1948, but this is the kind of programming i think we feel is really important. not just to engage folks in the story but to engage in the story behind the story. this is the first of a tripleheader of events we are doing this week. you can find out more looking at our website, and to our journalist friends, i hope you have a family start in philadelphia. if have a chance to breathe or was that the the cheesecake. thanks to all of you for being here. thanks again for our panel. and let's have a fabulous week here in philadelphia. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> coming up like today at 3 p.m. eastern, the heritage foundation hosts a discussion on environment and energy policy issues including renewable fuel standards. that will be live at 3 p.m. eastern here on c-span c-span2. >> the first time in our nation's history that a woman will be a major party's nominee. [cheers and applause] >> at the democratic national convention hillary clinton becomes the first woman nominee of a major political party for president of the united states. starting today at 4 p.m. eastern we will have live coverage of the 2016 democratic national convention in philadelphia. first lady michelle obama and senator bernie sanders our featured speakers. tuesday, former president bill clinton will address the convention.

president obama and vice president biden will speak on wednesday. democratic vice chairman nominee senator tim kaine will also address the convention. thursday, chelsea clinton introduces her mother before she accepts the party's nomination as president of the united states. live coverage of every minute of this historic convention begins today at 4 p.m. eastern on c-span, the c-span radio app, and c-span.org. >> congresswoman debbie wasserman schultz who chairs the democratic national convention will not dabbler party's national convention to order this afternoon. in a brief phone conversation with the sunset and she said i decided in the interest of making sure that we can start the democratic national convention on high note that i'm not going to gavel in the convention. she declined to answer any further questions. you can read more at "sun sentinel.com."

up next the mayor of philadelphia and the number of other city officials held a briefing to talk about security preparations for this week's convention. to talk with the impact of the heatwave, concern for police officers in the wake of recent shootings and lessons learned from the recent republican convention held in cleveland. joined the mayor or police and fire officials. >> twenty plus year veteran, it was a sad evening and at that time for his family so please keep him and then in your prayers and all who are firefighters and police officers over the course of the next few days and always. we just want to recognize that. thank you all for coming. we are excited for the weekend. we can go be a great opportunity to show the world once again how will philadelphia police big events like this. i know many of you interested in the tactile aspects of our preparations so today we are police commissioner, fire commissioner, our emergency management director, our

managing director, and our first deputy, managing director to answer your questions. these folks have done an absolutely incredible job over the last year of giving our city ready for the dnc. and so before everything officially kicks off we wanted to give you an opportune to speak with them. i'm going to get your questions, to get to your questions quickly. first i want to say two things. first, a huge thank you to our city employees as well as our local, state and federal partners. our officers, firefighters, sanitation workers, people working in this room today and for the next few days will be working hard, luscious trita parsi safe operating. i cannot thank all of them enough for the sacrifice they all are making. the second is about the extreme heat and whether we are expecting over the next couple of days. it is important to take extremely seriously. we are expecting heat and

humidity in the triple digits. excessive heat caused a dangerous health conditions due to prolonged hot temperatures, coupled with high humidity. there is little relief that night due to higher than normal overnight temperatures. the city has already had for heat related deaths this year. i urge residents to drink water frequently, check on their neighbors, limit time outdoors as much as possible and keep the windows open if they did not have air conditioning. if you see people who are homeless and suffering from the heat, call our outreach team out to 152-32-1984. seniors in distress our residents concerned about the senior should call the philadelphia corporation for aging decline at 215, 765, 9040. in event of a thunderstorm please take shelter. if you're demonstrating what a thunderstorm warning occurs, state personnel will direct you to the nearest shelter area. you'll be able to return to your

demonstration area as soon as the city that has passed. for the safety of demonstrators during the dnc, to medic tents, to misting dance and bottled water will be available 24/7 at fdr park. medics will also be assigned to marches and demonstrated are encouraged to request a permit to open sure there's adequate medical staff on hand. along broad street there will be as we played industries when we're kids, fire hydrants and bottled water pallets for free. the city as not granting permits for camping during the dnc and demonstrators are highly encouraged not to camp in light of the safety threat i extreme heat and expected thunderstorms. with that, we will take your questions. [inaudible] could up which offers at risk who are out there trying to keep

demonstrators said? >> officers are at risk when they do their jobs every day. we recognize that end we have done these things before. we've had, 2000 when the rnc and the number of marches. the weather was similar to what it is now. maybe it'll hunkere hot now butr office are prepared, treating. there is water stations and equipment can read to them to keep them fed and hydrated. we should be in good shape. >> the. [inaudible] keeping the crowd down and the volume does? >> that's just speculation. i don't have an idea. i know our officers are out there with equipment and are protected us and it's hard for them. so i think, i couldn't tell you whether or not it has an effect one way or another. >> what did you learn from cleveland? >> from cleveland's operation or cleveland from -- >> operations. >> with the exception of a few arrests and everything seemed to go particularly smooth.

smooth. i know we've had our police officers there, commanders viewing what was going on. commissioner, do you have anything to add? >> so i went to cleveland about three or four weeks ago for the express purpose of dialoguing with them to glean as much information as possible about their upcoming rnc and our agency. there were about eight or nine chiefs who had similar events in the past and just trying to collaborate as much of me as possible. very beneficial. this was put on by the police executive research forum under chuck wexler. we got a lot from that in addition to which with officers on the ground in cleveland and they were able to get some vital intelligence that helped us. also probing we were on the right page and doing the right thing. we've got a comprehensive plan as you might imagine and we're confident in debt and confident we will keep the people are visiting and working their safe.

>> are there any groups in particular you're keeping an eye on? >> look, we have a response is to protect the first amendment rights of everybody concerned. not so much anybody in particular. is monitoring the entire event to keep you posted as the question before the workers, not just police officers. give other city workers out there doing what will ultimately be a fabulous job. we don't doubt that but it's going to be tough with the. there is no denying that. [inaudible] spit in the wake of recent shootings targeting officers in dallas, baton rouge and get one of their own officers shot last year. are you more concerned? could you speak to the threat you feel for your officers whether it be from any of these actions were not, and opportunity that might have officers in a more vulnerable position? >> clearly we are always concerned about our police officers. it's a very dangerous job.

you never know what they're going to be confronted with. but in light of what's happened in the last couple of weeks, clearly we would be remiss if we didn't take appropriate measures. our overall plans have not changed but we'v we have taken e additional security measures to ensure the safety of both the protesters, police, as well as public in general. remember in dallas i believe there were a couple of people who were not demonstrators that were hit with gunfire. we are taking all that into account. [inaudible] >> i guess again. we are hopeful a lot of people will respect this process, this venue. we have done a significant amount of planning and conversation with many of the protesters in the way of managing everyone's expectations, theirs and ours we are cautiously optimistic that things will go well. we are always plan for obviously

impromptu protest as we imagine they will happen, but we've been dealing with them for the better part of 18 months as many big cities have. so they will come as no surprise to us. [inaudible] >> well, to me, you move forward. you have to be progressive. you learn from some of the things you did before. in many cases for this would be a lot more patient and tolerant with many of the protesters and demonstrators. some of the planning didn't change that significantly but the world changed. after 9/11 obviously everything changed in terms of a large-scale event. much of it is centered around the. whether it be are made in america are welcome america or any other the papal visit with you. we've had a number of large-scale events in philadelphia, and tremendous coordination goes into bed. it's not just police. it's not just via. it's many other city agencies along with folks across the

from, pennsylvania state police, national guard. the list goes on and on and on. we are protecting the city both on land, air and on the waterways as you may have seen. >> how concerned are you about potential lone wolf attacks? >> well, i mean, this is something you just don't know. it's hard to plan for the unknowns like that. just when you thought you were beyond all that craziness ntsb did something else happening. unfortunately, the unintended consequences is everyone of those incidences prepares you can when that you didn't want to have to. so it makes you think in ways tactically that you never thought before. spirit do you know officers will be on the ground? can you give an estimate of? >> not going to disclose that right now. it is significant as you might imagine and participation of someone else's question. we are a liberal blogger than cleveland. i think there about 1500. we are over 6000.

so despite that we have some coordination with other law enforcement entities, the state police is helping a significantly. we've had five counties dividing specialty services in the way of law enforcement. we will get there. at a later date but right now we are not prepared to disclose that. [inaudible] >> the mayor indicated we strongly discourage people from camping. however, we will evaluate every circumstance on its mayor. we will make those determinations as they come, as well as many circumstances that will occur throughout the dnc. >> what will the posture be -- [inaudible] you mention of tolerating protests. >> i mean, we hope that only the people with permits protest but

clearly that won't be the case. and it has not been the case even in the last like i said 18-21 or so in the city. and so we will deal with that. i can't tell you absolutely what we will do in every instance, because everyone will undoubtedly be different. so i don't want to put us in a corner by singer absolutely going to be one thing or the other. >> calls about i-95 and 676 and the bridge going from four to to linger i'm not sure it was an actress but it was but it appears they are funneling that trucks off of those points to visit to get them to other place before coming into the city. is it going to look like that from monday morning rush hour, that four lanes go to do north and south of? >> in all likelihood it will. i mean, because there may be truckers all that weight limit

that did not get that message and so we're very clear that that type of vehicle would be prohibited from come along the route you just alluded to. so commuters should anticipate that. they should be patient as we put up the city has already put that out so i wil was a yes is the ar to your question. >> the turnout in cleveland for demonstrators was far less than had been predicted. can you talk of maybe the difference between cleveland and philadelphia and why you believe the numbers will be far greater hear? >> i don't want to speak for the mayor. my entries i don't know whether they will be different or greater. we will have to wait an wait an. they expected large numbers and did not get them. and so innocent and so i don't know what will happen in the week. >> it is a bigger city but it still is way too early to start guesstimating numbers. i just don't know spent where does that number come from, the 50,000 per day? >> based on some of the additional permits requests.

and sometimes people will permit for a certain number of people at the half for a search of so again, as commissioner second we really don't know. >> you don't know what to expect? >> based on the weather. be made have 5000 person planned march but because the weather is so stifling, 2000 show up. or if it's a nice day more than 5000 show a. we don't really know. but we will be prepared whatever we are faced with. >> have any protesters been arrested so far? >> not yet. jusjust to backtrack on speaking the numbers fallen about what the permitted individuals have indicated that that's what we asked of have no way of. it is a big city and a lot of people may, above and beyond thajust to be clear. but no has been arrested yet. >> are there civil citations? >> no, not for this debt. not at least since i've been standing here. i don't know what has transpired since. >> one of the reasons why we did

that was we wouldn't have to arrest people. our goal is to not arrest anyone. the civil citations are one of the ways we keep people out of the criminal justice system because we really don't want that. we prepared an attempt to try to expedite this as quick as possible without making a formal criminal arrest. >> have you received any credible threats against dnc, against philadelphia? >> no, we have not. thirtysomethings have come in the last couple of weeks. nothing has been proven to be credible at this point in time but obviously the authorities including the fbi as well as our criminal intelligence agencies are remain vigilant with regard to that. we will continue to monitor as many sites as we can to determine if we were to any but right now we have not. >> to anything change following the events in germany and france? >> yes. clearly we would put down some additional barricades just to

make sure that vehicles would not be able to do that type of thing that happened there your that's one significant change, but other than that there's been no real significant changes with the overall plan. >> can you help a decision on how you decide whether officers wearing polo shirts for something with more protection? >> our posture for the most part used to wear a soft cloth like i'm in right now. so that we demonstrate that we have no desire to be disruptive. we want to allow as many people as possible to protest and demonstrate peacefully. i think that was a long way towards conveying that message. clearly because of some the events that have happened around the world that a big alluded to a couple of times in this press conference there will be some people that may be seen in places, they won't be part of a protest or demonstration but they are not there to do anything. they are protesters as much to protect all involved.

>> following the recent terrorist attack run world of please choose in the u.s., how do they change the outlook heading into the convention a month state officials speak with what we are dealing with internationally is sad, frightening and unpredictable. you have to go into everyday as if it's a normal day and try to take the necessary precautions to keep people safe, our citizens at protesters and officers. but again it's such an unpredictable world, i couldn't tell you other than going at each day as if it's a normal day, even though it's a four-day convention. we will respond, hopefully we will not respond anything really bad but we will respond if necessary. [inaudible] >> more barricades installed specifically to prevent attack on the events in france and germany speak was sure. we would be remiss if we didn't take those precautions. i'm not going into the details

about where and how we did it in answer to questio your question honestly, yes, we did take those precautions. [inaudible] do you plan to do that to be out there on a? >> first of a i can't say enough about my college in clinton and will he handle that event. the short answer is you don't have any other choice. you have to be out their conveying to the men and women who are doing a very, very tough job that you are there out front with them. but in addition which also to convey that to people are protesting, demonstrating as well as the general public that you have the situation under control. and so again kudos to chief williams and all his people as well as everybody who planned alongside him. spent as for the people who live and work in philadelphia and people that may be bringing the families, do you expect any persons in and around extension

center -- [inaudible] >> yes, we do. we anticipate protests and throughout center city most of which and probably 99% will be very, very peaceful. many of these people have indicated that they've no desire to do anything other than to express their first amendment rights and that's what we expect will happen. but it will be in center city. no question. [inaudible] >> i'm going to let the mayor's press person tell you that but for the most part i think we're going to do something daily. she let you know what time that will be but a think will be putting out some information in the morning that it will vanessa shall be in a form of an available in from the later in the day you will get that for me each and every day. >> what did the city learn from last years papal visit that was helpful in planning for the dnc? >> first of all something that was more reminded of the lord

of, the resiliency of these police officers, law enforcement officers as well as the city and the ability to plan significant events. that was a tremendous endeavor, as you know, and it just showed us that we are doing the right things with regard to our planning. in terms of anything that we did wrong i wouldn't say anything stands out but just this constant reminder that you're on the right page. the same thing holds true as they indicate with a trip to cleveland and send people to cleveland. these things help you in understanding your plan is weren't should be. >> -- you're planning is where it should be. >> is this where emergency operations in various reports looking to end is this how the city deals with protests, response, et cetera the? >> this is the city's emergency operations a if it's a coordination and information sharing a. when you have a national special security event there's a variety

of different facilities that certain things are coordinated out of. does intelligence centers, information centers. this is really the city's nucleus. in addition to police and fire and public safety, would also bring all of our support partners. there's a huge contingent, called smart department of streets or out of working with us and those were providing water to people. so all of that is really managed to this facility. [inaudible] facility. the fraternal order of police isn't work safe we respect and then their opinion that is expressed very penny. they express the first in an opinion. i have no other comment other than that. that's it. >> very similar. they have the right to express

their opinion. i actually know the president very well. he has the right to say what he has to say. i don't personally wade into political record. it's just not what i do. [inaudible] >> there's been a comprehensive plan around that you always do that a large-scale event. obviously, we are hopeful that we will have to resort to that but if we do we are very prepared for it. [inaudible] >> any cost determine or any other information? >> obviously it's still very early. firefighter lee was well it's respected. i guess the best way to say that is around 1:00 in the morning last night or this morning at temple with more than 100 firefighters there. the mayor was there, on duty

come off duty to say goodbye. it's still early and certainly we will provide information to everybody when we have more information to provide and get information about the funeral of reference and the details about that as well. right now we are certainly going to be fulfilled also requirements of our mission around the dnc, protecting the city 24/7/365 and also circling up and working together in the way we did as brothers and sisters and rallying around his family and doing right. >> can you confirm he responded to a fire earlier in the day speak was absolutely, absolutely respond to incidents. >> do you know how long has been with the department speak with he was 42 years old and had more than 20 years on the job. >> a question about the convention. during this year, 10 months leading up to it, has there ever been a point that you said to

yourself, why did i agree to do this? >> no. look, it is very exciting to see what's going to happen in philadelphia with this historic happening that's going to result in the first woman president of the united states. that is exciting and wonderful, but the details, the nitty-gritty sometimes get a little exacerbating and yeah, i mean, there's never been a time when i thought to myself i don't want it, or sid so we have a. i'm looking forward to it. i think this country after last week needs this. how it ended last week, i was stunned at how bad it was good and i think what this country needs now is four days of positivity. >> did you ever perhaps underestimate how much work -- >> i saw what happened with the pope. the pope was this time five or six. that's a big it was.

i wasn't involved in drug plan at the pope's visit but was in the city to watch everything going on. everyone worked really well. people were very nice to each other. the key to this whole thing is just to try to show some love, try to show some understanding. people are hurting. people are angry. people are fearful and we need to put the country back on track but we can't with the marginalization. we have to include everyone. i think that's what our message has been here when it becomes dashed away comes to protesters, officials. we need to come together to make this country move forward and gaza we look forward to do. >> when you say the country needs this after last week, what did you mean? >> did you watch last week? it needs some inclusion. it needs some love. it needs some hope. it needs some energy, that what we are living in difficult times but it's not all a downer. this country is a country. that the major party candidate,

i think this country needs to hear from us and to from positive people. .. >> and live to a discussion on environment and energy issues. a number of economist and energy experts taking part. this is hosted by the heritage foundation. should start any moment. >> good afternoon and welcome. you are here at our third event

in the series about farms and free enterprise. all of this comprises one vision we have for free market principles and agricultural. the work is based on the hard work of darren back who is in the back and he is the researcher fellow and agricultur agricultural fellow at the heartage foundation and he has spent years studying and we are seeing the results of his hard work today. his contact information is available afterwards and i encourage you to reach out if you have questions about the things discussed. the last events focus on the bigger versions. the first was about lifting the regulatory burden on agricultural. agricultural is one of the heaviest regulated from banking to agricultural regulations, all of those things come into play when talking about agricultural.

our second event focused on enhancing free trade and how that benefits agricultural and the entire u.s. economy. this event will focus on bio fuels particularly the renewable standards and how it interplays with the agricultural sector and our economy at large. leading the conversation is the three gentlemen to my right. to the very right is nick lorris, the herert and joyce fellow at the heritage foundation and he is the primary author of the paper on which we will base the paper on. thank you, nick. marlo is next to him and he is a

member of the house subcommittee, bureau of international organizational affairs and a visiting assistant professor of science at clarmont college. dan simmons is to my right and he is a vp for political studies. as well as working on energy and climate policy on the federal and state levels. he has been with american legislative exchange council, and on the committee on resources in the house. so we have a very distinguished and educated panel and i am excited to kick off our discussion. each of the panelist is going to give brief remarks. we will facilitate a discussion and then open up the discussion to you guys. keep the questions ready and we will get to you at the end. >> thanks, rachel. first of all, what is the rfs. in 2005, congress and the bush administration had an idea and

that was they looked at the trend in oil production which had been falling since 1970 and they said hey, what if we keep on talking about the problem it is to import oil why don't we create more liquid fuel boy using ethanol and to do that let's mandate a certain amount of ethanol and that is the rfs. it man dated a certain volume and mandates ethanol. that was the first energy act of 2005. two years later with the energy and independence act the rfs was amended and there was a number of different mandates created but they wanted to include stuff that was advance bio fuels. this wasn't ethanol made from corn but it is -- the thought was that, you know, if we

mandate it, thestuff not commercially viable will be commercially viable and we could mandate billions of gallons and that is how the rfs was changed. plus, the numbers were bumped up by quite a lot. the problem is any concerns in the economic cost of congress and the bush administration gave leeway in how the numbers were set. we don't if the spread of energy is possible. there are three fatal flaws and then is the viability of it. the first is production.

as you notice, oil production, all of the smart people thought u.s. oil production was in terminal decline. ten years ago there was talk about the u.s. hitting peak oil and we would not be producing more oil in the future. but the federal government really never tried to increase oil production. it should not have been a surprise given all of the additional regulations put on oil production that it continued to decrease until 2007-2008 when the beginnings of the hydraulic fracturing tur occurred and oil production is up 86% now since the bottoming out in 2007. since 2010 alone oil production on private land has increased 113%. was it the rfs that created the changes? mandates? no.

it was using oil from shell that completely changed the calculus. the u.s. oil production is booming. not because of the government program, not because of mandates but because of the free market. when high oil prices, people said all of these investments make sense. that was the first thing. the creators of the rfs, do not consider we could turn around oil production in the country. the second one is consumption. oil consumption seemed to be continually growing and it turns out u.s. oil consumption peaked in 2005 after the act was passed. the rfs doesn't mandate a percentage of bio fuels to be used. it mandates a certain volume and the problem is that engines can only use -- car engines i should

specify, new car engines can mostly only use ethanol in c concenstrations of about 10%. the auto makes only certify that percentage. 20% might harm the engine they say. so there is only so much ethanol you can use in the fuel supply in a given year but the rfs didn't consider that. it turns out because of the consumption peak in 2005 and fallen since then and the last four years has been gradually increasing. they screwed up on the production and consumption side. and lastly, was this thought that if you subsidize it and mandate it will come. the problem with ethanol is it isn't new. it is not new when used as a

fall. 150 year ago cars ran on ethanol. the reason is simple. people have been taking ethanol for thousands of year. ethanol is ethyl alcohol. the stuff we drink. we you know, we know how to make it and just using it for this new purpose -- you could increase the volume and doing that can reduce the cost. but the point is we have been making it for a long time, just because you impose a mandate isn't going to make the cost make all of the sense in the world. and then not only do they mandate volumes but the exotic fuel, ethanol that is not from corn but things made from the rest of the corn plant, and

congress, and the bush administration, this year they man dated we use 4.25 billion galleo gallons of this kind of ethanol. so far we have produced 2 million gallons. so the mandate is 4 billion. i don't know what kind of world we live in where there is a mandated market and the producers can't make enough so that tells you this stuff is way more expensive than what we were to believe. the assumptions are fatally flawed and it leads to you to a simple conclusion about the rfs.

scrap it and let the american people figure out what fuels work the best for them. >> thank you, rachel and nick for having me here today. dan's word have the fear full ring of truth. one tip on the ethanol, if you look at the liquid ethanol fuel that is being produced today, not all of the fuel qualifies as ethanol. they are use something called bio gas and calling it ethanol. but the amount produced is less than one tenth of what the mandate would require. we need this for fuel competition.

you buy a car today and have a choice on one that runs on gasoline and another that runs on gasoline. you have a choice that dispenses a pump that dispenses gasoline and another pump that dispenses gasoline. this is a cute, rhetorical formation but it confuses two things. the results of competition with the act. it is assumed that because we are not being served ethanol and that we haven't been served bio fuels for a large number of years. ethanol was the fuel to be used in ford's first vehicle. it could run on pure ethanol all the way to b-0 gasoline with no ethanol. henry ford and thomas edison, another great figure in the

history of industrialization and mass production and they pro dicted it would be the fuel of the future. in hindsight, it is obvious why we tonight have a huge bio fuel market or why no significant bio fuel market nationwide would exist but for these mandates and a host of other subsidies some that continue and some have been recened. for most of this period, right up until the mid-2000s, by volume, ethanol was more expensive than gasoline. you can look it up if you go to the web and search wrack prices.

they will show you the price by gallon of ethanol and regular gasoline going back decades. you will see it is only in the recent decades that ethanol by volume is cheaper than gasoline. when you then factor in the energy penalty, the fact ethanol delivers one third less energy by volume than gasoline, it is still not a very good buy. in fact it is a bad buy. there is a website the government maintains called f l fueleconomy.gov. it is tricky to find the information. you go to the website, fueleconomy.gov and click on advanced cars and fuels and then

click on flexible fuelled vehicles and then click on select selectable fuel vehicles. when you go through those steps you will

make these predictions. whether it is ice caps melting or running out of the quantity

because there is little accountability or repercussion when they are wrong. in the meantime, they get to make the plans and proposed solutions to alleged problems that use your money and my money as taxpayers and that really don't solve any problem whatsoever but it will benefit their district and help them get reelected come election time. these politicians, time and time again, like to think they can outsmart the market. they don't like to wear just their political hat but they like to wear their shark tank hat and think they are investors but they are using the taxpayer's money to invest and tell us about the next great innovation or wave of the future and be hugely economically successful. time and time again that fails which is why they are in washington and not on wall street.

one of my favorite quotes is by an economist and i use to time and time again, in fact when i testified to the house oversight i used it. the rfs shows how the government can't centrally plan energy markets and the unintended consequences it creates when doing so. economic, environmental, and ethical when you talk about the rising food costs. and so, to demonstrate one of those unintended consequences i would like to paint a picture and have you imagine something. imagine you are a farmer in guatemala and you need to feed yourself, your spouse, and your three growing children.

right now, you can grow the crops, you are feeding your children, and the entire country is self-sufficient in corn production so if you don't grow enough you can buy it easily. then the u.s. starts subsidizing corn production and guatemala rates drop 30% over a decade. you are okay right now because the corn from america is flowing south so has a business you are not really affected and can feed your family. then the u.s. creates a law that mandated corn ethanol be used in our fuel. what happened? this production flows from food to fuel. the cheap imports disappears. what do you do? you are really out of luck now because you can go back to

substance farming but you can't because that land is being used for bio ethanol being produced in europe. so that plot of land is now growing sugar cain to export to europe. you are out of options. what guatemala substance farmers had to do was literally harvest corn crops in the median of highways as the trucks drove by because that was the only land they could find to feed their family. t"the new york times" did a stoy discussing how guatemala was impacted by food prices. you had tortilla prices double, heg prices double -- egg. these rippling effects happen worldwide not just in guatemala. one statistic we put up before starting the panel that bears

repeating is 40% of the corn production in the united states goes to fuel production. that number in 2012 was higher than the food consumption of every single country with the exception of china and the entire continent of africa. this speaks to the rippling effects where you have torttiil riots. you have unintended consequences that are economic and environmental. it is soybean for bio diesel that have economic and environmental cost as well. before the mandate in 2004, about less than one percent of or soybean crop was used by for bio diesel. after the law was passed and you had an increase, pretty substantially of soybeans going to bio diesel the number jumped

to 23% in 2014. so you are feeling the effects world wide and at home. the congressional budget office estimates americans pay 3.5 billman your for our grocery bill collectively because of the mandate. there are other estimates that peg that number higher. whatever the number accurately is, the direction is the same. we are paying more. as marlow pointed out we are paying more at the pump, too. these costs, economic costs, and environmental costs are being disbursed among us. there are some in guatemala that benefit and there are some in iowa that benefit. even in rural america there is a lot at cost. we are seeing this policy, which is really exhibit a of why the government shouldn't get involved and it should be best

left for the private sector because the benefits go to a select few. >> i want to ask the panelists questions and highlight the principles outlined here. starting with you dan, when we talk about unintended consequences nick mentioned and he said u.s. bio fuels study is a large study in the unintended consequences of government intervention. i wanted to see if you could expand on this. this is mandated and the government subsidizes bio fuel so why are we not succeeding? can you talk about the economic effects there. >> well, the reality is just -- the reason you need a mandate is because the economics don't quite work. they don't work when using ethanol as a fuel as marlow

explained. ethanol can be used as an additive in the fuel and doing that, the economics can work a little bit better. as in using ethanol to try to boost octane and gasoline. that is a use of fuel but we cannot use enough to get to the numbers that congress mandated because congress made incorrect assumptions. any time you have a mandate congress overshoots. congress thinks they know better. what free markets do is that it aggregates incredibly large amounts of information. instead of taking that information, saying hey, doesn't look like using this much ethanol makes economic sense, what congress and the bush

administration did was say well, we are the smartest people in the room. we know that you can do this and it will not actually be that costly. in fact, once you start down the path you get these economies to scale and it will work out. the problem is they were just wrong. >> yeah, so i guess a better follow-up question is marlow mentioned ethanol was the fuel of choice for ford and edison so why didn't a government develop without intervention? -- market. >> there is a market for some use just not this much ethanol use and part of the reason has to do with the properties of ethanol. it can not be transported by pipeline like oil. there are hundreds of thousands of miles of oil pipeline in the country that are difficult to use for transporting ethanol because it has different chemical propties and picked up water and that is a water because oil and water don't mix.

so it is easier to separate out oil and water in pipe lines. it is harder to transport ethanol. we also have this incredible oil transportation infrastructure set-up so you can transport oil all over the country but transporting ethanol from iowa to california is more expensive because it has to be transported on trains. the economics are difficult to work. marlow, did you have any addition? >> no, i thought you covered that. the big three factors that were a barrier for many years was one, cost, because for a long time, by volume ethanol did cost more than oil. that is no longer the case but it is not enough usually to offset the energy penalty. the other, as dan pointed out, portability because ethanol loves water and you bring water

into a combustion engine and you kill the engine so it is difficult to transport the ethanol through the same network of pipelines you use to transport oil. and then there is the energy density issue which is that you don't get as much energy bang for our buck. so those have been, i think, the long-term market barriers that bio fuels have had to contend with. there is a market value for ethanol as an octane booster and many people think without the renewable fuel standard you would get a blend of gasoline that is close to e-10. you would not get anything beyond that, though. >> let me make one other point about this. that is the glory of the free market is that you have all of these incredibly smart people out there figure out what makes the most sense.

and you know, the three of us here have nothing against -- i don't think any of us have anything against ethanol. what we have problems with is m mandating it. when you have these market actors and refiners and when you have farmers, when you have all of these people involved in the process, they are going to come to answers that actually make the most sense as opposed to, you know, we readly admit we don't have the answers for how much ethanol we would use without the rfs. some would be used. however, when you have that very specific information of place, of time, you get answers that are much better than what we can come up with than sitting in our desks in washington. >> in fact, in terms of alturninate uses of fuel you are seeing this pop up with the

gasoline industry. this is happening without a mandate. granted they tried to get subsidies but nowhere near what the mandate is doing. the mandate was just part of the puzzle of what the market got. they benefit from a tax credit. we could not import cheaper ethanol because they slapped a 51% tax on imported ethanol. it has been hand out after hand out but no growth. >> the next question, starting with marlow, but jump in, one of the arguments we hear is we need to get away from fossil fuel, and foreign oil in particular given the instability in the middle east and the havoc that can wreak on the market. have bio fuels reduced our dependence on foreign oil?

>> it has made some contribution but if you check from the acting administrator at the recent energy and commerce committee hearing they will say it has made a very small contribution compared especially to fuel economy standards which have made overall motor fuel consumption smaller than it used to be but especially compared to fracking. so that has -- the claims that make us independant has been overstated and the oil weapon wasn't all it was cracked up to be. what created the gas lines in

the '70s, and a lot of people don't know this, was not the boycott which was the big visible political theater type action that opec took. but it was a cutback in production that will affect prices especially when the u.s. government didn't allow the government to adapt to decreased supply. opec couldn't take credit for that. it was our own bungling that created the rationing and people waiting in line for hours and hours or having to get gas on

alternate days and all that mess. that was because politicians felt they needed to do something, which they usually feel they need to do, and also because they didn't have sufficient grasp of how the market corrects for these short-term flucuations. that is what i would say to that question basically. >> the last time i looked at the numbers of the new liquid fuels on the market, about 30%-ish came from bio fuel production. the increase in bio fuels production and the 70% was new, domestic petroleum production. so putting this dramatic increase there has been in ethanol production means there is more fuel and domestic fuel we use in the united states but it has been dwarfed by the new oil production coming from hydraulic fracturing.

>> smng nick wrote in his paper that was interesting i want to mention. you talk about the coalition that supports repealing or modifying particularly the renewable stand standards. there is a range of people and you have the european union panel on climate change that noted the environmental harm caused by the renewable fuel standards. i wondered if you could speak to that and the impact it has on legislative activity. >> you would think it would have a lot but it doesn't. election years it crops up and gets support it doesn't deserve. with a diverse coalition, environmental groups, world hunger organizations, you have fiscal conservatives, all opposed the policy and it just speaks to how difficult it is to get rid of bad policies once

they are put in place and even when you think you have killed it, you know, it is zombie like and comes back. we had that with the targeted tax cretdicredited it pops back. despite the environmental concerns, the economic concerns, you have this, you know, special interest that stand to benefit from a very well oiled machine, even though they don't like oil they like ethanol and fight tooth and nail to keep this policy in place because a lot of times they realize the only way they are going to succeed in the marketplace and again, i think it is why we need push for full repeal. i think you can tinker around the edges and that will help save off some of the environmental and economic costs but one policy solution proposed was getting rid of the food part of the mandate.

that might make a good step but you are leaving in place the most economically uncompetitive part of the mandate where you had all sorts of problems and problems with cost, production and scalability and refiners are being fined for not producing enough of the advance bio fuel. >> can you go back and explain the food part? >> of the 15 billion gallons of the renewable fuel standards can be met with corn-based ethanol. this is the total of 36 billion gallons of ethanol that are required to be blended into our fuel supply by 2020. some needs to come from non-food sources. so in the description of the rfs there is different targets for different parts. after 2022 i believe it sign-up

to the epa to do what they want. some folks think after 2022 maybe it will expire but now it let's an unelected bureaucrats decide what happens next with the policy. given the fact they championed bio fuels and ethanol for this time they are not going to scale it back as they should. >> i wonder if i could talk about one environmental, unintended consequence that has just come out in the newspapers. >> we would love to hear about it. >> in fact, i blogged on this and in the handouts from the organization, i have a little blog post about it there. it was an ap story that was published last friday. it talks about the mugginess of midwest weather being the result of sweaty corn.

this is actually a very-well documented situation. the correct term is evaporation transportation. all plants do it. they give off water. there has been a long debate since the year 2008 between the experts on both sides as to whether or not the renewable fuel standard on net reduces the carbon dioxide emissions. i won't even try to resolve that very technical discussion. but this much i think is absolutely clear. first, is that even if the renewable fuel standard is resulting in a net decrease of carbon dioxide emissions from the motor fuel sector relative to a baseline without the standards, the impact on the climate is insignificant. nobody notices it, you cannot measure it, and you cannot verify it.

however the impact that corn agricultural and soy agricultural has on the climate of the midwest is discernible to use a favorite term of the ippc and even measurable. as it was explained in the article, and i ran it by one of my favorite scientists, john christy, who collaborated this, and when you have millions of acres of corn, you have billions of straws sucking water from deep in the ground and putting it into the air. moistening the air. and that increases the heat index or the misery index as it is sometimes called. it increases summer swelter. it is the heat that you feel when it is not only hot but humid. a nasa science is cited in this

story and he did a paper on this with a bunch of other scientist in 1996 and they determined corn sweat, or the moistening of the air in the midwest because of millions of acres of corn plantation, contributed to the heat wave in chicago in 1995 that killed hundreds of people. what happened since then? i did fact checking and in the year congress revved up, gassed up if you will the rfs, 2007 when everybody lobbying for this especially in the corn and corn ethanol lobbies, was expecting a huge increase in demand for corn. in 2007, the number of acres planted in the united states of corn jumped by 15 million anchors.

if you look at the ten years since, 2007-2016 what you find is on average there is about $12 million more acres of corn planted every year than was the case before the wonderful, internally independence and security act was inacted. you have millions of acres of corn and soy moistening the air in the midwest making summer swelter more durable and intense. i think the irony here is very hard to miss because of global warming policy, you see, is increasing summer swelter in the midwest. >> i thought all i had to worrys about was sweaty humans and now i worry about sweaty corn. another question i want to touch on that has been in the news here and then.

it wasn't mentioned today but i want to talk about the problems associated with mandates and when you force producers to meet quotas and blend walls we see fraud a lot of times. we have seen a lot of fraud in the renewable identification numbers. i am wondering if anyone can speak to what the rims and the fraud and consequences. people don't expect to hear about criminal statutes when it comes to bio fuel but it can be a thriller. >> the reality is the government created a market and with that, markets not created by actors, it attracted bad actors. sorry, i keep using actors. but what there is is there are things called renewable identification numbers, rims, it is a number assigned for regulatory purposes and because

these rims were in effect too easy to produce you just had to sort of tell the epa that they had been created there was a bunch of fraud and people had a factory that didn't make such. they would claim a certain amount of rims, a certain amount of these numbers, and you know, make a lot of money because they sell them to the people that have to comply. as a result, you have a government-created market that was rife with fraud for a long time until the department of justice started to look into this and their first thing that the department of justice tried to do was say, hey, oil companies you need to police the guys out there making it which made no sense because it is the government's market so why in the world should they be

requiring the oil companies to go everywhere and check all of the people claiming to produced these things. all you needed was a number and it was way too easy to get. nick? >> just to tell one of these stories and bloomberg just did a follow-up piece on a guy in jail as a result of getting caught. phillip ripkin was his name and he said he sold 50 million gallons but didn't sell hardly any. he was trading with another guy using fake credits and they are both in jail. he had a lambergeni and was in charge of the green diesel. when the epa had never heard of the company, they went to, i think houston, to check it out they websint to the plant, it wasn't producing anything, the

pipes were not connected. it was complete fraud. the guy jetted out to spain. the epa's accountability of this was laughable. they were saying create spreadsheets, we will try to track it and not do much about it. finally, when more of the fraudulent cases started to surface and when a lot of the oil companies, the refiners were realizing they were buying fake credits and not realizing where the actual production was coming from started to surface. it may be small potatoes but it does speak to bigger reason why the policy is a farce. >> one last question before we open it up to your questions. when we talk about the government selecting winners and losers, right, and this is a case when the government selected winners. who wins and who loses because of the rfs?

>> i will go first. the winners are the people that make ethanol, corn farmers, and lobbyists. and because you have to have people here in washington, d.c. that are, you know, looking out for your interest. who loses? essentially the rest of america because we have higher fuel prices as a result and yes just that simple. >> at that same hearing i mentioned, the june 22nd hearing with the energy and commerce community, the epa officials who administers the renewable fuel program, janet mckay, was one of the witnesses and one of the congressman asked her i am hearing from the bio diesel industry they can produce 2.7 billion gallons a year and you are only mandating 2.1 billion.

why don't you mandate more? and i thought her answer was fascinating in what it implied. what she said was you see bio diesel is one of the number of fuels that competes for the space called the advance bio fuels market. and if we were to mandate that refiners actually buy and blend and intr -- introduce everything the bio producers can make that would leave less room for other competitors. we want fuel choice and fuel competition. so it is not like we telling the bio diesel producers they cannot offer it all for sale but we don't think it is good idea for require them to share it all.

if you think it through, the renewable standard fuel program as a whole does what she criticizes, the bio diesel lobby for pushing. especially if you think about this in terms of the pie in the sky target that the congress enacted in 2007. we will never be close to 36 billion gallons in 2020. but suppose we did, the energy information administration is now projecting in 2022 the total u.s. motor fuel market will be about 132 billion gallons. if 36 billion came from mandated bio fuels, more than 1-4 gallons would be guaranteed to a certain group of producers in advance. so in other words, about a quarter of the market or more

would be removed from real competition. think about this. how fair would it be to have a world series in which one team is guaranteed in advance to win at least one of the first four games? or just think about any kind of business. how fair would it be to tell any business that one quarter of any market in which it is playing in must be dominated, must be filled, occupied, by its competitors. how long would any industry in this country be able to thrive under that set of circumstances or even survive? >> i will add one quick point. there are winners and losers within the agricultural culture. there are a few select producers who benefit but it diverts so much land toward meeting this

mandate and the opportunity cost is that land could be used for other crops. rather than letting the market determine how the land should be used a lot is artificially pre-determined because of the mandates and subsidies. >> raise your hand and let us know where you are from and let us know what your question is. >> david from the heritage foundation. it is an urban legend that at one point we were exporting and importing ethanol from brazil? sending tankers down and bringing it back with ours. is that true? >>es, it is still true. in fact, epa seems to be expecting that it is -- that

its proposed standards in 2017 will be met in part from sugar cain ethanol imported from brazil. we are free markets and don't have a problem with americans importing or exporting oil. there is a faction on the hill that was bent out of shape because we started to export oil. we are the only nation in the world that has ever decided to, you know, erect a trade barrier around itself to keep it's products out of the global market -- its. as free marketeers we don't have a problem with this. but those making home-grown energy groups, it is curious this program is encouraging the import of foreign energy.

>> no, and the reason that happens is because to meet the advanced bio fuel standard one of the only ways is ethanol made from sugar cain instead of corn because it has lower intensity in making it so the problem is we ship corn ethanol to brazil and import ethanol made from sugar cain from brazil and say it has a lower carbon intensity even though you forget about factors like it takes energy to ship it back and fort. it is an incredibly silly outcome. >> just one quick data as we look for another question. their are doing the same thing

to meet california's low carbon fuel standard and are shipping a lot of this advance bio fuels out by truck from nebraska and places like that to meet california's low carbon fuel standards. they don't really calculate all of the energy and environmental costs that go into those things. a lot of it it is a joke. >> you are talking about the full repeal of the rfs but that seems politically unlikely. where do you see room for compromise? any deals you are hearing about movement next year? >> this is marlow lewis. i don't know about any deals in the prospect. but there are other proposals

that would move the policy i think in a better direction that you are probably familiar with. but one is simply to sunset the program in 2022. so this mandate is not eternal. we are dealing with an industry that needs to be shelltered. it is a huge industry and most of it would survive. most of the corn-based ethanol would survive without the mandate according to the experts i talked to. in 2022, the program doesn't mandate but it is turned over to the epa to operate on the bases

of criteria to comply and statutory complaints and the standards must be per contained in perpetuity. it can not be less than the last renewable standards. from a rational economic point of view you don't want this to go on forever. it seems congress shouldn't want unelected bureaucrats to call all of the shots. that is a lesser, instead of outright repeal, you sunset it.

and then of course there is legislation already being promoted right now which is to cap at least, yeah, to cap the rfs basically just below e-10 which would provide space within the motor fuel markets for those customers, those consumers who actually want to by e-0. that is something else that -- that is a very finite problem within this larger problem but very real because in 2015, america, plain ole americans without government prompting, went out and bought 5.3 million gallons of e-0. ethanol-free gasoline. if you have been to a service station around here you know that rare. it is not easy to find. from what i understand there are about 10,000 service stations

that sell e-0. because it is a niche commodity. under the 2017 mandates, there would only be room for about 200 million gallons of that. what epa is proposing is to eliminate 96% of the market for e-0. that is not good for fuel choice, okay? that is really an anti-consumer policy. if you capped the overall convention bio fuel at 9.7% that would leave enough for people who wanted to buy it still had

had chance and you would avoid the other blend wall problems that are distorted. >> one quick comment, unless i for got because it feel like so long ago but ted cruz won iowa as someone that rejects the rfs. for many years it was assumed you needed to be pro-rfs to win iowa. it was an article of fakt faith and core political tendency and ted cruz tore it down. if that doesn't have to be part of a presidential candidate's platform -- it creates a greater opportunity for policy change than previously. >> we have time for one more. >> hi, i am sophy with the

george washington study center. i am curious about the environmental impacts you have been discussing. i know the epa's office of inspector general was going to look into whether or not the production of ethanol incurred greenhouse effects. i am curious if they will come out with a finding that will put epa in a joint position? i am curious if you have insight, predictions or any optimism. >> i don't have any predictions on where it might go. ...

so there's hope and there's optimism that there's at least independent analysis that shows this is true. there's some that shows it's not true but the fact that more and more organizations that are supposed to be the environmental activist organization are decrying the use of biofuels gives me hope that the epa will come out on the right side of this but as marlo mentioned, it shouldn't matter because we could switch over from all ethanol to, away from oil completely and it would be an

infinitesimal change in global temperatures anyway so the climate part of this is even what they should be looking at, they should be looking at the adverse environmental consequences that , the real hazardous air pollution's created from increase of insecticides and fertilizers.the epa acknowledged there was land-use quality problems as well as water quality problems as a result of these mandates so if there's anything the epa should be looking at and addressing it should be those problems. >> were going to go ahead and leave it there, can i get a round of applause for our panelists ? you gentlemen. [applause] the paper that was under discussion today is out on the front table as are the previous two papers that deal with regulations on agriculture and free-trade. these guys will be here for the reception as well as darren in the back overseeing the entire project so thank you for coming, i appreciate it .

[inaudible conversation] >>. [inaudible conversation] [inaudible conversation] [inaudible conversation]

>> and the democratic convention getting underway in just a moment inside the wells fargo center in philadelphia. you can see every minute of the convention on c-span, you can listen on the c-span radio app or watch any time on the c-span.org. one of the most popular exhibits at the constitution center in philadelphia is called signer small. >> welcome to the national constitution center. we offer the first and only museum in the country dedicated to the u.s. constitution located right on independence mall in the heart of historic philadelphia and we really have three main missions epicenter. of course we're a museum where you can come to see our amazing interactive exhibition but we are also america's town hall which means you can find great programming on the site and online about current constitutional debates and discussions. we are also an education center and were trying to get a lot of our civic content

out to teachers and students across the country. right now today i want to talk more about our museum and we are right now in one of our signature exhibition spaces called signers hall and this room is depicting the moment the constitution was signed on september 17 1787. there are 42 statues in this room representing those who were still present and participating in the constitutional convention in september through the end of a long summer that they spent in philadelphia working to create this document . you can really walk amongst the signers, you can touch them, we invite you to come and touch them, these are works of art they are life-size bronze statues but we created it so you could be interactive. ben franklin is one of our most popular and favorite signers, you can see how long he's been over the years that we've been open. you can also find that not everybody at the constitutional convention was

happy with how things ended up. there were 55 men who attended at different points, some of them left because they had other business that they needed to attend to what others left out of protest, they were happy with how things are going. these three men are called our dissenters, we had george mason and randolph and eldridge gary and they were stayed beyond september 17 but they refused to sign the document because they thought it didn't do enough to protect the interests they had for the country's future and for their personal stakes so we have of course other famous people in this room that you might recognize. we have alexander hamilton, who was left as the only delegate from new york after his two delegates and left in protest earlier in the confession but he was still here at the end and help with the final crafting and signing of the document. we also have james madison right ear. he's the shortest delegate in the room, only five foot four

inches and these are life-size, accurate depictions and is considered the father of the constitution, he really the guy who came in with a plan and that set the agenda for the rest of the summer and he was really the super influential and kind of changing what the final product was. he also took all the notes of the convention so he's the person who lets us know what happened during the convention and finally we have george washington and he is of course the father of our country but also was elected president of the convention and he really was that steady hand who was here all summer long , overseeing these proceedings and lending his gravitas and how much respect he had from his fellow countrymen to this whole proceeding because they really were going to have to go to the people and make their case and get them to support this new form of government . at the end of your visit you too can be a part of the story and add your name to the constitution because this

is really about bringing the past to life and getting you to interact with the past and understand these events and the spirit of history better than you might otherwise kind of reading something out of the textbook. >> so as the democrats get underway in philadelphia, here's tonight's lineup. includes senators elizabeth warren and cory booker, former presidential candidate bernie sanders and first lady michelle obama. we will bring you every minute on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. from philadelphia one of the speakers at the convention tonight, senator booker in addition to senator bob casey and afl-cio president robert trumka talk to the party breakfast. this is an hour and 15 minutes. >> i want to welcome everybody to our first breakfast. can everybody hear me all

right? i'd like c-span.org what? ... what? i sound muffled? i'm sorry. anyway, good morning everybody. i've learned over a long time in politics when you start readings that there's one thing you can do to everybody quiet other than that ring the bell and i think it's a really good idea because this is the beginning of our convention so now that you're seated i'mgoing to ask you all to rise for the pledge of allegiance . i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. thank you all very much. i want to wish good morning to all the delegates, to all

of our guests, to all of our speakers many of whom are coming up as we speak . i wanted to create gradually the delegates for being selected to represent the commonwealth. and i'm proud to welcome everybody here to my adopted city and to many of you who are here, the city of philadelphia. the city of brotherly love and sisterly affection. this week, we are going to make history. and were going to make history through november. [applause] and i've got a lot to say but i'm not going to say it all right now. i want to start with one thing because i believe it's really important area and i'm going to start with it, i'm going to close with it and i need people to understand what i'm saying.

this four days is not just about selecting the presidential candidate which we will do. these four days is to have unity within our party. [applause] and so here's what i want toask . if you are a bernie sanders supporter or if you are a bernie sanders delegate, would you please rise? [applause] >> you can sit down, it's all right. i want to thank you all for being here.

i know some of you have been in politics a long time. for many of you, this is the beginning. and i know i should address everybody but i specifically want to address you. we want you. we need you. we want you to be part of us. i've been at this a long time and we have people who are work for howard dean and we had people who work for barack obama who thought they were outside. we grant them, we are going to hug you. we need your thoughts, we your ideas, we need your passion and we need your ability to come together so we can speak with one voice. [applause] and i'm not good about baloney. that also means we need you to help us create compromises because in order to speak with one voice, it can't just be your voice and it can't just be my voice. it's got to be all of our voices and it's for those of

you who are in politics, the first time that is the single most difficult and most important thing that we can accomplish. so i want to welcome you, and will get on with the program and i want the baby with the end of the program or being here as well. first i want to thank our sponsors and i think you should all thank our sponsors because you guys are all eating and i'm not . i want to make sure somebody saves me some food red is christine ... our sponsors are wake third shop right and laura lie matisse, raise your hands, thank you very much. and our sponsor is also cp and l, christine martin here? christine, thank you. thank you very much. breakfast looks so good i'm actually going to enjoy it

when i'm all done. we have a number of speakers and i'm going to try to be ... i'm sorry. listen, i need your help with this too. it's going to be free-flowing, i have no idea what i'm doing, okay? i'm going to make it as smooth as possible, i'm going to keep it rolling. we got coming in, we got our governor and senator sitting here, we got instruct out here, all of them are going to speak and all of them have time commitments so i'm going to try and be patient with me, at the end of the meeting and i'm giving my remarks to the press, feel free to stick around and you can tell me what i did wrong, all right? i understand our firstspeaker is our sponsor christine martin . for a couple word from people you know, christine, come on out. you.

>> thank you. i'm honored to be your first official speaker this morning. and thank you for all for being here. this is my fourth dnc, my fourth time addressing the delegates is quite an honor. pcl corporation is very proud to support our delegation. so i got a number of questions at our table about pcl. for those of you remember, it was the old and sylvania power and light.they grew out of the merger of eight local utility companies in 1920. we invented business for86 years in pennsylvania . we have grown into one of the largest and best-performing utilities in both the us and the uk and in fact our utilities was just ranks once again my jd power as the number one utility in the east for customer satisfaction and that's the fourth time in a row. you.

and just as we strive to be the best in determining reliable, for the sake of electricity to our customers, pcl has remained steadfast in our support of allentown, the town we call home and the communities we serve in central and northeastern pa. we donate millions of dollars to federal organizations throughout our service territory and encourage our employees to volunteer and serve the communities in which they live. it is that civic side and civic duty that needs us to be here today, supporting this event. more than ever, the country and indeed the world are watching our political process unfold. there watching closely and all eyes are on philadelphia and as marcel said, you are about to make history area and so on behalf of tpl, i thank you for yourservice and have a wonderful week .

[applause] >> okay, so i'm going to around a littlebit . i'm getting my orders now so ... just climb in? all right so our first speaker will be mark stanley. mark was up for a long time so i have to figure out what i have to say. mark is the chairman of the nationaltuition democrats council . he runs the organization dedicated to ensuring jewish values in the democratic party. my recollection is you are from dallas texas and let me tell you something, if you are a long time democrat, a year from dallas texas that's going to mark 20 years, you

really got in your soul. mark stanley. [applause] >> thank you mister chairman. and thank you pennsylvania for hosting this beautiful convention, i really appreciate it. my name is mark stanley, i get a better title than sermon, i need as chairman of the nj dc. eva rabinowitz, our executive director is here and ira forman, our former director is here but i want to put something on your radar screen that you don't know about. that you're not even thinking about yet but convention is a place for business so i'm here to talk business with you for a minute. there's a little war that's going to break out in pennsylvania. sheldon adelson and the republican jewish coalition and their allies have pledged to stand $25 million to fight a war in eight swing states, pennsylvania unfortunately is a swing state. their goal is to get 10

percent of the jewish vote, alienated against barack obama and hillary clinton and swing 10 percent of the jewish vote. the results of that micro-war in pennsylvania if successful would be 22,000 hundred 80 votes. 22,680 votes are in i hope pennsylvania is a blowout. i hope every state is a blowout but the polls this morning and the polls in september are not going to show that. were going to work for every boat so they're going to spend $25 million to try to frame in that. you're going to see horrible signs like this one which you can't see but we can't trust hillary who sold out america and israel. it's the only thing they can talk about. they can't talk about domestic issues, they can't talk social justice, they can't talk about choice, education, poverty, health care. they can't talk about that and they're wrong on israel. hillary and tim kane are

supportive on israel but the only thing they will talk about so ... [applause] we got a super pack called juice for progress. were going to fight the $25 million. i'm here to tell you that help is on the way. at 4:00 today, in room 103b in the convention center we are having our leadership network, you are all invited and on thursday at 4:00 we are honoring all former and current jewish members of congress and debbie wasserman schultz and others. please come and you will hear about what we're going to do. if you have wrens in the jewish community that want to get involved with us, let your chairman no, he knows how to reach me thank you very much for your time. [applause] >> the next speaker, rich, do you want to go? is my honor, it's my privilege to call up to the stage one of pennsylvania's

phone who is now the national leader of the labor movement in the country. rich strother came out of the mine workers, he was president of the mine workers, he's now president of the afl-cio. he speaks better than i do, other than that i'm going to call him up so he can speak better than i can. rich strong,, rich? [applause] >>. >> good morning brothers and sisters, how are you doing today? marcel, thank you for the introduction and it's great to see you, it's great to see senator casey. this is like an old homecoming. we don't get together often enough but every four years we get to come together and

be in a room where everybody in the room cares about the same kind of america and is willing to work for the same kind of america you this for me, give yourselves a round of applause for all the hard work you have done and all the hard work you're going to do. [applause] look, in this election working people are in the drivers seat. we are ready to win in november, we will do it because we are a mainstream movement of working people and i mean allpeople , union people, nonunion people and never heard of union people yet. and pennsylvania, our state, we are going to make the difference. we're going to make lori clinton the next president of the united states and pennsylvania is going to make the difference, right? now think about this.

we on for governor wolf, we on forour supreme court candidates . we're going to win for katie mcginty, for you in the senate and were going to do everything we can to turn the pennsylvania house from red to blue, right? [applause] look, america wants and america needs raising wages. that feeling is all around us in philadelphia. it's all around us across this country. the political landscape has shifted the cause working people spoke with the voice that loud and clear and strong. we're going to stop the latest bad radio, the transpacific partnership . [applause] now, you can do better than that. let's hear it.

and i want to specifically thank all of you for all your hard work in that fight but that's not all. you see, we are moving forward also. last year, workers bargained for, fought for and one pay raises in the historic fashion. we stood up for jobs and against the gap between the richest in america and the rest of them. and this convention, we are going to set a new direction because the time is right for a new economic agenda for broad prosperity. we know wants raising wages every worker in america and this convention is going to start that process and move forward to changing the rules of the economy and creating raw prosperity. [applause] and never forget this, the democratic party is the party of prosperity.

the lead up to this convention has been a very positive and progressive debate between bernie sanders and hillary clinton. that debate has moved our country, our great country in the right direction. the democratic platform. the democratic platform, our platform yields the strongest and most unifying vision and the most progressive vision that this country has seen in generations. and hillary, hillary is rising to meet the challenges of tomorrow with the strong vision of american prosperity where all americans from the bottom to the top and we are going to make sure she gets into the white house and make that a reality for all of us. [applause] you see, america's labor movement, our agenda

leads our politics. working people at this convention are putting our agenda before our politics and not the other way around. and it's working. it's leading us forward, moving the candidacy of hillary clinton and division of the democratic party and we're going to continue to mobilize, organize, register, speak up and speak out and elect pro-worker candidates all across this country. [applause] you see, we stand for our issues, our values and for a better life for all. at this convention and every day, we are standing up and speaking out for the issues that matter most to working families and that lead to a better life for all working people and america. we stand for a voice on the job and that means the right

to join together in a union, to demand better wages and working conditions. [applause] and make that demand without fear of firing or retaliation. we stand for families and fairness which means fighting for equal pay and re-rating in wall street and reforming our broken criminal justice and immigration system. we stand for investments in manufacturing and a 21st century infrastructure and we oppose job killing trade deals like the tpp. look, ... [applause] hillary clinton is running a positive campaign to move america forward. and when we all thought, she listens. hillary shares our vision and our values. hillary is running to change america, not just manage

america andwe intend to help her . she's with working people and working people are with her all the way to the white house. [applause] i just got to say this. politics is a team sport. and we have to build a winning team. the extremism of the republican party which was on full display in cleveland last week has sharpened the choice of state by america this election year. you see, we need working families candidates who will get things done from the bottom of the ticket to the top of the ticket. but no elected leader, no elected leader alone, no matter how strong she is can win what america needs. we need powerful pragmatic

and principled team who share a common vision and common values. let build a winning team in pennsylvania and in washington. let's do it together. our state can lead the way to a better today, a better tomorrow, a better america where working people share in the prosperity. hillary clinton at the top of the ticket . katie mcgivney in the middle of the ticket and everybody else along the way, we are going all the way if we stick together. tell your brothers and sisters, solidarity. [applause]

>> a couple of housecleaning things and there will be some as we goalong. if you are not a delegate , if you are not a delegate and if you are a delegate there are a lot of things going on at the convention center, there are a lot of groups that are meeting. if you are a delegate, your delegate pass will get you in. if you are not a delegate, there are passes outside for all of the constituent groups. just ask for themwhether you are labor, lgbt or a native american , whatever constituency group you can think of, we got it because we're exclusive. we've just got to take it so you can get into the various places . i want to recognize a couple of people that are here and then we will hear from our next speaker. and i do this all the time so , over 25 years i've learned i'm going to announce everybody does here and i'm going to forget three or four people. i'm saying up front i apologize read and they just

told me that you're really important . okay? first i do want to recognize, what are you kevin? anyway, he's ours. the former executive director something, but what? i'm sorry. the executive director of the host committee, the convention that put this all together. as you can see i'm really well scripted but at least we can have some fun with it, right? kevin was so. [applause] >> earlier today congressman matt cartwright, 17 was here. he had to go to another place , another meeting. is my goal here, congressman from the 14th? mike, thank you. [applause] are you ready commerce people?

i do want to recognize rich fitzgerald, chief executive of allegheny county. [applause] i saw that john fetterman, the former candidate for u.s. senate is here, is siding here today? [applause] the governor of the 49, he's originally from york pennsylvania. when you're that big, you know how hard it is to disappear? all right. and i will recognize some others, i see our attorney general candidate, the next attorney general of the commonwealth of pennsylvania, josh spiro. [applause] so in 1992, when some of us started, i started with the presidential conventions in 1992, the first thing i brought out is that the ministers were in charge. it was tony or john.