drugs to market. i have pushed for that. by the way when it comes to big pharma, she is raising money from lobbyists from big pharma, she doesn't doesn't want to talk about that, she's raising money from lawyers and taxpayer bailouts and we can go down the line on each issue. >> okay, two and a half billion dollars from wall street to the senator's campaign at this point, voting with the coke brothers nearly 90% of the time of her first four years and office. she did not stand up to big pharma when it really meant something to stand up. i overturned citizens united which is what allowed the start money into politics. i strengthened the people's pledge in the senator didn't want to negotiate about it. >> let's talk about her favorite talking point like the coke

brothers. first's of all they've been critical of me because i've set up for protecting the environment and they're not running ads in this race but you are running ads with ten different groups supported by people like harry read, mike bloomberg, we could've kept that money out. she she didn't want to allow it. [inaudible] >> this is the most expensive senate race in the country and i think we could spend the rest of the time on this but i want to move on. before i go to that, i don't want to miss some important topics. this is an important one for both of you if you could. i'll give you 30 seconds each. second amendment, gun control efforts and gun ownership and the right to bear arms and guns. a lot of our listeners care about this. i know that every day on my show. i think in general you both said you are pro- second amendment, but if you wanted us to

characterize, are there any difference whether it's on background checks, additional gun-control laws that you would support that you feel necessary that may come before you as a senator. is there any big difference between you on gun control and all start with you quickly. >> i fully support second amendment rights and responsible gun owners to hunt and recreate and protect themselves and their home. i've supported along history of laws that worked pretty well. the difference between the two of us is they had the opportunity to expand background checks of terrace and other people who shouldn't have guns can't circumvent our background check law and buy them online and a gun show and that's a national security issue as well as and is significant difference between us. i spent my career working to keep people safe.

i strongly support the second amendment and there's a big difference in this race. the governor has vetoed bills to protect rights of gun owners in new hampshire's, but when when it comes to enforcing our laws to keep us safe, i have supported strengthening the prosecution of violations of our laws, i've made sure if you're terrace you can have access to a firearm but i will make sure i stand up to protect the second amendment rights of people in new hampshire. >> senator, the next question and i will allow some rebuttal back and forth. >> one of the subjects that has come up a lot, i think think it's part of a story this morning, if you look at the tabloid stuff on e-mail links, but the iranian nuclear agreement. i would have to say a lot of people are confused by this. they hear secretary of state john kerry, the president saying, we had no choice, good

long-term agreement, to keep the proliferation of nuclear agreements in iran down. then you hear stories that at the bad agreement or that we sold out. that it was a form of appeasement or that it could lead to the iranian nation enriching uranium outside of our control and producing a nuclear weapon. you criticize the governor on this and i just want to ask you, good or bad agreement and what's your concern with that? >> very bad deal. bad deal because it's going to allow iran to keep asic nuclear infrastructure that will allow them to legitimately have weapons capability at least within ten years, if not sooner. what we have seen from the bad behavior, testing ballistic missiles.

there's no reason iran should be focused on developing intercontinental ballistic missiles unless they want to hit the united states or one of its allies with a nuclear weapon. think about the cash that they are supporting, money and the relief that they've gotten from this administration, their undermining our interest in threatening our naval vessels and the golf and supporting groups in yemen that are taking aggressive steps against us, most recently, this is a very bad deal for our country and it is one that makes us less safe and our allies less safe and it's one i have opposed. i think we should have taken a much stronger position in not allowing them to keep their nuclear infrastructure and their support for terrorism which has grown and continued with this deal. >> you been criticized publicly on the show,. good or bad deal? do you support it or not. >> iran must never get a nuclear

weapon. and never will as long as i have anything to say about it. like senator sheen and experts in both political party, i think this is an imperfect but important agreement and it is the first step in many that we need to take to continue to hold iran accountable and continue to protect israel among others. one of the things the listener should know is that the israeli military chief of staff said this deal moved the most, the biggest threat to israel's existence and he and many other military leaders in israel support this deal, not because of perfect but because, as a result of the deal. it's more the much further away from getting a nuclear weapon than it was before the deal was made. that is, at the end of the day with this is about.

we need to do more to help israel maintain its military superiority and we need to do more to hold iran accountable. i would support extending the rain iran sanctions act and at the end of the day when you listen to the military leaders, this has removed the most significant threat to israel's existence. it's the first step to many. >> i would listen to the leader, they called this historic mistake. they continue to oppose this agreement and are concerned when she knows there are ballistic missiles being tested that are written to write israel off the face of the earth and may have a regime that denies the holocaust and continues to promote aggression by supporting terrorist group and to say that

israel supports this agreement is not the case. by the way, when she talks about stopping iran, this agreement enables them to have nuclear weapons. the next president, if you're you're in the senate may ask for authorization if it is determined that iran is living up to this agreement. they do have a weapon ready to go and aside intelligence tells us. how far should we go? if you had a vote of the president was asking you. >> that's quite a hypothetical in the sense that everything's on the table to protect the united states of america. everything is on the table to protect israel because israel and the united states have an unshakable alliance based not only on our joint security

interest but on our values. we need to do everything we can to keep israel secure and to make sure it preserves its character. that is for sure. we have a difference of opinion, the senator and i, about this, and before disagreement, iran was under the cloak of darkness developing a nuclear weapon and people have. [inaudible] this is an imperfect agreement but it keeps a safer and we have to keep working to do other things as well. >> senator shibley moveon? >> i think this issue is far from imperfect. this is a bad deal. >> next question, syria is in the news a lot. by the way, isn't it refreshing to our listeners were listening to a debate in the u.s. senate, its commercial free, but isn't isn't it nice to hear issues. just a comment. syria is a very important situation and it is a complete

and utter mess. aside, killing killing of children and women, it civil war we could do a whole hour on this, i think you would both agree. what should our role be and there's been debate on the presidential side about this. did we buy, not getting involved in the civil war create a vacuum for isis? should we go in? should we punish aside for what he's doing? should we stay out? a lot of people want to know we have veterans on the line. we have troops here who may not talk about it but there are fighting in and around this. it's the big gun talked about story. i know it's only 90 seconds but what you think? what should role be. >> first of all we have to do everything we can to destroy isis. i've a plan to do that. we need to increase airstrikes and continue to serve ours vessel operations, especially to go after command-and-control and serve our intelligence iraq.

we are going to have to work with our international partners to allow them to arm moderate forces like the kurds in syria. it is long past time as well for the united states congress to take up a debate and pass authorization and use military force. the american people actually understand what it's going to take to take isis out. i'm very disappointed that congress hasn't done that to date. now, we also know that in recent weeks, russia's behavior in syria has been outrageous. it has been appropriate that sec. carey calls for an investigation of their actions as potential war crimes and i think we will have to look at going after asad's positions as well because the syrian regime has been brutal to its own people and it looks as if they

may have committed war crimes as well. we are going to also work with the international community paired this is why it's so important to have a strong international community. we have to look at what a post asad stable syrian government would look like. it is one of the reasons i'm so concerned about the republican ticket. >> you've been there, you been in the region as a sitting senator senator. >> have been to the refugee camps in jordan that many of those who have been murdered by the asad regime have gone to and fled to. >> what should our role be. >> this is about american leadership and when you have a president who lays out red vines and then follow through and you have a situation where then your allies feel that they can't count on you and your enemies feel emboldened. this is about american leadership. number one to defeat isis, and we have to understand that one of the things that during my time on armed services committee that the military leaders wanted to keep a fellow on force in

iraq because they were concerned there would be a vacuum created. in fact, the president was fulfilling a campaign promise supported by clinton and pulled those troops out and then a vacuum was created in iraq and now syria where you have isis forming, this

something greater than that. we built this country to the greatest force the military has ever known. that is the spirit that i have brought and try to live by by gov. it is the spirit that should inform our work in washington d.c. ultimately, this election comes down to whether new hampshire is going to continue to have a senator who was shaped by

corporate interest or by someone who has a record for fighting for new hampshire. >> thank you, your closing mark. >> i want to to think you for your listeners for being here today. every day i work wake up with a sense of purpose and focus on getting things done for our state, whether it's the heroin bill which i worked for three years to pass on a bipartisan basis or it's the care that we need for our veterans, whether it's making sure that we make it easier for our small businesses by actually addressing the problem with the affordable care act and the higher deductible and higher co-pay, getting our fiscal house in order, getting our country safe in a dangerous world from countries like iran, this is about who's going to stand up for new hampshire no matter what. he was recruited to run by powerbrokers, i stand up for the

people of new hampshire. i will stand up no matter who is in that overall office and i will work to get things done in the state. >> i want to thank our entire team, our network, our stations, i want to thank the bank and renaissance fire. i want to thank are listeners who asked me to ask questions of substance. i received several messages thinking both candidates for being so substituted and getting issues talked about. i wish the national media would take note and get back to some important issues. thanks for joining us. ♪

♪ ♪ >> i came up with the idea of reproductive rights, i went and researched the recent events i've heard about in our news and i knew i could find information on that. that would also help me figure out what points i wanted to say about it and how to form my outline for my p. >> i took a very methodical approach to this process. i mean you could, if you wanted, but i think that really -- it's really about the process of working in reworking. as i was trying to come up with my theme, i was doing research at the same time. i was coming up with more ideas for what i could film.

i would come up with this idea and i would think that would be a great shot. i would think about that and that would give me a new idea for something else to focus on so i would do research on that. i would scratch what didn't work and just keep going until you finally get what is the finished product. >> this year's theme, your message to washington d.c. tell us, what is the most urgent issue for the new president and congress to address in 2017. our competition is open to all middle school or high school students grades six through 12 with $100,000 awarded in cash prizes. students can work alone or in a group of up to three to produce a 5 - 7 issue on the issue selected. you can also explore opposing opinions. the $100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded and shared between 150 students and 53 teachers. the grand prize, $5000, will thousand dollars, will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. this year's' deadline is january 20, 2017. mark your calendars and help us spread the word to student film

makers. for more information, go to our website student cam.org. >> live now to inform on the role of coronation in public and private organizations in addressing the global refugee crisis, this is expected to get underway in just a couple minutes, life here on c-span2.

[inaudible] [silence] [silence]

we are live once again this afternoon as the number of public and private organizations are gathered to address the global refugee crisis. this is hosted by the strategic and international studies organization. we have a couple minutes before this gets underway. donald trump is campaigning in pennsylvania and he has a rally coming up. it's in the southwestern part of the state. recent polls gathered by real clear politics have hillary clinton leading there by over five points. the rally is live at 4:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. also, hillary clinton clinton is campaigning in cleveland this

afternoon holding a rally at the tioga community college. most polls there show a tie between her and donald trump at that rally begins live at 430 eastern on c-span. tonight at 8:00 eastern, political strategists and activists discuss how the next president could handle race and justice issues. mary frances berry coalition director for the jeb bush presidential campaign and the former aide to president bill clinton along with mitt romney advisory are taking part. that's life tonight on c-span starting at eastern

[silence] [silence] [silence]

[silence] [inaudible conversation] >> okay, we are going to get started. i am dan randy and we are having

a conversation about international organization and the refugee crisis. i think many of you are aware we have the highest number of refugees and displaced people since world war ii. i think there have been a series of summits and meetings in the last year, whatever meetings we have had are probably not enough to respond to the enormity of this task. this will be a problem that will be with us for decades. the folks that are refugees stay longer as refugees, conflicts are lasting longer and so there is a whole series of reasons why this is happening and we can talk about some of those reasons. in the past, perhaps in the cold war, any conflicts that were underneath the surface were kept under wraps, if you will, and toward the end of the cold war

there were a series of things that have happened since then and that's one of the pieces and there are other reasons as well. the good news is, there is a whole series of countries that are joining the ranks of middle income countries but there are 20 or 30 countries that are fragile and vulnerable. some people call them the bottom billion. of the folks in those countries, i think development agencies and emergency agencies are going to have to be thinking a lot more and a lot harder about agility and space in refugees and how to confront these challenges of the bottom billion club. that major challenges that we have to face. a variety of institution including the world bank group, i think we will hear about that today. we have three very thoughtful speakers. we have doctor matthew mcguire who is the u.s. director of the world bank and represent the united states. he is the u.s. ambassador to the world bank. that's not exactly his title, but that's the concept.

my friend john brown who's at the world food program and has a distinguished career and served on the national security council he's done to stenciling u.s. government and two stints with the u.s. would program. thanks for being here. my new friend, nina, mastercard global product development and humanitarian solution is branch leader. thanks for being here. we really appreciate it. will have a private spec sector perspective to this conversation is well-paid we will hear from the world bank perspective, and emergency response perspective and then we will hear perspective from the private sector. i will start first with doctor mcguire. can you tell us about how the world bank is thinking about this refugee crisis? thanks for being here. >> can everyone hear me?

when matt calls me dr. mcguire's, i get nervous that people are going to ask me about their back and their elbows. thank you very much. let me pick up on what you wish saying about the challenges from a development perspective. there are number of things that occur over the past 20 or 30 years. the other thing from a world bank or development perspective is part of the food shift that we've seen over the past 30 years have included a decrease in people living in extreme poverty around the world. a lot of that is the liberalization of china and india's economy and the demand for commodities that help any number of other countries. there are a number of other trends, but the point is. >> we are having at technical difficulty. >> the point of that is --

>> kind of like a wardrobe malfunction but this is a sound malfunction. >> the only point of this is that we have seen a real shift in a lot of the problems we are looking at now we talk about raising people out of extreme poverty are ones that we really have to focus on much more. it's in conflict and fragile states, it's in environments where we see a particular set of solutions that have to be brought there. it's not to say the problems are over and all the rest of the world and getting out of extreme poverty is the endpoint. we clearly have a lot more to do. the point is the type of solutions have to be more focused. the thing i would say, this goes to my colleagues who are appear, one of the ways we have to think about solving a lot of these big economic development challenges is in partnering with different ways with different types of institutions. the un and its agencies like the world food program, historically has been thought of doing one set of things related to humanitarian issues, and the world bank is doing a separate set of issues related to development. these are merging and the big player who's on the scene in our

conversation is the private sector, and the trillions and trillions of dollars of capital that are sitting on the sidelines or not working in these countries as much as they could be. big challenges we think about it, how do we turn humanitarian crises into development opportunities. that may seem a little too buzzy and like a grand idea that people have, but the way to think about this is clearly a lot of people who cross the borders and flea have extraneous. some of them will have talent in agricultural sector, others are trained as engineers, but, but the point is there are people in the influx into another country that can often be in opportunity. the statistic i would point to that is not directly related but gives a framework is, if you look at the fortune 500 companies in the u.s., 40% were founded by immigrants or children of immigrants. the point is, the core strength

of our economy has been our ability to absorb people coming from other places. now, are they refugees or economic migrants, did they leave the great potato famine, there are number of reasons why people move but when there is an influx, there can be an opportunity. a few things i will say, the other way we think about it as a development institution is refugee crises are not short-term challenges. people tend to stay nine or 12 or 15 or 20 years. we've seen this over the decade. you can't approach these crises thinking we can solve the immediate challenge that someone has and then were done, because people tend to stay in these host communities for a long time. thinking longer term means you have to think about what sorts of things development institutions are good at, building building infrastructure, strengthening healthcare and education, thinking about any number of other things that which really go to the long-term health and development of the country. that's the sort of thing that the world bank has expertise in and money ready to lend and invest for and it's a place

where we can come in and make a difference. the final thing i will say, the other way the bank is thinking about this is on how to we create the regulatory and legal environments, in particular countries that are hosting countries, which that will allow private sector actors to invest. that is what unlocks economic growth overtime pay at we expertise in thinking about judicial systems and rule of law and labor market reforms, and part of our task is shifting those dynamics so so many other private actors will come in for those who are already there will grow and expand and hire more people and create more economic activity. >> i think i will stop there. >> okay. john, thank you for being here. what is the world food program doing to respond to this global refugee crisis - thank you dan. we are in the middle of it.

we are supporting .6 million refugees around the world and in 32 different countries. we are now and we have been involved in supporting refugees. i think the interesting thing for us in this context and in this discussion is the fact. >> your microphone is actually working. >> the interesting thing now is that the global refugee crisis has changed. there's a different context to it than there has been in the past. we remember, there there were refugees in africa and asia and what have you, i don't mean this in any way crass, but they were over there and we didn't necessarily -- >> out of sight, out of mind. >> yes in the community did its job to try and help out. also out of sight out of mind was how they were supported as well.

just deal with them as best you can with refugee camps in the rural areas. now we have a context where we have millions of refugees right in the middle of the east, right across from europe and they're not uneducated people. they are middle-class people. they are educated and in many ways the same aspirations that we have. we have large numbers of refugees in countries that don't have the capacity to accommodate them. it's a more middle income context. so, as the president summit pointed out, the current response community structure has been overwhelmed. it is not capable, in its current structure in meeting the demands of this new refugee system. what are we doing? i say there are two levels to this. there's the humanitarian level

there has to continue and has to function, but has to function better. one of our colleagues earlier mentioned the new refugee paradigm is one where refugees aren't as often in camps. they are in urban settings. they are mixing in with the community. the idea that you are going to gather them together and handout resources and they will be fine no longer works. that's where private sector come in. as an example, mastercard was the teacher, the guide for the un community to learn how to use the debit card, the electronic cash card which we can give to refugees now and displaced people and beneficiaries who are part of the local population and they can go into local markets, they can buy what they need to buy, what they want to buy, they have choice and this is the dignity aspect of this new construct and we couldn't do that just a few years ago.

it's not only that that can be used in middle income countries, some aspects can be moved into the other refugee situations as well. that's a great efficiency for us, but it's not just an efficiency, it's also a way of integrating the humanitarian activities into a broader developmental context. in lebanon, just as an example, these cards are used by the beneficiaries in 450 shops. they are commercial shops. they are commercial traders. those shops have seen an infusion of $720 million over the past three years. that's the type of economic stimulus these programs can put in because we have a new way of working, because of mastercard. also the skills mastercard has shared with the community. that is very important. the second level is we all recognize that countries like lebanon who have taken in 20% of the population equivalent,

imagine the united states taking in 60 trillion people and you get a general idea, they just don't have the infrastructure to support this level of additional people. you have schoolchildren who can't go to school, you have hospitals that can't meet the demand and then of course there are issues like jobs. we need the development community, the broader community to bring the same response capacity i would say, not the same ones, but their response capacity to these situations to enable the host government to create an environment for the refugees that is stable. again, just to put it in the context of the refugees in lebanon and in jordan, if if they don't see a future, these people were educated as we are or more in many cases, and have the same aspirations, you can't tell them to set for nine or ten

years and expect them to stay there. they want their family to have opportunities just the way we want our families to have opportunities. dependent on the global community as the president said in his summit and the group of leaders for the summit said. at the global responsibility to address these issues. i will end on the final important point, so much much of the refugee situation is created by conflict. it has to be a political solution or we are going to continue to have the struggles. thank you. >> why is mastercard involved in the refugee crisis, if i can put it that way. >> it's about doing good. that's what we can do, we put in a global infrastructure which can be leveraged and we can get 80 people quickly and efficiently and too many people surprise as well, it's not just natural products that we made available.

we recently had a project in the philippines where we used to get water to people. we have products that are about commodities. it's close to our heart. that is why mastercard is involved, rebuilding communities for a better tomorrow. whether it's it's a refugee or somebody who's been displaced or [inaudible] we also feel compassion about giving people an ability to keep their funds safe and to give them dignity. this comes down to choice and dignity and they have lost so much. :

enough to knowing i needed to prepare emotionally for what i expected to hear. i was prepared for some -- you speak to a mom who tells how she

got her son back in syria, and as a mom myself i couldn't imagine that ever having to make that decision or going through that. so you absolutely hear that and expect it or prepared to hear that. but it's the tough you're not prepared for that you hear. okay? it's the stories of when people tell you that essence has now become the world's capital of organ smuggling and that never crossed my mind. the story of hearing how grief since the crisis started a year ago they've lost 10,000 children. they know there's children in greece and they no longer know where they are. those are the stories i wasn't prepared to hear which makes me go, there's a bigger crisis here we should be addressing. the stories of hearing when families tell you that -- at this point we meet with the family in their tent and they had no idea i was working -- there was a group of us and we

looked like staff. we had our caps on and they were telling us about their journey, and the father shared with us that they'd left syria and his wife was pregnant at the time, and they'd been shot at on the border. his wife went into early labor. the baby was born. the police waved on and they said once the baby is born keep moving. then the were caught by the coast guard when they went to greece and the baby ended up in hospital. and the baby came out of hospital and they were in a refugee camp. and his wife was not able to stomach the foam. she was weak and frail. two small children. and he goes, we had literally made peace with the fact we were going to die was we made the peace, we had the discussion, and that is where we were, and he goes the person came around the next day and gave me a

prepaid card and that saved my life. and it's very moving when you hear somebody say that. i wanted him to explain more. he goes for in the first time i had the ability to buy baby formula for my baby. i had the ability to buy food for my wife and children. and when youer hat you realize how much dignity the option of choice can bring to people. it was a moving time as well in understanding we -- and we met with the brigadier general of me military who runs and manages all the refugees camps, and i was really surprised with the personality that came out and met us. this brigadier general i was expecting a really military orientated person, and instead a very compassionate man came out and spoke about how we need to understand theser people. we cannot expect them to stay in tents in winter, living in

boxes. what does file like when you go into a camp and people ask for the basics lying salt and pepper. thing wes fake for granted. win we spoke to the mayor he said people think this is the crisis right now. this is not the crisis. he says the crisis is to come. what about the generation of children which have lost three or four year of education. how do we correct that? how do we get them integrated and cross the language barrier, without causing more disconnection. so it was really, really impactful and gave a different view of what ther and -- that experience was like. >> matt, i want you to respond and talk about what exactly the world bank is doing to respond to this very dramatic picture

that nina just painted. >> what i wanted to pick up on is the point that nina made about the mayor and about the people who are incorporating into the local economy to say one thing we're address is the fact it's very hard to be discussful in supporting refugees. so while the discussion goes towards the people who have come across the border in the example of northern jordan, where i've spent time, 80 parts of the refugees are not in camps at all. they're living in towns and if you're not think can about how to support those host communities, you're not going to have success, and facilitating integrate into communication. the other important piecees often the notion people have is the sooner that -- if we let people be too comfortable when wisconsin they come into our country they'll stay sheer.

research is showing the most likely indicator of someone going back to their home country is how well they did economically in the place they went which is counterintuitive. and to the point is almost everyone wants to go back home unless it's not safe. and the only way to go back is if you have money accumulated to rebuild your home and resettle. so thinking about how to integrate people here in such a way that it supports the local communities and supports local businesses, where the cash is being spent, is core at being successful in supporting refugees when they move. in terms of the world bank we have done a couple of things which are new for us. we're looking at partnership quite differently and how to engage in this, and if you think about it, when you have the humanitarian world and the development world, they're two pieces pieces of the same spectrum. helping people in different ways at different points in their lives or in their economic paths. the bank for the first time has

created some facilities which allow wealthier countries, middle income countries to borrow from the bank in order to help some of these refugees who are coming into their countries and to help those countries as well. so, specifically, for the first time we created a facility called the global concessional finance facility that allowed middle income countries to borrow from us on a no interest or concessional basis. we had never done that before because the idea was if you were a middle income country you should be able to pay closer to market rates even though we are cheaper than the market. in this instance the jordanians and lebanese governments said to us, why should we keep piling up debt. we have high debt to gdp ratios when we're doing shot is is a broader global good and it's important we do and are doing whether we want to or not. we said that's actually making a lot of sense. so we created a fa which will -- facility which will help them

and help them absorb many refugees. from there we realize that is very good but there are many more refugees in africa than in the middle east, and a number of countries in that region are members of what is called ida, our operating unit that lends and gives grants to the poorest countries in the world. so we are proposing and hoping to get funded through a replenishment that happens with all of the shareholders of the world bank, $2 billion extra which go for the poorest countries in the world, who are absorbing refugees as well. the thing to keep in mind there is that the oldest and largest refugee camp in the world is actually in kenya, and people don't talk about that so much. and the refugees throughout the great lakes region, africa has been dealing with any number of these issues, a little more out of the spotlight. and we have to shine that spotlight and help those countries as well as they absorb refugees. i would just say in closing, this is part of an effort to

think innovatively how our catch-all can be most impact -- hour capital can be most impactful. we think of ourselves as being bold capital, and bob ruben used to see cap cal is a coward, and normal dub capital is a coward. the bank walks into those situations with an instrument that is helpful and we have been trying to think about that more broadly, not just in the refugee situation but also in thinking about pandemics. we created an insurance product that countries can buy should pandemic broke out, like ebola, we can get money quickly. instead of waiting and adding up the costs and then paying a country, after a certain number of casualties, a certain size earthquake, whatever, a country gets the money right away and that keeps the pandemic from taking off.

these are new ways -- i don't mean to take abuse the pandemic world but we're thinking about new wees to your capital to address broader transnational challenges. >> so there's a passing exercise called -- every three years and the short-hand in washington is ida 17 or ida 18. you talked about this international development association, but in addition to the specific moneys, isn't there also some additional agreement or focus there's going to be of the special low interest loans that the international community collects from countries very generous countries like the united states or germany or canada, those moneys are used to target specific countries in addition to specific facilities or interventions that you talked about? >> we're going to make it available. now, we have in mind certain countries are more likely to

come forward and ask for it but the key with this 2 billion i mentioned we're hoping to raise from shareholders is that it is money that the countries can access separate from what they would normally access for whatever -- separate and above. so the idea if you're country that is very poor, and you're weighing do we borrow in order to on so-the hundreds of thousands only people who come across our border or borrow to build roads or deepen a port, the idea is we don't want people to choose. we want people to do what they were going to do, plus to borrow to deal with the refugee situation. the thing i would say about this that's really important, you all are here in washington are. this is really core to the u.s. needs to come with a very good contribution. people need to understand how important this is for our leadership in the world and also for the bank, for its ability to go forward and do what wants in conjunction with all of the things we are doing bilaterally.

i would say the bank, testify board, we're pushing a lot of countries to come in for the first time. so pakistan, which is not an extraordinarily wealthy country, for the first time is budgeting they're going to contribute to i'd damp. that's really important. and that's the sort of thing we hope to foster and see, it's the kind of thing we need to keep in mind that also the largest donor to ida of the bank's 70 years we need to keep push ago country wes do the same and maintain the leadership and continue to show significant support for these efforts. >> i want to come back to that. so, john, would you please explain a little bit about what -- how -- what are the gaps you see in terms of their response to the refugee crisis? that the first question. the second one is, i think we can all agree in this room that the challenge that we're talk about here is going to be with us for the next eight to ten years, so next administration will have -- this is one thing in the in box.

so if you were on the national security staff council, john, or if you were a senior adviser to the aid administrator to a policy adviser to secretary of state or you were an advise to the new world bank president -- reuped -- what would you be wanting the senior leadership to think about? >> it's always nice to be able to use the president's words rather than my own. >> you're very diplomatic. >> he said we need resources. so his call was for the global community to step up and realize that even in the most fundamental sense at the humanitarian level we're not even meeting those needs. >> let's double-click on that. there have been -- there are act bid organizations like the -- we need $100 worth of goods and money and cash. i don't think you're getting your 100 percent of your -- is that complected the pledges and

what you're actually getting in the door aren't the same number. is that correct? >> for the refugee programs we're managing right now jurassic to get to the end of the year we're $300 million short. >> are we in arrears -- i'm 'em hoping the united states is never in arrears. >> the united states is never in arrears. >> that's a good answer. >> but i think it's -- the president said we need more resources from more donors, from the private sector, everybody needs to step up and realize this is a global issue. sothat is number one. and to use your question there's a tremendous amount of knowledge sharing going on and the world food program works with the bank o. social safety nets. just as an example. and if we were able to expand investments in social safety nets where we give the host government the capacity to take care of, first, their own people, with the basic needs

which we all take for granted, then by default those governments would have the ability and systems in place to take care of refugees if they came in. so we wouldn't have to go in and build things. so, there's certain longer term things we could do as a global community to encourage countries to give them technical capacity to build their own social safety net systems in their own model but that would become a resource for all of us moving forward. so it's a very big thing and collaboration between private sector and the bank on how -- international food policy research institute here in washington, one of the biggest think tanks on food security. but these are the kinds of gaps that we need to fill globally because if you -- you were talking about pandemic. if we have basic healthcare systems in countried you have a much better forecasting ability

on when some disease might start popping up. and the sooner you know, the sooner you can act. all of these things -- the united states takes for granted, can actually be put in place at some level in every country in the world. and if you build off of that foundation, i think we'll see real improvement over time. >> i want to just come back to matt here. if you were in front of a congressional committee, could you just make the argument for why should the united states participate in the world bank, a., and b., what is the argument for supporting ida 18? i can give all the reasons why i think we should but i think it would be important for you to share those, given the conversation we're having. >> sure. i think fundmentally it's about global leadership who america wants to be in the world and i think historically we have been so central to creation of the

post world war ii international financial architecture. one of the cower founders of the world bank and the imf and thinking about other multilateral institutionses and making sure they bring more and more countries into a global rules based order that really is the benefit, not only of our country but of so many other citizens around the word. and i would argue that the world bank and many other like-minded institutions have been a core piece of helping to see those -- so one issue which is about who are we as a country, what values do we want to lead with and it's important to stand song on that. when we think about the stability of the regions of the world we have to think about the economic health of countries. the bank is full of economists and other experts across a wide range of fields which are working closely with foreign governments who call the world bank when they needed a vice on how to think about -- needed a

vice on how to think about climate change and think about this pandemic which is two country away. so we want the world bank to be there then the final thing -- a woman royalty an article called "trouble travels" and the other thing to keep in mind if we don't address these fundmental issues where they's, trouble travels and we'll all deal with in many instances there's a political solution to come up with ask that's part of the overall thinking but in other instance thursday development and economic interventions to make and it's really important if we want the world to operate in a way we think works most -- that we're supportive of institutions and the u.s. continues to be strong and the rest of the world can see it. that's what i say. >> tina, can you talk about -- you have some interesting corporate partnerships and talked about doing good and doing well.

just talk more about in of some of the portions you're working with, a., and then could you talk about what does mastercard -- when you partner with an organization like the world bank or some part of the u.s. system, what are some of the things you want that organization to understand about what mastercards capabilities are. the conversation you're just describing, the picture you describe, the technology is a lot more powerful than just writing another check. so, i'm curious about that. >> most of our relations are not about the check. it's about education you give credit to people who don't have money so get to about not only educating people on the first thing, from a financial institution perspective and also why are we doing this? also look at financial inclusion which allot of -- from the

border perspective saying the six billion beam people, what is the actual impact and we go when people are not connected, all they're connect are the casketed to power and electricity and water? what does that look like and you oh to help those ecosystems. we are all about building a better tomorrow. and in africa we -- we speak about if you want to go fast, go on your own ump if you want to go far, go together and go in a group. and we're getting right partners in a group and like-minded people to get together to say how do we do this? which it's the lack of facebook, world bank, wsp we are all trying to make the world a better place and can do it more efficiently when we do it together. mastercard has astronomical

network and if you think about the world, we have got it already. we have the connectivity points and can reach people quickly and manage to move quickly. we can move, whether it be financials, commodities, we have got an ability to support that. we are present in over 200 countries. so all of that makes a huge impact on what we bring to the party, and while we have the footprint there we have the impact, the data, we can understand what is need thread and we can -- needed there and we can help and are prepared to bring that. we're doing it from a sustainability perspective. sure we have the mastercard foundation, and the mastercard center, which looks eight from a different spiff, and then we have the commercial side of the business, things need to be sustainable. if you do things for free, they're not sustainable. however you do not have to charge premium prices and if everybody can still make and do things more efficiently, it works

works and becomes sustainable and repetitive. >> john, we had a conversation about the merging of development and humanitarian response. could you talk about how that is happening and what does that mean for the world food program and other organizations and i'd like matt to comment on that from the world bank perspective. >> i think the big change is that in the past, organizations were happy to -- just do their job. if they delivered their food or delivered their supplies or whatever, job well done. now there's a recognition that it's life is much more dynamic than that, and we have power in the resources that we provide and we need to use them fully. so as i used just as an example. with the right tools, a cared instead of handing out food and doing nothing to stimulate anything beyond giving people a resource, the card gives the resource and gives choice and

dignity so its tripled its value, and then it stimulates the market, it is -- i would argue that when the market is happy, and the community is therefore happy, there's more stability, you don't have as much resentment of people taking over things or replacing systems. so, the humanitarian community has to be much more focused on development, and even in wps fundamental work with food assistance we have to understand markets, not just who needs assistance but how they need assistance, how that assistance can add value to the market structure, to transportation systems and then can it contribute to technical assistance in if we're doing a school feeding program in a country and not helping a government learn how to take the system over we'll be there forever. if we too much them how to run the program they can take it

over and if we can integrate local agriculture into the program it becomes something the community values. kids are going to school, farmers are selling their goodded. the government is getting recognition for providing a service to a community. so, these are broader things, way beyond just the humanitarian action. they have developmental impact and we all need to continue to look at how we can use our resources in a much more dynamic way. >> how is this impacting impacte world bank bank. >> the financial innovations'ving to us think about how to deploy our capital more creatively. the other thing i would say is deepening into different sorts of partnerships like those that john and nina talked about. that's another piece. and think the third is just thinking about what are we learning and seeing out there that ought to shape the way we do things? two quick examples. perhaps people wouldn't think of when they think of the world bank.

first is pick upping on the issue of basic nutrition and feeding people. we have come to realize through tons of resources, not just the banks but james heckman in chicago, but the importance of early childhood knew television on cog any different festival how important that children get the right nutrients when they're very young. matter because from a development perspective an allot of countries have 50% of the children who are stunted, meaning have low height and weight, and ties very closely into cognitive development it's hard to see an economy thrive if 45 to 50% of your children are stunted. what we have seen in latin america is stunting by half. so peru have, we have been able to reduce stunting from 28% to

14%. that's remarkable and important and tying how that fits with strengthening institutions more broadly. that's the other piece i would touch on. that's what we actually know how to do well and have done for many years so the question is how to strengthen the rest of the educational system so it's more connected to where the world economy is going and son, and one other example i would use is in the context of that how to utilize new technology. i think mastercard has a great payment platform. people think of it as a credit card company but they do payments and transferring of money. so why does that matter from a development perspective? the roenis some countries -- india is an example -- there are an awful lot of benefits going out in a digital mode which reduces leakage or the possible that ended up in the hand of someone else to the tune of billions of dollars. the country with a lot of poor people who can use the billions of dollars to come back to the

bank and say what's the next project might have the biggest impact and we can get in that discussion and use that money more effectively. so the point is there are all sorts of innovations which are take police as we understand the linkages between the extra daysally humanitarian fields and the more effective to advise countries, and promote values we think here in the u.s. can make a difference around the world. >> great. this has been a very patient audience. i want to dish see a lot of thoughtful people in the room. want it to call on my friend, andrew, front mercy corps, who is here. please give her the microphone. thank you for being here. >> thank you much, dan. i guess my question is for matt. also in ida 18 there's a

$2.5 billion carveout for the private sector. could you elaborate on how that is going to work and how the bank is going to ensure that -- because the money will be going into these fragile countries, where often there aren't functioning institutions and want but how you'll make sure that the money is going where it is supposed to go. thank you. >> i want to take advantage of that and ask -- john, i'd like you answer the question how to work with ngos like mercy corps in responding to months and nina how do you work with ngos and partner with them. like mercy corps. >> the question -- i have to be really clear the u.s. congress has not appropriated the money for ida yet so we're in the midst of discussions and hopeful that these things we realized -- i would mention again that we're

but one of the countries. while we're the largest contributor to ida over the years, any number of other countries are contributing as well. so this is a longer and more involved process and i don't want people to think this is locked in and done. there's real work to come. in terms of the private sector windows, about a third of the banks lending and investment goes directly to the private sector. the other two-thirds go to government chairs they've middle income or lower income countries through the ifc, the international finance corporation. so that's business that we have been doing, and when you think about -- what it goes to are companies doing thing chins crease economic development in any number of countries, 120 countries. so that's something we have already been doing. as you might expect, where you tend to have stronger institutions, more credit-worthy banks and more reliability regulatory environments tend to be in slightly wealth yaer

countries. d wealthier countried. one of the things i would cite is there's a book called "rich people, poor countries. "that talks about how to grow the economies of poor countries. some hat taxes showing that about -- has statisticsing to the that 30% of experts from countries come from the five largest companies in the countries. if you can identify the local entrepreneurs who are growing rapidly and support them you can see huge high are and job growth over time and that's part of what ioc is hoping to do how do we identify those companies, help them to expand, and then importantly, how do we also show, again, being the more bold capital, show other investors the ifc is in there, we have made good money, and other people may be enticed to come in as well.

the final thing mission the course of that, we don't jut go in and lend money for projects to invest in a health care company. it goals with advice. so we always say we have financial capital and intellectual capital and we bring them together. for example, if it's very hard to start a business, hard to export because of customs regular layings, those are the discussions we're having in parallel with the investment so we can improvement the investment climate and business climate. you might know we have a doing business report ask gets attention every year, which ranks countries on any number of indicators like energy provision, how regular it is, how long it takes to start a business, whether or not you can declare bankruptcy, whether or not you want -- one has an easy time resolving disputes. and that is the tool we have to point the light at different countries and say, here's some things you ought to be working on to improve over time. so it's part of a much more comprehensive effort but one we think is quite timely and we're

hopeful that our the shareholders come in and allow ifc to do even more in those poorest countries because it's so important for our overall mission. >> so. >> can you talk about how to work with a network of partners dish there's a whole universe of nonprofit organizations and you work with them. >> we do. and people would say the ngos are the last mile implementers for wsp and while that's true in one context, there's so much more, and i think it's -- when we talk about innovation, a lot of times the ny gohs are the incubators for the most creative innovation and the cash-based transfers and debit cards, the ngo community began investigate that and test it early on. what wfp can do with the ngo community and other partners is take these things to scale i

would say we have the sim byot -- symbiotic relationship and we need partners for the last nile, but it's just one facet of the need to partner in this new environment that we have the ngos re need to partner with and at the private sector, and our partnership on refugee response is almost -- we're practically married because they set the standards for targeting, but we have a lot of the implement tools so we have to work back and forth with them, and it wouldn't work without them. so, don't ever think of it as a simple relationship. it's a very dynamic relationship. and one that we're going to rely on for a long time. >> nina, talk about how you work with nonprofit organizations as part of what you're doing in the

context of refugees. >> sure. it's quite a bit different every country is different. every need is different and that's how we approach it. with we don't have one suspect one solution. so -- one product and one solution. and we have to understand how quick live they need to do it and and what are they trying to solve and we go in and help solve the problem. whether it's in noy and we the connectivity and we have specific products. how do get the ecosystem to work, and in a mainstream country they want to give people now but they need access to cash. how do we do that? and we literally go in and look at it and wouldn't say customize but we understand the need and we build accordingly. it's costing the ngo's money to get stuff out there. the difference whether it costs

the five dollars or one dollar, or takes two weeks or we can do it in 24 hours. the difference they need 50 people to get it out there or whether they need one person. those are the thing wes look. a the efficiency, the insight we can bring to them through data, through system build, partnerships, who else we need to bring, and seen as a market organizer, bringing the right people together to make sure it works. >> thank you. other questions and comments from the thoughtful audience. >> i'm with the united nations development program here in washington. i wish we had met before in person. i'm inspired by your experience. two questions i'd like to raise. one is local authorities. a lot of our experience is that

the burden and the onus of responsibilitying to the host community grievances and the incoming communities, say in jordan or in turkey, and lebanon, is with local communities, how are we working together with the local communities that is one area i'd like to ask. and the served is, thank you so much for sharing this. we have read loot about our partnership between martyr carried and wfp. all of the successful social assistance programs in eye developing countries are the ones that impear the -- empower the women with the card sorted not only the incoming population but the jordanian woman in northern jordan, if she has the card, she is also equally empowered. i'd like to hear you thoughts about how the broader development work that we all partner together already on the host communities and using the technology. >> thank you very much. >> i might start quickly on that.

it's not just being a world banker. have to go back to the economic points entire say it's not just the empowerment we see when women get the money directly but we see a huge increase in expenditures on health and education for their families which has a big long-term benefit. so if you design a program, effectively and move money directly into women's hand you get -- that's why we think about design. i would say in terms of working with local officials you're exactly right, and i'll just give you my experience in north jordan, certainly we make sure meet with the appropriate ministers imam but in other towns it's the mayors. we hear what they want. and we ask the questions, what would be most useful to you, and this gets back to why it's so important that we strengthen the host communities because they're worried about their core constituents who are people who

have lived in jordan for many years. they also are drawing on the decade of experience in that instance of jordan absorbing refugees for a long time. so obviously for 40, 50 years they have been absorbing palestinian immigrants and many others. so you draw on fir experience, hear what is most beneficial for them and then that helps to us shape the overall designs, even if we end up lending to the national entity. so this is core and it's part of what the bank team, some of whom are here, have learned over many years to have the greatest impact. >> this world bank able to lend directly to cities or national governments in. >> we do an awful lot of work with subnational entities. there's a gray area in some of the regulations and so we're looking into that and there are cases where we have absolutely in the past. it's something we have to november gait a bit -- navigate a bit there but there are mechanisms. the question is where and how.

one thing i would say to be frank is that in many case especially in poorer or more fragile countries the municipalities are not that strong so the question, do they have the capacity to absorb this money? there are ways we can help build those municipality entity in such way that over time they will be strong, much like john was saying on the food side but a case by case to see what makes the most sense. >> this issue of local authorities houston does wfp work with local governments and the city government levels and subnational government level. >> we have a very intense engagement at all levels 68 we're wife, the government of lebanon and with their banking sector and work with the local government employees, if you will to teach them how to track the refugee data, if you will so they are able to report what is

going on in their own community and to understand it, and then in another way, we're asking the community to help identify lebanese vulnerable families so that it's not just, oh, we're providing assistance to the syrian refugees so there's a need to constantly assess who the vulnerable are among the refugees but also who the vulnerable are in the local community and then everybody has a better understanding of how the assistance helps whole communities. so there's a lot of work done and unhdr does a huge amount so not just wfp and we're working with the university nets area because we want them to help us understand what is happening in the community. there's all sorts of outreach going on because we don't claim to know everything that is happening there we need the locals to help us understand what is happening in the community and better guide us.

>> john, let me go further. there's a bias in diplomacy, bias in development to do capital to capital engame. , and we engagement and we had a conversation, nina painted a stark picture in the conversation with the mayor in athens. what is world food program's ability to deal with e credibility live we mayors do you have to get a permission slip from the national government? i know some -- i think -- i'm not sure that aid -- i don't note know what they're angment is. >> always have an agreement with the national government. >> i understand. >> so we have or blanket agreement which lets us engage pretty much -- dead depressing on the country -- depending on the country. >> i'm make this up. say the national government is red sox the city government is

the yankees. in using deep sophisticated think tank talk here. but seems to me there are times in many developing countries -- i can name many examples where the opposition party, the city government is controlled by bun party and national by the other and that color thursday conversation, even in terrible events. do you have -- does that -- you have the ability to deal credible directly with mayors. if they say don't want you talking to that mayor what does the wpf say? you have the ability to say no? >> it's complicated, dan. i wish i could say there was same answer, but but -- my senss dons think the world bank and others have enough capacity to work with city and sub national government.

they have to work -- there's seasons whether it's aid, or the mbbs or the u.n. system, there's a heavy bias towards capital and national government. some are examples of subnational governments financing but i've been of the belief we need more permission slips or some kind of ability to work credibility -- work directly with the organizations but because of things -- my red sox and yankees example -- this is a real issue. >> i would just say that what wfp would do is not say we need to speak to an official. we need to meet with the people who can give us the information to help us get the job done, which the national government, you presume, hopefully would want to have addressed. so, we all presume and all hope -- >> depends on the context but you say we need to get into this area and talks to these people and understand the situation, and it's assumed or presumed

you'll talk to the local officials to get that information. but the world is difficult. and sometimes doesn't go the way you want. >> if i can put a plug in for wpf. part of that goes to reputation and if national governments found the wwfp is fair they have more latitude than some country's an bilateral basis. so they do tend to have a different sort of credibility. and i would argue that an awful lot of places we can point to success and say we just did this in -- which has 200 million people. that's not a small country. that's a large country. and that's just one state in india. so if we can take that and go to another country and say here's where we worked with a mayor or governor and you didn't read any news stories about us putting our thousand on bun political

party's scales and people nod they head but this world is hard and we have tole maintain the credibility and brand and reputation of the multilaterals. >> these two folks up here on this side. this woman here and then this woman here. >> hi. i'm with usaid. my question is more about corruption to what extent is that built into your framework of assistance. >> oh do you think about corruption. >> correct, and the financing for development and the stgs, we see that day-to-day and how the hill is consistently picking us more accountability, also we should. it's the taxpayers' money. so i wonder how you built that into your assistance. >> we'll do this world bank style and collect a couple of questions.

i'll come back to this issue of corruption this woman over here. >> my question was what role do you see more traditional aid -- if guess aid programs like food airdrops, what role do cow see the playing and do you plant on integrating them into the more innovative things like when monetizing market dots you want to integrate credit cards or prepaid cards? >> great. anyone else? okay. we'll take tease two. so as to corruption. great question. all all three of these institutions it would be interesting to hear from each. so matt, when you think about -- especially in emergency response, the issue of corruption is something that one has to be careful of. in the to the world bank thinksed about issues of corruption in its practices and

the issue of trying to reduce corruption in the countries where it's working. >> so part of this goes to, a., you're absolutely right, and certainly usaid is where the challenges that come with corruption it's something we have been grappling with for a long time. we have a series of group of safeguards the conditions upon which we lend to countries, and that hopefully protect us by ensuring that certain studies are done, certain evaluation and monitoring that happens, by doing due diligence who ended up with the money. we try rules the likelihood of a world bank project getting tainted by corruption it's not perfect but we think we have a good system in place. we just passed a flu set of safeguards which will strength 'en that and minimize the number of time wet get hit with corruption challenges. the other thing we do is to utilize our knowledge networks

or the way we can explain to one country what a drag corruption is on their economy by drawing on examples from other countries and showing when you eliminate this you see many more benefits and see the growth you're aiming for. so part of is it going back to resee ours of intellectual capital and trying to make the case. but it's hard. people sometimes act in real direct self-interest ways that are problem and have to be atubed to -- attuned to it so we have accountability mechanisms and panel and i was someone sees representation they can come to an independent body within the bank and hopefully people realize if it's bank money you have to play by a strong set of rules. ry not address the other question just yet. >> why don't we deal first with the corruption and then come back to this -- so, john, you

work some tough places with weak states or nonexistent states hospital. due you make sure somebody is not taking an extra bag of rice or somebody is not taking all the food giving it there toy the militia as opposed to giving it to people. make sure people aren't taking commodities commodities and then turning around and settle and it keeping the money. so this issue of corruption is something you most about it every day. >> we do. and none of the organizations can ever withstand a report that they were involved or they had some corruption going on. but i think what we always do is we have the monitoring systems we nut place for the traditional programs, but i'll just segway over to the newer mastercard type activities. not only do we have biometrics to ensure year giving cards to the right people, and that we're

not giving cards to them twice,. >> that was actually one question is was going to ask. i had visions of going five or six times and getting five or six of the cards and -- so i'm curious -- >> the biometrics have taken care of that in the case of one of the camps in kenya we saw 15% or 20% cleansing, if you will. so it's -- meaning where you eliminated duplication, where people people had multiple cards. >> really. >> oh, yeah. this new technology has given us the ability to reduce corruption, if you will 0, misuse of resources, but it also adds to our ability to know what people are buying to know how they're using their money, to help us better understand what their needs are, and as nina says if we see there's a spike in i guess, payment to education or payment to medicine or something like that, or rent, we

can see that there are increasing demand in a sector we blighted not have been aware of. that's not a corruption issue but it is a making sure we can fine-tune or programming to make sure it has the greatest impact. so the new technologies give us the ability to do things and even, again, the -- we can use these card when there's food distribution and they can still allow you to make sure the person is the right person. the biometric link still works. still workness the old food distribution programs, too where they're appropriate. but corruption is a huge issue that everybody has to watch for all the time, but i like to see that the new technologies are giving us the ability to tighten it up and then we decent do that much with host governments directly so we don't -- that would be an issue. >> when you were telling the example, i have the exact vision of someone going and getting five or six cards and so it sounds as if there are ways to

safeguard against that. >> absolutely. i'm going slightly of the refugee topic and speak about a real example in south africa. we have a government program and south africa -- it's small country. we had a population of 58 million people of that 16 million people were serving up social grantses and before that government were distribute thing social grants in cash and check is it was costing them $3.66 per social grant then the moved to a product from mastercard, and what they did from a cost perspective, bright it down 1.60 we had governments say $357 million over five years and called that separational savings it. and allowed for multiple grants to be paid out in one card. so if if was a grandmother and i

was receiving child support grant, gov was not paying 3.66 for it. they're only paying 1.60. then we speak about the corruption side. haven't found a country yet where there's not a problem with ghost collectors, people passed away, multiple grant collectors and whether that be adults or children, and in south africa because office this program we managed managed to evade indicate 850,000 illegal granters and that's saving 350 million. so we speck about a specific country north refugee program but that's a true example of how technology can come into partnership and really make things work and bring efficiency. >> let me move back to john and the woman in the row had a question about the nexus of traditional assistance, humanitarian response, new technologies. start off in anxious that question, john, given this is

your world. >> so a little bit of a mixed question. some of the more innovative delivery technologies, wfp has, air drops and flutter drops, they're going 'otoe be in repertoire forever. we yves used them in south sudan and we continue to innovate in those areas but they're -- as we move to more local and regional procurements, move to cash-based systems there's less of a need for that except in those very violent emergencies. i think you probably have been to the berm in jordan. i wouldn't call it really so much of an innovation but there's a big crane that delivers assistance from the jordanian side to the syrian side of the border. a sad situation but you do that you do get the resources there. so we'll ken fifthing are out ways to make sister commodities

get where they're going but new technology is opening up a world that we couldn't imagine a few years ago. >> do you want to comment on that? >> no. >> i would like to comment on that. think from -- i think there's a new understanding of that even when in kind it's happening there are times when it's more disruptive than what it's doing good and win you think about in kind being dropped into a small community, then often the person who has had the small mom and pop shop moves bears there's no longer a need for him to be there, and when the aid is no longer needed and the organization moves away, there's nobody left for the local community to support and get what they need. versus when you build an economy from scratch and say, there's a card. you go and support and bailed global economy. that mom and pop shop will thrive and holding on a larger

variety of goods and support the community in a lot more meaningful way and probably find new shops comping up as well. so there's a time and a place for in-kind need and a time and place where we do more good by going digital and giving people the opportunity to build the economy and get a sustainability for tomorrow. >> thank you very much. questions ore comments from the audience. well, this is really been great. really appreciate you all coming out for this and i want to thank the panelists. this has been a very interesting conversation. please join in the me in thanking the panelists. [applause] [inaudible conversations discussion]

>> our video library will have this program starting later today on our web site. you can find it if grew to c-span.org. road to the white house coverage continued today. we have donald trump campaigning in pennsylvania as he holds a rally in the southwestern part

of the state. five recent state and national polls gathered by real clear poll ticked have hillary clinton leading there by over five points. ... i want to send a message to every boy and girl and, indeed, to the entire world that america already is great but we are great because we are good. we are going to lift each other up. i want us to heal our country in bringing together. we have to start getting the

economy to work for everyone, not just those at the top, making the best education system from preschool through college, making it affordable because that's i think the best way for us to get the future that our children and our grandchildren deserve. >> my vision of america is an america where everyone has a place. this is the america that i know and love. if we set those goals and we go together, there's nothing that america can't do. i'm hillary clinton and i approved this message. >> i'm donald trump and i approve this message. >> the man who murdered joshua is an illegal alien and he should not have been your. >> the killer hitting and ahead. he took them to a field and he doused with gasoline and set them on fire. it's the hardest day of my life. >> kill the but clinton's border policy is going to allow people into the country just like the

one that murdered my son. >> they are often the kinds of kids that are called super predators. now colleges, no empathy. some are living in their parents basements. >> you could put half of his supporters into what i call the basket of deplorable. >> i'm donald trump and i approve this message. >> both presidential can attend the annual al smith mobile dinner last night at new york city. that event raises money for catholic charities. here's donald trump. >> hillary is so corrupt. she got kicked off the watergate commission. [booing]

how corrupt do you have to be to get kicked off the watergate commission? pretty corrupt. hillary is and has been in politics since the '70s. what is her pitch? the economy is busted, the government is corrupt, washington is sailing, vote for me, i've been working on these problems for 30 years. i can fix it, she says. i wasn't really sure if hillary is going to be here tonight. because i guess you didn't send her invitation by e-mail. or maybe you did and she just found out about it through the wonder of wikileaks. we've learned so much from wikileaks. for example, hillary believes that it's vital to deceive the

people by having one public policy -- [booing] -- and a totally different policy in private. that's okay. i don't know who they are angry at, hillary, you or i. >> you. >> you she is tonight in public attempting not to hate catholics. [booing] >> and the c-span the libra as the anti-al smith dinner on our website at c-span.org. it also airs this coming sunday at 6:30 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. on c-span. coming up tonight political strategist and activist talk about the next president might handle race and justice issues. >> if she did something counterintuitive as bill clinton did with welfare reform, she

would be doing something bad for black people because his policy was bad for poor people. the welfare reform. and which is why the guys who are here at the kennedy school like david ellwood know this, had a tough time being there. and my friend peter adelman. in any case, so that would be bad, but if you mean by your question which she did in the somebody who would feel the pressure to do something for african-americans because she's white and because she's a white woman, the answer to that is she probably would feel greater pressure because african-americans are more willing to say something to a white person who is in office than the -- barack obama. what she would do i don't know. >> mary frances berry will be

joined by former mitt romney adviser and other political strategist as they discuss race and justice in america tonight on c-span starting at eight eastern. in washington states governors race incumbent democrat jake hensley a republican bill brian that made homelessness, health care costs and the death penalty. the most recent strategies 360 polls gets covered in sweat a 10-point lead. >> good evening from house to washington and the columbia basin college where tonight we feature the final debate between the candidates for governor, republican bill brian and democrat jake hensley. icr douglas with q13 in seattle serving as co-moderator for tonight's event. >> our debate tonight was organized by the washington state debate coalition, a group founded this year, founded this

year by seattle cityclub to increase access to nonpartisan issues. >> we fight both our live audience and our viewing audience to be part of this debate by following us and commenting on twitter, hashtag -- and actually we are nonpartisan debate. that's what we're all about. would like to thank our host speak a at a final think so debe sponsors made possible, leave support from the aarp washington and microsoft are supporting sponsors of the bill and melinda gates foundation and the henry m. jackson foundation and tonight's debate sponsor, stokes warren. >> let's begin with our opening statements. we had a coin toss prior to the debate that determined that bill brian will go first.

bryant: thank you and thank you columbia basin college for hosting. tonight i want to play why i want this job. i want to show you with you my vision of all the we can publish together. with 30-50% of our minority students not graduating from high school, with the fourth worst traffic in america, with the eighth highest unemployment in america, with homelessness exploding onto our streets with a midlife system ranked 50th, and with salmon runs going extinct, is there anyone who thinks we can't do better? weekend, and let's do it. and let's start with education. through seventh grade i attended a rural school. is because of that experience that i want to ensure every kid regardless of where they grow up get an education that gives them an equal chance to succeed. i'm running for governor because of education.

let's fix our traffic mess of the khmers can get to work on time and get home to see their families at a reasonable hour. let's work with the private sector to generate good solid family will wage jobs and committees that are still struggling with unemployment. address and used to volunteer at a homeless shelter i want us to commit and dedicate ourselves to rebuilding our mental health system so we can get people out of tense and onto their feet. i want to restore habitat so that sam and come back think every fall for generations to come. fulfilling that vision is going to take an activist engaged forward thinking governor. someone is willing to walk into difficult issues and is adept at building coalitions. that's the kind of governor i'm going to be. i'm asking for your vote, and tonight i hope i earn it. >> moderator: governor inslee. inslee: thanks to all involved in this. we are just delighted to be here tonight. sent to washington is where we

raised our three boys. i used to have the honor of reps in the tri-city. i think it's a perfectly for this discussion about how and why we are a confident and optimistic state, and why we need a confident and optimistic governor. it's because if you look at the tri-cities and you look at this state you realize three things. we are making progress on jobs. we are making progress on education. we are making progress on transportation. start with the jobs where autozone is going jobs. look at economic guarding think it will take statewide. we have created 250,000 new jobs, and 20,000 have been great in the last month. we are to be proud abou about t. number one economy in utah county. look education. what's happening in the tri-cities. as global blogs if increase the graduation rate by 25% in the

last several years. we are moving forward. delta high school is a model for the nation and s.t.e.m. education. and what is happening here is happening statewide. we've had robust increases, early childhood education. every single child can have access to kindergarten. we are the only state in the country that is reduce tuition for every student in public school. we're making good progress. look at transportation, what we're doing in the tri-cities. we are going to rebuild the red mountain interchange, fix highway 12. that's happening all over the state because of a bill i help lead and made sure take a pass. we're fixing for under five, finishing one safety seven, finishing the north-south freeway in spokane. all over the state of washington were engaged in those massive infrastructure building program in history of the state of washington. so i'm looking for this, tonight for this discussion. i'm a confident optimistic government and the police when i'm to keep the ball rolling. thank you.

try not before we begin with a formal question we want you to know there is a way you can participate in shaping our debate with help of our microsoft polls culprit if you go to wadebates.org you can decide the subject matter we will focus on the this hour. and if he was will check back on the results and determine some of the questions are later in our debate. >> let's begin with the question. as you know, police shootings have captured headlines throughout the country. over the past two years. here in pascoe, antonio zambrano-montes was shot and killed by police officers before rocks at them. this incident was captured on video. the prosecutor declined to press charges against the officers citing current state law which requires proof that officers acted with malice and without good faith. we begin with mr. bryant. do you believe that should be

changed? bryant: let's first talk about the vibe with which we are living. and i think too often right now in the united states we are living in assignment that is sorted based on fear. that's not healthy for any of us. for our communities to work, for us to exist together in a solid community, to have a good relationship with law enforcement we need to trust regardless of what the law is. we need to make sure we trust within our community between the members and our law enforcement. that's beginning to fray. that's kind of money out of my. we need to ensure that we support those who run towards danger, not away from it when there is a problem. at the same time we need to make sure that those people are representing us and treating everyone fairly and equally. there is a task force to examine this. they're looking at all facets of with a difficult issue. they're supposed to come out with their findings. it involves law enforcement and advocates. i look forward to look at those results and deciding whether or

not washington state needs to change its legislation. at this point and to have that recommendation i think would be premature. inslee: we've come a long way in america deal with our racial divide. but we know we have more work to do to cure racial injustice. we feel the pain of any family who loses anyone of any race involved in violence. i'm proud, i don't buy everything law enforcement group that spent an endorsement in this race but i'm honored to have their endorsement. i feel strongly these are men and women who put on the back and moan and go out into harm's way. they deserve our support. we duty to do a couple of things. we do need to examine our a candid the statute which is unusual. it's an outlier in the united states and went to do this to prevent the shootings in the first place. we need to make sure officers have training so that they can deescalate problems so that they can be culturally competent. we plan on the best criminal

justice training centers in the country and they do this will but we've got to make sure in 2017 we make sure every officer has that training to prevent these tragedies. >> moderator: the final piece of the state supreme court's macquarie mandate on school funding is to in the over reliance on local levies. in many cases these levies are paying for teacher salaries which is a state obligation. do you agree with the concept of a levies swap whereby local property tax levies would be lowered and the state property tax levy would be raised to solve this problem? a swap in effect. inslee: i believe in improving the education of our students. that's why we put $5.5.5 billion that money into sports things are doing for kids. now we have to take the last step, it's like climbing mount everest. we've got to get the rest of the way to the summit.