d.c. circuit has impraised a new fcc could easily reverse course, and i think we cannot have policy continuing to pick penguin dub ping-pong back and fort and the courts have to hold agencies to a higher standard and i believe that's what the supreme court wants and i believe that's an important reason that there's this likely to get to the supreme court, because the approaches of the d.c. circuit has taken allows agencies to change policy preferences. >> likelihood to jump above 50%? >> this is my -- when i say very likely i'm talking compared to the five percent baseline. so i'm at 300% of the baseline. >> okay. >> i want to just jump in here because this is really, really important. so, again, you may think that net neutrality is great or may not care you should be concerned

not just pet the fcc's claims of legal authority, under provision -- which differences them power to regular hate the internet but you should be concerned because, number one, the agency in order to change it mind -- >> in 2002 and 2005 said broadband was not a common care area, and this one says it really is, and this is what williams' dissent is about and hall can elaborate. that was step one. so, claim of power and also we think it's really easy for u.s. to justify changing our minds. step two was, don't worry. we know you're concern about title 2. we'll tailor title 2 up to to a modern version that doesn't include price controls and unbundling mandates so networks have to apply other people to resell their service elm don't worry.

we'll edit this out and we'll use that to -- and the forebearance power of congress, we think the market is competitive enough for us to forebear but not competitive so we have to have regulation so when you do in the two steps together and what the ace hag does is make it easy for the agency to do whatever it wants and then you have an ah-ha moment and you realize thing a has made it easy for a future fcc to either expand tight 28 -- title 2, to cover -- or to change its mind completely about title 2 and say, do-over, we'll go back to 2005. also, on forebearance, the fcc can change its mind you. get a complete seesaw. all of this -- if the courts don't step in, all of this guesses decided by elections and

by how far the agency wants to go to one degree or another. if you have that environment, you have no certainty about investment for infrastructure. then you start to worry about the economic spigot that unreached $1.4 trillion of private investment in broadband in 1996 -- >> do you think congress will step in? >> absolutely. republicans have're proposed a legislative deal that would give the fcc authority -- as chong passed legislation in 2006 to do this -- they would give the fcc authority to address the core issues of net neutrality which k is -- >> and contrary to what sarah sad, the reality is because the president made this a partisan issue where he drew a line -- >> it's not a partisan issue. >> oh, sure, both ways. hold on. let's remember, 2006, republicans passed a -- rewrite

of communications act that gave the fcc power to enforce and but it didn't work out in 2010 the democratic chairman, to his credit, tried -- and henry waxman tried to negotiate -- and republicans thought they were about to win the house and didn't would to do a deal, so that moment was house. now republicans offered a deal in complete sin and the democrats -- >> come on. they offered a deal as the democrats were running a victory lap. and -- >> because there are good reasons -- listen -- >> they were gutting -- >> if you're a democratic -- >> -- a great deal for them. >> if you're a democrat you should be terrified by this precedent because it means the fcc can forebear from the act and no analysis. so, in other words, there are lots of good reasons why both sides would have wanted this resolved with a a clear statute, the kind of way that democracy

is supposed to work where we resolve policy matter, we write a statute, we give an agency a standard and then the courts hold the agency to that. >> but the order was 400 pages long. this was maybe not done under the exact analytical framework that you would have liked to have son or hall would have liked to have seen, but to suggest this was an unreasoned decision void of any analysis is untrue. >> do we tenant to make a policy to tim brennan and now cite him. >> explain what you're talking about. >> hal do you -- >> tim brennan is one of the three chief economists that judge williams cited -- >> former fcc -- >> -- and a democrat. >> -- that the fcc ignored in its rulemaking. i'm just going to stick to the economic analysis. with respect to economics, really nothing done on the score. as -- to an economists you have to demonstrate not only does

your policy generate benefits in -- you want to rule out the possibility that some less re, they there's a one-line dismissal, despite the fact that three former economy economists are jumping up and down and saying consider re -- never mind the fact they relied on case-by-case to take care of zero rating cases which are effectively the same thing to an economist. i want to pick up on one thing baron said on the major import. he is quoting from a supreme court case called king vs. burwell. the issue is whether deference should be granted when the agency is making rules that could generated, quote, major economic influence."

and we talked about tens of billions in infrastructure. now we have some data coming through on isp which is quite frightening. in 2015 when where we head three-quarters of the year under title 2, we had for the first time since the recession -- we had decline in isp cap x, mook -- among to top 12 and the first six months of this year, across the top three, unfortunately the only three who have reported but the biggest three -- a decline of $2.3 billion in cap. and in the first six mocks of this year compared to 2014 which i the last six-month interview but what the isps are doing is throttling back on their investment and i think this is a, quote, major economic significance-end quote, given hutch money is at stake. >> hal, under the order --

>> i think there's a lot of disagreement about those numbers but also the -- as the court recognized the fcc justified its decision on a multitude of factors that was not -- to ask the fcc to base they're entire decision on cap x is -- >> on economics, not cap x. >> they do not require agencies to undergo a cost benefit analysis. >> i agree. unfortunately almost every other agency under the sun is obliged to respect cost benefit, the fcc the exception. on the day the issued on order, a two-pager, disclaiming any responsibility to do cost benefit. i realize that's an issue. if this is where things stand then i think that congress, separate from net true neutrality stuff needs to impose a cost benefit standard which is no different than the environmental protection agency, the cfpb or all of the executive

agencies. >> the apa does require the agency to respond to the record and there was a great deal of economic evidence that the agency ignored, misconstrued or frankly misstated. >> okay so do we think this will be sort of a tailored specific net neutrality kind of wall here or are we talking bat rewrite of the telecom act, which could take a decade? anybody? >> i think i've invested more time in this cause than anybody, which is that -- >> not more than me or tim. >> in the rewrite -- i'm sorry -- look. the fact is, we have been talking about two different acts today. the 1934 communications act which just applied 1887 railroad regulation to the telephone network. congress really didn't significantly update that until 1996.

when they did, they really didn't even do it with the internet in mind. they were writing before home broadband was a thing of that's why these sets of issues have been unclear. we don't have time to get into the history but the point is i think just at every reasonable person who is involved in telecom policy would agree that the act is outdated and this is the kind of problem you wind up with when an agency is trying use this siloed framework in a world where we don't have those silos anybody. we don't have a separate voice service and video markets. all these things are blurred together. would love to find groups in the center, and center left, who would come to the table and agree we should heave an agency that has broad power, but has to justify when it uses that power, and that's the issue that hal raised. what's that tim brennan meant

when they refer to the fcc as an execs free zone. if we're going to serve consumers we have to be careful -- weigh cost and benefits and that was the point of judge williams' lengthy dissent. >> barron, are you saying this should be debt with a rewriting of the telecom act. >> there is a spectrum of options where you could do a narrow deal that resolves the issue, takes other grants of power off the table -- section 706 has not been talked. -- that would alaw the fcc to regulate, google, facebook, et cetera could be regulated by the fcc, which essentially a branch check. so if i'm not the tech world i'm worried. the net neutrality may not hold up and i'm worried, and the other people like hal -- we don't agree on a lot of things but people see ways to sweeten the pie and do a deal. >> i just want to make this concrete. the compromise i have in mind

would be to give the fcc the authority to do precisely what it wanted to do in the 2010 under but under a new supports. they tried under 706 and the courts said they cooperate. so if like the rules, they're a compromise. if you ask an economist -- i just cao are her toed -- >> good idea to do case by case they say no, the presumption should be in favor but you can convince enough people in middle of the aisle to go long with the 2010 order. that is the starting point. and then i think you have to throw in sweeteners to get the democrats to go along. >> but we are very happy with the -- >> i you're happy -- >> -- strong legal position. >> ephemeral. >> let her speak. that is my question for you, sarah. you have barron saying everybody should be worried. this is so scary.

this could totally flip even on the net neutrality folk. you decent seem worried. i don't see you sweating. >> contrary to hal's numbers we have not seen the disastrous consequences of this decision, and in fact we have seen -- i'm hoping we'll see a chilling effect on any harmful behavior that we have seen leading up to the open internet order, and as the commission pointed out, there are a lot of actors involved in the ecos which is not necessarily isp. applications online, content. users we he not talked about except at the beginning who have called on the fcc tone act important protections, and -- to enact important protections. so this is a bigger picture than any sort of -- whatever sort of

economic analysis that hal -- this is well reasoned, comprehensive and really quite thoughtful on the part of the fcc and i think we're seeing, as we're looking for the fires that come as a result of this terrible order, as my colleagues would describe, we haven't seen that. we see an effective regulatory regime which has been upheld by the courts and is settled. >> no one is yelling fire and no one predicted disaster. my -- >> i would say the petitions for rehearing yell fire. >> ike talking about investment in the network. if we can get the same protections -- shouldn't be to wedded to title 2. can we get net neutrality protects? who cares how thunder grandded but the fcc has the tort protect consumers. if we can do this without the downside you might not think eight seguan but a what if we're down $3 billion --

>> i want to step in. the argument is that the deal on the table -- >> i'm not defending that. >> -- not give the same authority to the fcc. new deal. but i think -- i'm not speaking for sarah but i think you're saying, we don't need a deal because we already won. >> for the next four years, the next cycle. >> maybe -- look. democrats in this room need to ask themselves what they'll do when trump really takes the fcc and does whatnot he wants to do. seriously. the fcc has made it supereasy for them to change their mind to expand regulation if they want to, to lower the regulatory burden, to unforebear. the fcc can do whatever it wants and of you give that power to a person who don't have enough particular principles, going wherever the winds lead him, you'll be terrified by the

result. so to say nothing terrible has happened, of course, this particular fcc has every incentive not to use the other powers it has claimed. they want to make sure everyone believes this lie. this is title 2 light, modernized. no big deal. well, just wade. >> let me make one observation from somebody who is not so invest in this. debate on the both sides has been about fierce about what will happen in the future -- fears about what will happen in the future. the carriers care about the power that has been claimed to create new rules in the future that would be terrible. and the net neutrality folks identified some problems but mostly concerned with things like -- becoming much more common than the past, and they say we have no interest in that. there's a lot of time left to see if bad things happen and people can take action when that does. the courts bill be able to review any new rule that the agency sets for them and

congress can take action and the people can elect presidents and elected representatives who will respond to this. the worst thing in is -- it's not the worst thing that elections have consequences, including for administrative agencies. >> i want to get to some questions here. in the audience here do we have anybody who has a burning question? you came all the way here and have to ask this on c-span? really? no one? >> folks on twitter, hash tag title 2. sent -- send in your questions eye. i-i've been checking and there have been a lot of comments but no questions. we have one taker. >> i paid him to ask a question but i don't know what it's going to be describing cross your fingers. >> obviously lot of legal debate here and a consumer who use the internet might be asking, what this mean to in the? i think that online video games

which are played by late ten si or live video, which different that netflix. why should one who plays "call of duty" online care about the debate. >> that was the beautiful if want of tech freedom. he is eluding to our core concern which- -- i keep saying most of the policy is not actually that controversial but there are issues on he margins. so it setting aside the debate about netflix we talked about paid prioritization, that's a lot of what drove the fcc, drove the president, apart from losing the mid-term election, to get involved, was the idea they needed to ban pied prioritization because that was a great fear would result in fast lanes and slow lanes. in fact, there are lots of

services out there where you as a consumer are much better off if you can pay for that to be part of the package you're getting for it to be given priority because most of what you do, you don't care about the packets getting there online. you're streaming video, you can have it buffer. what our intervenors are concerned about is live services. you want to deliver high quality hd you're in a better position -- if you can pay for that priority, and the fcc has said, with no economic analysis -- this is hal residents point -- not talking about two-sided marks at all -- said, nope, we're just going to prevent that at all from being a thing you can pay for. doesn't even matter if users want it. we just think it's inherently harmful and we'll ban it. that is crazy. >> first i hear that no one wants to do paid prioritization

because there's no economic justification and we shouldn't worry because new one is going to do it. now i hear paid prioritization could be in the next best thing since sliced bread. if you really care about bandwidth intensive and late ten si applications you should be worried about what happens when carriers don't play nice at the point of traffic handoff, and so -- having the fccable to step in and evaluate those as they come up is important, or just evaluate based on data collected -- consumer user data collected measuring network health to identify if there are problems where the fcc could step in. >> you're creating a false dichotomy. no one is arguing there shouldn't be a referee or cop on the beat. with respect to interconnection, the question is should the price always be zero? should netflix and youtube

always pay zero for intersection in. >> that's what the c -- >> what's chairman wheel-under put in chart are order. suggested you look. they subjected at the rates to, quote, just and reasonable under title 2, which translates into english as effectively zero. >> this is an issue that somebody will have an opportunity to challenge when the care about. it will be addressed by the courts in specificity should somebody went to bring a dispute to the commission. the commission is open to hear that. so much of what people are complaining about is not ripe to be resolved by the supreme court. >> one of the other arguments here on the other side was that if we have these rules and you sort of alluded to this -- that you're seeing a decline in cap x spending, but i think the other argument is that isps would

not introduce new kinds of business models, but we haven't seen that. we have seen some zero rating plans. again, we're not really seeing this bad effect nat a lot of companies said they would -- >> maggie, what we -- what we want to see -- my organization and many of -- is for the isps to compete on the merits of the service they offer. so our worry has beens you allow these new models to happen on the other side of the market as hal said, that that disinstant incentivizes the carriers from upgradinged inworks because they have another way to monetize the networks on the ad space side. >> one thing in the background here that is really informing -- informs a lot of the debate over

the issue -- is type one verse type two errors. problems you see and problems you don't see. historically the model has been, companies go out and come up with new ideas and put them on the marketplace and if they're problematic, you'll get trouble. the concern on the barron side of the equation is now companies need to get permission from the fcc or they're constantly concerned the fcc will be policing their business models, and sarah is just really demonstrated the point here by saying, well, if we allow companies to develop things that monetize the other side of the market there's less incentive to compete but there's another way to compete. one reason we haven't seen much development or interest in developing paid prioritization type business models is because everyone is concerned the fcc will come down like a hammer and -- >> i mean in all fairness, the rules have only been in place a year. there are many years -- >> no. no.

>> can order to wipe out paid prioritization, they took that to mean we can't do that. >> there's concerns about regulation, and the telecom carriers have known, if we do anything involving paid prioritization, then -- i apologize for using opi as evil henchman, but the -- they'll use this at a political -- to regulate us. so we need -- >> you're asking -- the fcc did in their 2015 order was they identified three egregious practices. blocking, throttling and paid prioritization, they said they would evaluate case-by-case basis with a specific set of criteria, but i'm just not seeing the disastrous consequences of these three

narrow brightline rules. >> characterize paid priority as egregious. >> the problem is that you're never going to see the missed opportunities. they're not given opportunity to have the good or the bad and there could be good here. >> is just want to emphasize, a lot of the push for net neutrality has been in the name of permissionless innovation is which is a catch phrase. 80% of run's think in the neutrality is great. but think about permissionless inknow vacation. what has has meant for those pushing for regulation, we don't want the broadband provider pots say no for our service. that's concern. welcome address that concern. ways to do that. i think the examples of that ever happening are incredibly few and far between and were dealt with by the company

quickly or could have before dealt with by another form of governmental authority. hold on. let me finish. but my important is, that's one form of permissionless eni know vacation. what gus is saying we have turned that on its head because now when we talk about the fcc having overview of things but as hal noted, setting the presumption against them, what we're really talking about is getting read of permissionless innovation, as an innovator if you want to do the services the intervenors we represent want to do, services that are real-time and high quality or give you another example. one enter veiner want to unbundle wireless service in steads of having a one month play and pay $40 a wong you decide what you want on your wireless plan and put it together. that looks an awful lite like paid prioritization or things the fcc banned.

so you have to go to the fcc on bended knee saying can i do that's in the name of, ironically, permissionless innovation. >> what the fcc was trying to guard against -- i think what made consumers look at this and worry about is for broadband in particular, a lot of people only have one choice. so, they've got one broadband provider, and they are afraid that provider is going to dictate based on paid priority what services they can get and which they don't get. which one sort of -- and so do we get to a point where our broadband, our internet experience looks like a cable tv experience where i only get to go to certain channels and certain sites. >> and i would just point to the 150 companies from tiny startups to very large internet companies who sent a letter to the fcc, very, very early on, in the fcc's proceedings, which

articulated why paid prioritization would be harmful for. the. i'm appreciative of the fact that on your -- within your side intervenors some are concerned about the rules. there are hundreds of companies that were concerned -- and other organizations and investors concerned about what would happen in the absence of the rules. >> i'll quickly say there war a couple of companies that commit e comments saying why paid prioritization was not problematache, and the fcc mischaracterized their comments to justify banning paid prioritization in the order. >> we'll have to sort of cut you guys off because wore getting very close -- i just want to give everybody ant opportunity to have a final statement here because we're about five minutes out from ending this, and so who wants to go first? >> this way and that way. >> sure go ahead. >> okay. so, when you have a debate like this where you have some people

on one side saying thing -- even if it's an whoeveremming number of people, and some say there could be some beneficial uses you don't ban it. you write a rule that is flexible enough to allow the agency to go after harmful practice us but allow the good things to happen. that didn't happen here, specifically on paid prioritization, the agency, because it ignored economics, wrote a brightline rule which was not driven by substance. it was driven by politics. you can say that there was a deep amount of analysis behind this but the fact is the agency was heading towards a more moderate position. the democrats lost the mid-term elections and the president decided he needed to have a series, a portfolio of things to point to, to re-assert himself. that's why he came in gave a big speech, asked for title 2, and just to give you a sense how little the white house cared about the substance, they didn't even reference the right title 2. they referenced the 1996 act

which is so basic in air but there were no lawyers involved no can cared about the details. purely driven by politics. the fcc has to change its course, without issuing any order, and to writing this order, lacking analysis, doing a hodgepodge job of this and opening the door in countless ways for other concerns in the future to arise by virtue of what they did, by virtue of changing completely their approach to net neutrality, and invoking forebearance in a way that be reversed in future. this is not a stable foundation for revving lating the internet. it will bev -- well have unintended consequences. >> over the last 40 minutes of this discussion we have gone into a lot of the weeds of the substance of it. net neutrality good, policy or not. i want to take us back to the case at hand, and i just want to remind us all that the appeals

process moving forward is not about the substance of is net neutrality good or bad policy. it's about the process by which courts review agency act. they're really important questions here. there's a lot of interesting stuff greg on recently at the supreme court. that is what will get this to the supreme, if it does get there. so will nobody think of the courts? >> hal? >> i want to make it clear that at least from my vantage -- i'm not arguing against net neutrality. i think protectionses need to be in place and fcc needs to have the power to -- make sure they're not done in a way to advantage an isp against a rival. the result we wound up with here is a mess. to use the phrase, it throws the baby out with the bath water. it's schizophrenic internally.

treats zero rating, form of prioritization, form of preferencing and interconnection we talk about is case by case. so the whole thing is a hodgepodge and makes no sense, internally contradictory and the best selection is to have congress resolve the issue once and for all so we're not back here at the next national election wondering whether republicans will take away title 2. >> so like -- i want to make sure i give kevin a chance to talk. i want to recontextualizeis. happy to all debate the relative merits of net neutrality but the reality is we're most likely at the end of the litigation pathway here and that these rules, for better or worse, whether you like them or you don't, will remain the law of the land, and so i want to just be very reasonable about what the next steps are. there are two options.

from a legal standpoint. one is to go -- is the rehearing and the other is the supreme court and those are very unlikely. >> so, i will just say, i understand in this discussion demonstrates the policy issues that stated here are important complicated. the legal question isn't. this is -- this case involveds a straightforwards application of settled administratively prims that recognize judges are not economists and much less well suited to decide in what policies are good or bad for the internet than are the folks at an expert agency like the fcc, no matter how much you've may disagree with them. as a consequence, if somebody doesn't like the rules issued here, they're much better off going to congress or winning an election than trying to get this overturned be the courts. >> okay. all right. and just want to thank all the panelists here and the audience

online and on tv and right here in the room. so thank you all. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> today on q & a, tammy baldwin talks before their career in wisconsin's political history. q & a starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern each week night through the end of august. on booktv primetime, global politics, starting at 8:00 p.m., david santaer, the less you know the better you sleep. russia's road to terror and

dictatorship under yeltsin and putin. and then politics in mexico. and at 9:30, choosing the hero, my improbable journey in the rise of africa's first woman president. at 10:10 p.m., this brave new world, india, china, and the united states. and at 11:00, oscar motor, history of violence, living and dying in central america. all this comes up tonight on booktv primetime on c-span2. >> booktv on c-span2, 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors every weekend. here some features programs this weekend: saturday, at 11 eastern, booktv is live at the second annual mississippi book festival, taking place at the state capitol grounds in jackson. then at 8:00 p.m. eastern, public, religion, research institute ceo robert jones

examines the decline and influence of white christianmers in this book "the end of white chin america." on sunday night at 10:00 eastern, "after words," see more hersh talks before the his book, the killing of osama bin laden, which challenges some of the facts presented by the obama administration and others. he is interviewed by bob dreyfuss. >> but that night the president also say, i want to thank the pakistani counterintelligence sources -- and they had to get rid of that. within days they were saying the president misspoke and then he went on television -- by this time, within a week, i knew the day after the raid there was trouble. >> go to booktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. >> up next, discussions on criminal justice policy and

incarcerationed part of the national urban league conferences. starts with the ceo, mark morial. >> good morning, urban leaguers. how many were out there with dougie last night? was it good? was it a party? are you bright-eyed and ready to go? what are we going to do? what are we going to do? ladies and gentlemen, i know you're ready to dive right into this all too important conversation on criminal justice reform and ending mass incarceration. this is one of the most important discussions at our conference here in baltimore. every day, in in communities across the nation, too many of

our sons and daughter are being locked ump. sometime fours long sentences, sometimes for life, due to archaic mandatory sentencing law. reform is needed right now if we're truly going to save families, our futures, and the lives of our children. what we have our work cut out for us but we're making strides in a positive direction. no doubt, the conversation underway in many state capitals, city halls, and indeed, at the white house and in the congress, the promise we can finally, finally, make some significant changes in our criminal justice system. the tragedy is, ladies and gentlemen, many people who are arrested for minor violations, for nonviolent offenses, find themselves destined to many, many years in prison.

and then, and then, in many states, after they leave prison, they are faced with barriers to voting and in some cases the enable to vote, significant barriers to re-employment, to education, to housing, to simply moving on and rebuilding their lives. this is an issue whose time has come. this nation, the united states of america, with five percent -- five percent of the world's population -- incarcerates 25% of all inmates in the world. we must change this reality. we must change this reality. and the president -- [applause] -- and members of congress and republicans and democrats and business people and faith leaders are now joining this

call, but this call, and the idea of criminal justice reform, has been at the center of the agenda for the civil rights community and, and, for the national urban league for many, many years. so as we begin this morning, please welcome jenny kim, deputy general counsel, koch triis. jenny manages political and public policy issues, including developing and implementing compliance programs across the companies. she is also chair of the board of directors for the coalition of public safety, on the board of the justice action network. these are both organizations that advocate for criminal justice reform. please welcome, jenny kim. [applause] >> good morning and happy friday. thank you, mark, for the kind

introduction. we at koch industries are honored to serve as into for this session, save our cities, criminal justice reform anding mass incarceration, we believe that individual liberty, at herns to the bill of rights and the freedom to citied pave the road to a freer and more just america right now our criminal justice system is failing all americans, and depriving our people of opportunity to, as mr. spock of "star trek" would put it, live long and prosper. we recognize the nation's explosive increase in incarceration impacts disadvantaged and minority communities the most. nationally, as you're all well aware, african-americans are jailed at rate almost four times of that another white americans. for over a decade, koch industries advocated for comprehensive criminal justice reform to make the system more fair, for all americans, and our senior vice president and

general counsel, mark holden, will speak more extensively about our efforts on the panel. that is why, along with morrah and john arnold, the ford foundation, and then d. and katherine t. macmacarthur foundation we are -- the largest partnership effort to improve or criminal justice system to be more fair, smarter and cost effective. as the board chair of this organization i'm proud to be collaborating with the coalition's president, steven hawkens who should be in the audience, and its left and for right partners. to demonstrate that different voices and perspectives of good faith can engage respectively and agree upon solutions to create positive change to the system. ...

and defending free expression. we all need to listen to what is being said as well as what is not being said, and to figure out how to bridge those gaps and build trust. as a friend from the aclu once told me, we need to listen and to engage whether or not we like what is being said and not just when it is convenient. remember when the heart does not tell the truth, painted you into. as we all worked in the divide, thank you for your time, and we are excited to participate in a solution action oriented plenary session we look forward to engaging with you to create solutions. thank you. [applause] ♪

♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, our next presenter is not new to the national urban league. he is always with us at our conference. he is a friend of the national urban league. he is a friend of mine. is one of the most important voices on civil rights and social justice in this nation in these times. i want to say as we always say, that the civil rights leadership of the 21st century find common ground on works together, does not engage in petty bickering, turf battles. we are unified in trying to work on the difficult challenges we face. ladies and gentlemen, i'm proud

to welcome back to the national urban league, the reverend al sharpton. [applause] >> thank you to marc morial, and certainly to all in the national urban league. i'm very happy to be at another conference of the national urban league. answered my friend and colleague, marc morial. no one has done more and no one has fought harder to correct the ills that we face in this country than marc morial as any is over a decade as the president of this organization. let me be very clear to you as we gather in baltimore, that we are at a very critical time in the history of this country, and in the landscape of urban america.

we are in an election that is as polarized and is hostile as we have ever seen it. but more than the rhetoric and the theatrics is the reality. when we are dealing with mass incarceration, when we are dealing with the question of police reform, when we are dealing with the questions of economic inequality and wage stagnation, when we are dealing with education inequality, all of these issues are front and center, and cannot be dealt with in an emotional way. it must be dealt with for concrete solutions. i was saying last night, on top of that, the optics will change because we are now faced for the first time in history that we will see a white succeed a black president. 's even our youngsters that feel

the inequality at the hope of watching a black family walked out of the white house and walk across that long every day, that will be removed coming january. i hope the right why is coming across that stage. but nontheless, a cosmetic change will drive the even more home to a lot of us that has to do with this on the ground. it is in that climate come in that scene that we must address the real basic question of criminal justice reform and reforming of our economic arrangements in this country, which is why it is critical national urban league and others that have a long-standing commitment and ability continue to work together. we cannot just have flashpoint

movements to settle systemic problems. [applause] flashpoints are good. immediate reactions are good, but if you don't have permanent institutions to deal with matters, then we would not see institutional change your one of the things we set national action network is one of the things it's important to any -- black women's roundtable does is that when you have a police matter, clearly all police are not guilty. most are not guilty of doing wrong, but when there is a serious allegation, they can depend on an institution, their union, to provide them with resources and legal advice in the advice and family counseling. only an institution can stand up against that. this weekend when i leave here,

i'm going to ferguson. it's the second anniversary of the police killing of michael brown. this week we are here seeing a policeman in baltimore that was convicted of doing the wrong to a citizen, even after the friday great police were but go. we are not in the beginning of seeing something in america -- freddie gray -- become critical. we are in the middle of it being critical. we don't have to go back to selma and montgomery to reference movement. it's happening right now in ferguson, and staten island, in sanford, florida. the question is will we be able to rise to the occasion that they rose to the occasion and dealt with those things in the '60s. this is our challenge. this is our mandate. i'm glad we stand with marc morial and the national urban league cannot just be a flash in the pan, but to change the temperature in the kitchen to

make sure that all americans can dwell together. thank you. [applause] >> urban leaders, reverend al sharpton, one more time to give him a hand. good friend. let's change the temperature in the kitchen at to change the temperature in the kitchen, what are we going to do? >> vote. >> all right. next unread welcome to the national urban league, the president and ceo of the naacp, cornell william brooks. cornell come onboard prime minister is the 18th person of service to the executive of the association. ladies and gentlemen, insisted with what we have today i want to note that the naacp, a national urban league, the national action network, and soon the black women's roundtable, we are all coalesce

working together on issues of economic opportunity, education reform, criminal justice reform and voting rights act reform. just a little about cornell brooks. a graduate of head start and yale law school. he considers himself a grandson, air and beneficiary of a landmark brown v. board of education decision. which was argued by the legendary naacp counsel and baltimore in thurgood marshall. before becoming president of the naacp, cornell led to nuke based new jersey institute for social justice -- new york-based. >> he directed the institute's efforts to pass prisoner reentry bills in 2010 in the state of new jersey. those bills are a model for the nation. ladies and gentlemen, he is an expert. he has walked the walk and criminal justice reform.

we are so happy to welcome to the national urban league cornell william brooks. [applause] >> good morning. we are in a moment in our countries history where leadership cannot be taken for granted. there are those who are adept and articulate in front of cameras, and then there are those who are skilled and deeply committed and sacrificially committed to the work of the nation. you have that kind of leadership in marc morial. someone ask you to put your hands together for your own, the president and ceo of the national urban league. [applause]

this is a moment where the national urban league has convened in the hometown of the naacp, to lift up the cost and concern of a generation of americans who find themselves profiled and criminalized by the criminal justice system. that would be the 2.2 million americans who are incarcerated in this country, the 1 million american fathers who are incarcerated in this country, the 65 million americans who have criminal records, the one out of three african-american men who can expect to spend some time in their lives behind bars. it is a moment in our country that has been described by the scholar michel alexander as the new jim crow. it has been described by the scholar douglas blackmon, slavery by another name.

this is this era of mass incarceration. it is a moment that transcend rhetoric it is a moment that transcends political platforms. it is a moment that speaks to who we areand where we are headed and what we represent as envisioned it is a moment that calls for serious policy reform. what does that mean? it means we have to sentencing reform represents an end, a categorical global total and to minimum sentencing. [applause] i didn't say the beginning of an end. i said the end. now, and that mandatory minimums to represent mandatory ambition, mandatory condemnation, a mandatory condemning of our people to the bowels of the criminal justice system. we have to bring that to an end. it also means that we have to take some of the lessons that we've learned in state capitals

in state legislatures across the country and take action with respect to federal legislation. here in the audience we have one of the leaders of that effort. from virginia congressman bobby scott. if you don't know him, you should because he is leading that fight. [applause] in the halls of congress with marc morial, with al sharpton, with melanie campbell, and with so many of you. we need to stand behind those who are pushing for serious reform and we need to set the floor of compromise really high. in other words, we can't back down from a commitment to ending this era of mass incarceration global it, categorically. we are also adding moment where we have to do something about policing on the front it. so in other words, where our sons and daughters, our grandsons and granddaughters,

our aunts and uncles, our mothers and fathers encounter the police on the streets. and they find themselves being treated as third class citizens in this republic. we have to bring about an end to predatory policing. how can we do that? the naacp, only a few weeks ago at our national convention, called upon both presidential candidates, all presidential candidates, and the whole of the country to take what we called an american pledge to preserve and protect our lives. that is to say, we are calling upon presidential candidates upon securing the office of the white house to act within 100 days to bring about an end to predatory policing. things like the funding law enforcement agencies -- defunding -- found to engage in a pattern and practice of discrimination. defunded them. that is to say, we should not be

in the position of subsidizing those who are discriminated against us. number two, calling for data, that is to say, transparency, with respect to how we are being treated in the midst of our democracy. and head of the fbi can't tell you what the "washington post" can tell you, that is to say, how many people have been, have lost their lives advance of the police any given year, i.e., 950 last year, well over 500 this year, we have a problem. we need that kind of data. we also need to have a minimum standards of conduct. how is it that when you drove down interstate 95 was a speed limit? there was a standard. how is it that when it comes to our law enforcement agencies, we have no national standard with respect excessive use of force, no minimum standard of conduct, the national certification?

we can do something about that. lastly, all of these measures cannot be realized unless we use the vote. we -- yes. [applause] on the precipice of the first presidential election without the full protection of an rest after we are at a point where we have to combine the energy and the routt county of protests with the practicality of the polls with the utility of policy. protest, polls and policy. every demonstrator needs to be a voter. every voter needs to be a demonstrator. we need to be in the streets and that the polls en masse and in the millions. it's just not clear. [applause] -- that clear. if we are to do that, it depends on all of us working together. we need the national urban league.

you are a part of an iconic american institution that has dedicated itself this year and at this moment to save our cities. you are here under the leadership of marc morial. you are here as a part of a great and grand post-millennium civil rights movement. we are asking you to join with the naacp, join with the black women's roundtable, joined with the national action network your let us join together and let us turn around this white house, turn around the senate, turn around the house of representatives, turn around this nation and let us lead. because you do for we have had those who talk about leadership we that those who pretended to be leaders but i see in this room at this time at this convention the real leaders of this country, and we call upon you to leave it. [applause] >> -- lead it.

>> thank you, cornell. let's give him another they can't. bringing fire, bringing intelligence, bringing vision applause met my very good college, a friend melanie campbell, president and ceo. she wears two hats, the national coalition on black civic participation is an umbrella organization that works on voter registration, education and get out the vote efforts. she's also the convener of the black women's roundtable which is an organization of black women who are in the forefront in business, in politics, in civil rights and civic affairs. she's from florida, and she's been a fighter for civil rights, youth rights and women rights for over 20 years. and leading, organizing and managing successful civic

engagement and civil rights issue-based campaign, she's a hard-working leader. she's a wonderful sister. i'm so pleased she's with us again. ladies and gentlemen, please greek a good friend of the urban league movement, melanie campbell. [applause] >> good morning, urban leaguers. >> good morning. >> i'm going to say this again. good morning, urban leaguers. >> good morning. >> thank you for inviting me to join you again this year. today is a bittersweet moment for me. for this time last year those who know me, my mom and my brother isaac were with me down

at fort lauderdale. my mom passed away after suffering a massive stroke on june 15, just seven days after 87th birthday. y'all, she was still driving, okay? so she left the way she wanted to leave. i want to thank you, my urban league family, the love he showed my mom last year. she had such a wonderful time. and for the prayers. my mom taught me so much in my life, especially about courage and resilience. so i know she would want me to be here with you to take care of business, to keep pushing, fighting for civil rights, women's rights and social justice. moving forward on my journey. so i just drop by, you know, i like to just drop by, this one to share you thoughts with you. we have a 95 days left before

the november 8 election win we will vote for the 45th president of the united states, 435 members of the u.s. house of representatives, 34 years senators, 13 governors, 88 of the 99th state legislative chambers, 41 of the 100 largest cities are holding municipal elections, including the city of baltimore. i heard reverend al say this. i'm going to repeat it again because it's really, we don't know how quite it's going to feel any always remind us we will be electing the first white president that will follow the first black president or y'all know how that's going to feel? i don't know how that's going to feel. i came by to ask you to join us. were working in coalition with the urban league, national action network, the naacp, national african-american clergy network and many others to make sure we turned out the black vote in record numbers and to protect our vote on november 8. what did marc say? when we going to do?

>> vote. >> you can go to unity 16 campaign.net and join us. what's at stake? everything. spent a good to say that again. what's at stake? >> everything. >> what's at stake? >> everything spent today on the we love this conversation around criminal justice reform and mass incarceration according to the sentencing project one in 10 black men in their 30s are imprisoned or jailed on any given day. one and 50 children in the united states has a parent in prison. what's at stake? everything. almost 6000 youth are incarcerated in adult prisons and jails. half of the people in federal prisons are serving time for a drug-related offense. what's at stake? everything. the number of women in prison has been increasing at a rate of 50% higher than men since 1980. there are currently 106,000 women in the prisons in the

united states of america. 2000 black women were incarcerated in state and federal prisons at six times the rate of white women. what's at stake? everything. americans cannot vote because of a felony conviction or we must not only site sentencing and they'll reform or for fair treatment of prisoners but we must also insist on returning citizens receiving the basic most basic of american rights, and that's the restoration of the voting rights. [applause] >> i applaud, i applause, i live in the commonwealth of virginia, spend my days in d.c. i applaud virginia governor terry mcauliffe and his fight to restore right to vote to returning citizens in the commonwealth. after the supreme court said the governor could not come could restore voting rights only on a case-by-case basis. i have a barber i go to i was there a couple of weeks ago who

came up to me and showed me his phone. he had been out of business -- prison for over 15 years doing the right thing, raising his family and he was so excited to show me his application in the system that he said, ms. melanie, ms. melanie, made me feel old. i just need to show you this. i look at it. he was like, i be voting. i didn't get to vote for the first black president but i'm going to vote, i think it's a woman president. i'm just saying what he said. so governor mcauliffe, visa all right, i'm going to take inside 206,000 restoration orders for ex-felons. 206,000. [applause] and including 13 who were already registered for april. remember tomorrow august 6 is the 51st anniversary of the voting rights act of 1965.

what's at stake? everything. just yesterday president obama commuted the sentences of 214 men and women, 214 men and women, the largest commutations than in the past nine presence combined. what's at stake? everything. urban leaguers, i'm about this, stand up. it early. 8:00, what? i'm here though. i want you to repeat after me. what's at stake? >> everything. >> in the mass incarceration. what's at stake? >> voting rights. what's at stake? policing reform. what's at stake? everything. thank you, urban leaguers. let's get out and vote as if our life depended on it, because it

does. thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you. i want to welcome those have just arrived. i'm so happy, happy that when the third wakeup call came you responded. [laughter] let's give them a big hand. [applause] welcome. welcome, welcome. you all are a great looking crowd. so we are ready for our discussion began as we prepare for our discussion, just a few things about today's conference. after this plenary there are workshops taking place. there's the experience expo which is a wide open, around noon. we have the national council of urban league deals lunch in, even for which you need a ticket to be able to eat. this afternoon we have

continuing workshops and plenary taking place. and, of course, this evening the gala. and tomorrow in the morning we have power walk. you all will always seek a wakeup call at 5 a.m. 5 a.m. to get out and walk through the streets of baltimore, following that with family session and also family and community day taking place. to reference the national urban league website and the conference for more details and information. this morning to keep us on track and to moderate this session i'm very pleased to welcome back to the stage reverend al sharpton who has stepped into moderate. you also seem on msnbc, at politics nation. thank you, reverend al, and come on back at the let's get this show on the road. reverend al sharpton. [applause]

>> all right. let us this morning, let us bring on the panel on this board spill is divided into two parts. while we were discussing the entire issue of saving our cities, the first part will focus on criminal justice reform. and our second part will focus on in the mass incarceration within our community. let's get started with our panel. please join me in welcoming our panelists, erika mcconduit-dig mcconduit-diggs, president and ceo of the urban league of greater new orleans. different a hand as she comes. [applause] -- give her a hand. kimberly foxx, democrat for cook county states attorney in chicago. [applause] michael henderson, president of associated builders and contractors of greater

baltimore. [applause] monalisa johnson, founder of parents with incarcerated children. [applause] >> and the one and only honorable william h. billy murphy, jr., senior and founding partner of murphy falcon and murphy. [applause] dr. tony outland, managing director, corporate reputation, global marketing, and corporate affairs of bank of america. [applause] >> let's give all our panelists a big hand. [applause] all right. you may be seated. let's start off by each one of

you taking one minute, and i do mean one, by giving us an introduction of what you do and where you are generally on this issue of how we deal with, from a criminal justice reform would if you saving our cities. let's go around, one minute each. >> good morning. my name is erika mcconduit-diggs to i'm president and ceo of the urban league of greater new orleans. we work with on urban league affiliate in the state of louisiana so we work closely with all of our law enforcement agencies throughout the state. would also work in the area of economic development and education which we know are so critically and vitally connected to what is happening in criminal justice reform. we work deeply in communities throughout the state from a direct service perspective and advocacy and policy perspective. >> good morning. i'm kim foss, democratic nominee

for states attorney and cook county. thank you, cook county people in the house. caulk gun is a second largest county in the country. was the largest single jail in the country the largest unified court in the country and sadly web jail population is 86% african-american and latino. our juvenile justice detainees, 94%, are african-american and latino, 80% of which are african-american voice. this election is historic in that cook county has never elected a and african-american o lead the prosecutors office. we ran a campaign platform on criminal justice reform talking about mass incarceration, talking about making sure we use our jails and detention centers for those who cause harm to the community, and not those who we don't know what to do with. those dealing with drug issues, mental health issues, public health issues. this raises a seminal moment i think for the country because this would be an opportunity or

us to show real leadership and reform from the prosecutor standpoint which one last point to that is 95% of elected prosecutors in the country our incumbents are running unopposed. in our election the fact that we are having an african-american woman in this position, we represent less than 1% of women of color who are elected prosecutors. this is a real seminal moment for criminal justice reform and i'm excited chicago can take the leadership role. [applause] >> very exciting race where you defeated alvarez. that was a very exciting race. let's go to you, michael. >> michael anderson. good morning. i am not a policy guy. i'm here mostly to talk about a workforce development reentry program that focuses primarily on ex-offenders, and we are considered to have one of the

most successful models not only here in baltimore and maryland but action in the country. we are taking this to other cities across the country. 10 years, this program has been established and we have learned a lot of really valuable lessons on what makes workforce development successful. because there's a lot of workforce development programs in name only to do not result in jobs. at the end of the day it's getting someone in the job that can lead to a meaningful career. that's the truest test of a successful program. [applause] >> good morning. i monalisa johnson on the i am the founder of parents with incarcerated children out of new york. we are a national organization, and i started this organization because my daughter is incarcerated at i started it totally out of my pain because i realized that society has a stigma towar parents who have

children in prison, in jail. they basically, we basically look at each other and judged each other and tear each other down and assume there's something wrong in the family. wing in reality, there could be -- win. but maybe there wasn't. so that is a pain that takes place in the heart of a parent when they lose their son or daughter to the system, and there is a great amount of terminal that happens emotionally, financially. anyway you can think of it. it affects the family. so we decided that we would create the resources that are needed for the families, and particularly the parents to be able to function and make it through this journey with grace and ease. so if you have a child that is incarcerated, the first thing i want you to do is stand up and not be ashamed, not hide, not

protect. i want you to stand up and be proud of the fact that you did the best that you could do, if he did the best that you could do, and now when your heart of hearts that they will hopefully come out and hopefully. and it comes out, if you stand by them and make yourself strong, you will be able to hopefully reduce recidivism and hopefully never see her child go back and again. [applause] >> i should be a pessimist, but i remain an optimist. i should be a pessimist because we have lost every significant battle since the last one we won in 1964 with the civil rights act, 1965 with a 40 rights act, and the war on poverty and the beginning of the women's movement. but we have lost every significant battle in the counterrevolution that resulted,

when the dixiecrat joined the republican party a that nixon's urging. so the overt racism join the republican party and converted it from the party of lincoln which the majority in congress have voted for every major reform on our side to the party of race hatred, division, individual and systemic bigotry. so look at the institutions that remain in place because of our history of racism. we are not making a dent on doctor mass incarceration, the prison system has gone overwhelmingly worst in the past 30-four years. lackstown has gone down the drain. we lost the supreme court. we never regained it. now we are in danger of making it even worse than ever. we have people who are now possibly emerge as leaders who have no concept of the impact of their personal bigotry on the united states' standing in the world where 85% of people all over the world our people of color. it is not a coincidence that

terrorists who attacked 9/1 nine 9/11 for people of color but it's not presidents that yemen and effort have joined al-qaeda because they see what's happening in the united states. and so the present group that wants to lead is a hopelessly a direct, so hopelessly racist that we may be in for a rougher times that we've ever seen. so i should be a pessimist but i'm an optimist. because this is a rare moment in our history where many people of good will have discovered how bad it is for the black community and how bad it's always been, for the first time. these kids instead of being born in communities where there was no opposition whatsoever to individual bigotry, they are now going to school with blacks, no working side-by-side with blacks. they are now in intimate relationships with blacks. those people have changed. that's why i'm an optimist. thank you.

[applause] >> good morning to my name is tony allender and manage corporate reputation for bank of america. part of our portfolio is building a platform for reentry services on two fronts. want to figure out better ways in our own policy so that we might have the opportunity to attract more folks who are incarcerated into the company. and to use our financial capability to spur investment and reentry service across the country. we are thinking about that for a couple of reasons. one, we think it's an economic crisis that so many black and brown men in prisons throughout this country. we think that's an economic crisis and it's not good business and it doesn't make good public policy for states across this country. and we have a lot of people of color inside our company to 43% of her company of 200,000 people are african-american. just like me, and i know just

like many of you, have family members who have been a part of the criminal justice system and are looking to this company to see what we can do better. we are here to listen and also to be a part of the solution. [applause] >> all right. let me post the first question. what can be done to steer efforts and resources away from retribution to sustainable rehabilitation? let's start with you. >> first we have to be very honest and say that it is institutional racism that has led to our current systems, and to continue to perpetuate the continual cycle we are living in today. policy is critically important to changing the future. we have to work on things that your own speakers talk about the smirk of the national urban league as it's a 10-point plan as well addressing things like

police training, hiring standards, anti-profiling laws, 21st century community policing, policy initiatives are critically important. in a place like we see in the, baton rouge specifically, -- louisiana. the police department, it does not reflect the community in which it serves and so that in and of itself is a problem. i think you to move from policy to program and programmatically there are several things we can do to rehabilitate and be more responsive in terms of sustainable practices. we do reentry program and workforce development will be critically important. also just looking at how we invest in our communities. if you drive through north baton rouge it looks as if it is deserted, neglected and just totally disregarded. entrance of the economic investment and development in that part of the city. we had to double down from the workforce and economic development standpoint to make

sure our communities are sustainable. the last thing i will say from a community and gave the stamp what we have to work to create dialogue between folks. certainly community, says law enforcement that's i think it's a three-pronged approach. >> part of answering that particularly which are coming in as prosecutor, how can local communities and the federal government also worke worked tor for effective law-enforcement as part of your overall question. >> what i would say is the issues around systemic racism that make people uncomfortable when talking about the criminal justice system, we have to have an honest conversation about that. we don't see prosecutors saying that we have issues with racism in our criminal justice system. for those who are uncomfortable using the r. word, there's a data from other places them from folks who don't to say traces but with interpol data that shows the difficulty economic effect that incarceration rates have on commuters of color,

particularly the black community. when we incarcerate, when we spend more money incarcerating people that just had done in chicago that someone neighborhood, the austin neighborhood on the city's west side, we spent $50 million on incarceration in one neighborhood, one block. that's money that we are not seeing in schools in austin or economic development in austin one of the most depressed neighborhoods we have but we would rather spend more money on incarcerated for low-level offenses that we would investing in the neighbors to ensure people don't come into our system. you can look at heat map and see where that divestment is an they would not surprise you that those are black and brown committees. having an honest conversation of where we start. in terms of where the community can get engaged and talking about incarceration, it's the point mono lisa made is that all of us if we're being honest know somebody who has been involved in the criminal justice system.

myself am so coming in as a top prosecutor, i have family members who have been incarcerated. it's not an us versus them. is not the good ones of us want to lock up the bad ones of them. it's all of us. so if we don't as a community stand up together and say we want our communities to be safe but we also want our criminal justice system to be fair and we talked a lot about weak entry, we need to start talking about no entry and no entry means making -- [applause] -- making those investments in the first place, if that's the conversation that we really have been very passive about the we've been very passive as a community i mass incarceration. we've been very vocal and it's very exciting to see what far as to talk about police accountability and the changes that will come from that we have not been vocal instance of the economic, social and moral investments that commute of color and continue to spend your

and my tax dollars on incarceration and not investment. [applause] >> mighmike speak with uncle toe a slightly different tack and speak on behalf of the business committee in baltimore. i think they really key piece to this as we have to dispel the notion that the have-nots in baltimore city don't really want to work. in our world we have had, we've been very blessed to have some tremendous success in dispelling the notion among the commercial builders in our city. and we have shown again and again and again when you click the right opportunity, would you provide the right kind of support, incredible things can happen here we have seen hundreds of individuals who have come through our program who were formerly homeless, ex-offenders, and they now have jobs and they have a truck and they have a home.

and they come back to our program and they speak to the kids, the students that we have. because nothing is more powerful than for them to listen to the story of somebody who sat where they sat, and now, now look at them. he's got a grea great job. it pays really well. he's got a future he is being moved into management. and nothing instills hope and hope is probably the most, i found them to be the most powerful gift that you can get somebody, really, any walk of life but absolutely in these neighborhoods. sal its dispelling the myth. they really don't want to work. yeah, they do. [applause] >> monalisa. >> so i think that emotional health is something that needs to be heavily considered, you know, not to downplay myself but

i don't function in all these collegiate thought processes and all this big advocacy stuff. i'm just a mother. i'm just a mother, and i'm living this walk a day after day. [applause] and i will say that emotional health is very important to changing the trajectory of incarceration as a whole from the parent perspective to the family to the inmate to just every piece of our african-american and people of color culture. emotional health will not -- we not looked at properly can really be in my opinion it can really be dangerous. it can be dangerous. we always run from the idea of getting any type of help. no, right? no, right? we run from we don't need to go see a psychiatrist at we don't need to talk to anybody about our problems. we say to ourselves let's just

keep it in the family. let's hide and protect you. let's not talk about it. we need to get to a space we can begin to talk about our problems and not hide, protect and defend the fact that we have problems. lots of families are affected by different things, different things. the whole spirit of judgment among our committee come if we could just be tracked back, tried to work away from that, because if i could just take a look at half of you guys when you were in high school, go back and look in your lives. i'd like to see what you did. let me be a bug on the wall, fly on the wall. let me take a look at what you did that you just didn't get caught for. that's the difference between your kid, my kid, between you, between me. that's the difference. emotional health, people. we need help. we need to go get psychiatrist,

we need to go talk to their this. we need to create programs for it that does not cost money. because it is expensive. the typical cost of seeing a psychiatrist is $300 an hour. $300 an hour. we don't have that. most of us. and insurance only pays for one visit, and that's what i would say. >> billy murphy. >> i'm a fan of microsolutions, but this is the time for microsolutions. it mystifies me why the court of our leadership across the country has not come out against the war on drugs and its elimination by legalizing all drugs and setting up a system where drugs are treated as a medical problem. a lot of people say it will not work. but the proof of it exists. it's called the white community. drones have been legal in the white community despite their

equipment usage, pound-for-pound, person-to-person, same amount of illegal drugs as black people. but we've been targeted and evidence is overwhelming that nixon did it to destabilize black leadership and he did a great job. he did it to destabilize blackmon were in merging of strong powerful leaders back in the day with 50 national league instead of maybe, how many, free? you and jesse and who else? so this is a serious space i never met who else. [laughter] >> this is a series regression of the people ravaged by colin kahl pro, mass incarceration are quick to bite the bullet the a major factor that's going the black family is mass incarceration. we need to have the political courage to stand up and fight it until it's done. none of these things are possible on a micro level to affect the macro level that is sending the black family into

extinction at the exponentially increasing rate your so this 800-pound gorilla in the room, the targeting of black people for imprisonment for drug offenses when whites get treatment, it must in. the only way to end it, you never get why folks to incarcerate white folks because they know that's unfair. do you know what any? one of the great hopes i have is the emergence of, not the hope that this gets worse for whites, but eight out of 10 of the last 10 years of heroin addicts have been white people. that sensitized them to how drug addicts out to be treated. because as long as they didn't have that problem, it wasn't a problem to them. it was only our problem. [applause] and so now we have an opportunity to make major reforms like we just did in maryland. i'm optimistic i left out one of the major reasons i was an optimist. we passed comprehensive overalls

of our criminal justice system in one session of the legislature because of the enlightened self-interest of blacks and whites who finally got it because of freddie gray. that shows what can be done here we did it because we were a united people. we don't have any black caucus is left to we have black individuals who participate in caucuses but get picked off one by one by powerful interests. in maryland we have 44 legislators who are black out of 144, for the first time in 30 years voted consistently as a block and made it happen. so two things have to happen. we've got to have the courage to speak out relentlessly so drugs are legalized the only way to end this war. number two, we've got to speak out until we get black caucuses that are united and into the occult hombre and we've been under for so many years.

got to be able to get back to our old habit of "speaking truth to power." [applause] >> dr. tony? >> i just want to do with being the first i want to say that is exactly why major corporations cannot sit on the sidelines on this issue. we have to be a part of the process of with respect to employing folks and with respect to standing up, particularly to political institutions around the policies that disrupt the opportunity for us to employ these folks, terry. second, i have a friend whose name is daryl chambers. if you would stand. there he is. i met when he was 13. we played on the battle to look like that, six i. beautiful. i look like this. not so much. spent are you saying he was short and fat? >> short and fat, there you go. mona, you bring up a great point

because we are from the same committee, had the same experience and he made a mistake and got caught i've made a mistake and didn't. as a result he went into prison and i went on to get my education and the like. but guess what happened with we wrote an article called grace and mercy. daryl is out of prison. [applause] daryl is the reason involvement in federal where we start a one-stop shopping reentry services for the 1200 people who returned from prison every year to the small city of wilmington which is only 70,000 folks. he is not a ph.d candidate at university of delaware criminal justice. [applause] >> i'm just here to say we are not that far, particularly

brothers and sisters in the room can we are not that far from daryl of the world. so whatever we are, whether we are at bank of america at an urban league or in a steakhouse, we have to remember where we came from and reach back in a big, big way. >> that's why billy murphy is still an optimist, bright? clearly we have a lot to discuss and many questions in this bill but asking each of you to give us one quick solution that we the community can do to affect change. each person will answer quick. i emphasize quick. don't be like a baptist preacher that ends three-time. just one quickly. [laughter] spent i think you've heard over and over throughout this conference but that is the number one thing that we can do, both hold our policymakers accountable, elect people who represent our values and make

sure we put our agendas in our community. >> vote. >> the special and cook county, right? >> especially november 8 in the county. >> i can't compete with vote. i mean really quick, mentoring. we had a fundraiser last year for project jumpstart, took that money and develop a mentoring program where returning graduates would come and for themselves into our existing students. the business community needs to embrace this idea of mentoring and make it part of their corporate culture. mentoring is something i found that it sticks and it works. >> humanize the face of incarceration. those are humans that are in there. and recognize that judgment that you put out on someone else will come back to you. it's just a matter of time.

>> my simple priority, everybody which are jobs and work full-time to elect another clinton and stop the donald trump minutes. do whatever you can do. organize, make it your top priority. because otherwise everything we've been talking about isn't going to happen. [applause] >> do not quit your jobs. [laughter] you will never get them back. and remember but by the grace of god there go i. [cheers and applause] >> let's get our first set of panelists a warm round of applause for their insights and opinions this morning. thank you. and giving us a lot to think about, but at the same token some real substantive information on which to take action. it's one thing to talk about the problems of the day, but another to find solutions. thanks again. it in a big and.

>> before we, how about giving reverend sharpton the praise that he is due? [cheers and applause] >> wait a minute, wait a minute. he's been consistently telling the truth to power. he's been consistently defending our first african-american president against unwarranted stats within and without our community. he has been consistently the voice of reason and sound tactical approaches to ending this problem. let's give it up. you know we can do better than that. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you. thank our panel and particularly thank billy murphy. no, i'm serious. while we set for a second then please focus your attention to the video screen.

♪ ♪ >> failing to signal a lane change. writing in your girlfriends car with the child in the back. >> run into the bathroom in your own apartment. >> selling cigarettes outside the corner store. >> riding a commuter train. >> walking home with a friend. >> making eye contact. >> selling cds outside of a supermarket. >> wearing a hoodie. >> walking away from police. >> walking towards police.

>> missing a front license pla plate. >> holding a fake gun in the park in ohio. >> driving with a broken brake light. >> sitting in your car for your bachelor party. >> walking up the stairwell of your apartment building. >> calling for help after an accident. >> holding a fake gun in virginia. >> on the way to bible study. >> holding a fake gun in wal-mart. >> laughing. >> holding a wallet. >> for attending a birthday party.

>> doing absolutely nothing. >> we are movement.com. that time for change is now. we demand radical transformation to heal a long history of systemic racism so that all americans have equal right to live and to pursue happiness. [applause] >> let's delve right into the discussion on ending mass incarceration within our community. first we have benjamin crump, attorney at law and the president of the national bar association. [applause] judson robinson, ceo and president of houston area urban league.

[applause] >> mark holden, senior vice president and general counsel and corporate secretary of koch industries inc. [applause] >> and honorable gerald mason come assistant attorney general for the office of justice programs for the department of justice. [applause] >> let's begin by asking each of you to give us a minute on this question of how you think we should deal with the issue of mass incarceration. one minute each. let's start with you. >> i am here on behalf of the national bar association representing 66,000 like lawyers, judges and legal professionals but also as the attorney for trayvon martin and michael brown, and 13 black women who were raped by a white police officer in oklahoma city. in all these cases we see nothing happened but on the

reverse side of that we see little black and brown people being arrested and convicted on trumped up charges. everyday all over america joining this vicious cycle of mass incarceration. so we are here to talk about this due process of the law and equal justice of our communities because really when you think about it, this is about our children? if we don't start standing up for our children, speaking up for our children and fighting for our children, one in three black men in america are going to go to give the that's the statistics. ..

to stop the madness and figure out ways to collectively work together to stop discrimination against the most vulnerable people within our community. that happens to be people of color. at some point you have to take organizations like the urban league and a command and an aa cp and look at some of the programs and recognitions they are making because they are working in the trenches with these communities every day.

we know what the ucf program will do. we know what empowering youth will do. we know that we work with our mentorship programs through the national urban league office. we have results that show we can redirect people , path to poverty and present to a pathway to prosperity and that should be something we all take very seriously and work very hard to see each and every day. the solutions are there. >> we need to get rid of our two-tiered justice system. right now if you are, as brian stephenson says, if you are rich and guilty you are treated better than if you are poor and innocent and he's right. judge kaczynski and judge ray cop on the conservative federal judge, a liberal federal judgeagrees their innocent people pleading guilty every day because they can't afford to fight the government . it'snot a surprise to me .

i first got my exposure to the criminal justice system when i was eight your 18 years old and i work in the present from college and a bunch of kids i went to school with were incarcerated. they were very poor and very uneducated white kids that didn't have any support. the same story is going on today. it's not working, in fact it's getting worse. his dividing our country. we are wasting untold dollars and it's not just way to handle people,particularly when you have the ideals of the bill of rights so we need to reform our criminal justice systemand after that we need to make sure that everybody has a quality education , a job in a real opportunity . that's simple enough, it's not easy but that's what i say. >> so i'm at the office of justice department programs and we work with you all, our goal is to strengthen communities and make sure we leverage all the resources across the federal government

so we are making sure we are creating an environment where what young people have an opportunity to succeed and for those coming out of our criminal justice system that we are equipping them to succeed because what we got to do is remember that it's there, there are some wonderful beautiful intelligent folks tied up in our criminal justice system and that's talent we only for this country. so we are focused on when we talk about second chances, i realized many people never have first chance but our commitment is making sure those who are in our justice system, we're making sure we are giving them the opportunity to succeed . >> let me ask how do we prevent from entering the juvenile justice system, you said about something having a first chance, how do we prevent them from entering, we are going to start attorneys and come down and once they enter, how do we prevent them from reentering. ? >> reverend al, as an attorney and an officer of the court we have an obligation when we see stuff to try to speak up because a lot of times we don't do that and like mister holden said, you have four people of color

and whether black or brown people, lying on themselves every day and admitting to crimes they know they didn't commit because the cards are stacked so high against you when you are a person of color, and you are poor and they say you could either go ahead and we and take this what we call a year and a day and the criminal justice system and get this feeling that you don't have to work for the rest of your life or you can roll the dice and go to trial and be convicted of possibly spending the next 25 years of your life in jail for a crime he didn't commit because it doesn't matter what the evidence is, the statistics are there. if you are black or brown, especially a young man and you go to trial with no evidence at all, 60 percent yes you are likely to be convicted of something and so that's what we are seeing because of these trumped up charges and i have to say is reverent, it's so important

to vote. we saw in ferguson, we are the solution. we just got to get and participate in the system the first time, ferguson now has three african-americans in the commission so they get to dictate who's going to be a police officer, was going to be prosecutor. it's so important and lastly out, if we don't, think about the trumped up charges we are talking about now. can you imagine the trumped up charges we would get if the republican nominee who doesn't seem to care at all about these issues we are talking about, we got to save ourselves . we've got to get in the system. lastly, reverend i saw something incredible in philadelphia. we have a prosecutor there, a young brother who says if you been arrested and convicted of a felony under the age of 28 years old, they will extend your felony conviction if you go to college and just get one year of education. isn't that an awesome solution?

isn't that what it's about? redeeming qualities in our young people, not locking them up and throwing away the key? >> there are programs again like the urban youth department program where we work with kids who are kind of pathway into principle, before they turn 18 years old, we have specifically programs that help redirect young people back on the path of prosperity. again, i think it's important we start early. in houston for example the school district, they redirected some of their resources to put more psychologists in the schools or behavioral therapists making sure that when we have kids or having behavior problems that instead of sending them to an alternative school, we might bring them some counsel. help the teacher to understand how to deal with a population that we had in our schools. help the student understand how to handle his or her emotional feelings they're going through. we are a smart world, right?

united states of america can do anything it wants. it's a matter of choices. it's a matter of priorities. it's a matter of putting your money where your mouth is so we have to make a decision about what we want the next generation to look like and do we want to change our practices that we have outcomes. we keep going the same way, you will get the same results. change it up a little bit, use some 21st-century apply ways of getting things done and you will get a different outcome.>> i think it's, the other two gentlemen said but the key is in my opinion, education and accountability. and someone caring about these kids and the statistics that were around a lot earlier, a number of people who imprison who have children, it's crucial that

doesn't repeat itself. for me the community needs to come together and everybody in the community including, i'm here on behalf of industries. it's employers but we all needcare, we all need to be involved . i think there's a lot of different programs in my hometown, my new hometown of wichita kansas for example, there's a group called rise up for you that david engility runs, they're all returning citizens that turn their lives around and a mentor these children who are in difficult situations in public high schools and they have 100 percent success rate or young women getting pregnant out of wedlock before they graduate high school and everybody is graduating on time and getting jobs and some are going to college for the first time. none of this is rocket science quite frankly. it's not even political science which is my major. it's just, the reality is people who end up in our system, i'm repeating myself

but there overwhelmingly the poorest of the poor and most uneducated of the uneducated and our system is set up for them to track and never get out and i don't think that's right, it's completely immoral. we couldn't have intended that for the reason why we set the system the but apparently we have because we haven't changed it but we do need to change the system but we need to get roxie to the issues, all of us and change the hearts and minds by caring more about people in difficult situations and that always happen given the way our society set up. >> as the president said when we set up brother's keeper two years ago, we need to invest in our young people and we need to change the narrative of how we think about the men and boys of color and we need to stop, we need to listen to them so when i meet with them, they say stop calling me at risk and calling hope because they are not at risk, they are our future, there are leaders and we need to see them as that and make the investment in them and if you're looking for a roadmap to my brother's keeper, if you go on the

website, we got a roadmap of how you can do this in your communities and most of you are doing it in your communities and so as everyone has said invest in them, caring adults who care about our young people and the philosophy that we have at the officers program about you and your to hear from bob lazenby's afternoon is their contact with the juvenile justice system ought to be rare fair and when they are there ought to be beneficial, it ought to be an opportunity to get some of those who have fallenoff the track to get back on the right track . >> we all know the problems but i was a quick closing statement from each of you on what is the quick, one line answer that we all should leave with these two patterns with. a very quick one-liner on what is the solution? >> ben israel, like i said, education. we've got to find 21st-century solutions to this problem of mass incarceration where we put

forth education. other than that we are going we housing black and brown bodies and the other solution i believe is so important is we got to quit incentivizing mass incarceration because what we have done is made it very profitable to put more black and brown people in prison. it's not rocket science, like you said and we know in our most talented, almost educated, we've got to speak of you all. we cannot deplane silence and continuing to kill our children in and out of the courtroom. >> the fact that prisons are publicly traded really sickens me to my stomach. we had an opportunity to again redirect our focus as a nation. we can make achoice as to where we want our priorities to be . but our voices need to be heard. if we believe in extending pre-k for all american

children then that's something we can do. we can put the money to make sure we have the kind of educational investment in our generations, because we had done in the past. if you don't do it in the future we're going to see more of the same. >> the system, the criminal justice system in my opinion needs to be reform from top to bottom. how there enforced, prosecutors have to much power. our sixth amendment programs are a joke, a violation of the constitution. we need to change our sentencing laws . in my and we should get rid of all mandatory minimums and let judges do their job and let the punishment fit the crime. we need to have prison reform so people come out better than they went in and they don't reoffend. one thing we speak about, we need reentry reform and we need that because there are 50,000 collateral consequences to conviction in this country and the people who make a mistake and make bad choices, they like sentence even though 98 percent of people get out of prison, they get a life

sentence because the scarlet letter is tattooed on their body, they can't get a job or housing and they can't get loans and can be with their families and they can't vote and not surprising when you treat someone like that instead of welcoming them back, they're going to behave like that and with limited options of recidivism which which you, the last thing i will say as as an employer we made the box, we did a couple of years ago. we encourage other employers to do it . no one should be judged forever for what happened on the worst day, i wouldn't want to be. i don't think any of us would and you don't need an act of congress for this, just an act of conscience so hiring people, giving them a second chance is a good deal. >>. >> right with my closing statement i want to say i took the lead and i have to people on my team that we recently hired who are formerly incarcerated and the woman who runs ourcorrections program , was formerly incarcerated so that part of

justice is putting its money where his mouth is so the solution is you guys. you are the answer. this administration, we have given you all the tools, working your communities to help build the infrastructure to tackle these problems and i will tell you, i have expiration date, they don't, i have to leave in january2 22nd and i'm depending on you to continue the work we started, we give you the tools and infrastructure , told you what you need to be asking for so when we are gone, don't stop asking and manning the same things you call me about every day, call my successor, hold them accountable and i look forward to seeing this. >> let me say we've heard from two panels of outstanding people that are on the frontlines and they'd given specifics solutions. they dealt with data. they talked about voting. they talked about the trade of across the stock market of prisons.

they talked about ending the incentives of mass incarceration. the question will be what we need here to do. she says she has an expiration date. as a minister i'm obligated to tell you all of us have one. the question is, we don't know when that date is and when that day comes, what will they say our time on earth achieves? the hardest job of a preacher is to preach the funeral of somebody that did nothing in life. we are supposed to get up and make up for you what you didn't make for yourself. we hope that you will leave here having heard all of this and not do this for some people somewhere else that are unnamed and that you can't see their face. do it for you so that your life will have meaning and