct us to the people that you think we should fund and work with. well, 99 out of 100 times the politicians is going to feed its political organizations before it looks for effective organizations. >> exactly. >> and just to underline that, there is no legal reason why that should be the case. foundations have almost complete freedom to do whatever they tried to do, you know, as long as it's getting money to ic-3 back and certified their legally ic-3 and yet they follow the same stale patterns that been tried so many times by other folks. >> is not that they follow them. in many ways they create spent i

put up the difference between the political conversations are at the nonpolitical conversations that are to indicate that as long as that gap exists, there's going to be missing resources. there's going to be a lack of ability to either scale up rallies spread out because they are formal and informal political systems that impact all of what these anecdotal kind of reports have revealed. and until my that's what bob's work was so important, that paul ryan would not just go himself to an established a model for policymakers to cross the divide, and to begin to see the other side of their policies. i think that model which has now been embraced and i think bob must have at least a couple

dozen requests from members of congress to do for them what he did for paul. and so i do think that there is potential to please spread this thing out and to create some replications, if not upscale. >> everyone of those congressmen have wealthy supporters back home who have charitable budgets in addition to the political budgets, and chances are they're riding their charitable checks to nonprofit organizations that are coming to washington to lobby for more federal spending. they are canceling out their political spin do with their charitable spending is basically what they are doing. and i should add, speaking of the center for neighborhood enterprise come with a wealthy person starts to look for a grassroots leaders or effective to write checks to, the first check should of course go to the center for neighborhood enterprise, right? because he's the one who is introduced us all to this kind of approach. pastor omar wants to ask the

question. >> question, more big comment and a question. you just said what i was about to say, is, i don't want come when it comes down to whether the government plays a role, i don't want to let government off the hook. just saying it's a will to anecdotal come hard to scale up. as leaders you all think of a way. [laughter] [inaudible] -- asphalt and as entertaining and as wonderful as i can make it seem to get one, someone else is producing four or 5 billion little wayne's. i know you like lil wayne. [laughter] what i'm saying is someone has a

system to replicate that at a level that i was just the one in at a time cannot compete with. you got to have some people who are intentionally saying let's systemically challenge, try, to demonstrations, grants, thought-provoking ideas, stuff that makes it possible for us to scale, even if we scale and it's like -- at least it will be better than what we have now. because we all know, and some of us have been in this for a minute, we know when grants are written for people. we already know they are not written for us. already written to united way. we understood it when we got the plan proposal from the government. we know when it is catch

language that i remember when there was wraparound service. i remember when it was full incarcerator. i remember when folks were supposed to be incarcerator. [laughter] the government found a way to systemically pushed the idea and funding to the point to where those who are on their particular side of the issue could be funded. but for us what we are saying is, and i'm really cities, but you did say it so i hear it late, but i would want you to understand that what we are saying is, and i am being very serious, i don't think bob's cause has gotten a shot, straight up. i mean, i hate to be this real. i may not be invited back, but i'm here now. i don't think it has gotten the shot to be to fail. because we could be wrong, but we have not gotten the platform

to see on the scalable level can this work? and if you never get that opportunity, we will always be in the bushes hiding behind, you know, trying to do in the backyard cooking up moonshine, try to figure it out there as opposed to being on the front, and it takes come it takes some governmental agencies to say what we are saying privately. i just want to say that. >> bob. >> what he's saying, the challenge that we have faced over the years is fundamental the leader some from the left and the right -- elitism. and that is truth has to be -- avec otherwise it's not heard. most people left and right of center look down at the what we

do and the people we serve. it is a myth that when you elect a republican governor, my experience has been conservatives do not know how to administer conservative policy into implementation. ..

that's the kind of healing that has changed and transformed and has broken us in the midst of these crimes and drug infested neighborhoods that perhaps they have solutions to the emptiness experienced by people who are starving in the ghettos of the wealthy communities because if people can find remedies in the midst of this despair, then they can also help people have better means so to me, the book tables of fortune with less people have you don't want. that's a very important because what he demonstrated is that emptiness knows no momentum and

the real bridge cultural weight -- culturally i had sent my son. he didn't get it. but nonetheless, those of us that are educated need to understand it must be horrible to be vigilant empty because if you are poor you can fantasize all this stuff. [laughter] but if you have all the resources and you still feel that way then the only answer is suicide so i am hoping that this

forum but isn't really low income practical knowledge to challenge that i have is can you learn to be on task but not always on time. are you willing to submit yourself to be used the way the company when he came to one of our conferences and sat and listened all day and his life has been transformed as a result he says the first time out of the room [inaudible] [laughter] but when we are able to bring people together across the cultural and racial divide where the common denominator is

supporting the transformation i think america has a redemption and transformation or somehow we've got to bring people like you so that we can come together and redefine it. we have wonderful people who just started supporting us. they spend a whole day trying to find out how can some of this in the blessings god has given them how can it be used more effectively. >> there's eight children, grandchildren, married, struggled with business, went

bankrupt, came back. we developed products that reduced by 70%. we had a pattern have a pattern until 2017 saves a very valuable product. in that time though i know very many wealthy people and who are giving back to the problem is they are doing the infrastructure. we are giving 70 cents to infrastructure and 30 cents to the poor. we believe wanted to investigate and say how can we work on the revitalization plan?

i was a single mother and i thought -- i was ashamed of that and in this life it was such a blessing because now i understand and not only was i poor as a little girl we went broke and my husband is an on-chip in entrepreneur but he came back. we had a mentor who helped us

take and start my little $5 million business which meant a lot but we start from there into seven of our children in the family business and the rest is history. but anyway, my point is we want to give money but we are giving it to the wrong -- when i met him it was like it's got to be organic. it's got to be people that he can be the foundation. we can support people like bob who can get the job done. [applause] i think you're comments are a prime illustration of the truth that we are all on the comeback

trail and it's good to agree if wealthy people and people who are in authority and power if they have the capacity don't understand they are on the comeback trail they are overcoming things. it's not just the folks who are here that we've all got stories like glenn and we have to be in touch with that to understand what these folks are doing. why don't you with a phd and pulitzer prize winners, why don't you take one last shot at maybe -- >> it's at the traffic the money that will come from people like you is much better than the

money to get filtered through government and i think it is better if it is done on the state level and not on the federal level but better if it isn't done at all. >> one of the things we see in either direction is a country more divided than we are used to being and the distances. there is nothing more there's nothing more important than bridges of the kind and i leave this day thinking think god for bob woodson and he didn't if he didn't exist we would have to invent him. [applause] >> i would agree with that. people are looking for places to put money and donate donated to the foundation grant it's easy to go to the mayors and

governors and i'm happy to try to help publicize the good things that are happening in the organization because there is a lot of good ideas out there and grassroots folks that were a bit high-profile. on 60 minutes they did a nice piece on her and there are worthy stories out of their and i'm happy you raised the profile. helping them raise the profile of civil society in general because i don't really think about it that much and it's not focused on in the schools and in that way so looking at the direction we are in the faith in institutions in general people are questioning everything. even ms. america for heavens sake.

[laughter] a good plan to close with. i heard what you said and it reminded me of the last speech that he'd given and what he said is when the slaves get together that is the beginning of the end of slavery and if i could paraphrase an essay on the public and private, the community and the state can together that is the beginning of the end of the recall to proceed. number two, i hope the next person that decides to become elected elected president of the united states will change the language we used to talk about people. war on poverty. when you look at the poverty is mostly women and children and then we call it a war on women and children. instead of the war on poverty why don't we call it a mission for prosperity. [applause]

i've known bob would sing for 30 years debate could -- what's -- woodson for 30 years and that needs to be known before we lapse into despair. >> he's not only standing but, you know, i will say this he's been picked up and dropped by some of the best politicians in the country and i've come to appreciate this more and more. he has worked tirelessly with politicians to get the resources to tell your stories to them and when they picked him up he will bring you to the attention of the public, they move onto

something else coming when so they don't need him anymore and drop them. bob has remained without the bitterness through the whole thing in a way that amazes me. i would be so angry if i experienced one third of what bob woodson experience from the intellectuals and delete for make the public policy and extraordinary testament to his character. we need to get his autobiography published as soon as possible because that's where we hear about that kind of depth of character that we are all familiar with. anyway, let's thank the panel. [applause]

talk talkshow host thom hartmann on his life and career and his response to viewer calls and questions. his books include the crash of 2016 rebooting the american dream and threshold then at 10 p.m. economist walter williams has most recent book is american contempt for liberty. his other books include race and economics and up from the project saturday evening at 10 p.m. eastern on "after words" karl rove the former deputy chief of staff looks at william mckinley dt 96 campaign and a new book the triumph of william mckinley mckinley wife election of 1896 still matters. including the political gridlock and expansion of the republican base. he's interviewed by richard kaiser senior editor for the national review magazine. >> the party has been beaten in

the election. grover cleveland has come into office and has been the governor of ohio and has seen the country does and to send and they think that the election is going to be there and he wants to be the nominee but he is not the favorite of the party bosses. >> and following 11 p.m. eastern join booktv as the attended a party thrown for karl rove. sunday author david marinus wilby live with calls, e-mails and texts from noon to 3 p.m.. books include the most recent release once in a great city a detroit city story as well as first in his class a biography of bill clinton, tell told newt to shut up and barack obama the story. booktv this new year's weekend. three days of nonfiction books and authors on c-span2. television for serious readers. hillary clinton is in new hampshire making a couple stops

in portsmouth and berlin. her campaign says she will lay out plans to get the economy working for all people in the united states not just those at the top. we will have coverage of the meeting scheduled to start at 1 p.m. eastern on the companion network c-span. the federal reserve estimates a total net worth of households in the united states at $80 trillion including real estate and financial assets. the top 10% of households with 75% of the network or $60 trillion. a recent wall street journal opinion piece by martin feldstein the former chair of economic advisers under president ronald reagan says the amount doesn't include a large amount held in future retirement benefits from social security and medicare. next a discussion about inequality in the u.s. hosted by the nation magazine. [applause] >> thank you. can you hear me.

it's perfect to be in san francisco with so many supporters, friends, i hope soon to be readers, subscribers and a score just theater. this is the last stop on the trip as many of you may know 2015 marked the 150th birthday in the nation. it is daunting. [applause] we have been traveling the country many cities. this is our great last stop at introducing a next generation in finding lap streeters and others i wanted 3 million people to come to the nation every week in different forms so we are proud of that and tonight we and tonight we gathered some of the great thinkers come activists on issues of fairness, fighting inequality for a panel i think that is vital at this time it is

a transcendent issue of our time to let me introduce our great moderator and we shall begin. doris cordell is a retired judge of the superior court of california and former independent police auditor for the city of san jose. she's a longtime advocate for improving transparency when it comes to police misconduct and was assistant dean of the stanford law school or she helped to develop a program to increase minority recruitment. within a year, stanford law went from last to first place in enrollment of african-american and hispanic students among nature law schools. she's received numerous awards and prizes for social activism, breaking race and gender barriers including the roseburg memorial award from the california women lawyers and the rosa parks ordinary people a word from the naacp.

she was the first female african-american judge in northern california in the first female african-american superior court judge in santa clara county california. please welcome judge cordell. [applause] >> thank you. [applause] [laughter] >> good evening and welcome to today's special program of the commonwealth club at the commonwealth club of california. tonight's program is co- presented by the nation magazine. i am ladoris hazzard cordell, retired judge of the superior court of california, former police auditor for the city of san jose and your moderator for

this program. 2015 marks the 150th birthday of the nation magazine. to commemorate this historic anniversary, we are proud to present a conversation about our countries inequality crisis, a pressing issue impacting millions of americans and a core nation issue on which the magazine has long been sounding the alarm. the wealth controlled by the top tenth of the top 1% has more than doubled over the past 30 years in the united states approaching unprecedented levels. san francisco where we are holding today's program most certainly symbolizes the any quality issue. the city has been wracked by battles over development, a

homeless population that spills onto the sidewalks rocketing housing costs and increases in crime. with its gleaming new buildings and influx of silicon valley wealth, san francisco has the fastest growing income inequality gap in the nation. so what does this mean for the political process? for the environment, living wages and immigrant rights? and interned for civil society and the future of our democracy lacks tonight we will have a conversation with four prominent experts of key problems afflicting america through the lens of the unprecedented concentration of wealth in the united states today and now please welcome the panelist first robert reich of public policy at the university of

california at berkeley and senior fellow at the bloom center for developing economies. he served as the secretary of labor in the clinton administration and was named by "time" magazine as one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the 20th century. his latest book is saving capitalism for the many not a few. please welcome robert reich. [applause] >> 11 * or if the national domestic workers alliance and codirector of the carrying across generations campaign.

she was a 2014 macarthur genius and was named one of the world's most 100 influential people by "time" magazine. she's a 2013 economic leader and author of the age of dignity preparing for the elder boom and a changing america area please welcome the ai-jen poo. [applause] van jones is an environmental advocate, civil rights activist and cofounder of four nonprofit organizations including rebuilding the dream of which he

is president. he is also a cnn political contributor. he is a yale educated lawyer and in 2009 worked as the green jobs adviser to president obama. he is the author of "the new york times" best-selling book rebuild the dream please welcome van jones. [applause] our final panelist, katrina vanden heuvel is the editor and publisher of the nation and is a frequent commentator on tv and radio, the author of numerous books and a weekly online columnist for the "washington post." herb laud appears at the nation.com.

please welcome katrina vanden heuvel. [applause] we are going to start our conversation with a a conversation with a question i'm going to throw out to all of you. in a 2014 survey come any quality was america's top choice for greatest threats to the world. all of the presidential candidates democrat and republican are talking about inequality. i will give you a quote. the rich have gotten richer come income inequality has gotten worse and there are more people in poverty than ever before. those were the words of mitt romney. so, panelists, are we finally at the tipping point, are americans left and right, rich and poor, are we all now in agreement that

our economic and political systems are rigged and they have to change? is all of the anger about inequality now the great unifier or are we now all about to take? >> no. [laughter] should i explain? laughter go >> i think the good news is that inequality is something people are talking about. i think that the years of seeing any quality lighting and the median wage, the poor and the poverty level of the stubbornly high and the rich get richer finally we are getting to a tipping point even among republicans or is at least expected or fashionable to say something about it but we are

not anywhere near doing anything significant about it. there is one candidate i believe who is talking seriously about it and a few others who are being influenced by him. [cheering] but i don't want to make this into a partisan. my biggest fear is honestly that we may be as a nation heading into a world war. and above or can bring up either the best or the worst in the nation. it sometimes can lead to paradoxically a great deal of social solidarity and some good things can come out of the war in terms of the issue of inequality but it can also bring out some terrible ugliness and we have to watch very carefully.

>> there is other good news which is that everywhere i turn i see low-wage workers in motion. i see incredible organizing, fast food workers, home care workers, domestic workers, you all heard of the fight for 15. wal-mart workers, retail workers, even though the restarts at starbucks. people are coming together and i think that combined with incredible vibrancy of the movement for black bias, there is a sense of collective self-confidence i think that people who are on the frontlines of inequality in this country are starting to express that we actually can turn the tide on this and that we are going to come together and build the kind of movement necessary to do so and that to me is the best news

in this situation. francis fox the great historian of social movements told me not long ago she does the lead we are in the early stages of what will be the next great social protest movement of this country that will fundamentally transform democracy for all of us and you know, she is right about a lot of things, so i'm going to go with that. [applause] ..

and that is their way of talking about the way that the government has been captured to protect big corporations and the expense of working people. i think there is a growing agreement and frankly growing militancy on the right in upper left with the solutions on the right to make things worse. i also think that when you listen to the orange guy, trump -- [laughter] >> who did you have in mind? >> when you listen to him, there is something interesting

happening where there is a style of politics that could be a precursor to something. in other words, i just don't give a. i am just not going to be polite. but there is something happening where people on the left and right constrained, there is just not enough cookies on the table now for people to be polite. the temperature is going up on the right in the left. i do think the income inequality debate and discussion is something we should be very, very observing for opportunities on the right that we might find more exciting. >> so i agree with everything that has been said. the rules are being rewritten in different ways on the left hand on the right in the heart of it we are witnessing a discredited, failed status quo.

this washington consensus inside the beltway consensus of the regulation of corporate trade agreement, a failure to make public investments of mandatory sentencing. all of this is coming under scrutiny in question. easy than bernie sanders campaign. he seated campaign. he seated donald trump in different ways. the question is where, where bullet had. it is no question a time about people and around the world there are movements like movements you are describing, both hopeful and not hopeful whether in greece and spain are canada, the wearable and will require your political power and movements. let's pick up on that. let's pick about the political power issue. first of all, the talk about inequality has been around for years. in the 1930s supreme court justice louis brandeis noted we can have a democracy or we can have great wealth in the hands of a few, but we cannot have those.

in 1056, the nation published an article by w. e. b. dubois in which he wrote corporate wealth profits as never before in history or turnover the national resources to private profit and have few friends left for education, health and housing. so if we talk about politics, there's a boatload of money and the lobbying industry. in 2013 if we talk about silicon valley, apple spent 3.3 million lobbying just in 2013. amazon 3.4, facebook six when far, microsoft 10.4 and google spent 15.8 million all to influence politicians in washington. so do we -- don't we have terrain and lobbying to achieve income inequality and if so, how do we do that? >> well, the answer is clearly we do and we have to get big money out of politics. we have to reverse the decisions united. we have to make sure that there

is -- [applause] public financing about campaigns and also make sure that there is full disclosure of where but the money is coming from. it is easy to say what we should be doing. it is extremely hard to get the power to do it because you see it's a chicken and egg problem people with powered don't want fundamentally to lose power and they feel that any fundamental change in how politics are financed would be a threat to them. so let's go back to the issue of populism because it really is the core question here. we see on the right and left of people, in angry, frustrated, anxious people all across america and also across europe and many other places around the globe. this is not just an american problem. but the question is how that anger is utilized.

what political leaders and movements and organization will do with that anger. this is the great challenges seems to me because if we are facing a common threat in the form of radical jihadist of, that anger can be turned into some name positively may be created or it can be turned into fierce phobia and racism and ethnic exclusivity. we have got to take a leadership role in making sure the anger is channeled in a positive direction and everybody in this hall has got to do exactly the same thing. >> anyone else? >> a couple things about this. first of all, from an african-american active, an

african-american, not the african-american perspective, the conversation about inequality starts with mass incarceration. it starts they are. [applause] and then moves to the rest of it. i think it's important to understand i mention the movement for black lives. i think this is one of the most important developments of our time. a lot of people got mad because some kids catch the microphones or whatever and not their only point of reference and bernie sanders missing the entire movie , missing the entire movie. you now have a generation of african-american who are coming and they were 12 years old when obama got in office. her team, 14. they are not impressed with having a president. they are not impressed of having

a democratic party that will say stuff. they are facing incarceration rates that are six times their peers when they are doing the same things as their peers in other words, black kids and why kids do drugs in the same amount, but white kids -- black kids go to prison six times more than their white peers and nobody's saying anything about it. and you have a view of the state that the state itself does a better job of punishing than protecting. the state itself does a better job of hurting people than helping people and that they see violence from the government inside the u.s. borders in the form of mass incarceration. their peers see it at the u.s. border in the form of mass deportation and all the young people see it the on the u.s. border in the form of militarization. so you have a seamless web of

violence from the government that somehow does not protect them from street-level violence but enhances it and no one is speaking for them. and then you have a democratic party that wants to open his mouth to talk about income inequality, but won't until very recently speak of these issues is integral to the fight. you can't have income inequality cuban labeled exxon for doing what your kids are doing in college right now and what some of you are doing this weekend. [laughter] you cannot have income inequality if you've been labeled a felon. you can get a job. you can get a student loan, apartment, business license. separate those young people here at democratic party after seven plus years of obama still not dealing with it. i was very impressed by them.

the only force in american politics decides hillary clinton that the political parties had to address in their debate was black lives matter. black lives matter was started by three young women come a couple of whom work with you with nothing but their name and a hash tag in the force both parties to do with them. we should celebrate a first, second and third. clark at >> limited to very briefly on this. it appears that embraces the weapon of choice by those who want to maintain the status quo and draw attention away from inequality. if you listen, donald trump's battle cry let's make america great again, that is just dog whistle politics, implement? is not code for let's make america weight again. if the black lives matter of

movement focusing enough on income and wealth inequality? should it be doing more in that area? this is for anybody. >> no, i don't think they should be doing more. you have a democratic party. i just want -- >> t. think there is one democratic arty because what has emerged in the last years post occupied, post crash and i might even argue post-obama is there has been a war within the democratic party, were between the wall street wing and the more corporate establishment wing, with both have got to take into account though you could argue they have any word character and six. applied rightly this summer or even the conscious -- senator morin. people are seeking anyways.

the battle goes on and it is going to determine the direction of the inequality discussion. >> the way i see them above to get the view of others, the way i see it is the visible fight in the party is between the wall street wing and the wide economic populist. i mean if you look at the reality, the problem that you have is that at the end of the day the republicans and the right wing democrats want black people to settle for trickle-down economics and the left wing of the democratic party wanted us to settle for trickle-down justice. in other words, you shut up. we are not going to say black. you shut up. we are going to talk about tax and wall street and you'll get yours. don't worry.

>> could not invest in schools or prisons. >> exactly. not raising the slogans of any mass incarceration and as a result you have a third leg in the progressive movement, which is a racial justice plague which has no home and has no candidate and you are talking about the dreamers on the latino site, the black lives matter movement. you're talking about i don't know more among native americans , the third wing of the party with no candidate in no voice and not even the pretense of a black candidate to follow that and they exploded into public view. i think you brought up frankly discussed in both rings and i have to say i was very, very proud of young people in very proud of the way bernie sanders himself righted himself and responded with such compassion. i think these young people have brought the best of both rings

are the party may no longer your trickle-down justice from the way progressive populist. i think that is a very healthy thing that they achieve. [applause] >> i think what has happened is that a dead i don't know precisely what is going on and night and a campaign or inside the washington precincts of the democratic party, but i think gradually a dawning realization is occurring at if you have progressives than they are white progressives, they can maintain or get an electoral majority. but if you have the progressives along with people of color, latinos and blacks, you can actually create the majority in america and not coalition if you can actually generate the coalition is a winning coalition. now what the democrats have done

since franklin d. roosevelt was to exclude african-americans very consciously, very carefully. i was fdr's coalition. that was the white working class and whoever he could find to muster in very, very direct question of the southern african american, southern blacks. that has been the policy of the democratic party on the way up until i would say bill clinton. bill clinton tried to have a larger coalition, but the error of bill clinton with katrina was bringing in and make an alliance with the wall street democrat and it undermined everything else. he made it difficult to actually create a new progressive movement. so the question for the democrats and the question for hillary clinton for bernie sanders and anybody else, martin o'malley is whether they are willing to abandon the wall street part of their coalition and join in a new winning coalition with people of color.

that is the central strategic question and to my mind the only way we get any kind of change in america is that the democrats choose the latter, not the former. >> so if you have these coalitions we can actually get people together. voting ends the bottom line. voting is critical to an egalitarian society and in america, low voter turnout is the rule, not the exception. bernie sanders wants everyone to be automatically registered to vote at age 18. but that still doesn't address the issue of getting people to actually vote. in australia, people are fined for not voting. so given how low our voter turnout is in this country, should we do the same? should we penalize people for not voting or are there ways to

get people to go to the polls? >> judge, i would flip it a little. the crisis we are witnessing a something related to what bob spoke about which is -- ai-jen poo and the rising american public sees that they are doing everything in their power to suppress the vote, to suppress this coming shift in our countries demography, destiny, politics. the money poured into suppressing the vote is staggering. it is akin to new poll tax, to jim crow. i think it will take movements to get out the vote. i'm not in favor of mandatory voting. i can be persuaded. the reverend barber of north carolina has made a commitment to devote his movement to get out the vote, multiracial,

multi-justice, multi-issue ensured what he calls it aired reconstruction. the civil rights movement of the 60s having done the second. in the third reconstruction rally people not on the north carolina that he will travel the country speaking about everything from health care to mandatory minimums to justice to mass incarceration of fast food workers. i think there is something in that motion that we should be aware of money that is then pumped in and that should be disclosed. my last point, all contributions to super pacs should be taxable in the mush go to universal voter registration. this state has done a good thing. clap back >> does anyone on the panel think that voting should be mandatory? >> i certainly don't. i think people will do when they have some end of the war. -- something to vote for.

[applause] >> part of it is a question of the agenda. if we could create an agenda for the future of this country were the full diversity of who we are and who we are becoming as a nation and our interests and interconnected could be articulated it reflects back in a compelling agenda that's not imprisoned by the politics of the possible but actually what people mean. to not only survive, but to thrive. not just some people, all people. i think when we have that agenda, we will see a desire to engage in a different way. so both of my grandmothers were the help. they low wages, no health care and one day off a week was theirs day, long days.

today's domestic workers include large numbers of immigrant women who unlike my grandmother has had organizations like the national domestic workers alliance to vote for them. your focus and yours as well have been on grassroots. but there are some who believe this is the wrong approach and that the way to think about eradicating inequality is by looking down, not up. so a pundit recently said the following. the problem in america is not wealth, but persistent poverty. don't punish the rich. help the poor become richer. like the song we all heard at the beginning, make the idle poor become the idle rich. so a ai-jen poo, what is your view on this russian marques grassroots gone gone about it the wrong way?

>> so, ever since the 1930s when our labor laws were put into place as part of the new deal and they deal with pat, southern members of congress refused to sign on for the national labor relations act and the fair labor standards act if they included farm workers and domestic workers who were black workers at the time. robert mentioned this. and those bills were passed with those exclusions in place and a concession to those other members of congress. and so for more than 75 years in the domestic workers and farm workers have been asked looted from the core foundation of our labor protection and the only thing that has changed that over time, more than seven decades, the only thing that has changed that is domestic workers organizing at the grassroots level, led by --

[applause] the first round was in the 70s a black woman courageous national led the national domestic workers union and one inclusion of some domestic workers the minimum wage protection and this generation of domestic workers whose organizing in 30 cities around the country today has one domestic worker bills of rights in six states in the last five years. so we are indeed changing policy in the course of history through classroom organizing and that has been the only thing that has worked. so that is what i was paid to them. >> first of all, i think we should give a round of applause to train tix for her incredible work. [cheers and applause] you know, i wouldn't dare to add

to what she said. there's just not going to be even liberal elite like ourselves just don't have the fingertips for what is really going on all too often so we are often trying to solve the wrong problem at the wrong time and you need when you talk about occupy wall street or black lies at the labor movement coming up, breaking all the rules. everybody applauds now. i'm hoping i'm not defending anybody, but you are not the darwin of progressives three or four years ago when you are driving these young brown immigrant women into the halls of power. that was very weird. [laughter] in people didn't know what to

think about it and people pooh-poohed it and all of a sudden you one in three or four states and extended more rights to more people. maggie personally, but your movement got more rights with it than anything in the last 30 years and the farmworkers. this is what happens when the people stand up. so i think we've got a bunch of young people from the human rights places than when i was young with dreadlocks, my ideas were much more militant. now i am old and i find myself in that very frustrating realm. and then these black lives matters kids came and kicked us in the and said screw you, we

are getting messed over. i think there is something to be said for the contribution made by people who have a national dog in the race. [applause] >> hillary clinton does not want a system that will provide a free college education for everyone. she said i don't want to pay for the education of donald trump's children. well, neither do i. but is she on the sound in or said college or vocational education be free for all? other countries do it, so why not here? >> i think that it is very important in terms of building the kind of coalition we are talking about and gaining the kind of grassroots supporters we are talking about to speak kind of a sysadmin which not only as public higher education free and i don't think donald trump's

children would go to public higher education, but also that we have a single-payer health care system. [applause] we may not be able to get this next week or next year or in a couple of years, but it is something to aspire to. it builds in the largest social solidarity. it creates the kind of links between the poor and the middle class, between blacks and whites and latinos, between americans generally that can support this kind of set of institutions in the fight is going to be long and bitter and difficult, but noting on something you said before, i've just returned from several weeks in red america and red states in red cities you may wonder what i was doing there.

i was trying to find a book. i didn't do very well in the red states are red cities, but what i did discover i had a meeting with a bunch of small farmers in missouri who were organizing against some of the big agribusinesses in fact three farms. these small farmers call themselves conservative republicans where they were organizing against what they considered to be and were in fact some of the forces that were systematically eating away at the profits and destroying the environment. i met with small business leaders, not only in stature. they were actually called some of them, but they were small business leaders and franchisees and they were organizing against some of the big business is a big franchise you are again undermining the profit and monopolizing and across red america i kept running into

people organizing against the wealthy, the monopolist and the fight for 15 people in kansas city are doing it back with the same thing and these people have got to be like that. the more majority, the more monday people who i met in raleigh, they are also beginning to link up with some of these conservative republican groups about the same issues of power and wealth. >> so i think there is a trans-partisan movement to be built on and you've been writing about it because i think they're so much in our history we could retrieve. there's so much radical history which is why when bernie sanders talks about denmark, we retrieve some of that history in our own country. the idea of trespassing, we need to revise that. if you recall years ago in the fight against media concentration and for media

date, a fight the nation was central to, you had trump lots of aligned with code pink because both didn't like the big miss. they wanted localism and diversity. there is a real suspicion that if the tea party hadn't been a racist, you could've found some possible alliance there. i'm not sure i fully agree, b.c. the future of american politics is between the establishment and the antiestablishment? >> there are two antiestablishment now. >> and that is interesting. >> we are finding something called the green tea movement. >> is that right? i know about the coffee part. >> the coffee part is liberal and the black tea movement.

[laughter] we are allied with them. the green tea movement in the argument they make is i think very compelling. shouldn't every american have the right and the liberty to power their own homes with their own power, without being bossed and dictated to by the company that will tell you when you are going to pay your energy bill, how much it is going to cost, how many asthma inhalers you will have as a result of it and yet you don't have that right in america. ..

because it turns out there's a conservative critique that says prisons are a failed government bureaucracy and they have money to do a horrible job from a christian point of view they don't treat people with respect and there is no redemption possible. i don't trust these guys.

i can point to three republican governors in georgia, in texas, in ohio trying to close prisons. i can't name one in the country that has closed a prison including your governor jerry brown. he got pulled into kicking and screaming a compromise that would have been much better had he led on it. my point is the temperature is rising at the liberty and justice for all, liberty, there is a liberty and justice for all moment coming that i do think we might find some.

>> if you are listening to the commonwealth club of telephone you program it is presented by the nation magazine in commemoration of the 150th anniversary and we are discussing inequality in america. our speakers are robert reich professor and former secretary of labor, ai-jen poo of the domestic workers alliance, van jones, white house special advisor for green jobs and cnn commentator and katrina vanden heuvel, editor and publisher of the nation. i am ladoris hazzard cordell retired judge of the court of california, former police auditor for san jose and your moderator and you can hear the programs on the radio, catch up with us on facebook and quicker and a c. program that he goes on our youtube channel. we are at a point we want to go to questions that have been submitted about what to do and

any quality jeopardy round. i'm going to get a quote about inequality to you all into you tell us who said it and remember it has to be in the form of a question. [laughter] and if you don't know just take a good guess. a republicans are for both the man and the folder but in case of conflict the man before the dollar. >> ted cruz. >> abraham lincoln. >> it's almost had cruz. [laughter] >> can't get rich dealing with politicians there's something wrong with you.

>> willie brown. [laughter] [applause] >> the answer, donald trump. the wall and its majestic equality in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from sleeping under bridges, begging on the streets into stealing bread. anatol france. last one. those are my principles and if you don't like them, i have others. >> groucho marx. now we will turn to questions from you all. how do we give individuals enough power to be effective but not enough to be corrupted?

>> can we get a lifeline? >> federal judge. [applause] who is the academy of justice, absolutely. how do we give people power but not too much? the >> it's all in the balance. this is a dynamic system. i voted in 2008 and everything didn't get to. i clicked. this is a dynamic system we will continue to interact with probably another thousands years

so there is no one single answer or thing because if you fix it today today there's new trick-or-treat tomorrow and it's not an end state. >> didn't you write in your book isn't really corruption it's just people making rules? >> it is in fact mostly big institutions, large corporations , wall street and also some very wealthy individuals who are buying their way in the form of changing the rules the way of the market. they don't think of themselves corrupt they just think that is the way that they have to maintain themselves and okay the principles to their shareholders but it's actually undermining the entire system.

going back to your question your honor, if i may call you that. >> please do, i love that. >> your public service has been exemplary. [applause] and you are both it turns out great artists. i didn't realize that you are an accomplished artist so maybe the left brain and right brain together can get us out. >> now getting back to the questions here. >> i think if you look at the healthiest of christie's around the world, one thing they have in common is vibrant social movements. so one of the most important

things we can do is add oxygen to social movements because that creates the context for good governance in my view. >> you are absolutely right into the greatest enemy is cynicism and anybody that detects cynicism about the power of politics and democracy to function as it should and as it can be our contributing to a self-fulfilling prophecy. >> so it is very tricky in terms of media coverage because we we doing a lot of investigations we do a lot of investigations at of the nation and you expose corruption and abuse that it can also lead to cynicism and there is a balancing act i agree it's not only cynicism, it is about the role of government is at the heart of it because i've heard

so many people say it's not working on behalf of the people and they are right to throw it out is the wrong way to go you want to take it back, get it working and it shows the most important thing you can do in politics is to show that you improve the condition of people's lives. african-american communities, white working class and no attention paid or concern shown until these last years that will turn people away from politics and government into the belief that government can work on behalf of of the two often a common good.

>> you've been able to get people to come together on your issues in a way that i think has shocked a lot of people. did you have any insight? i've been so inspired by the mass incarceration and i think that we just have to get smarter and more creative about how we you are connecting the dots across the pain people feel in this economy and one of the things that we think about a lot is the fact that this country is aging and the baby boom generation is reaching retirement age at the age of a person every eight seconds.

>> why doesn't somebody give me a microphone? [laughter] but it's resulting in and also because of advances in healthcare and technology people are living longer than ever before so people of my grandmother's demographic are the fastest in the country come 85 and older and so we are about to have the largest overpopulation we've ever had in the history of this country. [applause] the >> living longer is living longer and connecting longer if

we have the right to put in place and because of the huge demand of the the need for caregivers is going through the roof and we represent caregivers come, the fastest growing occupation in the nation is home 's home care and the average median income is $13,000 per year. so here you have a situation where millions of people, 27 million to be precise are going to need care to meet their basic dalia needs and then you have an incredibly talented but overstretched and undervalued working poor workforce. if we could connect the dots where we actually invest in a new care infrastructure and the ability for people to afford the care they need so they can live independently and connected to their communities and workforce

that can support that the independence gets invested in such that the jobs become good jobs for the future it's a win-win. people get to age in place and get good jobs. win-win, right? [applause] this is the kind of agenda that connects people across race, class, generation and ideology and we just need back in a really comprehensive way in the country so that instead of the coming increasingly polarized along the lines of race and generation, we are turning towards each other and finding solutions for the points of interest come together. >> let me pick up with a question from the audience. why do the working class and working poor so often vote in defense of the 1% in other words, vote against their best interest and how might we change

that? >> i want to say something about that question. here's the deal. i think this is a question that i went at and it's a favorite question among liberals and progressives and i don't like it and i will tell you why i don't like it. there are people who vote against their economic self-interest and they are the people in this room. rich liberals voting for higher taxes to help poor people are voting against their economic self interest but nobody calls them stupid. that's because we care so much about our values. well, great. i am a southerner i grew up in the south and a small town. i went to public schools and

church every sunday. i'm much more comfortable in red state america than any place else. and that white guy that goes against our liberal programs is voting against his economic self interest and for a set of values. if you listen to what he says he will tell you i know that this may wind up hurting me, but i don't want you taking somebody else's money and trying to bribe me with their money so you can undermine my parenting decisions. i want my kids to be independent. as mentioned i don't want you taking stolen money to bail them out. i have a value not respecting other peoples people's property and good parenting and i don't like you stealing people's money to undermine my parenting decisions. that's value.

doesn't help you with china or a whole set of problems but when we come to people and say you were just too stupid to know your own interest come and on the coast without telling you what they are it also makes it impossible to partner because if you insult somebody it doesn't matter if you are right or wrong i go the other way and say i understand and i believe that you are making decisions that reflect your economic interests and values so let's talk about your values and how we can make your family stronger. the one thing you can do to somebody has to tell them that they are stupid and i think that liberal elite i cannot tell you how many times i'm going to go

on about this stuff but i remember in 2004 i had us on this big and companies are living, he was a little burrito baby at the time and i was with a bunch of other progressive folks and somebody called the middle of this country dumbfuckistan and everybody laughed about it because everybody didn't vote for john kerry. and i knew in that moment i am not a part of some very important thing on the left. >> but at the nation i remember that moment -- [applause] and i said blaming the people is a politics that is dead on arrival.

the elites probably failed but people are not the ones to blame. you are right that we are seeing a moment and i will say very briefly there is a gop crackup we are witnessing where you have to country club establishment not clear what's going on in the more populist base. you are talking about social values but i guarantee donald trump can go to ohio and talk about trade and do well with a whole set of people right, left, center. so i think it is an interesting moment where there are people in the republican party that could argue that against their own self-interest to our waking up and saying wait a minute i am not getting my share from the country club type of republicans but i agree politics blames the people first without coming anywhere. >> i just don't think you can

lead a country that you don't love and i think that there is a part of the left roderick doesn't love the middle of the country and doesn't see them in their pain or beauty and almost cast them out anyway. there are different left and right. my husband is from kentucky and we go every year you just get to know people. we went down there a couple of years ago and we spoke at the museum of big trucks and cars. a part of what happens come and i will step very briefly as he talked to people you find common interests. you may not agree on everything but the idea is that you are able to talk and so much of our media doesn't talk to people it

that makes them spectators and it makes them feel cynical. it cuts them out so there is a lot swirling around in this issue. >> i was told the reason i got a microphone is because mine isn't working so you didn't hear anything i said? that sort of depressing to me. [laughter] [laughter] but no i would like to introduce myself -- [laughter] does a few things i would like to get off my chest. one of them has to do -- i would like to speak on behalf of coastal liberals. [laughter] [applause] because i'm sure that there are some who feel that her perhaps then people who integrate middle or south actually my experience is that there is a widespread sense, whether it is coastal

liberals or southern conservatives or midwestern tea party of powerlessness and that sense of powerlessness is almost universal in america right now except for a very, very small elite. i'd also like to put in a good word on behalf of the baby boomers who come in for some discussion tonight. i was born in 1946. so was bill clinton and george w. bush and donald trump. anybody who's anybody buys. [laughter] [applause] and a lot of the boomers political learnings into political leaders were not about powerlessness. they were about power. we learned of it through organizations through the civil rights movement, the

anti-vietnam movement we could actually make change and i a change and i think that's what americans need more than ever before and certainly since the 60s is a sense of efficacy, the sense that they can make a difference. i've been teaching the last 35 years to the ages of 18 to 25 and i've never in 35 years encountered a young generation of 18 to 25-year-olds that is more idealistic and more determined to give back to this country than the current one. ' so i'm very optimistic about i think we can build the kind of coalition we've been hinting around that but it has got to be based on the sense of mutual interdependence and the need for us to have a voice to overcome a power structure that is becoming completely disconnected from almost everyone including

coastal liberals. did you hear me. [laughter] sometimes i feel like i don't have a voice. [laughter] now what are the macek's of success that you look for in tax reform, for example the proposal of the flat tax. [laughter] there are a number of tax proposals out there that are in the time of raging inequality so extraordinarily stupid about all the words fail me. the idea of the flat tax for example it necessarily means that high income people will be paying less and more and that's how you get to a flat tax.

so don't have anybody tell you differently that it's going to aggravate inequality in this country. it is as bad as trickle-down economics and austerity economics and another version of voodoo doo doo economics. [laughter] [applause] have i found my voice? [laughter] skin on the more positive side i love when bernie sanders said in in the debate that president eisenhower was far more radical when you consider that 91% marginal tax rate on people making over 400,000 which would be the equivalent of about 300 today. i'm passionate about something called the robin hood tax.

it's not new but it has transferred support. the idea is that it's a small tax on speculation stocks, trade, currency. take that money and reinvest it in mainstream and rebuilding the middle class and the other small simple thing is an error and income at the same rate or much higher than work. it's just in saying that we have these hedge funds tax loopholes still in the system. so i think that bob could come forward with a manifesto that quickly we all know what the solution is, it's the political inequality of political power that holds back what could be done to make this a far more rational and fair system. >> we have received a number of

questions just about capitalism and i will put it in this one here. isn't income inequality just the unfortunate reality of the capitalist system fax >> es at some level but you can get to a level system seizes up and you can have tremendous problems. one thing i just want to say is something is happening here in northern california that i think we haven't discussed. we are moving into a digital age now and it's not unusual to see since we are talking about maloney also c. 26, 23, 31-year-old multimillionaires wandering around here in the mission district. [laughter]

for people who are listening to this on the radio it used to be the working-class neighborhood where i spent my 20s and i do think there's something happening and i don't think that we should rush past it. there is a technology dimension and i don't think that our conception of the liberal conception to our conception of the state has caught up yet. i still think that we can barely think of the state as a redistribute or of this industrial age capitalism where it's in the hands of a certain set of people and of the state is going to step in to redistribute wealth and push back and all sorts of stuff and i just look at what's actually

happening in the economy and the one thing i can say is that it isn't being written in the wall in washington he seems to be returning code in silicon valley and it gets shipped back. the ability of the state as we have known it is quite dubious switch becomes much more important to me and how we actually did change. i don't just mean to elect candidates candidates but i need to do battle on a dalia basis to connect with each other on a dalia basis and to be inside of the actual moment where change is growing exponentially. i don't think any anymore they say we are trying to make change. i think that's the sound weird when we say that. silicon valley is making change.

you have revolutions happening in biotech and grounds and smart screens. when we have that much change our goal isn't to make change, it's coming faster than we know. the goal should be to make change work for our people to make change our friend come to find a way whether we can use the government were not. i worry about this political coalition talk with you can get the government on our site or not to fight ways for popular movement to make change our friend and where the government can be captured, great but i don't think we should leave the communities to the market or the state in an age like this. [applause] you talk about capitalism and it makes me think why he's been traversing the country going to

the heartland. your book is about capitalism so i would love to hear your thoughts. there's many different kinds of capitalism. >> i think the point is that there isn't a division between governments and free markets government and free markets and if we accept that division, we have given away most of the argument. government is creating the market in silicon valley if there were not a patent system or intellectual property system that is enforced by the government of where patents and trademarks continue to get longer and longer and where it's harder and harder to litigate against them where intellectual property is a central subject of the transpacific partnerships, where the power over the networks in terms of standard platforms and standard software portals is getting larger and larger in the hands of a smaller number of companies and

antitrust isn't being used as it could be i think these are all a very central questions that have to do with the structure of the markets. so i don't draw the distinction between governments and markets and i think part of empowering people is understanding how government is shaping the market and it's not even a question of the size of government or the large or small government it's whether the government is working for us or working for a smaller and smaller minority of people who have a greater and greater degree of power. but this is a big piece of inequality because the lobbyists and political conditions and power of a relatively small minority to get experts, university experts and think

tank experts to substantiate whatever they want in congressional hearings and elsewhere, that the power has a compounding effect on the way the market is organized. it tilts the market in the direction increasingly of the wealthy and the wealthy institutions of society and as the market is told in that action, you see that consequence is for the wealthy to have even more power and large institutions, large corporations and wall street teaming up for power over the markets and that compounding gets worse and worse. it's a vicious cycle that unless we understand it and attempt to reverse it we are not going to accomplish much. i couldn't agree with you more, all of you about the importance of the grassroots organization. grassroots organization is so

substitute for understanding and recapturing the central institutions of society. [applause] one of the questions follows up on that. corporations united combining citizens united. [laughter] we have a couple questions about what is to be done to reverse that decision. do we need a constitutional amendment, and one question is what is the possibility of getting support from republicans to overturn that decision. my colleague argues that the movement is one of the most vibrant grassroots movements in the country. 600 cities have moved to issue repeal to amend the citizens united. we need a different supreme

court. [applause] and this election is critical. the next president will have the power most likely to the point of three justices. my colleague also writes when he writes about this we must move immediately to repeal or amend and i said you've got to give people points along the road. but in my city public financing, 6-1 has not only elected a mayor who ran on the most ambitious anti-inequality agenda we've seen, let's not forget he's having a lot of trouble but he did some good things. but the city council because of public financing has an african-american woman leader. there are seven women in the city council, radical political voices that wouldn't have been elected to so i think the public that public financing and powers people.

it's not just limiting people, it is those that might otherwise be able to run from a cashier in main, people for movements. an interesting anticorruption trust busting candidate ran with very little money with some public financing and gave andrew a run for his political electoral life so i think there are ways to do it for the citizens united decision and not just that you citizens united to justice, there's others that have now compounded and dismantled what remains and has left us in a place where 158 families, "new york times" reported last month contributed to half of the campaign funding so far in this action so i think the politics of power and you begin with public financing and build out and i think in cities and states in the country you can begin to chip away at citizens united. >> briefly though, our opponents

have one strategy. big money in, little people out. that's their approach. big money in, little people out. we have a split where we have one part of the movement that talks about the big money into the other part talks of the voting rights act. we talk about the fact of the voting rights act. that legislation they fought and died for us and destroyed by the supreme court and so when you have us over here marching for the basic rights to vote and others talking about big money, we have to pull that together. we should have one agenda that is big money out and little people in. [applause] >> the supreme court remember we

are talking about five of the nine justices that have been responsible for the decision that you were just referring to for citizens united and then let's not forget years ago, not that many e-echo was buckley where they found that money is the government of speech. not only vacancy for the that corporations are people and money is speech. talk about the triumph of the big corporations over little people. >> we've got to get one vote, of the five got to get one vote changed. this is not an impossible. katrina, you are 100% right next president, i think one of the biggest issues in terms of the upcoming election is who is going to get to be president. i don't generally support the tests that you can only be a

supreme court justice if you stand for this one thing or promised this one thing that i do the leave the next supreme court justice in order to be nominated and confirmed has got to pledge to vote against citizens united and repeal it. [applause] so, let's talk minimum-wage. are you in favor of raising the minimum wage and if so, what should it be? >> 15. [applause] nation in terms making 15 an hour. [applause] >> about hillary clinton said in that the debate there are debates about regional numbers. i don't know what your latest thinking. i think 15 is the way to go and

i think we see it moving obviously because it's the cover of movement and we haven't talked about this, the power of cities and states at the time washington is in gridlock. seattle, the great coalition in seattle and other cities it's moved like wildfire. >> cities and states are moving on the minimum wage and also moving on issues that you brought up a moment ago that his public financing, recently in ohio, connecticut moving on anti-gerrymandering public commissions. california one of the great things we did was get the districting out from under the politicians. [applause] i am very proud to be the chairman of the national organization called common cause which has a lot of work and it's now focusing on the states on many of these issues. with regard to 15 an hour i

might just say this. i understand the position that says cost of living is different and therefore one place a 15-dollar minimum wage might be too much for another place but we don't make that kind of distinction when it comes to worker safety, minimum standards or child labor minimum standards or any other issue with regards to minimum decency in america and i think that given that the minimum wage adjusted for inflation would today be $10.60 and that's not adjusting for the increase in productivity, dramatic increase in the american worker's productivity even low-wage workers if you adjust for both inflation and productivity it would be far higher than $15 an hour right now. [applause]

a couple other things about minimum wage, there are still some groups of workers who are excluded from minimum wage up until about a month ago 2 million home care workers were excluded because of that 1930s legacy in the labor law and this department of labor actually moved forward on the role change that brought them under the protection. i think it's one of the most important victories but there are still workers and people with disabilities who are working who are essentially still excluded from minimum wage

protections and is a clause that allows for some companies and even nonprofits to pay people below minimum wage and we have a page that hasn't been increased to think it is $2.90 and so there are still lots of ways in which we need to also fix and plug the swiss cheese of what is minimum-wage and secured it in addition to raising at 15. so there's a campaign led by the operation centers united for one of fair wage to culminate the tip to minimum wage altogether and raised us all. [applause] so, there was a reference made and this is going to be just a quick question there was

reference made to the agreement we heard mentioned for which president obama is campaigning. you have called this anti-american. >> this is a question that robert reich should be addressing. now, one of the un-american aspects i would argue over the way the treaty was old is how secretive it was that this is how they've been sold through time. secretive, nontransparent, incentives for corporations to be unpatriotic and move out of this country. at its root what i fought against is the view that the progressive left is anti-globalization. it's not. we covered seattle and fights against double t. -- wto. globalization for whose behalf,

how come and bob referred to the path of the law. the intellectual property protection, the arbitration secrecy, the access for ordinary citizens to know how they are being shafted by the trade deals which have contributed to the stagnation of wages over the last 43 go 50 years. and i don't know if it is anti-american but it's the worst, it's not the best of our traditions. i think the fight still goes on dot this was a case where we saw the wall street winning the party assert its strength and power and the president worked hard and overtime to sell it and got into a fight with i would argue bernie sanders is contending for the title of the leader of the populist wake of democratic party senator warren who didn't back down and spoke articulately and effectively about the reasons why against this but reasons why she could see other kinds of trade agreements.

>> we have time for one last question now. we've come to the end of the program so i will post one last question to each of you. if you were elected at the next president of the united states, within your first 100 days, name one thing that he would do to end income and/or wealth inequality in america. who wants to go first? >> get big money out of politics. [applause] you will have to give us a little more. [laughter] >> the key to all of this for what the nation can be and what we want whether we are talking about a coalition of populist from the left and right were talking about a new set of grassroots initiatives or

whether we are talking about taking and reclaiming our democracy, we can only do that if we get big money out of politics. this is the key. it's not the be-all and end-all that it is the first preliminary step because if we want to do anything on any of the other issues we talked about, single-payer or that public education or the minimum wage or whatever you want to begin looking at, you can't do it if the game is rated, and it is. i've been there and i've seen it. i tried to fight against it and i started out in 1967 as the intern for robert f. kennedy and there wasn't all that much then. washington was a rather poor and seedy place but it's got progressively wea