had before. >> let's talk a little more about how much money the publishers are going to make. in terms of, the terms are you guys will take a 10 percent fee and the rest goes to publishers, right? and i as i as i understand the list next year you should be paying half $1 billion to publishers? >> we anticipate by the end of next year we will have over 10 million users. and we estimate that on average they will spend five dollars a month but what's really interesting is if you look at monetization, it's shocking how little value you have to create so by paying as little as what you spend on a cup of coffee, by spending that much per month you can already create the same value for publishers without having to see any of the intrusive advertising. >> when you see the ad create little value for publishers, you may basically on a per eyeball basiss, then it can,

if you get a five also can add up to a big number but individually it's really high maintenance. >> exactly. if you look at the readiness generated through advertising on an individual basis it's very tiny so you as a user, if you spend five bucks a month, you can create the same kind of value for the publishers but you don't have to accept intrusive advertising, you don't have to accept tracking and malware risk and all the other things that are wrong with advertising today. >> you announced bladder plus last week but people have been able to see the product yet. >> you are going to open up at the end of the month, hopefully so right now people can go to the site platter plus.com and they can read the email address and we will notify them as soon as we open up the program. >> right now platter plus is a separate product from apple apps plus but over time there can be more integration? >> this is where we feel we

are in a very unique position to make this work because we have so many people using add box block plus so that it fits perfectly with what we've always been all about and that is user-friendly monetization and with your acceptable. [bleep] program we proven that we actually provide more value and now we're providing more choices to the user and how they want to compensate readers so as a user you can really just decide how you want to be monetized and i think this is important because the rest is all about user choice. >> let's talk about block plus, more broadly. how many downloads have you guys seen at this point? >> i think we are getting close to 1 billion downloads now but what is a huge milestone for us is actually we just very recently achieved, adblock plus is now being used on over 100 million access devices.

so i think that just shows that more and more people are just completely frustrated withthe current ad streams and they are actively seeking out alternatives . >> and you lost on ios last fall because that was the first time at walkers could launch, how much growth at the scene there? we lost on android and ios last september and since then we've seen over 10 million downloads so compared to our overall user base , that is not super huge yet but we see that more and more people are complaining about the mobile ad experience, complaining about issues like bandwidth consumption or page load time we anticipate there's a lot ofopportunities for us to grow on mobile as well . >> and have you seen anything in terms of how much money the acceptable ad program is making right now? >> we're not releasing any of our financial data but i think we are in, from a business perspective in a

happy situation. we can grow and also validates our model because we have created tremendous amounts of value, incremental revenue for our partner and the users on board with it and i think this is very powerful. >> going back to the publisher question for a second, the way some publishers have responded to ad blockers is they will have instead of an adult will say, we saw you had an ad blocker turned on. maybe consider turning it off . we're not going to show you the story or the content until you turn it off. what do you think of that? >> i think that kind of dialogue is good and intentionally we made it a very prominent feature within adblock plus to turn it off on a given site. we want to encourage users to use the app responsibly but this doesn't go far enough just asking users to turn off the ad blocker because you also have to show them if

they decide to do so because otherwise they will just turn it back on immediately and that is exactly what we are trying to achieve with acceptable ad as well is making sure that the ad experience for those users is just a lot better than the regular ad experience because if you don't provide them with the experience they want, they will move elsewhere and the traffic to those sites that are blocking adblock plus users, they are telling the whole story that users don't come back if they don't like the experience. >> you feel like the conversation around advertising and what constitutes good advertising has changed as a result of ad blockers? >> i think when we started a couple years ago we first had to create awareness that there is a problem with online advertising and nowadays there's no disagreement around that anymore so we just have to work on the right solutions but at least all the people in charge acknowledge that along the way they have lost the consumer and we can bring them back.

>> we've been seeing in norma's growth without blocker but with ad blockers in general, also you could argue that where ad blocking is a component but is not necessarily an ad blocker per se, browser that has that is a component, how do you think ad block plus needs to evolve so that it's still competitive? >> i think tanks to the success of adblock plus is not surprising. everybody wants to have the ad blocking feature integrated into their product and many companies are partnering with us around that. for us it is going to be important that we will always provide the best user experience because people can easily move on to a different ad blocker so especially since we make a point out of not blocking all the ad, we have to make sure the experience for the users with ad block plus is always a plus. >> we are almost out of time and my last question is we will have lando on stage and

i'm sure other people from the ad tech and media industry will be watching this video. is there anything you would change about the ad industry that would make the industry as a whole better? >> i think is really time to work on user-friendly innovation and for that we need to bring everybody together. we need the agencies, publishers, the ad tech companies, the consumers. we need all of them to agree on certain standards. i think the iab should have done that years ago. they completely failed in that which is why we are noww establishing this committee and i think we are going tobe much more successful because we are the only ones that actually take the consumer seriously. >> thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you . [applause] >> you want to stay with your with me for a second? come here. you guys know what's up? we've got obviously added

block and iad is coming on stage and they didn't want to hang out together which is understandable. we couldn't do a panel but i was thinking you guys could shake hands >> to. >> randall rothenberg from iab, why don't you come out here? come on. he doesn't want to. i will shake your hand. good job. randall rothenberg from iab and anthony howard, the other side of that conversation. how's it going out there man? gone out. slightly awkward transition. >> thank you for joining us randall. so we're going to talk about the advertising publishing industry, not just add blocking but we might as well start with blocking. use said in the past that, i don't think it's a surprise that you are not a huge fan of ad blockers, you think they are a threat to creativity and diversity. can you unpack that statement

especially for the 40 percent of people who use ad blockers? >> and i have no argument against anybody using ad blockers because i think there is a very strong kernel of truth when it comes to the impedance of user experience but absolutely it's a truism, that's fine. but what i said before and i think you heard it very directly in your conversation is this is an extortion based business. and it hurts publishers, small publishers. the overwhelming majority of revenue earned by publishers around the world of all sizes comes from advertising. these are companies, the for-profit companies i'm talking about here like adblock plus. these are companies whose business is trying to take chunks of back revenue and diapered into their own pockets. it's very straightforward. your company is one of the biggest sufferers, one of the

biggest victims for years because it's been primarily tech sites and gamer sites that have been hurt by this. >> i know, ... >> i was listening to the interview, he didn't answer any of your questions.he didn't say what it is an acceptable ad. refuses to talk about what the revenues are, they are very high. he's a rich man from blocking advertising. >> one of the things he did say was that he thinks the ip has done, the ip has failed to create a sustainable advertising ecosystem which is why there's an audience for something like adblock plus, you think that's fair? >> i wish it was there. i would love to be that powerful that i can say that. the fact of the matter is that any trade association in the united states can create standards that my definition have to be voluntary. we are not allowed to enforce them according to us antitrust regulations so that's true for any kind of

standards, even the three-pronged plugs that the ip believes recommends. the, it's fair to the extent that this is an industry that is very fragmented, very diverse and while in the early days of iab, the founders were very successful at coming together and creating different kinds of standards, safer standards on the format of advertising. over the past say, seven or 10 years it's been more difficult because the financial incentives in the industry itself led by short-term venture capital favor differentiation and customization and lack of standards rather than standardization. i wish it were different. we are obviously, we strive as much as we can to try and coalesce this fragmented industry around standards for

the supply chain but it is pushing a boulder uphill, absolutely. >> once you get that back for a second, because i expect a lot of people don't know what the iab is area the interactive advertising bureau. what is the ip and specifically who you represent? >> iab was founded 20 years ago by about 50 top publishers. these were companies that primarily created first party content, many of them in those early days began in the magazine or television or newspaper business, some more digital natives and they sold advertising as their primary source of revenue. against that created content. over the 20 years it's grown to about 650 or 700 members, most of them are still first party publishers. our board of directors for example, 70 percent of the companies on our board of directors are publishers.

new york times, condi nast, meritage, edc, disney, abc, companies like that. and what we do, we do what most trade associations do which is in no particular order, we are involved in training and development. we haven't iab and you will add certification program for ad sellers though as they say a qualifying check that 12,000 people have taken in the three years we've had and it was scott schiller, executive vice president of nbc is here, he was a founder of this program. we do a lot of market research and consumer research on consumer attitudes about content and advertising and user experience. market research on whatbuyers are thinking of and not thinking of . we run marketplaces, we are right in the middle right now of the annual digital content new fronts where about 40

creators and distributors of original digital video content are presenting their offering to about 10,000 ad buyers in presentations over this two-week period, that's a very exciting event to see, lots of original content. we represent our industry in washington. i have a team of three or four lobbyists in washington to work on everything from malware and spyware related issues to privacy to internet security. and we do lots and lots in between so. >> i want to dig into a couple of different things. first one being the new fronts because we are in the middle of the new fronts which is a really exciting time and this year is interesting because a lot of companies that haven't done new fronts before, they are doing in them in the obvious

installation ones like playboy is having their fronts on friday, i will be there butt. >> it depends on what you mean by salacious because i read playboy is no longer publishing pictures of naked people because there are too many free people. >> right. >> i've never looked at internet pornography before so i have no idea. how many of you fronts you get to go to? >> i went to pretty much all of them last week so i went to about 25 or so and this week i don't get to go to any because i have to go to lisbon tonight for the ip europe conference. >> you're missing a couple to be here too >> you can't say no to men desmond. >> are there any sort of trance existing in terms of, obviously online video, it's exciting, it's a thing, we are making money . >> there's a bunch of stuff. we've been seeing if all for the past couple years so i

wouldn't say there's anything that i've seen that dramatically, dramatically new but it kind of with one exception . i kind of one exception and that one exception is the degree to which virtual-reality narratives have come into play. a lot of publishers are really working on virtual-reality and the insight that i've got there but also i'm on the education board of the international center of photography and we introduced a graduate program in new media narratives over the past years i've seen it there as well get the big thing there that really exciting is two years ago, three years ago with oculus and all that, this is technology driven andthis was kind of a solution in search of a problem and now it's become clear to me especially , looking at the new fronts that being creatively driven. that creative people are very interested in virtual-reality narratives so that's been a really interesting thing.

i saw a new york times is doing it, her to doing it, condi nast is doing it. refinery 29 is doing it so that was one big trend that was interesting to me. in terms of things that have been evolving are exciting, the concept of the in-house agency or its known as a content studio has now become a real fixture. in my previous job i work for a big consulting firm and we did a pretty big report in the early 2000 in which one of our recommendations, publisherswas you have to get into the marketing services business .that was a very foreign concept to publishers back in 2001, 2002 and now i would say every major publisher in the united states has a content studio where they are creating content on the half of their clients or they are co-creating it and that's a very interesting evolution. >> for people who aren't

really involved in that, basically that means that a team that is involved either primarily or in partnership in terms of reading native advertising. >> is called naked advertising. the problem with the word native advertising is it means about 100 different things. we did a report about two years ago calledthe native advertising playbook . all the things i've mentioned are free on the aib site so you can download it and it's still the best study that's been done on native advertising and we found so many different definitions that we had to create a three-dimensional model to understand what people are talking about so native advertising means everything from industry advertising so the ads that you see on facebook when you are flipping through on mobile which are really not that different from television ads or magazine ads in that they are ads that sort of

interrupt the flow of content but in a seamless and natural way. all the way through to customize advertising that is content base, narrative base, looks like or is contextually relevant to the way a site is designed. those are two different things so content studios, creating all of the above area that's why i like to think of them more as in-house agencies that are creating content with a very specific and explicit knowledge of their audience which i think is a very important point. >> you think there's a clear stake in the business, you are the constant community making this up, here's our team that doing real journalism? >> everything that i have seen from mainstream publishers, yes. and also the federal trade commission has been very, very clear on this that if

you try to fool people, you will get harmed. you will get caught and hung and you should be. the ftc issues guidelines within the past couple of months on native advertising. where they talk in great detail about what the expectations are in terms of disclosure and we said from the beginning, disclosure is not optional, it is a must-have. are there publishers that violate that? i'm sure there are and there will be and i'm sure the fcc is looking for sample cases and salivating at taking some of them on. to prove the point. we had senior fcc staff members at the iab, i think three times over the past year to meet with publishers as they were developing the guideline so it was a very good, open process. we don't agree with everything they said but

their instincts around disclosure is definitely in the right direction. >> i want to get back to and walking for a second. you know, you've explained why you're using blockers and why you think the companies themselves are not great players and ecosystem but it's part of your job to bring these different constituencies together to find a solution. isn't it part of your job and to have good conversation with the ad blockers and partner with that theology? >> there are about 200 ad blocking companies out there. we've actually had conversations with lots of them. i'm trying to make a point and we are trying to make a point that extortion is not a viable business model. i've got no argument with companies that aim at trying to improve the user experience or give users control. of their own experience. i do have an argument with companies that fly the flag of user benefit but whose

actual business model is based on stealing money out of the pockets of publishers, especially small publishers. that seems to me so evident. >> the key to you is ifyou're an ad blocker and you're making money from advertising, urine extortionist . >> this dude bases in the public service business, why doesn't he opened up and do it for free?give me a break. you've got a couple hundred other companies doing it for free, he should do it for free too.to me it's, look. there is as i said, real truth in the issue that there are obstructions in the way of user experience. this is why aib has pioneered what i call the lima principal for light encrypted and choices supporting noninvasive advertising. this is why we're introducing a lead coring mechanism, a market-based mechanism to drive better behaviors from publishers and advertisers. this is why we are doing all those things. these are real issues with slow load times.

too many data calls from an advertising ad that really horrible object latency. the swap of tags. this is bad stuff that does need to be fixed, absolutely agree with that and we are doing everything we can to work with our publishers and asset suppliers and others on this but the idea that you're saying, we're in it to improve the user experience when you are trying to extract tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars out of the pockets of publishers,that's a fatuous argument . >> to your argument partly, it's that there are these problems but at the same time, at the beginning you were saying the aib is a trade organization, there's only so much we can do and a lot of the issues you are talking about are pointing to thisbut a lot of it is really foundational issues .

online advertising, so if that ever going to get fixed mark. >> a lot of it isfoundational issues related to the architecture of the internet itself . any reall. >> that sounds more pessimistic than. >> it's not pessimistic as much as it is being realistic. i think the fundamental underpinning and this is especially important for this audience of technologists and disruptors is that the internet at large, the source of our innovation is also the source of our vulnerability and that is that we live in a very open supply chain in which anyone can participate. you don't even have to have a lot of money to do it as i've been saying for years. any 14-year-old can build a global television network with the apps that come built into a laptop or are available in the cloud and everybody here knows a couple 14-year-old already paid for

their college education by doing exactly that. that's a remarkable, remarkable thing.the number of people who have made livings from the internet. we did calculations a couple years ago in 2009 and found a harvard study that more than three percent of us gdp is premised on internet advertising. it was hundreds of thousands of jobs in every congressional district in the united states so this is a great thing. on the other hand, everybody complained no matter how immature, no matter how corrupt in the sense of, it's not well put togetherand no matter how criminal . a lot of malware that's out there is based on organized crime. interpol, we've been working with interval and the justice department on trying to fight the stem of fraudulent nonhuman traffic that is based on malware derived bots

so the source of our innovation is the source of our vulnerability. it seems to me there are only three ways to deal with it. way number one is you muddle along, you don't resolve the problem, companies don't find a way to come together. ad blocking rises and the ad supported diversity of media gets further and further pressed down. way number two which we are seeing is an increasing reversion to oligopoly, a handful of giant platforms that have complete control of their own borders and becomes the favored platforms for media and advertising distribution and way number three is that the industry finds a way to come together and through self regulatory activity and possibly some

regulatory activity resolve these problems. we are betting on the way number three and i think way number three is a better way because it preserves the diversity of the open internet. as a former journalist and still a journalist myself, i think diversity of communication is a very high value, the highest value that i hold in life. >> it seems like, part of your job is to push for a number three. what we do say are the odds that number three is the actual outcome? i would say the odds are good . but not great. i would get it 60, 65 to 70 percent. and the reason i say that is because i think there is a natural human impulse to want to communicate and to want to communicate openly and freely, number one and i also think there's a natural human impulse to want to work for yourself rather than work for the man and so i think that

the system and the human beings that are the system that inhabit the system will work, strive very hard to self regulate to preserve that openness. >> so last quick question, what do you think are the odds that ad blocking is sort of going to kill my profession in a few years? >> i don't think it will happen. it's easy to say that for all the money adblock plus is making, for all the money he's putting into his pocket, for all the stuff they're not disclosing about their finances and ownership, we are finding as we canvas our own publishers is that it's not, it's still not having that much of an impact outside of tech sites and gamer sites. we've been following this, >> i know, it's harder for you

>> it's a very special

significance since i've lived all my life in paterson, new jersey. it's hard my district, my congressional district. i didn't live too far from the false so i have great fond memories. this is where alexander hamilton brought george washington and develops really the first industrial city in the united states with the technology that was brought from europe, so this site, this national site which has been in the national park for the last seven years, it's a new mark and usually the park service was not into urban parks that this is right smack in the middle of urban american in dust real urban america. with some problems of course industrialization. it has changed. even though they are still manufacturing going on in paterson but this becomes the aesthetics of the great falls with would choose the second-largest falls in the east

with the great historic happenings of the great falls, the industrial revolution, first submarine, first cars or trains. we had tremendous engines that were built in paterson new jersey. more engines came out of paterson new jersey like the great falls area than anyplace in america. it was the silk city of the world, paterson, new jersey and when people say you've got to be kidding me, no we couldn't grow the mulberry bush. we tried to do that a long time ago but we still developed the silk industry. from asia to paterson new jersey hamilton knew exactly what he was doing me -- he had a mind for finances in economics and he saw the city in new jersey as a place to begin his great industrialization so i'm very

very proud to be part of that and we are proud to have a national park in our city and its growing. we have had some growing pains obviously. when you are growing you have pains. we just completed the maryland kramer park which is on one side of the falls. mary ellen kramer was the wife of one of the mayors of paterson new jersey who still living. she is not still living. she was a great person. she got managers in the falls. she got me interested in preservation. preservation does not mean putting routes around the place so people can't see it really or touch it. no, this is a very part of our community. it's a lifeline. we tried to make it a destination, this national park so people will come here and from all over the world. we want more to come so we are very proud of our national park and i'm part -- very proud of the park service. they do a fantastic job a in and

day out. most of the time we take them for granted. we don't do that in paterson. they made a very severe move to make sure the communities involved day in and day out at paterson great falls. the park is grown in a short period of time. a lot of this coming from all over the world. now we have the stadium which we had legislation for. we got a pass thanks to the help of the resource committee and it's a very historic stadium. this is where the knee grow leagues played. this is where larry doby first african-american played in the american league with the cleveland indians for over 12 years. he grew up in paterson, new jersey. i knew larry very well. i just introduced a gold medal award for him into congress. we hope it gets passed by the

end of the year so this is an addition. we are growing that we are not growing beyond what we can handle, what we can maintain, what we can sustain and we are getting young people involved and all the people involved in this preservation. preservation is important because we know history but we don't know culture and culture is more pertinent history. the facts, the daily situations that we face day in and day out. what are your values? and the industrial revolution was really a value point for america. this is what america is about, hard work. getting your hands dirty once in a while, building america, building america. of course we lost a lot of our manufacturing production but we are trying to maintain what we do have because that's important for middle-class people in this country. >> i'm congressman french hill

and i represent central arkansas. today i met the central high school museum here in little rock, centerpiece of the civil rights trail around the south. here in 1957 was the biggest school integration crisis following the brown versus afford it -- board of education. one of the most beautiful high schools in our country. i'm an avid outdoorsmen and so the national park site in arkansas that has the most meaning to me is the first national river and our country the buffalo national river. i have been going there literally for about 55 years and so i have many many miles on the river and wonderful happy memories of floating america's first national river, the buffalo national river. teddy roosevelt landed a charge to protect america's wild places and special places. he believed in the strenuous life and now more than ever our young people, our families need

to get outdoors and enjoy american that's why if you're watching the show i'm in arcadia in maine, the arcadia national park in the northeast participating in the 100-mile challenge so i urge everybody in america this fall to support our centennial for the national parks and get outside, america. green party presidential nominee jill stein talk to reporters and answer questions at a news conference at the national press club in washington. topics included a green parties interests to be included in national presidential and vice presidents of debates.

>> hello everyone. my name is elizabeth morello. i'm depressed or rector for the jill stein presidential campaign. we will be starting in just a moment and are there any quick questions before we begin? okay, great and with no further ado fresh from baton rouge, louisiana where we were witnessing the floods in helping them recover here is green party presidential nominee jill stein. >> thank you very much. thank you all so much for being here today. really appreciate your attention to these very critical issues that are converging now in baton

rouge, louisiana but which are really symptomatic of a crisis across the country. so first, i just want to say a quick word about baton rouge and the particular springs are regis returned from and we have the honor of being escorted through some of the most tragically struck areas of baton rouge where essentially there has been no recovery and almost nothing in the way of services from the point of view of the residents in denham springs at least in the neighborhoods we were able to see, this is another change of very unequal recovery. in fact one of the residents of the shelter that we visited was actually a displaced person from katrina and from new orleans who had never been able to return to new orleans because the recovery

there was also a case of unequal recovery. and their feeling was that the services on the part of fema and on the part of the non-profits just weren't coming to their neighborhoods whether you were talking about help gutting their homes, food relief, services with laundry, just to be able to watch their filthy materials and help trying to salvage their precious memories and lifetime possessions. we saw out on the street not only furniture, bedding, cabinets, walls and so on but the mementos of their lives and of their children including sports trophies and photos and things of that sort reads of this was clearly a very

wrenching moment for them. they felt incredible strength and courage from the generosity of the community. one of the women we spoke to there had been staying in a neighbor's house who had taken in 22 people that were displaced on their street and we were hosted there by the louisiana green party and their connections to some of the impacted people and also to many of the nonprofit groups, including together baton rouge, north baton rouge disaster relief, the mutual aid disaster relief and also 510 denham springs which is a go fund me effort to help support some of the neighbors trying to salvage their homes. also, yeah those were the main groups that we were working with. and their resilience and their strength in their optimism was

really incredible. it is of interest that the shelter we visited, the lm lockhart center was not an official shelter because there aren't enough official shelters to go-round. the shelter was housing a community center was housing 12 families including some who would previously been displaced in katrina as i mentioned and it's also of interest that one of the people who helped get that shelter going was general honoré who was in charge of the federal relief efforts, the state or federal military who had come in and finally had brought order to the new orleans relief effort and here he was kind of doing the same thing on a smaller scale in baton rouge. as you probably know there are

something like 100,000 people who have filed for federal relief and many of the people, most of the people i think were not covered by insurance because it was a flood zone. so just looking at the larger sense of this, we have a climate emergency that is really taking place in the headlines all over the country right now. both the floods which are limited not only to louisiana but we have seen the recent floods in arizona and west virginia and in texas. we are seeing 500 years, some people call them thousand year floods from these extremely heavy rains that are undoubtedly related to climate change. anyone storm cannot beat definitively begs to climate change but when you see so many at such an extreme level, there

is no question according to the scientists that this is a consequence of warmer air that holds much more water and when it triggers a downpour -- down port really flows. as you know it's not just floods, it's also the drought, the heatwaves that we have seen across most of the country and the fires on the west coast which at last count had placed, what was it, some 82,000 people had been evacuated as of last week. and then in addition there are these growing warnings about sea level rise according to james hansen the former climate scientists. he is predicting meters worth, that is yards worth, not one yard but many yards worth of sea level rise as soon as the two years from now and that of

course would be an absolutely devastating sea level rise that would essentially wiped out coastal population centers including the likes of manhattan and florida and so on and actually all over the world. this is not something we want to continue charging headlong towards the end we know that even under the so-called all of the above climate plan of the obama administration that greenhouse gases have not just been rising but the rate of rise has been accelerating. so, this is why you know we call for essentially declaring a climate state of emergency, recognizing that we are facing civilization threatening events now and the time window to prevent them is closing rapidly.

this is not something that can wait 50 years. if we are going to stop it we need to stop it now because there's a lot of delay in the impact of greenhouse gases even once they are already they are. and, i will talk about our solution and summarize it very briefly in a moment that i just want to point out early here that this underscores why we think and open debate is absolutely critical in this election. there will otherwise not be a candidate who is not taking money from the lobbyists, the corporations, super pacs etc.. we are the only such campaign that is not compromised by the power of big money, the big banks, the fossil fuel giants, the war profiteers. we are the only clean people powered campaign in this election so we have a unique ability to tell the truth here

not only about climate change about the endless and expanding wars that are making us less secure, not more secure while we cost us over half of our discretionary budget and about half of our income taxes yet we only make the terrorist threat bigger which -- with each turn of the cycle of violence. their number of interrelated issues where we have unique ability to tell the truth in an election where we are seeing unprecedented realignment with republican party essentially unraveling at the seams, with many prominent republicans now supporting hillary clinton, with hillary clinton appealing to the republicans to come in to hurt big tent with her chance asian director being one of the lobbyists, who is very close to the fuel industry supports the keystone pipeline, supports the transpacific partnership etc..

we think there is a clear signal here of the democratic party continuing to move to the right leaving not only the bernie sanders supporters out in the cold but so much of the american public at a time when the polls tell us that over half of americans, something like 57% are very dissatisfied with their choices. a recent ap north pole about a month ago found that 13% of the american public was satisfied with the two-party approach to the presidential election, 13% were satisfied so we are facing really critical issues in an election where we are not just deciding what kind of a world we will have but whether we will have a world or not going forward. we think it's really critical now more than ever that we have a debate and put more choices in front of the american people who are clamoring for those choices. and then just a quick word about

a solution here to this crisis. essentially we are saying we have got to declare the state of emergency that we have and that emergency is compounded bi-racial disparities in economic disparities that put the most vulnerable on the front lines of the climate crisis as well as on the frontlines of the economic crisis so we call for a joint solution that solves these two problems, the economic recovery has come to those on the top but not to most americans, particularly younger americans who have essentially been hung out to dry here in the system and which they are held hostage by staggering levels of debt that are unpayable in the current economy and that have the climate crisis essentially exploding on their watch. so we call for a solution here that addresses of the economic and the climate crisis.

we call it a green new deal so it's not a hypothetical. it's based on something we actually did in the great depression that helped us get out of bed and that is an emergency jobs program that would create 20 million jobs, assuring that every american who can work and wants to work as a decent paying job, a living wage jobs as part of his emergency mobilization which we also call a wartime scale mobilization. when pearl harbor was bombed at the outset of the second world war in the united states, took us six months, all of six months to mobilize our economy. we went from 0% on a wartime footing to 25% on a wartime footing of gdp in the course of six months. so clearly we can do this. we can mobilize and we are

calling for 100% clean renewable energy by 2030 which is what the science tells us is exactly what we need if we are to hold temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees centigrade and essentially turned the tide on climate change. we would be creating jobs particularly in the areas of clean renewable energy. that is wind, water, sun conservation and efficiency but also in the area of healthy and sustainable local food production because that's a major component of greenhouse gases and also public transportation that is energy of fish and, renewable he powered and that dovetails with what we call recreational transportation. we have a right to recreation is a form of transportation. that is safe sidewalks so we can use our muscle power as part of how we get to transit hubs.

now the good news about this is that it's not only restarting the economy, it turns the tide on climate change. it also makes the wars for oil obsolete when you have 100% clean renewable energy for the foreseeable future. so, therein is how it pays for itself, through two mechanisms in the first i will mention has actually been articulated in very detailed engineering studies, how we get so much healthier than i can say this under authority of the medical doctors, we get so much healthier when we do away with the hour pollution and various koala into our water and into our aquatic food chain and so on. when we do away with those few looks grosser switch by the way cost 200,000 premature deaths in this country every year, 200,000

and make major contributions to the epidemic of asthma, two heart attacks, two strokes and cans are. so when you do the numbers on this and you look at the contributions of fossil fuels to the public health burden it turns out we get so much healthier when we zero out fuels that are savings in health care expenditures is enough to pay the cost of the trans-asian over approximately a decade and a half according to one of the prominent studies here. so if it pays for itself in terms of health benefits but also if you benefactor and the reductions in our military expenditures, our bloated and dangerous military which is not me can you say for but demonstrably less safe, if we cut that military budget, that too puts hundreds of billions of dollars into the money that we need in order to undertake this new green deal.

essentially it's a win, win, win for our economy, for climate, for our health and another for peace and international security. a couple other just real quick mentions. we also call for a just transmission that ensures both workers in the industry and communities like in coal country for example, that they will not lose jobs until those jobs are replaced or there will be a transition support as the state of new york for example adopted recently in their phasing out of their coal plants. they assured their workers a comparable financial support and benefit coverage for a period of two years did we would be looking looking at a longer period than two years. and i will leave it at that. we will open it up to your questions just underscoring that we are really at a critical moment of transition here on the

climate as well as on related issues including global conflict which very often are related in fact to access to fossil fuel and air their routes of transportation. so we are at a kind of a hail mary moment here where we very critically need to change course. we need to have an open and honest discussion about what we are actually facing particularly our younger generation which has been held hostage not only by a predatory economy, a predatory system of student loans and higher education and the full weight of the climate crisis which is falling on their heads. i should mention by the way to number 10 people who are locked into student loan debt which is essentially unpayable for most people, and it's not just young people, well into middle age, that's 43 million people trapped by student loan debt.

that right there is enough to win a three-way presidential race because 43 million is a plurality in the residential vote. that's a lot of people who could be mobilized so when i'm asked, aren't you just going to spoil the election i make a point this is some. serious stuff here. the american people are at a unique moment in history. we have never had such a majority support for charlie charlie transformative change. the american people are unhappy. distrust and dislike, the two major party presidential candidates. this is not the time for the party operatives to be telling the american people to be good little girls and boys and keep voting for the same two parties that have thrown people under the bus. it's really an organ for us to have that open conversation and for my campaign and gary johnson's campaign to be on the

ballot. therefore candidates, i'm sorry in the debate, there are four candidates in this election that will be on the ballot for just about every american voter. in america we have a right not only to our vote, we have a right to know who it is that we can vote for. thank you very much. >> you are taking public financing and every other candidate has pulled out of that system. what would you say the green party is entitled to public financing and do you favor expanding the matching limit lacks. >> i think you could bounce that question to the american people. do they think we should just have the same two? they are screaming, no and we are seeing the republican party unravel and seeing the democratic party moved to the

right. we have one demo republican big corporate party right now and the american people are tired of being thrown under the bus. they are sick of a rigged economy and sick of a rigged political system that delivers it. i was absolutely in what we call for is notwithstanding the ceiling for public funding. we are talking about publicly funded election. our democracy is too important to be privatized and put into the hands of big money, either big money donors are big-money candidates. one should not be able to buy influence in our democracy at a time, ever but especially now when we are looking our mortality in the face here, but we are looking at the consequences of the blowback from these catastrophic wars, when you are looking at the climate meltdown, the next meltdown of our economy which continues to teeter on the pranks. the banks are more prail -- more prone to fail as ever and just

look at the new nuclear arms race where barack obama basically set a trillion dollars , a whole new generation of nuclear weapons prayed we should be in the process of rapidly disbanding, retiring all nuclear weapons and joining what looks to be coming out of the united nations now which is a new call essentially to ban nuclear weapons. ..

where the news becomes the transition inside of the trump campaign? really? is that what we're talking aboutin this election? changes of staff? we have , our future is in peril right now and there are more important things to be talking about. i think personally as someone who has struggled with the system for many years , and then as a physician recognizing we were not going to cure what ails us inside of this very political system that if we want to fix the things that are literally effecting light limit and survival even, we need to heal our very pathological political system. and i think in this election we are seeing that political

system reached its logical conclusion. it is bought and paid for by big interests. we saw that in the sanders campaign. they can raise up a principal agenda but it was sabotaged like every other principal rebel in the democratic party over the past few decades. we are allowed to be seen and heard for a little while then they get taken down and essentially disappear and in this case, disappeared out of the democratic convention. bernie sanders was relegated to a footnote and then we saw the emails, how the dnc had been working in collusion with hillary's staff and members of the media to sort of tilt the playing field in that direction. this is a systemic problem and i think discussed that the american people are feeling right now has really reached breakthrough

proportions. this is a realignment election. every day people are looking for a new political voice that's not part of this compromise republican party and i'd sayhold onto your hats. there's a critical conversation that is waiting to be held and once it begins, i think all bets are off about where it goes . >> if you what you say is true why are you doing better? >> it may have something to do with the fact that according to the new york times donald trump got $2 billion worth of free media, hillary clinton got 1 billion worth of free media and bernie sanders had about half as much. we had essentially zero up until this week when we have you know, five minutes here and there with the exception of the cnn town hall where we were trending number one on twitter so i would say every indication is that people are really hungry for more. polls show right now that very few people have even heard of our campaign and if

they've heard of it they have no idea what it represents so i say to those who think that our campaign is to, sort of , uninteresting, to the american public, try us. let us have that exposure out there. bring us into a debate and let's see what happens. >> two questions in terms of your practicing hurdles. one is the commission on presidential debates and their 50 percent criteria based on corporate polls. and secondly, isn't part of the issue that some people who agree with you are effectively driving down your numbers? no one chomsky is basically telling peopleclimate change , this very issue that you

talk about, trump is a climate denier. you've got to vote for clinton in so-called swing states. how do you get past that hurdle when people who presumably agree with you on the issues are effectively driving down your numbers? >> so let me take that into pieces. first about the condition on presidential debates. the league of women voters when they quit and the commission came in and took over, league of women voters. >> because they says this is a fraud being perpetrated on the american public. basically because of the inordinate power of the commission which is essentially representatives of the democratic and republican parties. it's this to parties essentially controlling the debate inorder to silence

political opposition so this is not what democracy looks like in the first place but they quit. the league with , saying the commission had essentially granted themselves the power to control the questioning because of their control over the questioner, control over the candidate or eligible and control over the audience so they could create the illusion that there's popular support for things like more, corporate tax rates for the transpacific partnership or these expanding wars. they can basically create the movie to make it look like there's popular support so we consider the commission illegitimate. it is not a public commission and its name is very deceptive and we think that 15 percent is a disservice to the american public, especially at a time when people are saying that they are extremely unhappy with the two choices. and with the two political parties in the residential erection. we think there should be another basis for inclusion and that is the right of

voters to know about who their choices are and that any candidate who is on the ballot in the united states that they could numerically win the election, voters have a right to know about those candidates . and we will, we have challenges in the court of law without great expectations that that was going to go anywhere and it hasn't but there's a court of public opinion. in my home state of massachusetts we have been able to fight our way into the debates actually in which i did very well and the public had enormous residence with what they've heard and that i was yanked out of the debate because it became clear that the public interest point of view is a grave threat to the political establishment but there are tools and strategies that we will be using thousands of people are signing up and i encourage anyone who's interested to go to jail 2016.com and sign up, be part of the campaign to open the

debate. i don't think the american people are going to take this one sitting down and in the last election, my running mate and i were arrested simply for trying to get into the grounds of the college where a debate was being held and there will be in the future, we won't be going alone. >> in terms of people driving down your numbers? >> yes, well this politics of fear that tells you you have to vote against what you are afraid of rather than for what you truly believe we had no one chomsky has supported me in my home state when he felt safe to do so. i think it's fair to say my agenda is far closer to his then hillary clinton but he subscribes to the politics of fear . many maybe there's a generational difference here but i think that young people growing up today did not feed the democratic party as the party of the new deal. they also don't see it as a party that brings us, they see it as a party of fracking, they see it as a

party of opening up the arctic, that pushed for the transpacific pipeline until they were forced by the grassroots to stop. they see it as a party of expanding wars and drone assassinations, they see it as the party of immigrant deportations and detentions and night raids so donald trump says terrifying things, hillary clinton actually has an extremely troubling record from leading the charge into the catastrophe of libya to saying send them home to the children fleeing the violence in the latin america which she herself had a hand in by giving the thumbs-up to the two in honduras, ushering in that incredible violence from which tens of thousands are fleeing one of the major influxes of refugees. so hillary has been a major proponent of fracking around the world and now has appointed ken salazar, the best friend of racking to her

transition team. so the climate is not looking so good under a hillary clinton administration and pull is terrible but the science on fracking says it's probably just as bad. it's not okay to open up an entirely new generation of infrastructure now that is going to weather us to fracking for another 20, 30, 40 years. basically curtains the minute we do that so i think many people would take a different point of view and recognize that the politics of fear delivered everything we were afraid of. all the reasons you were told to vote for the lesser evil, you didn't want the meltdown of the climate, offshore jobs, all those things, all those reasons we were given

to vote for the lesser evil is exactly what we saw. democracy needs a moral compass, it's not enough to vote against, we need an affirmative agenda especially at a time when there are enough people we can drive that agenda forward. we could potentially win this race, i'm not holding my breath buti'm not ruling it out. it's been a crazy election, it's not over till it's over. >> i wanted to get your thoughts on , you mentioned access of money and assets accessing politicians. what are your thoughts on the latest batch of hillary clinton's emails in the state department. what do you think about that and what should americans be thinking about that? >> i think it's not a coincidence that lori has the numbers she has. as one of the most on trusted presidential candidates ever and the more we see of what went on in the secretary of state's office which hillary attempted to cover up, you know? to sort of take off the record by using a private

server. this is sort of the elephant in the room around the private server, why did she put national security information and the names of cia secret agents, why were they put at risk smart she was clear about this and the inspector general's report about the emails actually makes this point that this wasn't a mistake. this was my intention and hillary told her staff she did not want her personal business to be accessible to flyovers for example but this is a disturbing thing. where did her personal family financial business and and where did the official business of the state begin? to me the mere fact that half of her emails, half of the volume and the number of her emails, she classified as private. if someone is on the job and half of their emails are for

their private affairs, there's something wrong here. you know, either the private is leaking over into the public or someone is doing their own private business on company time. so to my mind, the continuing revelation about the influence of the clinton campaign donors, the special deals that they got, the lucrative favors, weapons deals for example to saudi arabia who we are now seeing all else aside but looking at yemen alone, the incredible war crimes being committed by saudi arabia with our weapons, not to mention our assistance, this is really a national scandal and the fact that money was flowing to the clinton foundation as these very regrettable and harmful decisions were being made, i think regardless of the legality, this just raises

serious questions about judgment and character that in my view are not compatible with someone you want to trust as the leader of the country.thank you. >> hi, dana milbank with the washington post segments of the corporate media. i have a conundrum i want to present to you. so i could write about today and we could report here about what an important issue climate change is and we publish it or broadcast it and the fact is very few people will read it and they are going to go read or view stories about trumps staff machinations or clinton's emails so i'm not sure the issue is necessarily a corporate media what people are demanding. why is that? was the rail around that if there is one? >> let me say we've seen this problem get worse. worse and worse.

i think it's a multi factor problem. but what we do know is that when we have greater diversity of candidates opinions, there is an opportunity to have a more diverse discussion. right now so many people are tuned out of the election and out of the political system in general because they are accustomed to being ignored by that system and because, not only ignored by the discussion but ignored by the agenda. bernie sanders tuned out? i don't think so. i think he had more attention from the american public that just about anyone, at least from my point of view outside the democratic party.it looked to me like he was the guy saying that the emperor

had no clothes and everyone was agreeing with him. even trump supporters were agreeing with him. remember this, polls show the majority of trump supporters are not motivated by supporting trump, they're motivated by not liking hillary clinton so let's give them another choice besides donald trump as an alternative to hillary clinton. let's have a more diverse discussion. more we have diverse media outlets, the better, the more that media has been consolidated, the harder it's been to have a truly diverse discussion. so those are some of the things i would say going forward but i think it's not rocket science. we did have an open discussion a few months ago because we had a candidate who was engaging a whole other body of voters and even that was very early in the campaign. as we get closer i think the power of advocating for jobs, for the right to a job, for traveling student debt, that's going to spread like wildfire.

we have, we are running between four, six, seven percent in the polls. prior to any big media coverage, that doesn't usually happen. why is that happening? in my view it's because there's a generation here which is really desperate for another way forward. their network on the internet and that word is getting out. if we could get to four, five or six percent without any coverage, i think all that's are all as to what will happen when we get into the debates . a question? >> there is going to be voting to have you at the top of the ticket as a green candidate for congress or the state school board, etc. would you recommend they vote for one party in particular? >> i would say to look carefully at the candidates. and don't just look at what they say because if you look at what there's say there's very little difference between according to some online candidates informational sites, there's

not much difference between hillary clinton and myself but that's if you take what hillary clinton said and what hillary clinton will do rather than looking at her record so it's important to look at the record of the candidate whose funding them as usual but you'd be surprised how many green candidates there are actually running for congress, for senate, for state offices, for city council, etc. we have a lot of down ballot candidates and i would just say that if the black swan event were to happen in this age of black swan and we wound up in the white house, i think we would find a lot of people ready to move with this agenda inside of the democratic party feel like they've been held hostage by prevailing politics. >> yes, after what we saw in the process both in the democratic and