support it. and the resources necessary to maintain the positive policing will be easier to get. and so on and so on. so my point is that this is not the end of the line here. with us sitting out here and congratulating one another on how well we got along happy as i am because i only have so many fights left in me. and hopefully wexler does too. we need to move forward positively. we need to keep this going, make it spread, make people understand that -- make our members understand that police chiefs are cops too. and make the police chiefs understand that just because these guys haven't had scrambled eggs yet doesn't mean they're brains are scrambled. so with that again, i'm very happy to participate in this task force and very happy to participate in a series of round tables, again hosted by cops and

prf. i hope they don't end with a report. i hope it's a springboard to action. >> thank you, mr. pasco. very interesting. our last speaker on this panel is dustin smith. he's president of the sacramento police officers association. welcome. >> good afternoon. and thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. what i'd like to first comment on is the fact that we create a large part of the public's perception of their local law enforcement. no manner of outreach can overcome what we create. please let me define we. by we i mean the police unions, police departments and the governments. we need to take care of our own house through our relationships. my first example would be we need to discontinue the practice of tearing down each other publicly. we're no longer going to battle with my chief and my local government.

and the real public relations portion of that, the real connection to the community we're looking for is if i spend all day tearing down my chief and talking about why his decision is improper or unjust or even immoral, and i do the same thing to my local government. and then i turn to my public and say, now, please, trust us. i say to you, good luck with that. i would first start with my first recommendation would be to quit tearing each other down publicly so we can build a real trust with the community by showing solidarity with each other. we've taken on a new strategy we've only recently put into place. and our long-term strategies with each other. so for example, in the city of sacramento, mayor johnson and chief somers will actually share their media responses with the police union, and i do the same

with them. even though i have to come out a little more negatively than normal, i will share that with them and their staff ahead of time so they have an opportunity to see where i'm going and why. and then also have an opportunity to potentially educate me to where i may be off in my statements and why i'm not fully understanding or maybe vice versa why they're not fully understanding the other viewpoint. so it's given us a real opportunity to have a pretty solid public message come out. one of the other things we tried real hard to do is to not indict or generalize. and i know that typically, that's the police union saying that the government and the administration needs to quit indicting all the police officers and all these other things. and i do agree with that standpoint. but at the same time, i can't indict my entire counsel if only one or two of them come out with an opinion i disagree with. i can't come out and say the council has. i need to be specific about who i'm dealing with and who i'm

talking about and how we hope to fix that course of action. and the same thing would go with the police department. if a decision was made within the police department, i can't tear down the entire administration in my comments to my membership, otherwise i start to unwind the fabric of trust we tried to create. so another point i'd like to make is that we try very hard to fight behind closed doors. i mean, i can't sit here and pretend to say we get along at all times and it's the perfect relationship. but what we do try to do is take advantage of the fact we can have our own private moments. and that i don't have to not only use the media, but use my personal messaging systems with my membership and the other things i can do to tear down the trust or to unwind part of our relationship we worked so hard to build. so for us, i have the ability to meet with my chief very frequently. we meet twice a month, usually at least once over a meal. gives us an opportunity to be a little more personal, sit down and have some real conversation. and then also, i bring my executive board together with my

command staff, my chief and his deputy chiefs every month, and sometimes some captains will join, as well, so we have more of a joint feeling, a message of where we're going forward. and i have that same opportunity with the mayor and my entire council to meet with them. typically we'll meet with each of them one on one face to face, which gives me the same opportunity to then understand and share the same drive they do. because we all have the same general goal, as a safe and flourishing community. so for us, we are fortunate we have binding arbitration for both disciplinary matters and for our contract enforcement as well. so what we've adopted is the idea of the policy and the practice that that policy and the practice of that policy will allow us to basically let it rule. instead of it becoming personal and us having to attack each other in the process if it's a discipline case or if we're in disagreement with how the contract's being enforced we let

the neutral third party arbitrator be the one that makes those decisions. and i don't go after the chief or the city government in it and the media and other things. i allow the process to run its course and ultimately let that neutral third party arbitrator use the evidence and facts that's been presented to them to make those decisions. that's really helped us from basically turning our membership on those other entities. policy briefly i can touch on that. we share every policy that goes into place in the sacramento police department comes through my office first. and that was created a great amount of trust with the officers because they know they're now vested through their association in that same policy. our officer-involved shooting policy is actually contractual. there's a very specific way it's laid out. what's going to happen. who's going to be present at what parts of that incident. and it is available for public viewing.

so it has allowed for a pretty high level of trust between the department, our government, and the union. and then attaching that to the community trust by them being able to see our transparent policy. one last thing that's really helped with our department is that they've trained a number of our officers to actually be what we call peer support. they're internal counselors. most of them are people who have lived through pretty traumatic incidents within the police department themselves. so when you show up and you come to talk to me about my traumatic incidents you know how to recover from that. that program is attached to our employee assistance program and all the other things with professional counselors. but on scene and all the way through your incident you'll have that support in place. and then the last thing you'd say i was approached recently by a major city union leader who said some of the things you say sound good and i wish we had some of those relationships in our city but how do i get there? because we've been so bad so long. and really the honest answer i

gave him was somebody has to take a leap of faith why not you? and until somebody burns you there's no real reason to no longer trust them. and there's opportunities with turnover in government new chiefs. there can be timing to it. but there has to be a leap of faith on somebody's part that we're going to get together and collaborate instead of fight. so, my primary recommendation is to support what you've heard from dr. chuck wexler today and i thank you for your time. >> thank you so much, mr. smith. and we're now going to turn to questions from the panel. we're going to start out with sue rahr followed by tracey meares. >> thank you. sacramento sounds lucky. good cooperation. actually, my question is for chief magaw. i have two questions. one, could you tell us a little more about the disciplinary review committee and how that works? that sounds pretty interesting. >> the committee meets quarterly

and reviews -- we have laobr, law enforcement bill of rights in the state of maryland. there's a set process for discipline action. but lesser offenses and even things that go to disciplinary board, making sure that -- so they look at what's happened over the last three months. making sure that there's equity between what you got for discipline for an action and i did the same thing and i was -- i got less than you did. it's about keeping -- it's equal across the board for everyone. it's made up of f.o.p. members from their staff and command staff from the police department. and that group will rule if it's equitable or not. >> and if they find it's not equitable, what happens? >> well, it would stand. if you were involved in a departmental accident and you got a written reprimand and i got a $200 fine, what's the difference?

they look through the specifics of the case. i was somewhat reckless in my handing of an automobile, that type of thing, and they may deem that, you know, it would stand. if they say this is not equitable, then it would come to me. >> and you would have the opportunity to -- >> yes, ma'am. >> okay. totally separate question. your arrive alive initiative sounds wonderful. i'm curious. we talked a little bit with the previous panel about mandatory seat belt wearing. and i know from my own experience in law enforcement that there's always pushback. the seat belt gets hung up on all the gear. how did you overcome -- resist that amount of resistance? what was a couple of key things? >> like i said, and i mentioned a little earlier in my testimony, the real push came after kevin bowden, the second time within three months i'm standing in a trauma room with a family along with the fop

president, and us coming together and understanding, it's state law anyway, and we've got to come together and not necessarily in a discipline way but as a peer pressure way. this is what we do. somehow, like i said, the first officer, adrian was 23. kevin was 27. they grew up with seat belts. i didn't. we went back and forth across. but they grew up with seat belts. and all of a sudden adrian had 18 months on the police department. somehow in 18 months he decided that he can't wear a seat belt. we sat down and, you know, one of the things was we made a video with all the loved ones from officers who have been killed, you know, in the line of duty in car accidents. this is not about you. the seat belt's not about you. it's about your family. so, we took a real strong peer pressure point, because if we're all in the squad you know, you know who wears a seat belt and who doesn't. >> absolutely.

>> you know. and it's -- it's been tremendously effective. last year we reduced preventable accidents by 20%. but it's a whole series of things that we put in place. we went to u.p.s. to see what they did about driving safety. and we have a message that comes out three times a day from the dispatcher, and it changes every day as far as seat belts, about speed, about being distracted. there's a whole host of things. but the interesting thing, and i'll be quiet here, but one of the things, we made a simple sticker. every cruiser, marked, unmarked, has it at the same place in the car. and it basically says, arrive alive. and it mentions the three things. but it has a picture of our memorial, police memorial, so it's personal to us. but i had an agency after one of the roundtables who's close to us in the area who said, there's

no way that i could put -- have a sticker put in a cruiser without the fop saying okay. basically the fop would never do that. they would never allow me to do that. i'm like, it's about coming together. it's about partnership. and sometimes it takes a tragedy like the mayor was saying, there's an opportunity in every -- in every tragedy and for us it hit us within three months back in 2012 and we seized it. but we -- we seized it. and that was really the key piece of it. >> so the key also was peer pressure? >> yes. and that's really -- that's been the key, is putting it out there and allowing the rank and file to hold each other accountable. and they have. because again, it's a very stressful time when you have a

line of duty death. or kevin -- the second wasn't even -- wasn't working at the time. but he was in a cruiser. and those types of things ripple through the entire department, through the entire community. and when you have a crisis like that, you have to seize the moment. >> i think sheriff gillespie did that in las vegas. >> absolutely. >> officer smith, do you have any thoughts on this from the officer perspective, things that would overcome the arguments against ranks wearing seat belts that would have credibility with your troops? >> you know, we've had a mandatory policy for quite some time now. and i think over time the training officers involved come from a different generation with a different message. sometimes i believe that will help. i know that i trained a number

of our folks that have come out of the academy. and i personally preach the use of a seat belt as best i could. and if more of the training officers as you're coming out. academy -- in the academy, if you don't have it on, you'll probably fail the scenario you're in. when you get to the training process, the same message needs to continue. you fail if you don't wear it. if it starts at that level of culture with the more senior officers training, i think it can help carry on through the entire department. but i -- the equipment and, you know, one half of one second that you lose getting out of the car is all a weak argument, to be honest with you. weak at best. you just wear it so you survive. >> thank you. tracy meares followed by roberto villasenor. >> thank you so much. i have a comment first and then a question. the comment is for you, mayor freeman-wilson. i had a chance to read through this document while you were testifying. and i really appreciated many of the recommendations. it's reflective of some of the things we were talking about. listening to you and having a

chance to listen to mayor rawlings blake and mayor nutter, so i wanted to say thank you. >> thank you so much. >> so my question for you, are you officer smith -- >> yes. >> i remember when you came here with mayor johnson, but you didn't have a chance to speak. and you actually touched on my question which, you know, you spoke at the end. it has to begin somewhere. why not let it begin with you or let it begin with me. i was hoping you would say a few more words about that. you know, we gave you limited time to speak. and i imagined in some sense it's easy to say, well, it should just start with you as the union representative. i'm sure it's a little more complicated than that. and i think this is really important. so if you could say a little more about your strategy, i think it would be helpful, because we know that you have a great relationship, or at least, you know, on the distribution better than most. your mayor brought you here. you have twice monthly meetings

with your police chief. but for someone who's starting not from a good -- a position of, you know, relatively good relations, i think maybe there are some more concrete things you can say about how you let it start with the union representative. and if you could give us some ideas about a strategy, that would be useful, at least for me to hear. like getting your membership on board or something. i don't know how you do that. >> it's a fair question. and we all have our own constituencies. and people sometimes try to overcater to theirs. for example, if i'm expecting a public official to be the one to take that leap of faith, what you have to realize is that they answer to their constituency and that they're going to weigh that very heavily. the chief answers in our city to the city manager who answers to the mayor and all the council members. so they're going to make certain decisions based on what they know is going to happen as well. and then i am voted into my position and i have to take that

into account as well. what works in our situation or what helped me take a leap of faith, especially with the more recent events and to continue down this path instead of really falling prey to my vocal minority in my membership is that i sit in a position where there's no real threat with me as a union leader. if i'm unseated and somebody else takes my place in the sacramento police officer association, i'll go back to making the same money doing a job that's a lot more fun for half the hours in a week. my wife would probably be really happy about it. so it was upon me and my organization and my board, i believe, to take that leap of faith in our organization, which would be different. it's not a one size fits all. but with us, it was an easy decision to make. and we have a very charismatic mayor, very personable man who can connect with just about anybody i've ever met. and to bring him to my board and

my membership and allow that opportunity for his character to be shown clearly and who he is and that we can trust him was very simple with him. and then a chief who grew up within our police department. and it's not a knock to anybody who was hired from outside an organization to come in and lead another organization because sometimes that is the best thing. in our organization, that hasn't been the case. we have continued to bring people up from within who know the culture, who know the people. so when i meet my chief for the first time after he's been put in that position, that was deputy chief summers before that, and i already have that connection or relationship and that trust has already been building over the years. i used to have monthly meetings with deputy chief summers before my two meetings per month began with him as chief. so as far as who takes a leap of faith, it's not a one size fits all but i guess it just -- my organization, not just myself because it's easy for me to sit up here and try to say it's myself, but my board, i work at the will of my board and the will of my members.

that is really the message they want to carry forward. >> roberto villasenor. >> yes. i want to thank you all for your words of wisdom. and i agree with most everything i heard here. but i'm trying to figure out how to frame this question. and it's something that probably is geared a little more towards mr. pasco and officer smith. we all agree we're all working together. but you just touched on it, officer smith, that everybody has the constituency that they work for and the people who, you know, they report to. and as union leadership, you report to your members and part of your job is to defend your members. and some of your members think that that has to come at all costs. and that's where i have an issue sometimes, is i have seen things where management has known that the officer's conduct was wrong. the union knows that the officer's conduct was wrong. yet the union will come and

defend the officer's conduct because that's what they're there for. i have a real ethical problem with that, understanding that. and i'm wondering if i could hear your perspective on how we deal with that. >> can i start? >> you know, every day we see -- practically every day we see lawyers go for confirmation before the senate. and invariably they're challenged on cases that they've taken, either as prosecutors or as defense attorneys. and the course they've taken. and the answer is always the same, everyone's always entitled to a defense. and it's not -- it would be unethical not to give them a defense if you're in a position to do so and it was your responsibility to do so. so, you're right, from time to time police officers who have committed an offense which is actionable, possibly it was

termination, are retained because of the defense presented by the union. and it's equally possible that officers who should have been retained were dismissed because of a vigorous prosecution by management. the fact of the matter is, everybody has that -- has a job to do. and nobody, whether they're a police officer or fireman or anyone else in public service, checks their civil rights or due process rights at the station house door. so, it's part of the job. and we do it as vigorously as we can. or we would be acting unethically. >> well put. thank you. >> i would like to respond a little bit to that as well. i've represented probably 95% of our officers in internal affairs myself over the past few years.

and then on some of those high-profile cases we'll bring in attorneys and other things. but we've always taken the -- the viewpoint that we're not defense attorneys. i'm not here to defend you for terrible acts that you've committed within the community. if there is an accusation made that you've had conduct unbecoming or the things we'll typically see in internal affairs, then it is my job to represent you the best i can and to find the facts. if those facts show you were wrong, we'll find a reasonable settlement or the discipline will be appropriate. now, if somebody does something terrible within the community, which unfortunately we have seen throughout the history of the sacramento police department, and even a few years ago as i first stepped into the role of president there was a pretty heinous case in sacramento where a police officer had done something. we made sure we technically represented them properly, but then that same day, i reached out to the family and offered any support, can i fly in family members, can we put them up in hotels, can we supply meals, what can we do to you, the victim family of this officer, to help support you as well?

it was really just a viewpoint of, i guess it's pretty simple to say, but do the right thing for the right reason. even in these types of representation you have that opportunity. and we don't typically criminally defend those that have done something terrible to society. it's if you've been accused of something within the scopes of your duties -- within the scope of your duties then we're there to defend you. if it's outside the scope of your duty and it's terrible, it is not my job to defend you. >> thank you. >> sean smoot. >> i sensed there wasn't another question so i'm going to ask dr. wexler. it sounds a lot like what officer smith is talking about when he says take a leap of faith or do the right thing for the right reason, what he's really talking -- i think he's a little -- i think what he's really talking about is adaptive leadership. and leadership.

and so what is perf doing to accentuate leadership models like officer smith on the side of management? >> probably not enough, but i think -- i think it is leadership. you know, probably the biggest challenge -- i want to pick up your question but what jim pasco's comment was, how do you change the dynamic here? i think the best way to change it is with examples. when people see the benefit. officers don't get laid off in sacramento when labor and management work together. in camden they work together and they get an agreement on a contract. when officers and management work together in prince georges county, lives get saved. when the fop and napo agree to the mandatory wearing of seat

belts, lives will be saved because people will be required to wear it who normally think it's uncomfortable and their life will be saved because of that. leadership is on both sides, in labor and management. in boston, where i'm from, we used to say, management gets the kind of union they deserve. management gets the kind of union they deserve. so, if you treat people badly, your union gets more militant. and i think the best example here, sitting right at the table is in philadelphia. what's happened with the philadelphia union. it was a very militant union in philadelphia. and not to say it's not still a strong union but now there's communication. i think a lot of this is leadership but it's a little bit idiosyncratic. you need the right personalities.

i have seen over and over again, whether it's labor or management, someone will say, and jim pasco can correct me if i'm wrong here, is we have a new union president, so now things are bad. or we have a new chief who doesn't think their role is to talk to the union. so when you have either a new union leader or a new police chief who doesn't have this kind of experience, they think they're supposed to treat the union a certain way. and the union president thinks they're supposed to treat management a certain way. and sometimes, whether we like it or not, and this is where my friend jim pasco is talking about, if they get -- if they have to get elected because they have to, you know, badmouth management publicly, then that's what my friend from sacramento was talking about in terms of character. you have to make a decision. is this job really worth me becoming a different kind of

person to get re-elected? so i think we have to do more with labor to educate new chiefs and new union presidents, that you get more working together. now, if someone steps outside and, you know, is disrespectful, that changes the dynamic. but we shouldn't go back to square one. you know, the days of the public reading in the paper that management and unions and no confidence votes, you know, no one gets helped by that. no one -- no one is safer because of that. we have enough examples. and with the way the public feels about the police today, we have a lot of work to do. people talk about, we need to change the culture of policing. how do you change the culture of the policing without cops? right? chiefs can't do it by themselves. so somehow we need to recognize

that we need the cops if we want to change things. the cops aren't the opposition. the cops, you know, the cops want better benefits. chiefs want happier cops so they'll be treating the community better. you know, we talk a lot -- tracy meares at the table, prominent proponent of procedural justice. we need more procedural justice in police departments. there needs to be more conversation about procedural justice within police departments. unions came about because people would be transferred overnight because they looked the wrong way at the boss or if they find out where he lived or she lived, they put them in the most farthest district. all these things were done in an arbitrary way and you understand why people feel the way they do. but it's a new day. we need each other. we're going to disagree sometimes, absolutely. we can get more accomplished together than we can at each other's throats. >> sean, i'm glad you asked the question because i didn't want

to let jim pasco's question remain up in the air. so, thank you, dr. wexler. i want to ask jim pasco if he wanted to weigh in on this again. >> well, it's very discomforting to disagree with chuck wexler once in an afternoon, but here i am agreeing twice. >> we can keep it off the record, if you would like. >> that would be appreciated. i've got a job, too, you know. i think that what i wanted to say when chuck was finished, okay, let's go sell it. that's where i left off. that's what we've got to do. he makes a point. we within the fop for the last 12 or 14 years have been putting on a leadership seminar for newly elected state and local fop officers. and it's a four-day seminar.

and we try to teach them how to interact with management with, you know, to getting to success. how to -- how to message to their members so they'll understand what they're doing. and how to -- how to interact with the public from a public standpoint, so they'll understand the police perspective without, you know, pyrotechnics. we have found it to be very successful. you see it's an incremental process. it isn't going to happen overnight. but if you look at cities and when we talk about cooperation and collaboration, the city that we like to point to is cincinnati. and cincinnati, they were basically forced to the table in cincinnati by the justice department. the civic leaders were, the church leaders, the city

government, our union. were forced to the table. they went kicking and screaming. and they didn't like it at first. but they had to stay there. and over time they came to realize that the only way they were going to be able to ever get away from that table was to make something happen. they started working together cooperatively and collaboratively. cincinnati's not perfect. but it's a much, much better city to live in today to live in and police in than it was at the beginning of the process. these folks get together still, the collaborative is gone, but they still get together voluntarily on a regularly scheduled basis and work together for the betterment of the city. one of the naacp leaders in cincinnati, and you may have heard this while you were out there, was one of the biggest critics of the fraternal order of police. that naacp leader ran for city council with the enforcement and the active support of the fraternal order of police, now

sits on the council and is a great proponent of resources for police. so, that's the kind of evolution that can happen when people come to the realization, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, that they're going to have to work together and we need to find a way to make that happen, probably less -- with less force, but with more often as we move around the country. >> wonderful. thank you so much. please join me in thanking our panelists. [ applause ] >> okay. we'll come back at this time. we will go into community feedback. i'll turn to jim again. do we have -- we have the online. so we have no online comments and for now i have two speakers from the audience. let me start with -- and ahead of time please forgive me if i mispronounce your name. i want to say alupe comfort.

and then followed by michael bell. please say your name so i know how bad i pronounced it. >> oladipe. >> thank you. >> thank you. my name is oladipe comfort. and i'm here today -- of course with every civilized society we do need good cops. we need good policing. but my question to you is that of accountability. in case of cop misconduct. i do raise my children that police are friends. they see a police officer around they should go to him or her. and they will get the help they need. but that's not what happened on february 19th in silver spring when my son was brutally

murdered in the hands of a police officer christopher jordan. and he said he he told him to stop like 30 times in 30 seconds. and the contents of his backpack, his i.d. and everything, is still unaccounted for. what do we do to -- evidently there's a problem. if they have to kill the people that they are supposed to protect, how do we go about this? that this doesn't -- because it was the worst pain ever for a mother to bury their child. and my family and i believe in my son was white or he's not an african-american he would be alive today. how do we resolve this? because it's the worst pain ever. and in my own case i feel like justice was not served. it's the worst injustice ever.

and he doesn't deserve to die like that. and no compensation -- and the video the cop shot him, that he obeyed the police officer and everything, state attorney and the prosecutor is like they're walking together like husband and wife. telling me that somebody mistakenly deleted my evidence. how do you -- how do you stomach this? >> so thank you ms. comfort. >> thank you. >> what i can say, this is not a question and answer period. so i apologize, we won't provide you a response. i would recommend, however i have some outstanding of the cops office team that you can meet with afterwards and we can refer you to potential sources to help you answer some of the questions you have. but we're just not in a position as a task force to actually respond to comments. so i apologize for that. yes, ma'am. next is mr. michael bell. >> good afternoon. michael bell here. i made a trip down from

wisconsin. my flight was canceled 8:00 saturday morning. and at 11:00 i said okay, i'm going to drive. that's how important it is for me to be here. in 2004 i had a 21-year-old blond-haired, blue-eyed boy killed under a spotlight. his cuffs -- his hands cuffed behind his back. and i tried to work with law enforcement and also the government entities at the time. i'm a retired air force lieutenant colonel. i flew the kc-r35 model which is an air refueler. i served in afghanistan, bosnia, kosovo desert storm. immediately after 9/11 i was refueling fighters over the president's ranch down in heyward, texas. my first response when my son was killed was i feel this investigation is going to go the same way as national transportation safety board and united states inspector general investigations but in a very short period of time i found out

that was not the case. so over the years we ended up winning a settlement with regards to my son's death and i spent my entire portion of that and probably another $750,000 of my own money to bring the concept of independent review and external investigation to the process because i knew that the way i kept myself alive and pilots under my command and those that i trained alive by teaching them lessons from the past. and i had recognized that there are six core elements involved in an aircraft investigation and review, and that led to its success. and if you take a look at the chart that i provided you in the handout, you can take a look at 60 years. we're at the lowest level ever. there is a professional that is successful. and there is a profession that

is a national crisis. and so i fought in the state of wisconsin for about nine years. and on april 23rd of this -- of 2014 governor scott walker signed a portion of our law in the state statute. the first in the nation. i did not get that done by myself. i worked with law enforcement. law enforcement must be part of the solution. but essentially what i had recognized, that those six core elements in investigation review weren't happening in law enforcement. therefore, we tried to change portions of that. and i asked for data. and there was no data. i said, let's see the dash cam. it was withheld from me. i asked for further investigations that were being sent out throughout the community so law enforcement could learn from it and it wasn't happening. so we fought very hard. i sat down at the wisconsin professional police association headquarters with its director. jim palmer and i sat down and we

crafted this legislation together and i gave it to representative gary bayh, who's a retired chief deputy sheriff from dorr county. he worked hand in hand with a human rights advocate. and together over the course of several months we worked hand in hand and we got it through the whole process. one of the other things that i think is very important here is that there is -- we talked about officer safety today. the officer involved in my son's death committed suicide in 2010. and i do think that if there was a proper investigation, and those types of accidents do occur. sometimes we kill our own people in friendly fire. we know that by being a military man. i think that officer might be alive today. one of the things that i did to help process my own emotions of losing a son is i worked with a group out of california. her name is laura mellon, she's a professor of family medicine

at university of california-san francisco. she spent 20 years developing a method called emotions-based training. and earlier today we had the chief from tampa pay say she worked with emdr for ptsd, but i also strongly, strongly, strongly recommend taking a look at emotions-based training because if you want your officers to -- if they're sad, you don't want that sad emotion to go to depression. if they're -- if they're angry, you don't want it to go into rage. and i strong -- and i know that laurel's group right now has been working with officers out in that area. so, i'd strongly take a look at it. it's not counseling. it's emotions-based training. i have some information regarding that. if anybody needs to contact me please take a look in the back of the handout. i did not give my e-mail address, but if you call me, i can go ahead and correspond with you that way. thank you. >> thank you, mr. bell.

thank you for -- we talked. thank you for the travel. that's not a short trip. and do me a favor, please give -- if you would give your card or phone number to this young lady right behind you nodding her head from the c.o.p.s. office, we would like to make sure the task force has all the material you have. so thank you very much. with that, i'll double-check with mr. -- no other comments. anything else from the rest of the audience? no, sir. so, the co-chairs, you have the time. >> this has been yet another very full day of testimony for the task force. i think our panels and witnesses have once again been remarkable in bringing very, very intelligent testimony to us. the day has been full. i would just say it's been extraordinarily helpful. with that, chuck, i'll turn to you. >> well, let me just close by, one, thanking everyone who

appeared today to provide oral testimony, those that submitted written testimony or simply watched via the internet or television, whatever it may have been. your input has been very, very important to all of us as we move forward to present final recommendations to the president. i want to thank the c.o.p.s. staff for the great work that they've done, even with this short time frame, they have really been keeping up with what's going on, providing feedback for us along the way to kind of make it a little bit easier in trying to put together a report in such a short period of time. s.a.i., who has been working alongside c.o.p.s. providing a lot of the staff support, i want to thank them for everything that they have done. and i don't know if you've noticed, but we've had sign interpreters there throughout the day, and they've been with

us at all the different hearings for the deaf and hard of hearing. and we really appreciate them being here and being able to communicate with that very important community as well. so now we'll turn it over to the task force members for their closing remarks. and roberto villasenor, why don't we start with you. >> thank you, chuck. i, too, want to thank the staff from s.a.i. and the c.o.p.s. office for all they do to help us do this important work that takes a lot of time and a lot of coordination. and your work has just been amazing. so thank you all. the most fascinating part about this whole process of the task force has been the fact there's such similarity of thoughts

throughout the country but that there's always unique and creative, different ways to do the same goals that we have. and to be able to gather as much of those as we can in one document, in one strategy to put out as a best practices for the nation, i think, is going to be very helpful to the profession at large and for individual agencies that are looking for -- to how to address certain problems within their own jurisdictions. so i'm very happy and excited to continue with our work. i finally see a light at the end of the tunnel. i'm just hoping it's not a train truck. but it's been a rewarding experience. i thank you for taking the time, those of you who came to listen. >> co-chairs ramsey and robinson, director davis, thank you again to you and to the c.o.p.s. staff and s.a.i. for another fantastic day of testimony. the quality of the witnesses

today and the subject matter, as you know, is something that's very near and dear to my heart. and i think we've got a lot to take away from today. and a lot of really good recommendations, witnesses today provided not only great testimony and rationale for their recommendations, but solid recommendations in most cases. and gave it to us in a way that we'll be able to turn around into our final report, i think, fairly easily. i really appreciate the fact that the task force dedicated a day to officer wellness and safety. and the fact that officer due process rights and internal procedural justice was a thread that carried throughout the witnesses' testimony today. and so i thank you for that opportunity. on behalf of law enforcement. thanks.

>> i'll jump on the bandwagon and thank the c.o.p.s. staff and s.a.i. for your support. i think that's really important. i also wanted to echo what sean said about how much i appreciate the discussion about internal procedural justice. i think that's absolute key for us to expect our troops to employ procedural justice on the street. i want to thank the two parents that came today and express my deep condolences for your loss. i can't imagine how hard this is for you. and i really admire you for having the strength to come and share your story and i encourage you to keep sharing it so that we can keep getting better. because nobody wants this to happen. he looks like my son. thank you for coming. i really appreciate it. >> like my fellow panelists, i thank all the witnesses for coming. and the contributions of those of you in the public who came

here near and far to contribute to our deliberations. i said earlier today and i just to want say it again, that hurt people can hurt people. and so officer safety and wellness is not just important for the officers' sake, it's important for the health and safety and wellness of their families and for the communities in which they work. they are, in fact, part of the community, so it really is about community safety and wellness. and so it's important that we spend the time thinking about this issue as it's as important as all of the other issues that we have discussed so far in our listening sessions. as we're coming to the end of this, i also want to take an opportunity to thank my fellow task members in addition to the great leadership of our co-chairs. we have been able to do a lot of great work together. we don't all necessarily agree,

but we know how to speak together and work together in a way that, i think, will produce a document that we will be proud of and hopefully will be useful for the nation. >> i echo many of the thanks to the incredible c.o.p.s. staff to the team at s.a.i., to fellow task force members and in particular to our co-chairs who have kept the train moving and kept us focused and on task. certainly to those who provided testimony today on this really critical issue, i do agree that hurt people can hurt people. and so it is of collective importance that we have this conversation. and i appreciate the clarity with which people made very clear and succinct suggestions today and all those folks who followed along with us online and in person. we thank you. i also would agree, though, that i think the most important people to thank today are ms. comfort and mr. bell. thank you for making the journey.

and not just the journey to come here today. the journey that you have been on every single day since you unfortunately lost your children. and i think that your example, your continued examples remind us that the urgency of this urgency of this conversation should not have to cost lives but most certainly that this is a conversation that needs to continue so that it doesn't cost more lives. so i thank you for reminding me personally of why i'm here and why we need to do this work. >> i want to thank everyone who came out today and folks who tuned in. everyone who sat on a panel and my colleagues on the table here and all of the technical support staff that has been working hard behind the scenes. i can't -- i also want to thank

you. when you say that you believe that your son would still be alive today if he were white, i feel like that came at a moment we're about to go in as a task force to deliberate the recommendations that we put on the president's desk next week. and i hope that it serves as a reminder to everyone in this room and the folks on this panel that we need to have the conversations that we have been having but we need to have them under the scope and under the context of race relations in this country. and so i want to thank you for coming out. i want to thank you for sharing that story. mr. bell i imagine that was a long ride out so thank you, as well, for coming out. we have a lot of work to do on this task force and we are running out of time. so i'm committed to being here

and working with you all and hopefully next week when we bring that report to the white house that can be the first step on this journey on creating a process to fix all that is wrong in this country. >> i would just like to say in closing without being redundant and i think we pretty much heard it all from those that sit on this panel with me thank you all for being here. thank you all for the evolution of this task force both the leadership and new friends and colleagues i have had an opportunity to meet over the last couple of months. more importantly than anything else and i will say this very quickly is that history is taking place in front of us. and this history of all who have

lost their children without a sense of understanding and where we go from here and what we learn from here and hours of testimony and sharing that people have come in here from across the country is going to be of value. and i truly do believe that. and this to me is not going to go into nowhere land. this is going to be meaningful going forward. i truly believe that, mr. bell ms. comfort. and to the rest of this country as well, to that. this is truly about change. and what it is that we can do better going forward because this is an age old issue from the beginning of policing. and we are in a position and we're on a trajectory that is going to change the course of history and policing in this

country and it is long overdue. and thank you all for being here. i would like to say thanks to all my colleagues in the leadership and cops office and support staff, contractors, everyone involved in this process. it has been more than a notion more than a pleasure. this is something i will carry with me for the rest of not just my career but my life so thank you all very much for helping me to grow and develop and be a better human being too. thank you. >> so let me thank my staff and our support staff and great team from sai. this is now the end of the sixth pillar. tomorrow thanks to the great leadership of our co chairs we will close out the listening sessions or the hearing sessions with a panel the future of

community policing. there is no better way to wrap this up than to look into the future. i want to thank panels for coming. i appreciate them still sticking with us using skype for our audience participation and today was a reminder of a comment that i heard both the president and the attorney general say. that is as we look at the recommendations for the field we know we need to make sure that young men of all colors have the fair and equal treatment when they step out of the house that they are not stopped or harassed because of the color of their skin. the president made it clear after the attorney general that we also need to with equal rigorous support and loud voice to make sure that officers who work here have the right to go home. and a threat to them going home is not as simple as gun fire. we learned there is a lot of other variables.

i think we look at all stakeholder groups. i'm impressed with the diversity of the witnesses, perspectives positions on the table. we have been able to agree and disagree and to do so without being disagreeable. i hope those watching really will embrace that notion. there have been various perspectives here and that represents perspectives in the country. this is going to be without a doubt a historical moment as been suggested. it is one we should be proud of before we finish the report because this process alone suggests that the progress today. as i listened to the last panel i think we can look forward to seeing where we are heading as a country. we have elected officials and police management, people who have suffered great loss willing to come together to talk about solutions on how to advance forward. i think that is what it is all about. if i may on behalf of the administration of the president the attorney general thank the

two co chairs, task force those watching and everyone participating, our staff our technical advisers. and i want to thank them now because we are about to work with you more than we can imagine to get this report done and have a good product for the nation. please accept our thanks and know we are grateful for your leadership. >> with that we will be wrapping up this session and see many of you tomorrow for our last listening session. thank you all.

here are some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. on book tv saturday night at 10:00 eastern on after words former marine and war correspondent david morris on the history of post traumatic stress disorder. and sunday night at 8:00 former navy s.e.a.l. sniper. and saturday bloody sunday selma march. and on saturday beginning at noon eastern. we are live from selma with your phone calls followed by the commemorative ceremony with president obama and congressman john lewis. on sunday our live coverage continues with a service from the historic brown chapel church the starting point for the marches.

find our complete schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. call us, e-mail us at comments@c-span.org or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. coming up on c-span 3 remarks by dell incorporated founder michael dell and then a conversation with dan fyfer followed by a senate foreign relations hearing on fighting isis and later a panel discussion on combatting violent extremism. dell corporation founder and ceo michael dell spoke on wednesday talking about his experience of dropping out of college and starting his company at age 19 and the ongoing impact of technology and invasion on

the global economy. this is 45 minutes. >> can i have your attention please? can i have your attention? thank you. so i indicated earlier we are very pleased and honored to have michael dell as our special guest. michael is a legend in the business world. let me give a little background. michael is now the founder and chairman and ceo of dell inc. which is one of the largest it service providers and companies in the world. it is a company that he started when he was 19 years old. he was a college under graduate university of texas and began assembling computers in his dorm room and started the company at 19. the company went public when he was 23 and he became at 27 the youngest ceo of any fortune 500

company. and the company became well known for its personal computers business among other things. and then he ran the company until 2004 and then stepped back as ceo to turn it over to somebody else. in 2007 came back as the ceo and in 2013 decided to take the publically traded company private in one of the largest buy outs of the era since the great recession. it was the largest buy out about a $24 billion buyout. the company has done quite well. michael is very involved as well, in philanthropy and he and his wife have a foundation given away more than a billion dollars very involved in medical research and children's health among other causes. michael is also very involved in the computer and technology industry. he is here in town in part for a

ceo council among other things that he is doing in town. and i would say that in the computer world and the it world he is obviously one of the legends. he is one of the few people who started the company 20 something years ago in this industry who is still a ceo of a company in the industry. if i could just start off by asking you you took your company private in 2013. do you miss dealing with analysts? is that a problem? >> i don't miss that at all. in fact, for entertainment i listen in sometimes to my competitors conference calls and it is really fun. >> so when you're publicly traded you have to deal with analysts and so forth. now that you are private what do you focus on instead of quarterly numbers? how is your company run differently now that you are a

privately owned company? >> we focus on our customers and medium and long term and getting away from this shot clock has given us freedom and flexibility to invest in our business without, let's say fear of the short term targets. and i think it's energized our team. we had a very good year last year and it's really changed the focus to be more long term. >> so at the time you were considering doing this i remember you and i were in dabos. i did a tv interview and somebody asked me what i thought about your transaction that was pending. i said most buyouts of that size don't work so i wouldn't be that optimistic. i wouldn't look at investing in it. i didn't realize we were going to have lunch later that day and i would apologize to you, but there were other buyouts firms

that looked at it. you did it with silver lake. have you called up the buyout firms that didn't want to do the deal and tell them they made a mistake? >> i wouldn't do that. i think look our business has some volatility. it has some uncertainty. that's why the technology industry is so dynamic. it's changing all the time. and we have been actively changing our business. when you're doing that in a short term focused financial market it can be pretty difficult. >> so at the time firms like mine said he is a pc manufacturer and that business is probably going down and there is probably too many people that

manufacture them very cheaply. so this wouldn't be a great business. what did people miss because you're not just a pc company or what did people miss in analyzing the way your company would operate in the future? >> as it relates to the small computer systems pcs, tablets work stations we have had eight quarters in a row of increasing our share of the overall industry. so that's clearly a good thing. there isn't necessarily a lot of growth there but by gaining share we can grow our business. there is somewhat of consolidation there. on the other side of our business in software and services and data center we have some pretty robust growth. now, we have spent over the last six or seven years roughly $15 billion acquiring 40 or so firms

that acquired 150 companies and built pretty substantial capability in it solutions software services data center. to give you a sense for this last year our deferred revenues grew more than 20% year over year which is pretty hard to do. many of our competitors similarly positioned would have had negative growth in the same period. so we have been able to reshape the business pretty significantly and successfully. >> so what percentage of your revenues if you can say roughly are pc oriented? is that less than 50% of your revenues now? >> it's still a little more than 50%. i also think of it as the tip of the spear particularly in the emerging world. so if you think about you have 3.5 billion people in india,

china and africa. while it services and data analytics and more complex solutions are interesting it's not actually what they buy first. what they buy first is infrastructure which is the actual machines that bring the data the servers the network and then they get into the more complex areas. so when i look at our small computer systems business with businesses in enterprise in these emerging developing markets which still have relatively low penetration compared to developed markets there is robust growth there. in the developed markets it is kind of a replacement cycle business, but to be able to bring an end to end solution i think you have to have both ends of the solution. so we fundamentally believe to

be able to solve the problems that customers have out there it is a combination of hardware software and services together. >> private equity firms usually like to exit at a nice profit and maybe three or four or five years. what will you do to help silver lake exit? will you take the company public again or have you had enough of that? how would you give them an exit if you didn't do an ipo? >> they haven't shown any desire to exit anytime soon but there are many ways for that to occur. >> going public wouldn't be your highest priority again? >> no. why do companies go public? there is certainly a role for public markets. when we went public in 1988 it was really the only way to get

the amount of capital we needed for our growing company. but we don't really need capital now. we generate lots of capital. our brand is also very well known by our customers so the reasons to go public aren't really there. i find it much more enjoyable to be a private company. i think the flexibility that we have is tremendous and we can take on investments with an uncertain outcome. that is quite attractive in our business. instead of having to manage --

>> 12%? >> 15%. >> now you are on to 75%? >> 70%. >> is it too late to invest in the ipo? >> it might be a little bit late. >> let me go back to when you began the company. you were 19 years old. >> flattered by the interest, though. >> we always like good investments. unfortunately, we missed this one, but at 19 you're in college and you're a freshman at the university of texas. you grew up in houston. you're a premedstudent. your father was an orthodontist and you have a medical background in your family. you were preordained to go to medical school, i assume. what happened that led you to start fixing computers? how did that start in your dorm room as i understand it? you were assembling computers.

how did that come about? >> it goes back a little further than that. when i was in junior high school i was in this math class and my math teacher had this teletype terminal. you could type in programs and the answer would come back. i became enthralled with this idea of machines that would calculate and threw myself into all of that. fast forward to 1981 i'm 16 years old. ibm introduces the ibm pc. it was clearly aimed at business. and what was interesting to me about that is you have this computer for a few thousand dollars that any business could buy, not any business but a lot of businesses could buy. and it was incredibly empowering. it was exciting. and kind of threw myself into all of that.

as i took the computer apart what i realized is that they were selling $500 worth of parts of $3,000 which seemed to me like a kind of criminal enterprise almost. it just seemed unfair. it's like how could it be $3,000? and so i started mapping out what all the parts cost. and then started upgrading like people would upgrade cars and things. i was upgrading computers. and that ultimately led me to starting the company and making our own computers. >> you were in your -- you have two parents who thought you were going to medical school, nice jewish parents. >> that didn't go over so well. >> you tell your parents you are dropping out of college to start

a computer company what did they say? >> they said you are bananas. it did not go over well. so we basically made a deal. and the deal was that i would take a semester off. at university of texas you could take a semester off and go back. and if the business did well enough then i would continue. if it didn't i would go back to school. so after 90 days i had financial statements, business was booming and thriving and i continued. >> so the name dell is very simple name and sounds like it would always work. suppose your last name had been reuben stein? you think the company would have worked as well? how did you come to name it dell? >> i don't think it would have

been -- but the name was actually a bit of an accident. when i was in my dorm room i had a trade name called pcs limited. i was a sole proprietor doing business as pcs limited. i had this customer who was a lawyer. he was kind of saying your business is thriving and growing. maybe you should incorporate. i said why would i want to do that. he explains the benefits of being a corporation. and i said so what's involved here? he said well how about you install another hard disk drive for me and i will do your incorporation. so that's the deal. so i installed a hard drive and he says there's two problems. first is you can't incorporate the name pcs limited because it is too generic.

this is the lawyer speaking. i called it dell computer corporation doing business as pcs unlimited. i said fine. the second thing is he said you need $1,000 and he said you can't start a corporation unless you have $1,000. i said i will come back with $1,000. so that was may 3, 1984. company was incorporated with $1,000 as dell computer corporation. fast forward three years we embark on our global expansion in the uk, hire a guy in the uk. he actually didn't show up for work so the second in command was promoted to be the head of the uk. and he is calling back to headquarters saying i can't make pcs limited limited in the uk so

what should i call this company? back in texas business is booming. we're too busy. we just said you figure it out. so the guy in the uk says i'm going to call this dell computer corporation. so we were dell computer corporation in the uk. and we were dell computer corporation doing business as pcs unlimited in the u.s. for a period of time. and then a bunch of folks came to me and said you should just have it be dell computer corporation. it has all worked out. >> i would say so. so you are in your college dorm. do you have a lot of friends from your college dorm era who have said this is really their idea and they have sued you and said you took their idea? that hasn't happened, right?

>> no. maybe they weren't that clever. but i had this one room mate who really got upset with me. there were boxes and so one day my room mate piled all the boxes in front of my door and so i couldn't get out of the room. and so i moved to a different. >> what happened to him? >> i don't know. i think he is a lawyer somewhere. >> so as i remember it when you started your company the thing that was very clever and was unique is you would say i'm going to by pass the middle man. i'm not going to go to the retail store to buy my computer. somebody would send you an order. is that essentially right? >> we created a direct business

model. and that enabled us to create all kinds of efficiencies in our supply chain, customer information. today we have a what we call omni channel where we have channel partners and relationships with customers kind of combined together. >> today as i mentioned earlier in 2004 at your relatively young age i guess you were 40 or so or something like that 39? you just turned 50 years old. so -- >> in the 50 club. >> 50. 50 to go. 39 you say i'm tired of being ceo. i will step upstairs. you did that for a couple of years. was that difficult to step back as the see croand have somebody else running it? i guess so because you came back in three years. what did you miss as the ceo or why did you come back a couple years later? >> i was actively involved in

the company. i think the industry rate of change started to accelerate. and the board asked me to come back as ceo. and i think we needed to make some relatively swift changes in our strategy. and i was happy to do that. that's what we did. >> you came back. let's talk about the industry today. what do you see the biggest challenges for the american technology industry, the industry not only in silicon valley, obviously in texas and other parts of the united states where people are building companies that are technology leaders? do you see foreign challenges that are great? what do you think the biggest challenge is you face? >> i think if you step back what's interesting about our industry and the way our customers are using the technology is there was this enormous wave of let's make existing businesses more efficient and more productive

using technology. and all of us have been doing that for a long long time. that has been going on. now you are seeing this how you reinvent things or invent them completely new given all of this new technology that is out there. and in the technology sector we kind of live and breathe this all the time but now i think it is showing up in sort of all industries. and for any company in our sector you have to change or die. you have to evolve. for us that has meant aggressively growing in these new areas like software services, understanding the challenges our customers have like in cyber security and helping to go build solutions to go solve those problems. >> now, you still make a lot of pcs. do you make tablets? >> we do.

>> is that a growth business? do you think that will replace b bpcs? >> i think of the tablet as a descendant of the notebook. there are many different shapes and sizes for the products. you've got work stations virtual machines tablets notebooks, desk tops. we make them all but let customers decide. i think with the enormous growth in mobile devices, particularly smart phones, there was, i think, maybe a bit of a swing to believe at some point that all of those devices would replace the pc. i think the reality is it is more of a multi device world and not just the pc and the smart phone and the tablet. it's now all of these embedded

computers, the wearables, the internet of things. so you are kind of going from this world of let's say a billion connected devices to 100 billion connected devices. as the cost of semi conducters comes down you have this instrumentation and kind of making everything smart and intelligent. that creates this data that has to be turned into insights and knowledge. that is really the big opportunity that all organizations have out there is how you use this data to make what you're doing more productive or reinvent it. >> i want to talk about big data because you have so many customers you know what they are interested in among other things. do you use the data for other purpose that you can make another business out of all of the data that you have? >> sure. we use it to improve the efficiencyf our own sales and marketing and services.

increasingly with data scientists that work for us help our customers be more productive efficient with better outcomes in whatever it is that they are doing whether health care, education banking, finance, et cetera. >> you don't make manufacture smart phones? >> a lot of ways to make money in it other than smart phones. it industry is about a $3 trillion industry. and of that roughly $2.75 trillion is commercial business enterprise public sector and 250 billion is consumer. we are much more focused on the 2.75 trillion and so from a device standpoint what does it mean? pcs, tablets, embedded work

stations. then we get into the data center all of the infrastructure, cloud computing software to find network storage, compute. then we focus on the systems management, the security, the big data. and then ultimately one of the most exciting areas is services because we find more and more customers want us to help them implement all of these systems run them for them and help them make use of all of the tools. we think the combination of all of these things together are really important. >> so you bought one of your acquisitions was perot systems. did you deal with ross perot in negotiating that? how did that come about? >> i didn't personally deal with him in the negotiation but he

still comes to work every day at our office. >> really? >> yeah. >> do you tell him what to do? >> i don't think anybody tells ross what to do. >> so what about apple has said they are going to come out with a wearable watch. are you going to make a watch? >> no. here is a way to think about the smart phone. for every 50 smart phones that get put into the world a new server pops up. and the reason the server pops up is because when you get a smart phone it doesn't have anything on it. and you put stuff on it that comes over the network. where does it come from? usually not another smart phone. it comes from a server. and so this massive build up -- so you think about the companies that are providing the services

that users are using on their mobile phones. we're providing the infrastructure and the equipment to be able to power those. >> as a young man when you were running the company you met with steve jobs and bill gates, how did you compare the two of them? are they different in personalities? are they are customer of yours? >> pretty different. some form of collaboration and/or competition with either of them. >> and today you were in washington recently for meeting with government leaders on part of the technology ceo council so you met with president obama. what would you say the technology ceos said to president obama about technology? were you concerned about something? what did he say to you? did he ask for free computers or

anything? any advice? >> he didn't ask me for free computers but i did wonder how come there is no computer in the oval office? >> probably hidden. >> we focused on a couple of issues. i think trade promotion authority. we are exporters and u.s. technology industry has done very well. and to do that to continue to do that we think trade promotion authority is very important. we talked about immigration and certainly the focus on the stem skills that we need in our business is a big one. we talked about taxes and how do you keep the sector that we are in competitive. all of our foreign competitors

don't deal with this repatriation problem. >> cyber security. there are a number of bills that are worked on. cyber challenges is a big one. we see on behalf of our customers about 120 billion events per day. and i really built a threat intelligence to be able to understand what's going on. you have state sponsored groups. you have criminals. you have activists. you have espionage. and you have terrorists that are all using the cyber domain as a big attack vector. >> so you met with members of congress. were you impressed with any of the members of congress that you met with?

>> very impressed. >> do they seem to know technology very well or are you just kind of teaching them a little bit about technology or are they more knowledgeable than i might have suspected? >> i think they are more and more knowledgeable. we met with some of the incoming freshmen. actually some of them came from our industry and had a pretty refreshing insights into our sector. i think we're pretty proactive about coming and explaining what challenges we see and communicating what the opportunities are. but it's a frustrating environment. there isn't anybody who would tell you something other than that. >> people always want to know what the next big thing is. in technology if i wanted to make an investment in the next big thing what area would i put my money in? what would you say is a good

investment? >> i think there are probably many next big things. this idea of the data economy, call it big data, machine to machine communication machine learning. we think that is an enormous opportunity for not only our customers and organizations but for the it industry. to our calculations roughly a trillion dollar opportunity for the it industry in turning this data into real insights. and the availability, the cost to acquire the data keeps going down dramatically. >> you started your company as i mentioned earlier by by passing the middle man or retailer. you went directly to the customer. apple for example has a lot of stores in the united states and retail stores. i think microsoft does, as well. you have no stores in the united states. are you considering having stores in the united states? >> again our business is about

85% commercial business enterprise public and 15% consumer. we do have stores that actually are operated by partners in the emerging markets. so, for example, china which is our largest country to sell our products into outside of the united states we have 1500 dell exclusive stores. we just opened our 400th store in india. we are opening one every 16 hours there. business is booming in the emergeing world. >> as a percentage of revenues more than half revenues from the united states still? >> it is about 50/50. >> and today as you look at your life you have the opportunity to give away a fair amount of money. you are very involved in philanthropy. to atone for sins of not going to medical school you are creating a new medical school at

the university of texas. why are you doing that? doesn't texas have enough medical schools? >> interestingly enough the university of texas system with its main campus in austin did not have a medical school which many regarded as a real oversight and opportunity. so we have been working for quite some time to bring this together. so now we have a new medical school, a new teaching hospital that over the course of 2016-2017 will really get going. >> so at your age bill gates stepped back as ceo from his company though he was involved as chairman and so forth. you have any plans to step back as the ceo or are you still happy to be the ceo for quite some time in the future? >> very happy to keep doing what i'm doing. it's a lot of fun and very energized by the whole privatization. i think that has made life much

more enjoyable. >> so you and your wife have a foundation giving away a great deal of money. when you and your wife are thinking about things if you disagree on where the money should go how do you decide that? >> you know, if we disagree we just don't do it. and fortunately we have a lot of the same values and beliefs and that's been certainly some great ingredients for a fantastic marriage. >> you have been married 25 years. you have four children. >> four kids and the foundation is something we do together. and it's been a lot of fun, very rewarding. she spends more time on it than kr do. i'm spending my time on dell. >> everybody would say this man

has a perfect life. he has built a great company great marriage four kids got a lot of money to give away. what is not perfect in your life to make us feel better? make us feel that there is something not perfect that we can say he is not a perfect life? anything that crow can say that is frustrating? >> you know well, look, i feel very fortunate and grateful to be born in this country and the opportunities that i have had. i don't really have a lot of complaints. there is nothing you should really feel sorry for me about. >> i like that, for example do you play golf? do you have a high handicap? >> i am undefeated at golf. >> wow. >> i've never played. >> so for outside activities what do you do? you are obviously in pretty good shape. do you exercise a lot? >> i like to stay outside move

around whether it's hiking walking, a little running cycling. >> and if people want to get ahold of you they can e-mail you? how do you stay in touch with your office? regular telephone communication or e-mails? >> we go to the office. so that's one way. and certainly it's all the normal ways. i have e-mail. >> do you think it would be as easy today for michael dell to start a company today or easier than it was then say you are 19 all over again today? what would your advice be for young entrepreneurs? should they drop out of college? get their degree? if your children said we are going to drop out of college and start a company what would you say? >> well i would want to hear what their idea is. i don't think dropping out of college is for everyone.

it worked for me didn't work for charles manson. >> right. you're probably right. >> but, you know, if i was 19 i would be trying to figure out what company i would go start. if in the process of going private somebody had bought the company from me which was a very real possibility i probably would have started another company. >> at the time karl ikahn was talking about making an offer suppose he had done that would you have started another company? >> if somebody had done that very likely i would have started another company. >> in the computer area or technology area?

>> not going to say what the company would be, but likely in the computer area. that's what i love. that's what i know. >> in the philanthropy area is most in the united states or some outside? how do you decide how much to putin the united states? >> started in the united states but has been expanding around the world. we have been very active in india and also in south africa. and we continue to expand what we do. again, the focus on children and urban poverty. we have done a lot in the education sector using insights that we gain from the dell experience in terms of how do you use data and knowledge to inform progress? so for example in education

there is a standard that's been adopted by over half the states here in the u.s. called ed fi which is a way of normalizing all of the information that a district may have about a student's performance and outcomes. the challenge here is a kid goes from third grade to fourth grade, what does the fourth grade teacher know about the student from the third grade? and the answer is it depends. did the teachers talk? were records kept? that information can be incredibly helpful. the other challenge you have is two kids can go into two different classrooms in the same school learning the same subject and have very different outcomes. and so how does a principal, a

district, parents actually begin to understand all of that data and start to do something about it? so we have been very focused on those kinds. >> in the philanthropic area what would you like your legacy to be? what would you like people to say about what you actually accomplished? >> the goal we have set for ourselves is to figure out how to make a bigger impact on our world through philanthropy than through business. i think we are off to a reasonable start. and the foundation has done some great work like you and i had talked about before earlier it's not easy to do it really well and we treat it like an

investment activity with real measurement of results and returns and we also look for projects where we can change the trajectory make a meaningful difference and then leave and have it continue without us. >> being michael dell and living in austin you are well known everywhere. can you go into a 7/11 and not have people say i have an idea for a computer. does it leave you alone if you are shopping? you don't shop that much probably. >> i like to shop online. i find that is a lot easier. >> if you walk into an apple store, for example, you wouldn't do that? you wouldn't go into apple store and they would know who you are. >> haven't had that experience. people generally leave you alone. i don't find it's a big problem

which is good. >> have you had role models in the business world that you would say you have aspired to be like them or people you really admire in the business world or technology world? >> i think you can learn from just about anybody, positive or negative and certainly in the tech sector we have had some great folks before us who have paved the way and led through all sorts of challenges. i have been fortunate to have known and worked with just about all of them. >> so as we were talking about at breakfast you seem like an even keeled person. don't seem to get upset. so when people are -- when you are mad how do you tell people they are not doing a good job. what is your way of actually showing anger to somebody if they are not doing a good job? >> i don't think you have to

throw things. it wouldn't seem like a good idea. i'm direct in my communications with our teams. i spend a lot of time on making sure that certainly for the executive team that i work a lot with that we are all aligned on what it is we are trying to accomplish. everybody knows how they are doing relative to the objectives that we have. and there is no confusion about where we are. >> i think having constant realistic assessment of where you are and what is working well, what's not working so well what needs to change is super important. >> when you met with the president he said i would like you to come into the government and serve as a senior cabinet officer and adviser to me would you consider going to

government? >> no thank you. >> ever consider running for office? >> no thank you. >> no. and so what you would like to do to help your country is what you are doing now, pay taxes and philanthropy. >> i think i am much more helpful with that. i have taken on various roles from time to time where i think it can be helpful. for example the united nations asked me recently to be their ambassador for entrepreneurship. and in the fall the general assembly is going to vote on the sustainable development goals. and my job is to convince world leaders that job creation and entrepreneurship ought to be one of the sustainable development

goals. sustainable development goal number eight if you happen to be voting. my experience around the world is that if you look at new jobs, 70% to 90% of them are created by entrepreneurial businesses, small growing businesses and governments can or cannot do things that can help that. i have lived and seen some interesting experiences. we have a sight in morocco. and i was there relatively recently. we have 2000 young excited people that are energized and love what they are doing. i remember when we were deciding whether to put that site in morocco or tunisia it was close maybe 60% morocco and 40%. the morocco government did a few extra things to make it better

and we decided that was a good place to go. i think we should be thinking a lot about where do the next 500 million jobs come? where do the next billion jobs come from? i believe they come from these small and entrepreneurial businesses. we also should be thinking in these sort of conflict zones where you have a lot of young unemployed people, how do we figure out how to good them jobs? if you have a lot of unemployed young people you haven't solved the problem. what also worry about is these places where we have been let's say dropping bombs for a few decades, once all the smoke clears you still have a lot of young unemployed people unless they can go back to their families and explain that tomorrow is going to be better, you still have a problem and

there is no new administration or whatever that can solve that problem. so i think we have to be thinking how do we create jobs over there? that to me is the root problem. >> any regrets in your career? remarkable career in business and philanthropy and personal life? any regrets to make us feel good that there is something you think you didn't do right? >> you know, you could have done this or that. that's not how i have lived. >> final question, if i want to go out today and buy a pc which one would be the best value for money for me if i wanted to spend a couple thousand dollars. anything you recommend? >> i understand you're reasonably well off. >> not compared to you. >> so what i would recommend for you given that you're traveling all over the world and you want to have the latest and greatest

is our newest xps 13. >> and that costs roughly? >> depending on the configuration call it $1,000 something like that. >> no discounts. i don't get a discount? >> everybody gets a discount. >> michael i want to thank you very much for a great interview. i am going to give you a gift. one second. this is the first map of the district of columbia. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thanks so much. >> thank you very much. thank you. on the next washington journal former under secretary of state for political affairs nicholas burns on foreign policy challenges facing the united states including u.s. relationship with israel negotiations over iran's nuclear program and the threat posed by

isis. we will also talk to john wonderlick about hillary clinton's use of personal e-mail. washington journal live each morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. wednesday the supreme court heard the oral arguments in king versus burrwell challenging the federal subsidies of the purchase of health care. friday we will bring you audio of oral audio starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. here are some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. on book tv saturday night at 10:00 eastern on after words former marine and war correspondent on the history of post traumatic stress disorder that effects over 27 million americans including himself.

sunday night former sniper scott taylor argues that the obama administration is hurting our national security. and on c-span 3 the commemoration of bloody sunday when voters rights advocates began a march from selma to montgomery, alabama and were met with violence by state and local police. on saturday we are live from selma with phone calls followed by the commemorative ceremony. and then on sunday our live coverage continues with a service from the historic brown chapel church the starting point for the selma marches. find our complete schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. call us, e-mail us at comments@c-span.org or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter.

dan pfeiffer sat down to talk policy. allen also interviewed white house correspondent april

coming? was that predictable? or are you surprised by how harp it has been? >> i'm surprised at the sharpness. particularly seven term fourth quarter seeing this president

going out talking about race and issues of race and how he has been effected by race. he had to navigate to avoid the topic. for instance selma he is going to selma and making bones about the issues of selma and screening in the white house to issues of my brother's keeper and addressing racial profiling and the mistrust between black community and police trying to support the police and this nation as well as trying to root out those who are doing bad mese policing. >> you are there in the white house press room every day. you talk a little bit about the importance of being there. you're not a pundant. why do you need to be there and what do you get by being in that room every day? >> when you are there the body

is in that seat. i'm the body. the body of the third row smack in the middle they cannot avoid me. that really helps to perpetuate your questions, throw the questions in front of the principles. you have the president of the united states or the press secretary. it is important to be there so they know you are serious about your what you do. unxx e fortunately. >> i call them the millionaire seets. >> it's pretty hard to gain the attention from the principles. >> >> white will >> while we're watching the briefing, what's happening? what's the principle deputy, the principle deputy doing?

if a reporter would ask questions that they didn't feel too comfortability with or they didn't welcome, there would be a certain look. the eyes would roll, the stairs, the heartbeat would feel that they were piercing through you. they would give you eye contact and ask you sometimes who's that sitting next to you, if they don't know, you know, their person. there's a lot going on there. >> you'd answer them? >> yes i'd answer them. when i ask you that, i'd can e ask them a question. >> april is always working it. >> you've got to work it. >> what's the biggest specific advice you can give to them about how to be as you are a

tough, respected, interesting rorer. >> objective. be as objective as you can. also, do not rely on just the information in the white house. i think you get more when you have sources outside the white house. and, without as much spin as it is in the white house. so i think that you come in with the roladex with people inside the white house that are your sources as well as outside the white house. >> now for the book "the president sill in black and white" you had a fantastic standing room only event in politics. you had a very high level of current obama administration official there.

she advised the president that i was there. she has a very unique role. she is very close to this president, as far as from hi can goal. there's a trust there. she advises him do mesically on things. she helps him-and-a-half navigate the waters on how to fix problems or how to move forward. >> is she is most powerful person in the white house? >> the president is. >> after him. >> i joke and say she is. i think she is. i think it's a great thing. we've had condie rice. in this book, she even acknowledged that she was one of the closest advisors to the

president. the president called her mother hen. and it's true. >> what do presidents call you? >> i don't know. >> have you ever -- george w. bush had all of those nicknames did you have a nickname? >> he called me abreu. that's just a spanish version of my name. i don't know. but i hope they call me honest and fair. i hope that's what they call me. >> in your book you write about covering president clinton. and you write in there about a soul sfood dinner that you offered president clinton. >> yes, we had a historic dinner with president bill clinton at a time we were dealing with. she's a race. this is a second term. and the numbers of black reporters and the white house, question had not had an otr. many of the white reporters there -- >> tell us what an otr is.

>> an otr is an off the record. they had all of these off-the-records with the president. you always want to get close to the president to find out what he's thinking. everyone was getting this but many of the black reporters were complaining nay e they never got it. so they can taung to us what we think about it. both sides came and met in the middle. we met at a local reporters house. my aunt cooked the dinner. this is when the secret service had to watch a person skook. i mean, anything you can imagine. potato salad and he at it all the on one fork. and he jokingly said during the

bush years, when i ran into him in the april office. he said hey april, how are you doing? i said okay. he said you remember that soul food dinner? i said yes, mr. president. he said that's why i had my heart attack. >> you also covered the first lady hillary clinton and then what would hillary be like to cover as a candidate. >> she's very different from her husband. people really need to recognize that. she is a trail blarzer. but she's not president clinton. we're gouge to have to see how she-and-a-half gats the waterers.