>> this is going to be real change. and we're going to have a border, and also you have a border, you don't have a country, folks. you don't have a country. remember that. now, in addition -- we go through a list of things quickly because, frankly, doesn't take a long time. we're going to end common core. we're going to bring education -- will we local. everybody wants it. we don't want our children educated by bureaucrats from washington, dc. so we end common core education local. we're going to terminate obamacare. we're going to repeal and it replace it with great healthcare for far less money. that's going to happen. that is going to happen. we are going to protect our second amendment. our second amendment. remember, it's under siege like

you've never seen before, and we are going to protect it. you know in paris, which has the toughest gun laws of the world, the world, no tougher gun laws than paris, france. tough. guess what? 130 people dead, no bullets were going in the opposite direction. it was just boom, boom, boom. same thing happened in california. 14 people, radicalized people, she probably radicalized him. they went in and killed 14 people that they worked with, supposedly that they liked. it's not going to happen anymore, folks. it's not going to happen. we're going to be smart. we're going to be vigilant. we're going to be the smart people. we're going to know what we're doing. we're going to be proud of our country again. [cheers and applause] our military is depleted. our military is exhausted.

we don't replenish. we take, we don't replenish. we send the best equipment in the world over to wherever we're sending it. we don't even know -- i don't even think we know where we're sending it. and a bullet gets fired in the air, and the people we send the equipment to they flee, and the enemy takes over this great equipment, and they have better equipment than we do, and they are using our equipment. those days are done. those days are done. we are going to rebuild our military. it's going to be big examiner better and stronger than ever, and hopefully nobody, nobody, and hopefully we're not going to have to use it but i guarantee you this, nobody -- and i mean nobody -- is going to mess with us anymore. all right? nobody. >> u.s.a.! u.s.a.! u.s.a.!

u.s.a.! >> i love you, too. i love you, too. i love you. i love this country. i feel so dish have such a spot in my heart for this country. the people are so amazing. no matter where we go, we have crowds like this. this is a big one. in alabama we had 35,000 people. oklahoma no matter where we go we have these massive crowds, and by the way, are we winning or what? look at the numbers. man. it's really amazing. it's really -- to me it's really amazing. we have won now i think 21 states. 21. and we have won in massive, massive landslides. started with new hampshire. wasn't supposed to win new hampshire. ted cruz -- can you believe it -- he wasn't born in our country, folks.

he was born in canada. he is weak on immigration. he is in favor of amnesty. he shouldn't even be in the same category with the people that we're talking about. but ted cruz was supposed to win but definitely was going to win in south carolina. so, i go to new hampshire. we win in a massive landslide. we go to south carolina, where you have the evangelicals. now, 68%. but you know, lying ted -- we call him lying ted. lying ted. so lying ted comes up with the bible high and he's going with the bible. puts it down and he starts lying, and you know what? the evangelicals don't like liars so we go into south carolina. that was going to be an easy victory, and trump wins it in a landslide. right? in a landslide. and then one after another we go in and win nevada landslide. we win the sec.

we did so great, and then we had a great day on tuesday. you know that. we won five, five. and then i hear cruz the other day, he's going, i'm the only one that can stop trump. i am the only one. ever hear this guy? i'm the only one. i beat him five times, and i said, well, wait a minute. i beat him 20 times. what's going on? lying ted. lying ted. and you flow, i tell you, kashich is a nice guy but honestly very weak on illegal immigration. that's the end of him, certainly as far as phoenix is concerned and as far as arizona is concerned, kashich is very, very weak, as you know. and there's another thing don't like. he approved nafta. when you approve and a half tacoma a lot of your -- nafta, a lot of your businesses left, and he is in favor of tpp and so, by the way, is ted cruz.

tpp is a disaster. it's the transpacific partnership. it's a disaster. it's going to take your businesses away. it's going to decimate the automobile industry. you don't want it. you don't need it. we will make great deals. once i get into office, we will make great deals, but not with nafta. you do them one at a time. one at a time. one at a time. one at a time. and if they misbehave and if they don't treat us properly, we terminate and we put them in the shed, and then maybe they come back. so crazy. i built a great company, massive company, a fantastic company, and i filed -- i did my filing, and everybody -- they were so unhappy when they saw. they thought maybe it's not so good. a phenomenal company. some of the great assets of the world. some of the great assets of the world. very little debt. very, very -- tremendous cash

flow. all of these things, and i say it not in a bragging -- you know what, bottom line, this is the kind of mentality we need in this country, at least for a while. at least for a while. we have $19 trillion in debt. 19 trillion. who knows even what a trillion is? five, six, seven years ago, never even heard the term. we have $19 trillion in debt. going to 21. they just approved a budget which is a disaster. the omnibus. the omnibus budget. a total disaster. it funds obamacare. it funds syrians come into the united states. we have no idea who they are. it funds illegal immigrants coming in through your bored, it right through phoenix and right through -- comes right through arizona. all of these can goes are funded with the budget that they approved. and i think it took them, like,

12 minutes to approve the budget. not going to happen anymore, folks. not going to happen anymore. so, here's the story. bottom line. the bottom line. it is, first of all, it's great to be with you. this is incredible. we expect -- this was just set up recently. we had, bill the way, last night -- i don't now if you saw -- we had an unbelievable inning in salt lake city, utah, and i hope they go with us. i hope they go with us. i say we have to stop there. we stopped and we had an amazing evening there let me just tell you. the way i finish is very simple. our country is not winning anymore. our trade is a disaster. china has -- it's one of the great robberies in the history of the world. what china has done to our country. china has been rebuilt because of the money and the jobs we have lost and the money we have given them.

we have rebuilt china, and they know it. i have many friend from china. i don't have any objection to china. it's wonderful. i'm angry at our people. not their people. if you can get away with it. we have rebuilt china and it's not free trade. it's not a anything. this is horrible, stupid trade. when you have an imbalance of $500 billion a year, folks, we got to get smart. i have karl ike cop, the greatest negotiators in the world, the greatest business people in the world, all endorsed me. say trump is the only one that knows what corporate inversion it. companies, pfizer, great company, pfizer just announced they're leaving. the great drug company. thousands of jobs. they're going to island. many companies are going mexico. carrier air conditioner, nabisco,ford, where are they going? they're going to mexico.

mexico -- mash my words -- mexico is a small version of china and we better get smart and get smart quickly. so you know, tell the story -- i tell the story, and it's sort of vowels but relates to a lot of things. my wife and my daughter, ivanka, said to me, act presidential. act presidential. like in the last debate, i acted presidential. okay? i acted. i didn't hit little marco and i didn't hit lying, lying, lying ted. i didn't want to hit him. i wanted to really impress my father my wife, and said, all right. and i one of the debate. i've won every single debate according to the online polls. i don't know. because i know that cruz is a good debater but can't talk. he talked -- a lie, a lie. not the right guy. he is not going to be the right guy and not going anywhere so it's not going to happen. i say we make it before the

convention, by the way. a lot of nonsense. you have these stiffs like mitt romney. a total stiff. did he let us down? this gave is a loser. did he let us down? i mean, here's a guy, goes up, so devastated, he forgot to campaign in the final months. he gave it to obama. i'm going to beat hillary so badly. let me tell you -- [cheers and applause] -- beating obama four years ago was easier than beating hillary clinton now, believe me. and mitt romney choked. secure simple. he choked. he choked like a dog and that's not going to happen. that doesn't happen with me. so here's the story. here's the story. we're going to tell our companies, come on back, folks. you left. we had incompetent leadership. you left, and they're not going to come back. they're going to say, we're not coming back. why?

we're in mexico, we're all over the place. here's what we have to do. jeb bush would say he is not a conservative. i'm conservative, folks, but i'm also smart, you know, smart. jeb spent $48 million in new hampshire. i spent two. i won in a landslide. he was number six. give me a break, okay? give me a break. he is not a conservative. i am a conservative. but they get me on trade because they say he's not a free trader. i'm a free todayer, but has to be smart trade, good for us, not bad for us, and if our incompetent politicians use political hacks to negotiate trade deals, people that have no clue about money or deals that have not read "the art of the deal" in all fairness, and don't intend to, it's not of interest to them. look at john kerry. look at the deal he made with iran. one of the worst deals ever negotiated. one of the worst deals ever

negotiated. look at -- it's a disgrace, an embarrassment. by the way, on that deal, we should have never, ever even started. until they give our prisoners back. you know that. we should have had them back years ago, and once they got back, we should have gone in and told them, by the way, the $150 billion, sorry, folks, we're a debtor nation, foeckes. we owes 19 trillion. we don't have it. sorry,over not getting the money, and after two days of turmoil, we would have saved $150 billion. okay? that deal is such an embarrass: our trade deals are just like that. our trade deals surgery sergeant bergdahl, five for one, right? we get bergdahl. they get five. who is a traitor. we get bergdahl. they good at five of the greet killers they've have coveted for a poured of nine years, and they got them. and those guys are now back on the battlefield, trying to kill

us all, and we got a traitor, big deal. but that is the way -- by the way, a traitor that supposedly, supposedly, five or six young beautiful soldiers were killed trying to find him and get him back. okay? that is our deal. that is the way we negotiate. not going to happen anymore. okay? not going to happen anymore. so what we're going to do is we're going to tell our wonderful businesses that deserted us -- they left us -- and i'm not even blaming them. they had no reason not to. because nobody -- you think anybody went to carrier and said, you're letting off of these people go. you're moving to mexico. please don't do it. blah blah. here's the deal. they don't do that. so they move into mexico, and i would say that whether it's -- i want to do it myself. i know it's not presidential it's not presidential. it's not presidential. for the president of the united states to call up the head of

carrier. hello, this is the president. but i don't care. it's so much fun for me. i love doing it. please don't take that away. please don't take that away from me. i love deals. so whether it's me or one of my killers -- i know the great ones. i know the bad ones. i know in the overrated ones. i know the ones you have never heard of that are better than all of them. whether it's one of these killers or whether it's me, but let me do it, okay? at least with carrier, please. so i call up. they say the president and his -- calling the head of carrier. i say say, good luck in mexico. enjoy your stay, but here's the story you. let go of 1400 great people that helped build your company, and i really love -- by the way, i love the pictures of you new facility. here's the story. every singling air conditioning

unit you make, every single one, as it crosses the border -- and we're going to have a real border because we're going to have a wall. we're going to have a real border, okay? we're going to have a big, beautiful wall, that nobody is crossing and nobody is going underneath, by the way, in case you had any questions. don't worry about the tunnel stuff. nobody is going over it or underred it and we're going to have a big, beautiful door, and people come into the country but they come in legally. legally. legally. so i tell the head of carrier, every single unit you make in mexico and you sell in the united states, we're going to put a 35% tax on that unit and i hoch it works out well for you folks. and here's what's going to happen. they're going to have lobbyists call me, but i didn't take their money. they're going to have special interests call me, but i didn't take their money. they're going to have donors,

donors, but i didn't take enough of their money. i don't give a damn for them, folks. i care for you. [cheers and applause] >> and here's what's it going to happen. within 24 hours of that phone call, the head of carrier, and ford, and so many other companies -- just take a look. i could read them out all day. the head of nabisco, leaving chicago with their big plant, moverring to mexico. no more oreos for us. i'm not eating oreos anymore. i guarantee. so here's what is going to happen folks, i will get a call within 24 hours and he will say to me, head of carrier, ms. president, we have decided to stay in the united states. i said, thank you very much. build your plant anywhere. i don't care if you don't build it in phoenix or arizona. i want until the united states, right? we want until the united states. and it's going to happen a lot. and here's the story.

we are going to start winning again. we don't win at anything weapon don't win with our military. we can't beat isis. how about our great general george patton. i love george patton. he is too tough. he could never be a general now. he is too tough. he is mott politically correct. we got to stop with this political correctness. and by the way, by the way, chipping away, just like i said they're whiching away at the second amendment, they're chipping away at christianity, chipping away at our religion. we're not going to have it anymore. it comes compliment -- christmas time we'll see signs that say merry, merry, merry christmas. remember it. so, we have become so politically correct that we're totally impotent as a country. it's not happening anymore. so here's what is going to happen. we're going to rebuild our military. we're going to knock the hell

out of isis, and we're going to come back and rebuild our country. we're going to rebuild our country. our military is going to be so strong and so respected, and we're going to buy the right equipment. we're not going to buy equipment that was gotten because somebody at a that company, that sold the equipment, had political collections to these characters that i run against. we are going to have a great military. and we are going to finally, finally, take care of our great veterans. we're going to take care of them. so we're going to win with a military. we're going to win with the -- look at you. thank you. u.s.a. is right, u.s.a., u.s.a., u.s.a. >> u.s.a., u.s.a., u.s.a., u.s.a. >> thank you.

so, folks, we're going to start wishing again. we're going to win with our military. we're going to win for our -- that's right, we're going to win for our vets. right? we're going to win for our vests. we're going to win with education. we're going to win by knocking the hell out of obamacare, terminating it, coming up with something much less expensive, much better. we are going to win in every aspect of our lives. we're going to win so much, we're going to win of our second amendment. we're going to win big league with our second amendment. we are going to keep winning at every level. we're going to win so much you'll come and say, mr. president, we're winning too much. i can't stand it anymore. and i'm going to say, i don't care. and you know -- this is for the people of phoenix, for the people of arizona. we're really going to win at our border. we are going to win at our border and we're going to build the wall and, ladies and gentlemen, i love you.

you have to go out. you have to vote on tuesday. you will never be disappointed with me. i'm not going to disappoint you. we are going to bring our country back. we are going to take our country back. we are going to have victories against. you are going to be so proud of your family, yourself, your president, and your country. we are going to win again, all the time. thank you very much. i love you. i love you. thank you very much. thank you. thank you. ♪ ♪ >> thank you everybody. go vote. go vote! ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> you'll have another chance to sew donald trump today. he will be speaking at the american israel public affairs committee policy conference in washington. fellow republican presidential candidates john kashich and senator ted cruz will also be speaking. we'll have live coverage at 5:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span2.

and turning to the democratic race, hillary clinton will be campaigning today in arizona, ahead of the state's primary tomorrow. see your remarks live starting at 6:30 eastern on c-span3. and just yesterday, former president bill clinton spoke at a get-out-the-vote campaign rally for his wife in tucson, arizona, and talked about her bipartisan legislative efforts when she was senator and her proposals in areas such as gun safety, trade, manufacturing, immigration, and the criminal justice system. appearing with the former president were former congresswoman, gabrielle giffords, and her husband, retired astronaut and navy captain, markelly. ♪

♪ ♪ [cheers and applause] >> thank you. thank you, mayor. thank you, ron. we are incredibly grateful to call both of you friends, and grateful for how much you have done to serve the people of this great state of arizona. you know, one thing that i've learned here in arizona is that arizonans are straightforward and honest people. so i'm going to be honest with all of you about something. i'm kind of new to this whole campaigning thing.

i've definitely not had the chance, at least not many times, to introduce a former president of the united states. [cheers and applause] >> you see, in my career, i didn't do politics. i was just some bald guy who flew airplanes in the navy. and later i got a chance to fly the space shuttle several times for nasa. then i met and was really lucky to marry this incredible woman from arizona. and her name was gabby giffords. and you know, politics clearly was her thing. and we were both really proud, very proud to be public servants. and now we are both fortunate to

have a second chance at service to fight for those things we always fought for, which are responsibility, -- that's why we are fighting for a congress and a white house that will stand up to the gun lobby. and that's why gabby and i are here with all of you today, asking all of you to help make hillary clinton the next president of the united states. good job with those signs, by the way. you know, for too long, for far too long, congress has been in the gun lobby's grip. it is fiercely protected loopholes in our laws that let dangerous people get their hands on guns.

and it has stoked fear and peddled misinformation all in the interest of maintaining a dangerous status quo, and throughout all of this, the gun lobby has moved further and further away from gun owners like gabby and me that's correct claim -- me that they claim to represent. you know what? a lot of people running for president talk about how tough they are. let me tell you a little secret. the truth is, a lot of them are really terrified of the gun lobby. gabby and i, we have listened carefully and very closely to all of them, and we have looked at everyone's records, and there is only one candidate in this race that has the determination and the toughness to stand up to a very powerful corporate lobby and the record to prove it, and that candidate is hillary clinton. [cheers and applause]

does hillary seem scared of the corporate gun lobby to you? >> no. >> not one bit. when he was in the white house, president bill clinton was not scared of the gun lobby, either. [cheering] president clinton stood up to the gun lobby and he stood up for common sense, and he did the responsible thing. and on november 30th, of 1993, president clinton signed into law the brady bill that created the modern criminal background system as we know it today. [cheering] now, get this. this thing called the national instant criminal background check system, this has stopped nearly two million illegal gun

sells to dangerous people legal felons and domestic abusers. two million. so there is no doubt that what president clinton did in 1993 has saved thousands and thousands of innocent lives. so we have president clinton, along with the then-first lady, hillary clinton, to thank for that. so thank you president clinton. and like we do, and like president clinton does, hillary knows you can take common sense steps to keep guns out of the wrong hands while protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners like gabby and me. so if you want to build on the progress made on reducing gun violence under president clinton and president obama and not roll this back, then you need to help

us make hillary clinton your next president. if you want a president who takes on tough fights, who will take on the gun lobby, will take on powerful corporate interests, then you need to help make hillary clinton our next president. why is this so important, you might ask? well, what we're doing here today matters. and that's because elections matter. and we need to make hillary our president because she has always fought to bring out the best in america. to break down barriers to opportunity, to build consensus, to get things done, to be the voice for all americans.

and right now, right now, on the other side, we have a candidate for our nation's highest office who is bringing out the worst in our country. bringing out anger, hatred and division. somebody -- let me tell you something. somebody who does not want to be a voice for all americans, who doesn't respect all americans, and who is working to divide us in any way he can, by race, economic status, and by religion. who even said he wants to bar american citizens from re-entering their own country soley based on their own religion. this is not the america we strive for. here in arizona, we strive for a

tolerant and fair america, one built on optimism and hope, not fear and anger. and we have too much to lose in this election. so we need to make sure that hillary clinton is the next president of the united states. a friend of mine and a friend of gabby's and one of my own personal heroes, and a great american named jim lovell, the commander of apollo 13, once told me something. he told me that he remembers being amazed when he heard president kennedy say that we would get people to the moon, we would send a man to the moon, and jim says when he heard that, you know what he thought? he thought it was impossible. the moon, he said? no way. then jim wound up flying to the

moon twice. now, jim has a saying. and i like this saying so i'll tell it to you. he has sage he says there are three types of people. there are people who make things happen, there are people who watch things happen, and there are people who wonder what happened. and hillary clinton, hillary i this kind of person who makes things happen. so we need work together to make sure hillary clinton is our next president. i think a about these campaigns a lot like a space shuttle launch, space shuttle mission. it takes a lot of hard work, a lot of work, by a lot of individuals, to get ready for a very big day, and, folks, we are getting ready for that day. that launch day. and for us here in arizona, that launch day is tuesday.

we're not only do you have to get out there to vote, you got bring other people with you. so i want to challenge each and every one of you. when you go out to vote on tuesday and if you voted already, your josh is still to send somebody else out to vote for secretary clinton. so now, i want to introduce you somebody who is working hard to do just that, somebody who has taught me each and every single day to deny the acceptance of failure and somebody who inspires me each and every day, my wife, congresswoman gabby giffords. [cheers and applause] >> gabby, gab by, gabby, gabby, gabby. >> thank you.

>> mellow, -- hello, tucson, arizona! great to be here today. >> love you! >> i'm their talk to you about hillary clinton. really, really -- hillary is tough. hillary is courageous. she will fight to make our country safer. in the white house she will stand up to the gun lobby. that's why i'm investigate for hillary. [cheers and applause] speaking is difficult for me, but january, january -- i'm --

>> i want to -- [cheers and applause] >> but i want to tell you through words, madam president. [cheers and applause] >> let's work together to make hillary our president! thank you. [cheers and applause] >> now, gabby and i would like you join us in welcoming to arizona, the man who can explain all of this stuff much better than i can, the 42nd president of the united states, william jefferson clinton! ♪ ♪

>> let's give mark and gabby another hand. were they great? [cheers and applause] >> if i had any sense, i would simply say, amen and get off the stage. they were great. i want to to thank the mayor for being here and his support, and my friend, ron barber, thank you very much for your service. and i don't want to get involved in your local politics, but in that last election, ron lost the election by less than 200 votes in the worst year for democrats in history. so you got some democrats willing this time and it wouldn't make me totally sad of you reverse the results of the last election. and i want to thank the young organizer for hillary, diane boneit who made the digital pitch. she graduated from the citadel

in south carolina. now, some of you may not know this, but it's a military school and it was the last bastion holdout against accepting women. so she is one tough young woman who deserves our support. thank you. i want to thank the principal here, aid and the assistant superintendent for welcoming to us sunnyside, and since it's a warm day, i would ask all of your give a round of applause to the anymore the overflow outside the building who don't have the air conditioning. [cheers and applause] >> look, i want to thank my friend, delores huerta. who 54 years ago this year, started the united farm worker wiz cesar chavez and has been

like a member our of our family, the farmworkers endorses the hillary and many other latino organizations have. i'm very grateful to her. she is a real heroine of progress in america. look, hillary needs your help. this election is important. and i know a lot of you have already voted. but there are a lot of people who haven't voted yet. across all ethnic groups. we need to tell people why it's important. the other day i read the most amazing article by a man named john treveraex. probe probable's first speech writer and we had that heated race eight years ago, where arizona voted for hillary. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] >> all right. but anyway, john said some pretty salty things about hillary, and then after the

election he posed with one of those cardboard cutouts of her and it wasn't entirely favorable, the posting. and he said the first time he saw her, after she had been named secretary of state, she put her arm around him and hugged him and said forget bit it. we have work to do. he wrote a behles that said he believed this election and her winning it was even more important than the election eight years ago when president obama ran. and he -- why? because look at all the stuff that is at stake. i asked mark -- we were back talking about the promise and perils of being an astronaut, how his brother was doing because he just landed, after nearly a year in space. and he described what it's like to be in gravity again, and then i asked him if he read the news and felt like he was still in outer space.

i mean, it's kind of crazy year. here's why he is right. we are in position for the first time since i left office to restore an era of broadly shared prosperity. and to create the most exclusive society we have ever had, and -- [cheers and applause] -- it is being impearled because that's what president obama said in his state of the union. and by the way, think he has done a better job than he gets credit for. [cheering] >> we have had 14 million jobs in the last five years. the most since that other democrat, whatever his name was. and we got more than 90% of our people n insured for the first anytime history. [cheers and applause] and we have the youngest, most diverse work force of any big

country, the best system of higher education and job to training weapon just need to get people access to it. we have the number one or two capacity in the world, according to all scientific studies to power our entire economy on the sun, wind, and other renewable resources. we have the world's best military and no one comes close to being trusts among the great pures as we are in most places, and with could put all that in peril because of the fact that 80% of the people still haven't gotten a pay raise since the crash, and about half the people after inflation are living on what they the last day i was president. so there's a lot of pentup anger and anxiety, and it is totally legitimate. the problem is, sometimes when we're mad, or we don't like the

best decisions, so this election may turn on whether you believe what i just told you. we are on the verge of being able to launch an explosive period of economic growth that lifts everybody so we can all rise again. but if you want to rise together, we have to think, we have to seize the opportunity, and beat down the problems. the opportunities are enormous, and the problems are pretty profound, but manageable. my argument for hillary is simple. she more than any other candidate has offered specific solutions and all these economists, including the most progressive economists in the country say, she is the only candidate running for president whose numbers add up.

second argument, she is the only person prepared by virtue of her service as secretary of state, a member of the armed services committee, member of the pentagon special commission to design the military for the 21st century, to be commander in chief. to recognize that keeping america safe requires a strong military, a stout diplomacy, and a serious ongoing effort to make a world with more friend and fewer enemies. which is why i'm very proud of the fact she has been the most outspoken person in this campaign against a ridiculous notion that we should condemn and exclude from our country muslims because of their religion. we need them to win this fight. and you know, maybe it's because we're from new york, but i will never forget, after 9/11, when hillary was a senator, she had to rush back to washington to

try to get the help our city needed to begin again. and my daughter and i, we just wanted to make ourselves useful so we went down to the center where people were connecting information and you remember -- i'm sure you all remember -- there was a great board where everybody posted a photograph of everyone who was missing. remember that? i was looking at it, just standing there, and i noticed a guy standing next to me, head taller than i was. he was about 6'6", i think. and he had tears streaming down his fails. -- his face. there were more than 200 muslims killed that day who were not terrorists. and i said, sir, did you lose anyone? and he said, no, i didn't, but i hate what they did worse than anybody because i am an egyptian, muslim american, and i am afraid my people will never trust me again. we need guys like that to win the battle over the social

media. we've got to have it. and. [cheers and applause] >> i got news for aberdeen else you can build all the walls you want, you can't keep the social media out. so, my third argument is, she spent a lifetime change maker, the best changemaker i've known and in all of her positions in washington, also first laidy, a senator, secretary of state, every single thing she did has the support of republicans and democrats. now, -- and look, i know they've one rough on her for the last four years because the don't want to run against her, and they sure don't want to be in a room with her because she -- they know she's make them do the right thing. 'she'll say, let's grow up and act like adults and think about

the country. the opportunities are staggering. hillary wants to have a massive infrastructure fund that is more roads and bridges and airports. it's what is under the ground. you were sick about flint, michigan, but it's by no means the only place in america where the old pipes endangering the health of dour christian. can you imagine how much job wes can create by ripping up old pipes and putting new ones in? our moon shot should be clean energy. she wants to put up half a billion solar panels in the next four years. half a billion. and, look, when president bush was in office, his energy department said that there's enough wind blowing between north dakota's border with code and weather texas' border with publics to electrify america several times over.

complete. the problem is that with certain exceptions, the wind blows where the people aren't. can you imagine the number of jobs we could create redoing our electrical grid and building those cables and pipelines and putting all those things. none of these jobs can be exported. they're american jobs. there would be jobs in arizona. and for those who tell you this is not economical, let me just say this there three straights in the country that already gate third or more of their electricity every dave from the wind. minnesota, iowa, and, believe it or not, texas. and iowa has the lowest electric rates in the united states of america because they rely on home-grown energy, and all the jobs it creates and all the income for those farmers it makes. so, hillary wants to bryn mawring back to -- to bring

manufacturing back to this country, and i want to say about a little bit about that. i don't know if you read the story about carrier moving jobs out of indiana and going to mexico. not be able to get a tax deduction for the cost of that relocation. they should have to give back all the state and local tax credits they got for the knicks five years. here's why. they've they were losing money it would be one thing. they admitted this plant is part of a highly profitable air conditioning business in the united states. and they admitted in the story that they were moving the plant because the shareholders wanted more money and the chief executive and the other top guys there bonuses depended on the value of the shares. here's what i think. if you -- this is what hillary thinks -- if you do something like that, you ought to have to pay an exit tax to fund those people's lives.

i bet you anything if they let that go go, running the company, he would get a golden parachute. it's about time the workers of the country got some golden parachutes if they're going to be abandoned. and, look, she is not against all trade dealeds. she believes in competition. but it's got to be fair. what happened is, along the way -- they've been trying to do this for 30 years, but in the last 15, it's really taken -- picked up steam. the old understanding we had about corporations has totally broken down. when hillary and it met in law school, 100 years ago, this is the way corporate law was taught. corporations are not citizens. they're creatures of the state. they get certain privileges, including limited liability from certain kinds of lawsuits,

return for that they have obligations to all of their constituents, more or less evenly. their customers, workers, communities they're part of, and they're shareholders. we have seen this head-long rush to say, here's the shareholders up here, and everybody else down here. even the customers. when an activist shareholder practically ruined dow chemical and forced them to sell to dupont, he was trying to force. the to sell a division that was making money and that he admitted would make twice as much within three years and was serving customers. he said i don't care. i want my money in a year and a day. that's the capital gains, hillary thinks we should lengthen that time to two or three years and there won't be as much of that business and the thinks when people leave, we ought to charge them an exit tax and spend that money to take care of the workers left behind and to give incentives for people who want to bring jobs

back to america. and, look, just so you won't think this is pie in the sky, when i ran for president in 1992, my state was one of only eight states in america that gained manufacturing jobs in the previous decade, and i know a lot about this. labor is a smaller and smaller percentage of all manufacturing because it's highly productive. same number of people can produce more stuff this year than last year. so what really matters now is the cost of materials, energy, and transportation. hillary's argument for getting into advanced manufacturing is simple. since we have the biggest market in the world, let's save the transportation costs and make more things here. we can do it and it makes a lot of sense. and finally, we shouldn't forget that two-thirds of the new jobs in the country for 20 years have been made by small business.

in this crash, we dropped out of the top ten countries in the world in new business formation, and we got to get it back. the dodd-frank law that president obama signed, i think the second best law after the health care bill he signed, i don't care what anybody else tells you, it will stop wall street from wrecking main street. there is one hole in it because of virtue unanimous vote in congress let the -- said that hedge funds and billionaires doing the same sort of thing that didn't belong to any bank, couldn't be regulated. it was a terrible mistake, a lot of people voted for that bill honestly didn't know what they were doing. it was an honest but terrible mistake, and it needs to be fixed. but the other problem is, a lot of people are worried about the last war instead of this one. that is, the law clearly says that community banks, loans to small businesses to farmers, new

entrepreneurs should not be subject to the same kind of rules that $80 billion bills that fuel speculation are, but many places are doing that so hillary wants to say, look, let's go back to community banking. we have a law on that. $800 billion was loaned when i was president. 90% of the money loaned under the law. let's do that again and get funds to our small businesses and get funds to new people, young people who have good ideas to start businesses. we can do that. now, we have some barriers. we have plenty of barriers to what she believes is necessary. if wore going to have shared prosperity and an inclusive community we can't do that until every single american has the opportunity to live up to her or his god-given ability.

everyone in this country. and we got to tear the barriers down. and i know it's a hot button issue in arizona but she really, really, really believes that we have to have comprehensive immigration reform. she really believes we have to protect the dreamers and enforce president obama's order. she really believes we have to stop demagoguing this issue. there are areas in this country which have been left out and left behind. appalachia. indian country, the highest rate of poverty than any group in the united states. wherever there are no casinos. didn't have anything to do with immigrants. and for somebody to stand up and say they're going to send home 11.5 million people is like saying, it's not only wrong, it will crater the american economy. so, she said, let's just all

calm down and realize that our youth and diversity in a global economy is a massive advantage and let's embrace our advantage and stop demonizing. so, second thing we have to do is to realize that as long as we're divided, over fundamental issues like public safety, we're in terrible shape. we're all sick of seeing these videos of police shooting young african-americans who never should have been shot. doesn't matter what your race is, you don't like that. but i was in an african-american church in chicago the other day, and the preacher what the chaplain to the police department. and he said, you know, we need police reform, we need it here, butter we need the police, and if you remember what happened in

san bernardino, you saw the police at their best. going in final and again, risking their lives, saving people without regard to their race, gender, their religion, or their politics. they were pulling people out. so, what hillary believes is, yes, you have to have reform, and when videotapes were taken they need to be nut a secure place where they can't be messed with and where they can be retrieved at an appropriate time, but more important, if we need more police, they should look more like the community they're policing. and that's what we did. when i was president we put 11 other thousand police on the streets and they were walking in the neighborhoods, two-by-two. they knew people. and we got a 25 year low in crime and the 33 year low in the murder rate.

so we can do this again. police reform and police. we need prison reform. too many people in prison. for nonviolent offenses. and the federal system, seven percent of the people there are there for violent crimes. some of them need to be there because they ripped off a lot of people financially. but the point is, this is costing you a fortune to keep all these people in prison, and they can make a contribution to our future. but as -- she had the first proposal on this of any candidate in either party in the campaign. although, i will say this, this is a chance where we can get the parties to work together. because there are lot republicans that think we need to do this. she pointed out if you're going to let people out of prison you don't want to turn around and welcome them back in within six months. so you have to have a transition assistance which includes

education, training, job placement, and no job discrimination for people who have a chance to start again. and i want to say something about this gun safety issue. it's a big deal to me. when i was president, we did have universal background checks. we passed the assault weapons ban weapon passed an ammunition clip limit and -- wait -- but i had a big cultural advantage because i was a governor of arkansas, i had a .22 when i was ten years old and a shotgun when i was 14. i like nearly every other male in the state and females, couldn't wait for duck season every year. and like gabby and mark, nobody

ever talks about taking people's second amendment rights away. i get that. that's what is fueling the fear people have of the nra. it's their ... but there were two problems with that bill. one is it couldn't get the guns to close the loophole because then people were not as automated as they are now and in

my native state the gun show was a couple of guys and a gun in the back of their pickups. the other is there were no online gun sales when the bill passed. the third problem we had been that we still have is the mental health records which they always say they are for are not organized and automated throughout the country. sometimes the background checks can't be completed. that's what happened at virginia tech and why that young man got into that church. and it might have affected what happened at sandy hook. so, what hillary wants to do is they look, the supreme court says you have the right to keep and bear arms. you should be able to hide hunt

and protect your family. there are some that live in our away from wall enforcement. nobody wants to fool with that but it's crazy for our fellow citizens to stop sensible background checks which would save the lives of people just because they are disproportionately in the cities, because they are disproportionately people of color it doesn't mean that their lives don't need to be protected and saved. [applause] i saw the president arguing on television the other night. [laughter] but here's what he said. he made an argument and said we

have messed this up so much you couldn't fix it anyway. they said the same thing when i was president. here's what i know and don't forget this coming this is why she's fighting for this. we have a 33 year murder eight but a 46 year low in deaths from illegal gun violence. don't tell me that it doesn't make a difference. there are untold numbers of people walking around because the congress set up what it was a tough vote for some of them. she can convince them she isn't coming for their gun and they should do their part as americans to help save

children's lives. she ran up there and met with all of back with all of the gun clubs and hunting groups and she got there. she used to did.com -- go duck hunting. my daughter thought it was fun and wouldn't talk to her for a day. but we get this. when you look at gabby and mark and ron and you realize we live in a society with a lot of disturbed people can we save every life?

no but what's behind this is a corporate interests that wants to increase its profits by keeping its constituents terrified so they will buy more guns. that's all this is about. [applause] i've been doing this all my life. i endorsed background checks as governors. he said they are fixing to kill you over this. [laughter] if you can find one legislature i will stick with you otherwise don't do it. because of what happened to president ronald reagan the time came that we could do it and we did it and lives are saved.

all these things come if you want these jobs come if you want to finish the work of healthcare reform, get down the drug prices and reorganize the market so the copayments and deductibles go down and the insurance works so we get to 100% of people. [applause] if you want to encourage the legislature to put the children's health insurance program back into the law -- [cheering] we've got to convince people to vote in this primary and go out and talk to the neighbors. one of the greatest honors of being elected president in 1996 is why was the first democrat to carry arizona since harry truman and 58. [applause]

and i think that it can happen again. but only if we talk to each other. you can look at all the stuff you see on television. it's designed to get people to shut their brains off, to be very mad, feel very threatened. for goodness sakes. hillary trusts you to think. [applause] i want to say one other thing. we've got to do something for these working class people who can't find another job all over america when in 2000 i signed a tax credit that that giving tax credits to people who would invest money in places like the native american reservations or appalachia or any other place that has persistently high

unemployment and low income. the congress allowed us to expire and hillary has proposed that we put it back in and more so we can all grow together. look what she says, that's why they've been beating up on her. they are smart. but when she got a hold of them come if changed. when she was the first lady and be lost on healthcare because we didn't have the 60 votes to break the republican filibuster -- and don't forget that when people say that they are going to give were going to give you a whole different healthcare

system. we haven't passed anything since world war ii that we didn't have it for. we had just 60 votes and not one to spare. a lot of people lost their jobs over that, too. when she got beat she kept working to get the children's health insurance passed, worked with senator kennedy that we put it in the balanced budget bill until we got 75% of the republicans to vote for it. then, the other big deal that she did as republicans were to go to the house, republican leader who i believe this likes me more than anybody in congress. [laughter] he was the enforcer and she said congressman, i know we don't have much in common. he said he do we have anything in common and she said yes, you

love your kids, don't you lax what does that have to do with this? i know your children are adopted and are you for adopting them. the foster care world is exploding. children are aging out with no education or training options come in no pleased to even live. they will be turned loose on the street and it's wrong. i want you to deal with the problem and he said what is the problem? people are afraid to adopt children that are not infants and to adopt children with special needs. so, i want us to give a big tax credit are those that adopt non- infant children and children with special needs to do more and to do some other things. [applause] they passed the bill. the congressman actually came to the white house and we had a nice signing and there was an 80% increase in the number of kids adopted out of foster care.

[applause] when she was a senator she worked with john mccain and lindsey graham to take care of the veterans coming home from the national guard and reserve to make sure they got the same health care as people in the military get to take people to be cochair of people with dramatic stress and brain injury and do more for them and get them to get the gear they need and should have had in the beginning and the combat zone. she worked with republican groups in new york. to get the manufacturers into e-commerce and help family farmers. they have the farm bureau in long island a reporter came up to her and said i will never forget this. i thought you were a republican. i am. how can you endorse her?

she is the only person at either party who did anything to help us make a living as a farmer. [applause] when she was secretary of state she had republican support for the sanctions which even they like even if they don't agree with the nuclear deal. if iran gets a nuclear weapon, three or four others in the country will get it and then we will never know what is happening to all of that material. the real reason is you don't want to have an arms race in the middle east that would be uncontrolled. she got the only treaty that survives to get along with

mr. putin's russia called the start treaty reduces the threat of accidental or intentional or if treated like that for 67 votes in the senate. that's a lot of republicans, she got them. [applause] and on and on. so that is my argument. she literally since she got out of law school and went to work for the children's defense to get african-american teenagers out of prisons, trying to help register mexican-american voters who have been citizens along time and systematically excluded and the legal services from the beginning she had been trying to make something good happen long before she was elected to anything.

she's the best club she is the best club of a person for this moment in time that i have ever had a chance to vote for. [applause] [cheering] so i want you to go out between now and tuesday and pull people in and get them to vote. remember the speech here we are on a moment of being able to grow together and live together and we are discovering so we're discovering so many of our past bigotries we don't want to be around anybody that disagrees with us anymore. and we have too many of our full of americans who have been too long without a raise, too many have college debt they cannot repay. but there's a plan to make college debt free to be able to consolidate it and pay it off for their income over 20 years so it will not stop them.

[applause] it will not stop them from moving out of their parents house. it will not stop them from borrowing money from their own small business. i want you to get out there and help them. what would you do it? like i said, one of the happiest memories of my political life was in 1996 when secretary harry truman was president and they voted for a democrat. [cheering] and i would like to see it happen again, but it depends on what you do. thank you and god bless you. [cheering]

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪

♪ ♪ coming up shortly we pulled into a discussion on monetary policy and how the u.s. might respond in the event of another

recession hosted by the brookings institution. former treasury department officials to start about eight minutes from now and we will have it live. just a few hours ago president obama became the first to visit cuba in 90 years. we hosted a discussion about the trip. president obama arriving for the historic but somewhat controversial trip to cuba. we are joined by the councilyo latin american economic growth initiative. you've been meaning to this represents a major opportunity for the president in the united states. why? >> guest: it co. it represents a historic opportunity because it is too the games that have been made over the past 15e' months and i know that there is a lot of criticism haven't gotten much in return for what the u.s. has opened up withlo regards to cuba.

but i would say that we need to look at what has happened over the last 15 months so far as the negotiation and the cuban government but more what can the government do to provide opportunities to the cuban people. that's the goal of the policy and i would say that what we have gotten over the course of the last 15 months to help solidify our real opportunities for greater economic freedom for the cuban people. there are over 500,000 that work as a part of the private sector because of the policies over the last 15 months. remittances can now go to the entrepreneurs. they have greater opportunities for access to capital, u.s. businesses can go in and provide services for parts of the cuban economy that are critical for the entrepreneurs and even the growth in tourism that top-end

in the travel restrictions as it is now open to up to 110 daily flights from the un to cuba we have seen dramatic increase ints the tourists and when they go down they are largely eating at restaurants are owned by independent entrepreneurs and tipping taxi drivers that go right into goes right into the pockets of cubans themselves ano other things so the policy has helped provide a slight opening with regards to greater economic liberties. i think that's important. >> that if we are not demanding human rights changes before the engagement and political engagement that we are seeing this week, are we giving away the ^-caret two track to get the regime to move in that we direction? >> i think first of all i'm a try for 50 years to get there regime to listen to the united

states with regards to improving its liberties and that has not happened. what the president signed a year and a half ago is we have to try something new. we have to try to end and power the cuban people to give an opportunity for access tosi greater political liberties and so what the president is doing by going to cuba speaking directly come he will be speaking on the state run television probably later today. he's been to be directly addressing the cuban people. that's a powerful signal to show there are other options that exist besides the options theyue currently have and we are showing american values and ideals and open them up to the outside world. >> event he had plenty with canada and the eu in the past

several decades and hasn't got engagement helped the cuban people on the issues of human rights and economic engagement that you're talking about? >> they've had engagement with the canadians and the europeans it's been more of an off and on relationship they pulled back a for a while.hat the cultural access that can help the people to see what else is out there and if theyri currently don't have access to it. this is a whole differentviewer. ballgame. >> host: i want to bring the viewers in the and democrats, 7,478,000 republicans than for 88,001 for independent,

748-8002. a special line for cuban-americans to 027-48-8003. i want you to explain where we are economically with cuba and explain where the embargo stands today and what these executive orders and what we saw last week from the white house how they change how we can engage economically with cuba. >> it still remains very much in place.gi what the president has done over the course of the last 15 months beginning january 2015 and another round of actions in september, another around early this year just this last week is to peel back different aspects that are under executive authority. we have done that in a number of different categories. one of the most wisely cited as the category of travel so originally rather than the specific license to go down to cuba under one of 12 categories we have made it accessible with

a general license and you could go down to cuba if you were participating in journalistic activities or cultural exchange or research without requiring a specific license from those acts. just last week those licenses were changed such that you need to go down to the specific group. you can go down yourself and say i am here to participate in an activity that's deemed dee permissible under the license categories and you can now berkley go down. >> host: what are some of thees major restrictions still in place? >> guest: there's been ann opening with regards to business. we saw that the hotels just signed a deal in cuba yesterday. sprint, air bnp.tain sectors but they are only permissible under certain types of categories were certain sectors

and some of the areas that are most prime for u.s. investment which is telecommunications and agriculture and travel and tourism there is a member of restrictions between main and agriculture for example where the u.s. has historically been the number one agricultural exporter to cuba we fell from number one and number four recently got -- >> we believe the plug-in at this point and go live now to the discussion on monetary policy and how the u.s. might respond in the event of another recession posted by the brookings institution.

>> [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon and welcome. i'm the director of the center for fiscal and monetary policy here at brookings. today, we are going to ask a question that seems only

slightly less scary today than it did about six weeks ago when the market was down which is are we ready for the next recession. i'm going to kick it off with a little bit of background and then we will have one segment on fiscal policy which i will introduce later, one segment on monetary policy and then my colleague will come up and moderate a panel among all of the participants at which time he will invite you to get your questions. i will warn everybody this is on the record and in case you noticed there's two cameras. one of them is ours being webcast and the other belongs to c-span. so, the basic question is are we ready for the next recession. in case you're wondering we have recessions from time to time and the only point on the slide is to remind you that they commit their regular intervals. i'm not a believer that you can say that expansions die of old age but it is a fact that it's

been a long time since the u.s. has had a recession. it might not feel that way too a lot of people that the recession ended in 2009, so we've had a long stretch. you can see that we had some with lousy growth and slow growth and then the question that we are asking today is what if. what if we had the misfortune to be hit by a recession and again if the fiscal authorities, congress cut taxes and spending are equipped to do what they did the last time, are they equipped to do what they've done in the past to fight a recession and in particular if it happens sometimes soon because we don't do what the fiscal or monetary policy will be a decade from now and this is the reality that we face that simply shows you the debt to gdp ratio and the size of the debt is a fraction and the important thing to note is that it's pretty high now if you look we haven't been this high since the end of world war ii.

projections suggest that the current policy line debt to gdp ratio is headed higher and higher. my colleague and his co-author have drawn the other line there which shows with interest rates stay low for a long time you can see the rise is substantially less rabid but it's still pretty big. we have had big deficits during the period of the great recession. you can see how deep it was in 2009. you can see the deficit has come down and the economy has improved and raised taxes as there was by accident a lot of spending restring thanks to this request or. you can see that it isn't getting much bigger in the near term but it starts to get thicker towards the end of

decade but for a nation with federal debt is proposing to have deficits of 3% of gdp for the foreseeable future it turns out the rest of the world is willing to lend a lot of money at low interest rates and a ten year treasury, the nominal yield that is adjusted for inflation is currently below 2% and you can see how unusual that is. now, one of the things about the fiscal policy in our country is that it automatically adjusts to the recession. this is a nice chart based on the data and the dark blue shows the extent to which automatic stabilizers, that is things that didn't require congress to do anything kicked in during the great recession and how much of the deficit was due to them. it's important to note the automatic stabilizers do not include the big american recovery act so this is things

that took place without action from congress and you can see that they were a substantial fraction of the deficits we were in. these slides are online and we just gave a list of the things congress did in addition to those automatic stabilizers and the nice thing about this chart you can see although when it was announced it has 600 billion was 600 billion actually committed and in the end they estimate ultimate cost is about 40 billion you can see they did quite a few things in the great recession and given that level that we have today, given the political environment would we be willing to do that again, i personally would be happy to if we had another recession. then it comes to the question of monetary policy. once upon a time we believed you didn't really need much because the fed could cut the interest rates. the point is pretty simple they are at zero and if you look carefully at the bottom eighth

managed to barely get off the floor about a quarter of a percentage point. we used to think interest rates could go below zero but now we are learning maybe they can go below zero and we will talk about. this is the countries abroad that have negative interest rates. you can see switzerland they are three quarters of a percentage point. if the bank puts money on reserve at the swiss national bank it has to pay the swiss national bank money it doesn't get the interest rate. the other thing they did is buying a lot of assets and so when bad bernanke took over they had less than a true in dollars of assets and today they have 4.5 trillion. one of the questions we will ask is what's wrong with five and a half or six and a half is there a limit and is there a reason to be the traditional quantitative easing wouldn't have the same

effect as this did before, but again it comes in a really unusual context and that is that interest rates around the world are very low. this is a nice chart taken from the bank of england economists and it shows you what interest rates are around the world adjusted for inflation on the ten year government bonds. in other words if what we are seeing is unusual but it reflects a long period and at the point here is we have reason to be the interest rates may be lower than normal for a long time. the trend is well beyond the great recession and in that context will the fed be stuck near zero for a long time and how much will that limit their capacity. so could the fed or congress do more and what would it be? to kick us off we have three speakers each of whom have a different cut on fiscal policy.

who is going first? and he is going first from the congressional budget office. i think i'm supposed to say she's speaking for herself or something like that, no, she's speaking for cbo. then from the center for budget policy priorities who has a nice paper with jared bernstein posted on the website this morning and the link on our website about the ways we might want to expand the fiscal automatic stabilizers and then the third is the university of maryland formally of the bush treasury who will talk about how he sees things. each of them will speak for seven to ten minutes and then we will have a discussion. wendy, it's all yours. >> i bet i can do it but you can

do it faster. [inaudible] im from the congressional budget office and associate or a associated economic analysis and i'm delighted to be here to discuss this important topic. let me give you a quick roadmap of what i will say. first of all i will briefly walk you through the budget and economic projections and i will highlight some of the significant consequences that we see from the projections of high and rising federal debt. i will also talk about how the economic projections influence our budgetary projections and the interplay of those. and then finally i will talk about the automatic stabilizers that and the fiscal fiscal

policy during times of economic s.. this might look familiar. in the current law revenue is projected to stay constant as a share of gdp the next decade. but with the aging of the population and rising healthcare costs, cbo projects a substantial boost to federal spending on social security and the government's major healthcare programs. so alongside the rising interest payments deficits are expected to increase from the current level with 2.9% which is just a touch higher from the average of 2.8% of the past 50 years to 4.9% in 2026 which leads us to projections for the federal debt held by the public. if current law generally remain in place growing deficits are projected to raise federal debt held by the public with 86% by 2026 up from 74% in 2015 and

almost twice the average in the past five decades. so, some of the consequences of the high and rising debt. the focus of the discussion today is that increased borrowing would restrict the ability to respond to economic challenges. whether that's through an economic downturn or the result of a financial crisis and that would make those economic challenges have larger negative effects both on the economy and on people's well-being. so in addition, just to just a more straightforward direct effect increased borrowing would increase the amount of interest the federal government would have to pay which would make it all that much harder to stabilize debt to gdp in the future. harder to quantify is that we think that high and rising levels of federal debt increase the likelihood of a fiscal crisis. now, such a crisis would certainly prevent policymakers with significant challenges and

lead to significant and negative impacts on the country. there is no particular tipping point at which we think a fiscal crisis was over and certainly you would think investors would care not just about the level of federal debt but also their expected trajectory. nonetheless, to be sure, the high-level and federal debt and a higher level of federal debt and steep trajectory or send those risks. so in addition, looking at the second bullet point were the first, cbo estimates that sustained high your deficits lead to lower gdp, lower economic output in the long-term by crowding out a shovel saving and domestic investment which is to say they estimate federal borrowing crowds out private investment. going to skip that slide. sure. co. i should say the projection over time they are there despite the fact we are also projecting

improving economic conditions the next several years. beyond the next several years, they do not attempt to predict the timing or the magnitude of economic fluctuations. so the projection should be interpreted as the average of likely outcomes. in other words they reflect the projection that any cyclical strength or weakness after the next couple of years would be offset or counterbalanced by cyclical weakness or strength such that gdp is projected to grow on average with potential in the latter part of a decade. we endeavor to set the text in the center of the distribution of possible outcomes so with that in mind we see both the upside and downside risk. so for example, gdp growth in the forecast might be too pessimistic over the next five years. so for example the firms might respond to increases in the overall demand by doing more

robust hiring and that would lead to faster increases in household income and consumer spending and on the other hand of course there's also downside risks. it might be too optimistic so for example increased tightness in labor markets may not lead to us s. faster than increase as we project and just as the flipside that would lead to less consumer spending over the next five years. international conditions could be worse than we anticipate there could be a slowing in china and that would have spillovers on the economy and of course as we are discussing today the possibility exists that they might enter recession the next several years. the current economic expansion is over 6-years-old which is slightly longer than the expansion since 1945. over the past 30 years expansions lasting at least six years with a low level of unemployment as we see have tended to fall in within ten

years. however, the length of the expansions very greatly and although the longest expansion in the last 11 business cycles has been ten years, we see no statistical evidence that the length of the recovery or expansion is in and of itself a prediction of an economy going into recession. nonetheless it is the course of the risk. so in the latter part, they project that gdp will be one half% below the level of potential and that's because they estimate output has been that much below the potential over the last seven complete business cycles. so that output gap you can barely see daylight between the two lines at the end of the projection. as for so that output gap has budgetary implications. so just how in the past any strength or weakness that we project has budgetary implications in the other medic stabilizer's.

automatic stabilizers are provisions in the wall law that decrease government revenue or expenditures. when the economy goes into recession and vice versa when it expands its always out any additional actions taken on the part of the government. a stabilizers tend to reduce the depth of the recession and vice versa tend to dampen expansions. basically stabilizers affect aggregate demand so households and businesses who pay less in taxes were received less in transfers we think that those changes flow through the differences to the changes in aggregate demand which affects the economy. so this chart is similar but with more history shows what has happened to automatic stabilizers that can shift to the budget in history and projection. they expect the current law generally does change. going forward at the much smaller than they've been over the past seven years. so for example.

that is about half a percent of the potential for by comparison, you estimate. the automatic stabilizers are going to continue to shrink although they are influenced by that estimate in the projection of the average output gap so this table gives the numbers on the how automatic stabilizers have responded to recessions in the past. in the recent recession that was obviously severe after four quarters the automatic stabilizers added the equivalent of 1.5% of potential to the deficit and after eight quarters, 2.1% said of previous recessions have generally seen a smaller increase in the deficit from automatic stabilizers, so let's say about 1% after eight quarters over the previous three

recessions. but again as david said, used a lot of my thunder even after accounting for the role of the stabilizers to deficits are still cyclical for example automatic stabilizers account for not much but much of the increase in the deficit since 2008 and indeed they are typically increased both through automatic stabilizers and proactive fiscal policy. like automatic stabilizers we estimate that the fiscal policy that lowers the revenue for increases transfers boost the demand in gdp. in the past can access has provided a short run stimulus for at least a month. two thirds of the time the economy was in session than any particular year and nearly every case that involves a reduction in revenues and in fact about half the time most of the stimulus was a reduction in revenues. active fiscal policy often has had the reverse effect on the

economic expansions. dampening growth about half the time. so, automatic stabilizers and changes have different implications for the budget projections so by design, automatic stabilizers are budget natural that an important i should note that fiscal policy is undermining the automatic stabilizers generally do have budget implications which is to say the policies undermining the automatic stabilizers may affect revenue and spending even when the economy is operating at potential and we will talk about that later. but for the active fiscal policy, reducing the deficit to stimulate the economy without imposing comparable fiscal restraint and fiscal years would reduce output and income in the longer run relative to what would have occurred with no changes in fiscal policy which is to say that they conclude the estimates that the benefits of fiscal stimulus are temporary

but the costs are permanent in absence of any offsetting changes in the future. i should say some researchers come to a different conclusion and estimate that maintaining policies that boost overall demand in the short term have positive long-run economic effects because basically the crowding out that those increases in deficits create is more than offset by increases in potential that result from the stimulus which is to say the increase and the demand raise the long-term potential by enough to offset the negative effects of crowding out. how significant that is is unclear and figuring out how to make any positive effect on the potential with a negative effect of crowding out is complicated so they do not incorporate this but certainly we continue to look at it. that's all i have. i know i'm out of time.

thanks very much. ' [applause] >> i just want to start by thanking the center for hosting this event today and all of our fellow panelists in all of you for being here to talk about what we think is a really important topic. i also want to thank my co-author a paper that we just released, jerry bernstein, thank you very much. i want to thank my co-author and all of our colleagues at the center for budget priorities who gave us valuable feedback as we develop the ideas contained in the paper. when i think about the question that motivates this event are we ready for the next recession, i think there are two answers to this question from a short answer in a and a long answer

and the short answer is no, we are not. but the long answer i think it's is really what motivated us to write this paper and motivates a lot of people who are also speaking here today and we can be if we take the lessons from our historical experience and start to prepare for it now so with that idea in mind, we try to outline two sets of recommendations that we think can really enhance our paradise for the recession before it hits. those broad recommendations are first, we want to strengthen the automatic stabilizers david mentioned and wendy talked about and second even outside of the automatic stabilizers, we think that there is architecture we can either leverage or build such that when the next recession walls around of congress agreed to take countercyclical action we can maximize the effectiveness of

that countercyclical action so i want to talk about those two broad policy areas and then i will give an you an example in each area of what we talk about so you can get a flavor of what the recommendations are. first, i'm going to talk about the strengthening of the automatic stabilizers. wendy gave a great overview of what automatic stabilizers are. again, they are programs that expand when the economy is weak and contract when it's on its way to recover. we discussed free stabilizers, unemployment insurance, snap which we call food stamps and medicaid. to give you just a sense of what an automatic stabilizer looks like, if you consider something like unemployment insurance why does it expand when the economy is weak and contract when it's on its way to recovery when we are heading into recession people lose their jobs, more people qualify for unemployment insurance compensation therefore government spending on that

compensation increases, putting money in people's pockets, and that's the cause of the increased consumer demand that wendy is talking about and when the economy is on its way to recover and again, fewer of them qualify more on unemployment insurance compensation therefore be in government spending will decline. so that's what we are talking about with automatic stabilizers. now, the three programs that we discuss in the paper are particularly suited in our view for additional countercyclical stimulus of automatic stabilizers because there's already an efficient administrative infrastructure in place which you can leverage for more countercyclical funds. but i'm going to talk about is something called the map stands for federal medical assistance percentages and it is the share of medicaid funding that the federal government covers for state service ranges from 50% in the wealthier states like

massachusetts for example to a higher percentage in states that are like for example mississippi at 75% and during the last recession and during the recession of 2001 by the federal government boosted the map meaning and paid a higher share of state medicaid costs, and this was an effective form of stimulus during those recessions because it's a form of state fiscal relief. you might note that states have commenced operating budget requirements so during recessions when the revenues are falling there's a lot of pressure on states to either cut services were raise revenues to make sure they meet those requirements and what's boosting the map does with the share of medicaid spending in the federal government that is covered that states use what used to be their share to cover other aspects of the budget shortfall so it's

effective in that respect to make sure whatever service cuts or revenue resources they might have to undertake are not as severe as they might otherwise have to. so what we recommended in the paper is because it's been done during the last two recessions and what effect if we think it's should be a part of the permanent law that should have been out of medically and future recessions. we want to make this an automatic stabilizer when the recession hits. the other reason it's valuable is because it helps with the timing if you make it into an automatic stabilizer can be more assured that it's not going to end too soon or begin to late and recession rolls around. now the devil is in the details and how you make sure that enhanced map is great to trigger automatically and then when the economy is on its way to recovery is somewhat difficult. what we do in the paper is offer

to potential set of triggers which are economic indicators that can say at this point the economy is doing poorly so we are going to turn this on and then at this point the need for the fiscal relief is no longer necessary and we are going to try turning it off. these are inherently arbitrary to a large extent so it's hard to design a perfect one and we are not wedded to the two that the purpose of the paper. we did want to give some options but if people can come up with a better one we are all for that. the enhanced map should be something that is triggered automatically rather than relying on congress for the discretionary stimulus in the future and the other thing i wondered about the options in the paper, we do look at how they would have worked in previous recessions and they looked pretty good to us but again somewhat arbitrary and would be interesting if others have ideas about how they should work so that's the first set of recommendations. and we also have proposals that

we believe would enhance the countercyclical properties. the other thing i want to talk about is what he can do outside of the automatic stabilizers. so, the other thing that we think is true is that there is the possibility to either leverage existing architecture or build new architecture in certain programs such that when the next recession rolls around if congress wants to act, whatever actions they take can be more effective and we talk about this in the paper in the context of both direct and subsidized job creation and housing assistance and the one i'm going to talk about his direct or subsidized job creation. what we propose in the paper is the creation of and am planning to fund and what the employment fund would consist of its two component. one would be subsidized job program flexible streams so that states could fund subsidized job programs.

this is modeled after the program called the emergency fund that was enacted during the last recession and it worked pretty well. the other aspect that we proposed is something that the commission proposed and so even though the emergency fund was affected during the last recession we think they would've been more effective if it had an infrastructure to build on already and gotten off the ground soon. our belief is a special if we have this ongoing structure in place during normal economic times when