great deal has been accomplished but even as he has acknowledged, there's much more to be done and on behalf of all our arms control association members here today, and i know many others out there who've been concerned about these issues, let me just say, ben, we hope the president can and will use the power of his office in the months that remain to take the inspiring message from hiroshima to advance further common sense steps that would move us closer to a world without nuclear weapons. so, we thank you for being with us today taking time out of your busy schedule and we appreciate your personal contributions to these issues and we look forward to your remarks. please come up to the podium. and afterwards, we'll take questions from reporters who are here and then we're going to take questions from the general audience on 3 x 5 cards that are

on your table. my staff will come collect them. we'll try to get to as many of them as possible. ben, thanks for being here. >> thanks, sir. well, thank you, daryl, for inviting me here today. anyone who's worked on arms control issues in government which includes some people in this room, gets used to receiving the occasional thousand-word e-mail from daryl. usually laying out exactly what we should be doing. i thought that the arms control association could save a lot of additional time by just publishing your collective e-mails every quarter as a roadmap for the u.s. government. i want to thank you, though, sincerely and aca and all the other groups who are here for your tireless advocacy on these issues and as i said in a note to daryl, and i'll come back to this in me remarks, when you go to hiroshima, it gaves y sgives

greater appreciation for the essential work done by the arms control seengs ma control association and many others. nine years ago in the summer of 2007, i recently left the wilson center for a job as a speechwriter for then-senator obama. if you can believe it, some people were calling me young and inexperienced back then. and i had a lot more hair. that's a problem with these events. everybody i know looks the same and i always feel like i look a lot older in the mirror here. that summer and fall, a key issue in the campaign was the iraq war and then-senator obama's opposition to it from the twinning. on october 2nd of 2007, the campaign was gearing up to mark the five-year anniversary a speech that obama gave opposing the iraq war in 2002 where he warned of an occupation of undetermined length with undetermined costs and undetermined consequences. instead of giving a speech just about iraq, senator obama asked

us to prepare a speech about the need to pursue a different foreign policy course. and the centerpiece of that speech was a call for the united states to pursue a world without nuclear weapons and to engage direct diplomacy with iran over its nuclear program. and we even had the incomparable ted sorensen introduce president obama as a tribute to kennedy's historic speech at american university calling on the wrooiunited states to rethink our approach to nuclear weapons in the cold war. many efforts made to follow the path that was laid in that american university speech. so as we enter the homestretch of the obama presidency, it's worth remembering he came into office with a personal commitment to pursuing diplomacy and taking arms control seriously. the first major foreign policy speech he gave as president focused on these issues putting meat an the bones of what he'd talked about as a candidate. this early focus was also rooted in concerns about the status quo in 2009. north korea had recently

conducted a nuclear test. iran was steadily advancing its nuclear program. america eegs own commitment to arms control had been called into question for a variety of reasons including the withdrawal to the treaty, nuclear fwiguida under the bush administration and nuclear security efforts we thought were lagging behind counterterrorism policies. the central objective of the prague speech was nonproliferation, nuclear security and diplomacy back where they belong, at the center of american national security policy. we got a stark reminder of the importance of that effort the night before the speech when north korea tested a missile. that was the first time i had to meet the president of the united states in the middle of the night after he'd been woken up and it was in a kind of sparse blue tent in a hotel in prague. not exactly the glamour one dreams about, but it helped drive home for us even before that speech the seriousness of these issues. so today i'd like to revisit the prague speech and the prague

agenda. what we said we would do in that speech. what we've done. and what do. and what we haven't done. and i'll be straightforward upfront, i know the work is incomplete. i read enough of daryl's e-mails and many of your work to know there are areas where many people in this room would like us to do more and i'll get to that. and i'm glad that's the case. as i said, having been to hiroshima, i'd like there to be more people and organizations consistently pressing for bolder action on these issues. but i do think that president obama has set and followed a course that profoundly changed the status quo that he inherited. one of the overarmching objectives of the prague speech was to create a sense of urgency. as the president said in that speech, more nations have acquired these weapons, terrorists are determined to buy, build or steal one. our efforts to con thain these dangerous are centered on a global nonproliferation regimer. we could reap reach the point where the center can't hold.

all these threats require effort in coordination with one another so we weren't taking individual pieces but trying to look at the issue broadly and act broadly. let me just review three broad objectives the president set in prague, what we've done, again, and then what we remain to do in our term and would hope happen in the future. first, we believe that we have made substantial progress in securing vulnerable nuclear materials around the world. the most urgent danger we face today is a terrorist organization acquiring a nuclear weapon or the materials to make one. that is why the president launched the nuclear security summit process so that this issue would be elevated within our own system, within other governments and on the international agenda. since that first summit in washington, 3.8 tons of enriched uranium and plutonium removed from more than 50 facilities in 30 countries. enough material for more than 150 nuclear weapons. 14 nations in taiwan have

completely disposed of highly enriched uranium. when poland and indonesia fulfill their commitments, the same will be true of central europe and southeast asia. these are not always headline-grabbing events. one country that disposed of its yeuranium was ukraine. at the same time, we have strengthened international efforts to counter nuclear smuggling. we've been able to work with many of these countries, raise proliferation concerns. with our partners we've also installed radiation detection equipment in 300 international border crossings, airports and ports. 102 nations have joined -- which allowed that treaty amendment to come into force in may of this

year. that's lot more work to be done on these issues which i'll get to in a few minutes. we've secured important commitments, strengthened institutions, and we hope that we develop habits of cooperation that will outlive the administration in ways that make the world safer. second, the president has taken steps toward his vision of the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in america's own security strategy, we revised our declaratory policy to make clear we would not use nuclear weapons against a nonnuclear nation in compliance with the npt. we made it u.s. policy to pursue the objective of making deterrence against a nuclear attack the sole purpose of our arsenal and reduced the role of launch under attack in our contingency planning to help avoid catastrophic misjudgment. the central numerical limits of the new treaty which must be met -- the treaty also includes an ongoing comprehensive

verification ray jegime and at s when there are tensions between the united states and russia is when i think we need to be gradeful for strong arms control agreements that come with a verification embedded. there are now just over 4,500 nuclear weapons in our stockpile, 85% below our people during the cold war and lowest it's been in several decades. we further determined we can sustain our deterrent while reducing deployed -- of course, we have not fulfilled our ambition. we continued a step-by-step pursuit of a world without nuclear weapons and in doing so fulfilled our commitment under the npt. this leads me to the third objective in prague, fortifying the global nonproliferation regime. in prague the president put forward several principles to strength the npt. president obama said we needed more resources and authority to strengthen international inspections. the united states is providing more funding for the iae,

investing in its nuclear security fund, capacity of its inspectors and peaceful uses initiative that was announced at the 2010 npt review conference. president obama said we should build a framework for civil nuclear cooperation including an international fuel bank so the countries can access peaceful power without increasing the risks of proliferation. since then we reached several new agreements on peaceful nuclear cooperation with other countries. most recently including vietnam. we've supported the iaea in kazakhstan. for countries that cannot obtain on the global commercial market but need it to fuel peaceful reactors. finally, president obama said we need real and immediate consequences for countries caught breaking the rules or tries to leave the treaty without cause. since then, he's dedicated an enormous amount of time andest to following through on that principle. much of the work we did at the outset of the administration set the context for the capacity to hold a country like iran

accountable for failing to meet its npt commitments. we secured support for the prague agenda through a u.n. security council resolution, a session chaired by the president in 2009. president obama said in prague we will support iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy with rigorous inspections and demonstrated our willingness to pursue direct diplomacy with iran. before seeking international sanctions, we presented clear evidence of iran's violation of an international norm. most dramatically, its development of a covert facility in gome. all of those efforts allowed us to make the case to other nations and at the u.n. that imposing consequences on iran was not simply a national security interest of the united states. this wasn't a bilateral issue. a bilateral concern or regional but but rather essential to the npt and a rules-based international order that there be consequences for violations of the npt. and the president also made clear that sanctions were not an

end, they were a means to an end. a means to strengthen our diplomacy with iraq iran. we had numerous false starts. following the deterioration of the iranian economy, there was an opening. and we took that opening to pursue fwoegss. of course, it took a while to negotiate, but the negotiations also demonstrated the enormous value of having both extraordinary diplomats and experts at the table to solve hard problems and here, again, i think the tag team of john kerry and ernie monese holds a great example for the future in terms of how we address these issues and i will tell you that we all found ourselves in meetings with ern ernie monese, it felt like basic nuclear physics lessons at times. he was down in the level of detail. but ultimately that made an enormous amount of difference. now, in that process, we benefited from support from groups outside of the

government. there's been a little bit of commentary about this recently. look, the obvious truth is this. the white house did not have to convince the arms control association or anybody else to defend the iran deal. you've thought about these issues many years. you advocated for diplomacy. shared ideas about what a deal could look like before we even had one. that helped in the negotiations. again, i think that's an underappreciated element of the work that was done. we had tough issues to solve in different areas around verification, around how we think about the design of the iranian program. and we were able to draw from the advice of outsiders and thinking through ways to get over the hurdle that was set or get around the challenge in that negotiation. so all of that input was essential. and so, yes, then the arms control association and many other allies successesfully defended the deal. because it was a good deal. and then you went back to criticizing many other aspects of our nuclear policy right

after it. but i'd say, you know, for critics, it's easier sometimes to have a debate about the messaging than the results of the deal, itself, because results speak for themselves. iran has taken cig cabsignificas to roll back its program and cut off pathways to a nuclear weapon, steps verified by the iaea. these are facts and they match how we describe the deal last summer. to address the enriched ye eed pathway. they shipped t eped 98% of thei enriched uranium stockpile out of the country, enough for ten nuclear bombs. now less. iran is enriching uranium at only one facility now. this activity is under 24/7 iaea monitoring. iran removed the core of its reactor and filled it with concrete rendering it wholly

inoperable now and in the future. so before this deal, iran's breakout time to gain enough material to build one nuclear weapon is we estimated two to three months. today it would take about a year and if they cheat, we'll know because this deal subjects iran to the most comprehensive nuclear inspections ever negotiated and the iaea reports on implementation continue to indicate that iran is acting in line with its commitments. iaea inspector remain on the ground conducting ongoing verification and monitoring activities keeping a watchful eye on iran's entire nuclear supply chain. which gives us a far greater capacity to detect a covert breakout scenario than we would have with no deal. so, again, part of what we were able to do is learn from past efforts, learn from some of the challenges in north korea, and try to think through ways to design a verification regime that was much broader, that encompass not just the additional protocol but again the entire nuclear supply chain

and hopefully this may be a type of model that could be drawn from in the future as we look to prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons. so with the ra iran deal, we did more resolve a specific security challenge. the effort demonstrated the diplomacy with the most complicated adversaries can stop the spread of nuclear weapons which should make this the first post-could war administration to not have another nation acquire a nuclear weapon during its time in office. the truth is iran took up an enormous amount of time and energy building the sanctions regime, negotiating a deal, ensuring it could be implemented and i know there are other areas as i've said where more work needs to be done. let me touch on a few of those and fwgive you a sense of how we're looking at the last seven months and i think president obama has shiown he's not unwils to work through the tape. we have many sports metaphors. we've not stopped the advance of north korea's nuclear program and continued testing of nuclear

weapons and missiles systems by the north crkoreans is the most serious proliration challenge we face today. if itch letted we believe can have a significant difference. it's a further indicate the international community including china is taking very seriously the provocations coming out of north korea. we worked hard to cut off north korea's capacity to sell material overseas try to break their relationships with some of their defense partners. trying to interdict shipments and make clear even as they are pursuing their program, that we are tightening a net around north korea so that they are not the proliferator that they have sought to be in the past. we also advanced our missile defense systems and planning in northeast asia. this will be a top priority through the end of this administration and the next, indeed. we have not been able to lock in further stockpile reductions. given our interest in pursuing

those reductions through fwoe negotiation with russia, the largest obstacle is president putin's unwillingness to come to the table and given what's happened between our two countries, one of the main reasons we canceled the planned summit moscow in 2013, we had nothing of substance to talk about in mithis particular spac. we've not been able to secure all vulnerable nuclear material. this effort has been impacted by russia's, shall we say, reduced enthusiasm, along with a number of other countries that proceed cautiously on these issues. moreover, pakistan opposed efforts to negotiated a treaty to end -- in our first years in office, the priority, getting that through wasn't easy. many people in this room may have scars from that fight. seemed like a tough one until the iran one. then following the 2010 midterm

elections, the composition of the senate changes and we've not seen a viable pathway. finally, i know the scale of our planned modernization program generated a lot of debate and opposition in the arms control community. of course, even in prague, president obama was clear about the need to sustain a strong deterrent and we've also invested in conventional systems that make nuclear weapons less relevant to some of our stree n streejennstreeje strategic planning. so where does that leave us? i can promise you today president obama is continuing to review a number of ways he can advance the prague agenda over the course of the next several months. our work is not done. this is something we're still actively working and actively reviewing a number of different proposals. now with respect to our stockpile, president obama already decided to accelerate the dismantlement of retired nuclear warheads by 20% and will continue to look at how we

address our nonkdeployed weapon, we'll review whether there are additional steps to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our own strategies and reduce the risk of inadvertent use. senate ratification is not going to happen this year, we will continue to consider ways to affirm the international norm against testing nuclear weapons and that's something that we can do with our international partners. and we will, of course, continue to focus on nuclear security, working to put more nuclear material under appropriate monitoring and security regimes and institutionalize the cooperation the president advanced through the summits. finally, it's a schism faimple plan was put together in a different budget environment with a different congress. our arms control efforts going forward. our administration has already made plain our concerns about how the modernization budget will force difficult tradeoffs in the coming decdecades. the president will continue to review the plans as he considers

how he wan wants to hand the ba off to his successor. of course the other thing the president will do is speak about these issues as he recently did in hiroshima. one of the questions i sometimes get is whether the president should have put forward such an ambitious, idealistic vision in prague? so let me close with just two thoughts on why that ambition, yes, indeed, even that idealism, is entirely necessary. first, in a city, washington, and a world, where you almost always have to settle for half a loaf, you sometimes have to start by pursuing the very biggest loaf possible. and the goal set by prague were so big they could make even historic progress look smaller and that's fine because as the president recently repeated in hiroshima, we may not achieve the goal of a world without nuclear weapons in our lifetimes

even if daryl argued with me about that formulation, but we can set a course and move in that direction and do what we can with our time and set a pathway that makes it easier for that course to be followed in the future. and second, let me return to that john f. kennedy speech at american university where he said the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war, and frequently the words of the pursuers fall on deaf ears. of course, those words are just as true today. and that is why it is imperative that we force these issues back into the public conversation. we push back against the fatalism which suggests that it's not worth the effort. that we do our part as the president said in hiroshima to feed a moral awakening around these issues because, again, the further we get from the use of a nuclear weapon, or the more distant some of the challenges in the world may seem from the united states, the easier it is to get complacent. and sometimes i think it takes the putting forward of a

significant vision and a forcing of a conversation that wouldn't otherwise happen to make the progress that is necessary. so as the president made clear in hiroshima, ensuring that a nuclear weapon is never used again is not simply a matter of arms control. it's a matter of how and when we're able to choose peace over war and no president or even succession of u.s. presidents can fulfill the prague agenda in a vacuum. it will require cooperation from congress, it will require a change in global dynamics just as we were able to reach an agreement with iran. it will require continued work with respect to our relationship with russia. continued progress even when it seems -- the ability to pursue diplomacy in south asia and beyond. ultimately, the diplomatic work that allows for trust to be built is just as essential as the arms control work that he t

charts a pathway for the ultimate destruction of stockpiles and nuclear weapons. and that, again, was the core message that the president had in hiroshima. this combination of the need for arms control efforts coupled with the need to reinvigorate our efforts to avoid the type of conflict and mistrust and intra intractability that can put us on a pathway of nations seeking to acquire nuclear weapons and ultimately tragically a nation using a nuclear weapon. so it's very easy to say that's impossible. it's very easy to say that, you know, we can't possibly envision how we're going to get around some of the structural impediments to eliminating nuclear weapons today. but if you go to hiroshima, that tells you that history can change and that it should change. when we were driving in from the airport, we were surprised to see huge and very friendly crowds greeting the presidential

motorcade. it's not something i think we could have imagined seven years ago at the united states and japan would have a friendship like they do today. presidential motorcades drive pretty fast but every now and then you're able to lock in on a face in crowd. for me it was a small japanese boy that was smiling, holding a sign in english that said, welcome to hiroshima. when you see that, of course you think about what would have happened to that child 71 years ago. if he was standing in the same place. but you also think about the necessity of the work that is done to assure that that never happens. and, again, it's work that includes what we are doing to fulfill a vision related to arms control but also what we're doing to forge the type of relationship that we have with japan. and that we've sought to build with many other countries around the world. so i have to say, let me conclude by says that the work

that's done by groups like the aca and many of you is essential to this effort. the only way governments are going to pay attention is when citizens and civil society and o add vo kasy groups insist their voice be heard. if you put this to people everywhere, generally they would favor a world without nuclear weapons and a world without that looming catastrophe, so what we do have i think is the assurance that this is the right work to be doing and there are differences about tactics but for the next seven months we look forward to continuing the dialogue with you all, look forward to what we can complete during our time in office and hope to work on these issues, those of us who leave government even after january 20th, 2017, not that that's circled on my calendar or anything. thank you all very much. [ applause ]

>> thank you very much, ben. we have a good deal amount of time for your questions. and latest note, just a logistical note, that my staff's fwoings going to be coming around taking the questions some of you have written on the 3 x 5 cards. we're going to get to as many as possible. we're going to start with questions from journalists who are here and i would just ask that you raise your hand tall. microphone will come to you. just please identify yourself. we'll start with the gentleman in the front who was good enough to come in the front. >> as you know, i'm jeff smith at the center for public integrity. as you know, the administration's -- costing between -- [ inaudible ]

>> closer. >> so, as i mentioned, the administration's modernization program consists of hundreds of items. and i just wondered since you said you're reviewing the modernization program, if you could name just two or three that might be -- that are near the top of your list for potentially tweaking or eliminating. >> well, first of all, you know, i'm not going to be specific because i'm not here to suggest that we've made, you know, a determination about an aspect of the modernization budget. i guess what i would say is that we recognize that the plan was developed, as i said, at a different time when we, number one, anticipated a different budgetary picture going forward particularly with respect to our

defense budget. some of that plan was developed in the context of an earlier congress including related to the new start ratification process. but also with an expectation that we might be able to be further along in our own negotiations about further reductions with russia and, frankly, we now sit at a point where we absolutely believe in the necessity of maintaining and sustaining an effective and credible deterrent so there's going to have to be a significant investment in that. the question presented is whether or not the scale of the plan fits into the long-term budgetary picture. what tradeoffs would that force on future administrations including on important conventional capabilitcapabilit? how do we essentially want to leave this issue, or at least

leave the next administration with a sense of how president obama believes we should move forward? so we will be, you know, looking at the modernization plan, of course, it's in the budget, but if we -- you know, if we determine that, you know, we want to be more specific, of course, you'll hear from us. i think i just wanted to indicate, again, that this and other issues are the not closed to us. we heard the last from the president on this, not just this, but a number of areas i think we're going to want to continue to explore. is there anything left to be done the next seven months? that can, again, both advance the agenda the president set in prague and also i think indicate what we believe our priorities should be going forward. >> all right. thank you. all right. reporters' questions. why don't we go here in the middle with rachel. thank you.

>> hi. commercial quarterly. ben, my question has to do with secondary sanctions on north kpr korea. china signed on earlier this year, recognizing the sanctions signed into the law earlier by obama. how long will the administration wait to designate chinese banks that seem to be supporting china's evasion of the sanctions recognizing that you recently did designate north korea as a money launderer. >> so first of all, you know, china supported through the u.n. security council resolution a much more robust international sanctions regime than previously existed and simply the implementation of those sanctions as it relates to shipments into north korea,

relates to other efforts undertaken by the community, we believe would have a positive impact. at the same time, with respect to the legislation the president signed, it is always our preference and we believe the iran case proves this to be effective, that we work in cooperation with other countries so that they are helping to enforce sanctions. the iran instance, of course, we didn't made to imposeese as man secondary sanctions because we got other nations, banks and others to work with us. so i think we're in a period now where we're having a dialogue with china about sanctions and limitation. currently in the strategic and academic dialogue and jack lew i'm sure has been addressing this among many other topics. so we're going to try to do in the near term is work with china

so they're cooperative in enforcing sanctions. ultimately we believe that will be most effective. and so that remains our preference and, of course, we'll be able to evaluate going forward the strength of chinese implementation. >> all right. i'll take a couple more questions from reporters here. yes, ma'am, in the -- the pink. and then we'll come over here on the right. thank you. please identify yourself. >> stephanie cook with nuclear intelligence weekly. i have a question with prime minister modi in town this week, and efforts by the white house to secure nuclear supplier group approval for full membership. the people i've spoken to in the nsg opposed o that are worried full membership will allow india to gain access to more advanced reprocessing and enrichment technology that could benefit their nuclear weapons program.

it also obviously ratchets up pressure, both have sent letters requesting some kind of membership status. i wonder if you could tell us how that effort by the white house to secure more support is going, and "b" how does that -- how do you connect that to your support for a strong nonproliferation treaty given there is a precedent now for membership? it's not t-- it's sort of a de facto requirement for nsg but not hard and fast. still there is this question of mpt membership. >> thank you. >> so, look, it's a good question, and, i mean, guess what i would say is having gone down the path of the civil nuclear agreement with india and having invested a significant amount of time in building up

our cooperation with india as it relates to nuclear security and, again, civil nuclear capacity, we are at the point where we believe that engaging india and trying to bring them in to international processes will be more effective in promoting their security protocols, in investing in them in the type of peaceful nuclear cooperation that does exist globally. and frankly, it takes place against continued conversations that we have with india about their approach to nuclear weapons. and, of course, the support that we've always expressed for diplomatic efforts between india and pakistan. so i think the bottom line for us is we believe through engagement with india and through engagement with groups like the nsg, we are in a better

position to support india as a good citizen on these issues going forward. of course, we'll take seriously the concerns of other nations, but, again, for us i think this is a part of a broader context where we've decided to take this approach with india and we've seen it bear some fruit. particularly on issues related to nuclear security. so, again, we understand the concerns but in many ways we're dealing with, you know, a challenge that was fairly far advanced by the time we took office and we decided to sustain the previous administration's decision to pursue that -- a civil nuclear cooperation broadly. anyone what we've tried to do is nest it in these international bodies and protocols so that, again, india is in a stronger position to be a good position

on proliferation-related issues. >> all right. and that's just one of the 1,000-word e-mails i sent to ben, something about, and i think a number of us as we discussed this morning would think there was another way to pursue mainstreaming india and pakistan by raising the standards, but let's continue with other questions. go on the right side here. then we'll go to the back. for a question. if you could identify yourself. >> with exchange monitor publications. so the latest nuclear weapons stockpile numbers released by the pentagon seem to suggest a slowing down of stockpile reductions and warhead dismantlements throughout the obama administration. so could you speak a little bit about how does that fit into the president's intended legacy as stated in the prague speech? >> so, essentially we've had the

reductions in deployed weapons required by new start then the president given the context of the previous nbt review conference around that time authorized 20% retirmt of the nondeployed stockpile. so we sought to try to set markers that is is allowing us to reduce both the deployed stockpile and the nondeployed stockpile. you know, the lower you get, obviously, the more complex the reductions get. and that's partially why it was our determination that we would want to pursue more ambitious reductions through a negotiated agreement with russia, ultimately with other nuclear states. i think on this issue, as i mentioned, of the nondeployed weapons as so-called hedge, obviously, you know, we sought to be more transparent about that. that's something we'll continue to look at. again, that's why the president

decided to set down a marker in that area. but the fact of the matter is, again, the lower the stockpile number gets, the more you feel compelled to ensure that you're working through a prism of arms control that can hopefully bring in russia even as i think we can make our own decisions particularly about the numbers we feel are required deployed but also nondeployed. >> all right. let's take the question in the rear by the cameras there if we can make our way to the microphone. thank you. >> from voice of america, persian news tv network, sir. your first maybe 10 to 12 minutes of your speech, mr. rhodes, was focused on iran deal

and president obama's achievement in that respect. despite that, continues ensuing the program and capable of carrying nuclear warhead. last week, two of democrats, senior democrat senators, proposed renewal of the iran nuclear -- iran sanction act in the congress. but what -- white house state -- during the recent weeks was insisting that this might be upsetting iranian following through the nuclear deal. sorry, this sanction act only

kicks in if iran gets out of the deal or violates the deal. why is the white house adamant to, reluctant to endorse it and mr. obama threatens? >> so, so let me address just a number of elements in the question. number one, we were very clear in the advocacy for the implementation of the iran deal that this is focused on the nuclear program. and i think we're very straightforward that we fully expected that iran would continue to engage in other activities like we found deeply troubling like its ballistic missile program, support for terrorism, destabilizing activities, human rights violation. frankly, the case we made it it's all the more imperative to a nuclear afwreegreement with a country like that. you would not want a country with a ballistic missile program

and destabilizes its region to have access to a nuclear weapon. the first point here, sometimes when i hear people say that the iran deal hasn't stopped this other behavior, you know, we said over and over again that the iran deal was focused on the nuclear program and that we would have other means of dealing with these other elements of iran's behavior. we have the ability and already have significant sanctions we would pursue on iran for some of its other activities in the region. and we've even since the implementation of the nuclear deal kdesignated individuals an entities under those sanction so we're entirely comfortable and clear about the fact that we may have to pursue additional sanctions if iran continues to violate basic international norms as it relates to their

ballistic missile program or support f support for terrorism, for instance. with respect to legislation, i think the main point we made to congress is we have to have the ability to work with them to make sure that legislation in this space does not in any way conflict with our jcpoa commitments. and so we're going to be able to work with congress as necessary to continue to enforce sanctions in these other areas. the question is if people are designing new legislation, does it interfere with the commitments that we have to lfill the jcpoa? now, one thing i'd say here is, one of the warnings during the debate was that they were going to get $150 billion. we've actually had the opposite challenge which is they've had very great difficulty in accessing sanctions relief precisely because we have so many other sanctions related to iran that banks are

uncomfortable doing business. so there's not been a problem of this windfall coming to the iranians. on the extension, just the last point, that is expiring at the end of this year. what we've said to congress is, you know, we'll continue to have a discussion with them about various ideas that they have related to iran sanctions that we don't think that it has to happen now. we have time given the fact that it is a piece of legislation that expires at the end of the year. and that whatever we work with congress on is going to have to be able to protect the ability of the united states to meet i commitments under the jcpoa even as it's going to sustain the very strong sanctions authorities we have and are using in all these other areas. >> all right. we'll take this question in the rear. gentleman in the yellow. if you can make it short, that would be great. >> sure. i wanted to ask about one component of the nuclear modernization plan. the long-range cruise missile.

the new nuclear cruise missile. as president obama was traveling to hiroshima, senator markey gave a speech on the floor of the senate where he had choice words about that. he didn't just say it would break the bank in the 2020s and it was wasteful. he said it was dangerous. most likely to lead to catastrophic nuclear escalation. how do you respond to that criticism and more broadly, why are you going forward with that program? >> another issue i've gotten an e-mail from daryl about. again, like i -- i'm not, you know, going to get into the individual capabilities and modernization. what i will say is we've looked at this in a number of ways. we've tried to determine what capabilities do we have to maintain both in terms of stockpile and delivery systems, so that we can maintain a

credible deterrent that can sustain itself for the coming decades? as we hopefully are pursuing additional reductions. at the same time, we've tried to look at ways in which we can change our own way of doing business to make it certainly less likely that there is an inadvertent launch, and so the efforts that we took carefully looking at the launch under attack contingency plan is meant to try to create some additional space in this area. and we'll look at other -- we're constantly reviewing other ways in which we are reducing the risk of an inadvertent use of a delivery system. so that's the second point i make. the last point i make is i think, again, we'll look at this issue comprehensively.

and bone of the challenges with cruise missiles is it's the area where i think some of the other nuclear states, you know, have been the least inclined to entertain stringent restrictions. so, you know, the additional question essentially of also how are you looking at different delivery systems in the context of arms control as well as our own effort? so, again, i know that it's a long way of saying essentially we recognize the concerns have been raised about this, that has been our thinking on this. we certainly want to reduce the risk of inadvertent catastrophe as alluded to but we have to operate in the context of both sustaining our deterrent and

being mindful of the capablabi y capabilities of other countries. >> all right. we're running short on time. i want to get to three representative questions from the audience. i'm trying to sort through some of the most popular issues here that have not been addressed. so i'm going to ask you these three questions and wel we'll be close to the end of the time by the time you answer. related to system of the questions we've already heard, you said in your remarks president obama has reduced launch under attack and contingency planning for nuclear -- in our war plan. can you provide an example of how this has been done? and if you can't today, perhaps i would just say that's something this community is very interested in hearing more about in terms of what that means in terms of operational -- operations. second question, in a different area, we heard earlier today in great detail from joel whit

about the expanding nuclear and missile threat from north korea. he argued that the existing policies such as they are, even sanctions, tougher sanctions, are not effective enough. if we continue on the current course, we could be looking at a much more dangerous north korea by the end of the next president's term. so the question from the audience is, what is president obama considering in terms of the diplomatic signs, engaging in some way or another with north korea directly, indirectly, through the six-party prorcess, to hand off to the next administration a better situation with which to, a better set of tools to deal with this. and then third question which i think is an interesting one for all of us to ponder, as you said in your remarks, achieving progress on these issues depends

on a lot of different factors, no just presidential leadership, but public awareness. congressional leadership. and we have seen just in the last four, five years since the new start the new start debate the departure from the senate some of the heavyweights in the nuclear policy space. people we looked to for leadership on the republican side and the democratic side people like dick lugar and john kerry. how important in a plan reflection, over the past seven years how important is that and how important thatl that be for the next president to achieve the progress we need to achieve? >> well, those are all very good questions. look, on the first one, you know, we made efforts in our own guidance to be more transparent in sharing our thinking and objectives.

when you get into very specific operational contingent sees, i think that's where that becomes more difficult. so this is something that ultimately you know, becomes quite sensitive. the basic principle again was reviewing our contingent sees so that there is a degree of decision space that creates an additional hedge against the risk of launch. but we'll continue to review, darryl, i guess what ways we can be more transparent about these and other elements of our approaches. the second one, on dprk. so you know, i think, you know, what we're doing is -- you know, we're concerned as the president said by this pattern of behavior that has escalated in recent months and years. we're obviously particularly concerned by the efforts to try

to marry a nuclear capable with a more advanced missile capabilities. that implicates our security in very dangerous ways. and it already of course threatens our allies and our americans who are serving in northeast asia. so in the first instance he has taken steps to try to enhance our defenses against that threat while, as i said, trying to increase both pressure on north korea but cut north korea off from the ability to proliferate. on the diplomacy, you know, we have been -- we certainly have been open to pursuing diplomatic efforts with north korea. we have wanted those to be in the context of coordination with our allies, japan, and the republic of korea, and with china, given the significant influence they have. i think the way in which the president thinks about this is that we would need to assured

that there was some recognition and effort by the north koreans that indicates that what we're talking about is denuclearization. and, again, you know, that doesn't mean we expect that they on the front enwould give up their entire nuclear program, as much as we will like that to be the case. but we'll have to try to find some opening within which you know we are coming to the table to discuss these issues and we're coming to the table around approaches that could begin to get at the threat posed by north korea with the ultimate outcome of denuclearization. so we'll be open to that for the remaining time that we have in office. it's something we constantly talk to our partners about. but we have not had a signal of seriousness from the americians on those -- from the north

koreans to this. this will be front and center for us and for the next administration. in terms of the changing dynamics. i want to say two things. one before we evening get to congress -- one of the interesting things -- and this relates to korea, you don't know what exact opening is going to present itself. so what's interesting in retrospect is we had an opening with russia for four years. you know, i think people kind of look back and they say these guys must be second-guessing the reset. but the fact of the matter is we had an opening and we took that opening and because of that we were able to get a new start. and lock in those reductions and that verification regime and we were able to get an iran deal, because absent cooperation with resolution 1929 and the sanctions and then this the

diplomacy i don't think you can get around it. and now russia looks very different. and iran -- y. frankly, we were not getting anywhere in the nuclear discussions n. part because of the sanctions and in part because of the election there was a new leadership in iran and they were willing to come to the table. i say that to make the point that you don't know what opportunity is going to be there in the next four or eight years. you know? you don't know whether there might be some progress between india and pakistan or if there might be a shift in mind-set in russia. or you don't know -- certainly people have a hard time trying to discern who is going on in kim jong-un's head. you have to take action when the opportunities arise because these other dynamics can be stuck for reasons beyond your control sometimes. that is important to keep in

mine to look at where do we see some sliver of an opening that we can drive through, whether that's on the koreian peninsula, whether that's in south asia or anywhere else. that's a mind-set that will be important for anybody in these jobs. with respect to congress, i totally see the point. i worked for several years for lee lament ton who is kind of in that vein, and --ly hamilton. and saw that it was actually a congressionally led, arms chrome had been congressionally led. even early in our administration dick lieu guard was a consultant. you have seen an exodus of a certain generation of particularly senators. i think that it makes it all the more imperative that there are

efforts made to ensure that as people are in the house or people are coming into the senate that there is a dedicated effort to raise the profile of arms control and nuclear issues so that people are developing that type of kind of career-long degree of expertise. so it's not just showing up in the senator's office and saying i'd like you to support this. it's actually investing people in the type of deep understanding of these issues that were so evident in the people you mentioned. and you know, because opposite that there is kind of a stasis that sets in. you know, there is always a reason to not pursue an arms control effort. or there's always a reason to perhaps sustain a certain capability. so there has to be, i think, a concerted effort in both parties

to try to kind of raise the awareness around arms control issues and try to -- at the staff and member level -- ensure that that engagement doesn't just happen when there is some big debate but it happens constantly. again, the final thing i'll say on this is on iran. people dug down and they worked hard and they got smart on these issues. part of that is because people have to focus a lot on iran in congress. is he they already have a baseline understanding. agains that a plug for you guys, but i think that's why they have a constant and consistent engagement on these issues is so important with congress so it's not just showing up to complain about something after it has happened. not that you do. that just -- i'm saying that can be a problem. >> all right. listen, we have taken up this hour with ben rosen and i want to discuss your appreciation,

our appreciation for your willingness to come by and subject yourself to our interrogation at the end of your talk on the praug agenda and the plan and work that needs to be done. we look forward to working with you and the president and hess his team on the work that needs to be done. please, everyone, join me in thanking ben rhodes. [ applause ] and we're going to adjourn for about seven to ten minutes before the next panel begins. so let's take a quick break and be back in your seats very soon. thanks.

last week janet yellen held a news conference after the two day meeting. she discussed the brexit vote and said it plays into the committee's decision to keep interest rates steady. this is an hour. good afternoon.

today the federal open market committee maintained the target rate for the federal funds rate at one quarter to one half percent. this accommodative policy should support further progress toward our statutory objectives of maximum employment and price stability. based on the economic outlook, the committee continues to anticipate the gradual increases in the federal funds rate over time are likely to be consistent with achieving and maintaining our objectives however, recent economic indicators have been mixed suggesting our cautious approach to suggesting monetary policy remains appropriate. as always, our policy is not on a preset course, and if the economic outlook shifts, the appropriate path of policy will shift correspondingly. i will come back to our policy

decision, but first i will review recent economic developments and the outlook. economic growth was recommendtively weak late last year and early this year. some of the factors weighing on growth were expected. for example, exports have been soft, reflecting subdued foreign demand and the earlier appreciation of the dollar. also, activity in the energy sector has obviously been hard hit by the steep drop in oil prices since mid 2014. but the slowdown in other parts of the economy was not expected. in particular, business investment outside of energy was particularly weak during the winter and appears to have remained so into the spring. in addition, growth in household spending slowed noticeably early

in the year despite solid increases in household income as well as relatively high levels of consumer sentiment and wealth. fortunately, the first quarter slowdown in household spending appears to have been temporary. indicators for the second quarter have so far pointed to a sizable rebound. this recovery is a key factor supporting the committee's expectation that overall economic activity will expand at a moderate pace over the next few years. despite lackluster economic growth the job market continued to improve early in the year. during the first quarter job gains averaged nearly 200,000 per month, just a bit slower than last year's pace. and the unemployment rate held near 5% even though notably more people were actively looking for work. however, more recently, the pace

of improvement in the labor market appears to have slowed markedly. job gains in april and may are estimated to have averaged only about 80,000 per month. and while the unemployment rate fell to 4.7% in may, that decline occurred because fewer people reported that they were actively seeking work. a broader measure of unemployment that includes individuals who want and are available to work but have not searched recently as well as people who are working part-time but would rather work full time has flattened out. on a more positive note, average hourly earnings increased 2.5% over the past 12 months, a bit faster than in earlier years, a welcome indication that wage growth may finally be picking up. while the recent market labor data have been unbalanced been

disappointing it's important not overreact to one or two monthly readings. the committee continues to expect that the labor market will strengthen further over the next few years. that said, we will be watching the job market carefully. ongoing economic growth and an improving labor market underpin our inflation outlook. overall consumer price inflation as measured by the price index for person consumption expenditures was about 1% over the 12 months ending in april, still short of our 2% objective. much of this shortfall continues to reflect the effects of earlier declines in energy prices and lower prices for imports. core inflation, which excludes energy and food prices, has been running close to 1.5%. as the transitory influences holding down inflation fade, and

as the labor market strengthens further, the committee expects inflation to rise to 2% over the next two to three years. our inflation outlook also rests importantly on our judgment that longer run inflation expectations remain reasonably well anchored. however, we can't take the stability of longer run inflation expectations for granted. while most survey measures of longer run inflation expectations show little change on balance in recent months, financial market measures of inflation compensation have declined. movements in these indicators reflect many factors and therefore may not provide an concrete reading on changes in the inflation expectations that are most relevant for wages and prices. nonetheless, in considering future policy decisions, we will

continue to carefully monitor actual and expected progress toward our inflation goal. let me now turn to the individual economic projections submitted for this meeting by fomc participants. each participants's positions are positioned on his or her individual monetary policy which in turn depends on each person's assessment of the multitude of facts or that shape the outlook. participants projections for growth of inflation adjusted gross domestic product are slightly lower in the near term than the projectst shuns made for the march fomc meeting. the median growth projections remains at 2% through 2018 in line with its estimated longer run rate. the median projection for the unemployment rate edges down from 4.7% at the end of this

year to 4.6% in the next two years, somewhat below the median adesment of the longer run normal unemployment rate. the median path of the unemployment rate is little change for march. finally, the median inflation projection stands at 1.4% this year. a bit firmer than in march. and then rises to 1.9% next year, and 2% in 2018. returning to monetary policy, as i said, the committee maintained its target range for the federal funds rate. this decision reflects the committee's careful approach in setting monetary policy, particularly in light of the mixed readings on the labor market and economic growth that i have discussed, as well as continuing below target inflation. proceeding cautiously in raising

our interest rate target will allow us to verify that economic growth will return to a moderate pace, that the labor market will strengthen further, and that inflation will continue to make progress toward our 2% objective. caution is all the more appropriate given the short-term interest rates are still near zero, which means that monetary policy can more effectively respond to surprisingly sponge inflation pressures in the future than to a weakening labor market and falling inflation. although the financial market stresses that emanated from abroad at the start of this year have eased, vulnerabilities in the global economy remain. in the current environment of sluggish global growth, low inflation, and already very accommodative monetary policy in many advanced economies, investor perceptionless of, and

appetite for risk can change abrupt abruptly. as our statement notes, we will continue to closely monitor global economic and financial developments. we continue to expect that the evolution of the economy will warrant only gradual increases in the federal funds rate. we expect the rate to remain for some time below levels that are anticipated to prevail in the longer run because head winds weighing on the economy mean that the interest rate needed to keep the economy operating near its potential is low by historical standards. these head winds, which include developments abroad, subdued household formation, and meager productivity growth, could per sisz for some time. but if they gradually fade over the next few years, as we expect, then the interest rate required to keep the economy

operating at an even keel should move higher as well. this view is consistent with participants' projections of appropriate monetary policy. the immediate yandle projection for the federal funds rate rises only gradually to 1.5% at the end of next year. and 2.5% by the end of 2018. somewhat below its estimated longer run normal level. although the median federal funds rate at the end of this year is unchanged for march, the be in of participants revised down their projections. for 2017 and 2018, the median projection is one quarter to one half percentage point lower than in march, roughly in line with the one quarter percentage point downward revision made to the estimated longer run level of the federal funds rate.

as i've noted on previous occasions, participants' projections for the federal funds rate, including the median path, are not a fixed plan for future policy. policy is not on a preset course. these forecasts represent participants' individual assessments of appropriate policy given their projections of economic growth, employment, inflation, and other factors. however, the economic outlook is inherently uncertain. so each participants' assessment of appropriate policy is also necessarily uncertain, especially at longer time horizons and will change in response to changes to the economic outlook and associated risks. finally, the committee will continue its policy ofpry

reinvesting proceeds -- of reinvesting proceeds from maturing treasury securities and -- from agency debt and mortgage backed securities. as highlighted in our policy statement, we anticipate continuing this policy until normalization of the level of the federal funds rate is well underway. maintaining our sizable holdings of longer term securities should help maintain act dative financial conditions and should reduce the risk that we might have to lower the federal funds rate to zero in the event of a future large adverse shock. thank you. i will be happy to take your questions. >> ma'am? >> thanks very much, sam phlegming from the financial times. one of the -- hangover markets right now is clearly the vote in the united kingdom next week. how much of a factor was that in

today's decision relative to the questions you've elucidated about, domestic jobs numbers and inflation data? and could you talk about the channels that you think about when you talk about the potential impact of a brexit on the u.s. economy? thank you. >> well, brexit, the upcoming u.k. decision on whether or not to leave the european union, is something we discussed. and i think it's fair to say that it was one of the factors that factored into today's decisions. clearly, this is a very important decision for the united kingdom and for europe. it is a decision that could have consequences for economic and financial conditions in global financial markets. if it does so, it could have consequences in turn for the u.s. economic outlook that would

be a factor in deciding on the appropriate path of policy. so it is certainly one of the uncertainties that we discussed and that factored into today's decision. >> thank you. the feds' outlook for rates has come down sharply for 2018 especially. but it's been coming down gradually over time almost a full percentage point in some cases compared to a year ago. yet the gdp outlook remains the same. what has happened in say just the past quarter for the committee's outlook for rates to bring it down so much to 2018 where it's 2.8% and further in the long run than it was say in the prior estimate that was tlut? has there been a change this the committee's view on the relationship of the gdp to

rates? and maybe you could explain why the fed has to keep lowering the rates and getting that forecast wrong. >> as i mentioned in my opening remarks, there is really a contract deal of uncertainty around each individual's assessment of the appropriate level of rates, particularly as we go further out in the forecast horizon and when we come to the long term. and i think what we can see and what many kind of metric and other studies show is that the so-called neutral rate, namely, the -- of the federal funds rate that is consistent with the economy growing roughly at trend and operating near full employment. that rate is quite depressed by historical standards. many estimates would put it in real or inflation adjusted terms near zero. now, the path that you see in

the dot plot for rates over time is importantly influenced. there is accommodation. and as we achieve our objectives, i think most participants feel that the accommodation in the current stance of policy needs to be gradually removed. but a very important influence in the outyears is what will happen to that neutral rate that will just keep the economy operating on an even keel? and i've often, in my statements and remarks, talked about head winds that reflect lingering affects of the financial crisis. to the extent that there are head winds, i think many of us expect that these head winds would gradually diminish over time. and that's a reason why you see the upward path for rates.

but there are also more long lasting or persist end factors that may be at work that are holding down the longer run level of neutral rates. for example, slow productivity growth, which is not just a u.s. phenomenon but a global phenomenon. you know, obviously, there is a lot of uncertainty about what will happen to productivity growth. but productivity growth could stay long for a prolonged time. and we have an aging societies in many parts of the word that could depress this neutral rate. and i think all of us are involved in a process of constantly reevaluating where is that neutral rate going? i think what you see is a downward shift in that assessment over time the sense that maybe more of what's

causing this neutral rate for low are factors that are not going to be rapidly disappearing but will be part of the new normal. now you still see an assessment that that neutral rate will move up somewhat. but it has been coming down. and i think it continues to -- it continues to be marked lower. and it is highly uncertain. for all of the dots. >> hi, i'm jason lang with reuter's. the median participant forecast for the fed funds rate for 2017 and 2018 came down dramatically but it stands in contrast with the 2016 median forecast. as you mentioned, there were a number -- actually, six participants who saw only one rate hike this year. can you comment on what it would take for two rate increases to

be the likely or appropriate policy path? and about this disconnect between the median view and the view of the -- say the voting members of the committee. >> well -- >> if there is one. i should add. thank you. >> i'm not going to comment on participants' versus voters. you know, monetary policy, the committee feels that monetary policy, when we're looking at several years, we should show the public what the views are of all the participants in the committee, especially given that voting rotates every year. and so that's a decision we made. but you asked me what it would take to have two increases. so, you know, the committee as a whole never discusses how many

increases should we have this year or next year. that's not a decision we're making as a committee. we're making decisions on a meeting-by-meeting basis and trying to give a sense to the public of what we're looking for, and what the basis of a decision will be. and as i indicated first of all, international uncertainties loom large here. we mentioned brexit, the u.k. decisi decision. obviously, how that turns out is something that will factor into future decisions. and we're also looking at the prospects for economic growth and continued progress in the labor market. the forecast that you see in the sep and the statement indicate the committee continues to expect we will have moderate growth, 2% growth, you know,

suggests healthy growth for the rest of the year and a pick up in growth in the second quarter. and we expect to see continuing progress in the labor market. now we had questions about the growth outlook because we did see slower growth in the fourth quarter and in the first quarter. i have to say there, with respect to the slowdown we saw in consumer spending, that seemed to be out of line with fundamentals. we expected it to pick up, and we've seen very good evidence that it has picked up. but now the labor market appears to have slowed down. and we need to assure ourselves that the underlying momentum in the economy has diminished. so as i said, we will be carefully assessing data on the labor market to make sure that

job gapes are going to continue at a base sufficient to result in further improvement in the labor market. and we will be watching the spending data to make sure growth is picking up in line with our expectations. of course with respect to inflation, we're constantly evaluating whether or not incoming information is roughly in line with our expectations. so we will be evaluating that at every meeting. every meeting is live. and we could make a decision at any meeting to adjust the funds rate. but that's the kind of thing that we will want to see, then make such decisions. >> the fed created a labor markets conditions index a couple years ago that was designed to sort of bring together a lot of these factors in the labor market that you have talked about. as i'm sure you know, it's been falling since january. that suggests to some people that it was your decision to

raise rates in december that caused this weakening in the labor market. can you address what role, if any, you think the feds' decision to raise rates has played in the slowdown we are now seeing? >> let me just say the labor market conditions index is a kind of experimental research product that's a summary measure of many different indicators. and essentially, that measure tries to assess the change in labor market conditions. as i look at it, and as that index looks as things, the state of the labor market is still healthy. but there has been something avalos of momentum. the 200,000 jobs a month we saw for example, in the first quarter of the year that's slowed in recent months. exactly what the reasons are for that slowing, it's difficult to

say. it may turn out -- again, we should never pay too much attention to for example, one job market report. there is large error around that. we often see large revisions. we should not overblow the significance of one data point especially when other indicators of the labor market are still flashing green. initial claims for unemployment insurance remain low. perceptions of the labor market remain fine. data from the jolts on job openings continue to reach new highs. so there is a good deal of incoming data that does signal continued progress and and strength in the labor market. but as i say, it does bear watching. so the committee doesn't feel and doesn't expect, and i don't

expect that labor market progress in the labor market has come to an end. we have tried to make clear to the public through your actions and through the revisions you've seen over time in the dot plot that we do not have a fixed plan for raising rates over time. we look at incoming data and are prepared to adjust our views to keep the economy on track. and in light of that data dependence of our policy, i really don't think that a single rate increase of 25 basis points in december has any -- has had much significance for the outlook. and we will continue to adjust our thinking in light of incoming data in whatever direction is appropriate. >> chair yellen, i want to come

back to the longer rate projections that you have been asked about. yield on ten year treasury notes have fallen below 1.6%. on five year notes they are near 1%. elsewhere in the world, in germany and japan, long term bond yields are negative. how do you explain this low level of long term bond yields? and does it give you any pause in looking at your own projections and coming to a conclusion about whether those projections are possibly still way too high when the bond market is at a much lower level? >> so i -- i think the levels of longer term rates reflect essentially two things. one is market expectations about the path of short-term rates over -- if we are considering say a ten-year treasury security, what would be the path of short-term rates over the

next ten years. and the second factor is the so-called term premium or the extra yield that investors demand in order to hold a longer term security instead of to invest short-term. and clearly, market expectations for the path of short-term interest rates over the next ten years remain -- remain low. and that is a factor. that is an important factor that is i think holding down the level of longer term yields. perhaps as important or maybe even more important, the term premium is also low and has probably come down. now, when we engaged in longer term asset purchases, our very purpose in doing that was to

drive down longer term yields by making these assets scarcer, and hence, more valuable to the public that wants to invest in long-term securities. and we were consciously attempting to drive down that term premium. now, we continue to hold a large quantity of those securities, but we are not adding to them. but in many parts of the world, the ecb for example, and the bank of japan, are also engaging in quantitative easing, buying longer term assets, and pushing down those term premium. so i think term premium are very low as well as the expected path of short rates. >> do these yield levels give you any doubt about whether you are going to be able to get rates to where projections say they are going? >> well, so i want to say, again, we're quite uncertain

about where rates are heading in the longer term. we write down our best estimates at this time of what is a longer run normal level of the federal funds rate. and those are numbers about which there is great uncertainty. as i said, we have good reason to believe that the so-called neutral rate or rate compatible with the economy operating at full employment is low at the present time. and many of us believe, as a base case, it's reasonable to assume that those rates will move up over time. but we're not certain of that. it is -- it's one of the uncertainties that -- and there could be revisions in either direction. but thus far, in rene seps, i'd

say the revisions have mainly been -- have been in a downward direction. the idea that a low neutral rate may be more closer to the new normal. but you still do see some reversion. so we are really quite uncertain about that. >> in your speech in philadelphia, you called the slowdown in job growth last month concerning. and you mentioned today that you want to verify that the underlying momentum in the economy and in the labor market is still continuing. what do you need to see to convince you that the labor market is still moving toward full employment? and for how long would you need to see it? >> i can't give you a formula. i know you would probably like to have a number that's a cut off for what we need to see in a particular report. there are a lot of different

indicators of the labor market. for example, the labor market conditions index. the binia referred to as 19 different indicators. clearly, we will be looking at the next job report. and if we were to see a healthy pace of job growth, you know, above that needed to kind of maintain the status quo in the labor market -- so you know, over time we should expect to see, as the economy comes closer to maximum employment, the likely pace of job gains is probably going to slow down somewhat. and we have seen some slowing. but the recent couple of months was very low, and arguably not even at the pace we need to see to maintain stable labor market conditions. so we will want to see an

adequate pace of job creation. there might be revisions to previous months that we change our views, but there will be other surveys of employment intentions and other indicators of the labor market that we'll focus -- we'll be focusing on. so there is no formula for what it takes. but we will be looking at the labor market. >> peter, and then dana. >> did you want to follow up. >> sorry. i had a quick follow up. in your speech in philadelphia you did not say you felt it would be probably appropriate for a rate hike to occur in the coming months. did you intentionally leave that out? >> you know, we do need to make sure that there is sufficient momentum. i don't know what the timetable is going to be to gain that assurance. every meeting is live. there is no -- there is no meeting that is off the table

that -- no meeting is out in terms of a possible rate increase. but we really need to look at the data. and i can't prespecify a timetable. so i'm, you know, not comfortable to say it's in the next meeting or two, but it could -- it could be. it could be. it's not impossible. it's not impossible that by july for example, we would see data that led us to believe that we are in a perfectly fine course and that data was an aberration and other concerns would have passed. >> ma'am, peter barnes, fox business, hi. we are in an election season. in the fast, the fed has been sensitive to making policy changes in election years. you have three more meetings before the november presidential election. could you comment on whether or not the election will come into play and any concern that if you

change policy ahead of the election, and based on your forecast today, you obviously could, are you concerned that that could then lead to charge has the fed is trying to change policy to influence the outcome of the election? because the fed has been sensitive to that in the past. thank you. >> so we're very focused on assessing the economic outlook and making changes that are appropriate without taking politics into account. look, if the incoming data were in the coming months to justify the kind of gradual increases that we have long discussed that we see as appropriate in light of the outlook, i think markets should not be surprised by such a decision if we make it. and it's obviously consistent

with the data that we've seen. and the committee will feel free to move in the coming months if the we think it's appropriate. >> dagina. >> gina, bloomberg. you mentioned in your remarks we are getting a slightly different signal when you look at inflation versus when you look at inflation expectations. could you tell a little bit which you look at and wait more. are you more concerned with the expectations or focusing more on the slight pick up in actual inflation? >> we are looking at both. i would say with respect to the behavior of inflation, inflation is behaving roughly in the manner i would have expected. i have really not seen significant surprises there. we have long said that important an important reason that inflation is as low as it's been

is because of past declines in energy prices and increases in the value of the dollar. if those factors began to dispayne paid we would see inflation moving up. now that's exactly what we are seeing and that's in line with our thinking and with the data. so those things have stabilized. their influence is dispaiding. and with respect to core inflation that's partly influenced also by the dollar. but trying to pull out the dollar and import price influence, core inflation seems to be behaving roughly as one would expect with well-anchored inflation expectations and an improving labor market. so i'm not seeing anything -- inflation, even core inflation is running under 2%. i continue to think the evidence supports a projection that it will move up over the next couple of years back toward our

2% objective. but we've seen in the past an economic theory suggests -- and economic theory suggests that inflation expectations are relevant to price and wage setting decisions so we do monitor indicators of inflation expectations carefully. now it's very hard to know exactly what inflation expectations are relevant to actual price and wage decisions. so for example, we've seen the michigan survey address household inflation expectations move down. it's hard -- that's a preliminary number. it's hard to know what to make of it. we've certainly taken knost it. -- note of it. survey of base measures where forecasters are queried have really all been quite stable. and measures of inflation

compensation i'm always trying to be careful to call it inflation compensation rather than inflation expectations because they are not inflation expectations. inflation expectations influence those market measures, but there is also an inflation risk premium. and there are actually good reasons to think that the inflation risk premium could have declined significantly and may be depressing those measures. so we watch them. we have taken note in the statement that they have moved down. but actual inflation is behaving more or less as would be expected. >> marty? >> marty with the "associated press." when the april minutes were released, they caught markets by surprise and they seemed to show there was an active discussion of a possible june rate increase, something that we hadn't gotten from the policy

statement that was issued right after the meeting. was that a conscious decision to hold back and tell us when the minutes cam out about the june discussion? if so, could you tell us what surprises we could see in the june minutes? >> so the minutes are always -- have to be an accurate discussion of what happened at the meeting. so they are not changed after the fact in order to correct possible misconceptions. there was a good deal of discussion at that meeting of the possibility of moving in june. and that appeared in the minutes. i suppose in the april statement we gave no obvious hint or calendar based signal that june was a possibility, but i think if you look at the statement, we

pointed to slower growth but pointed out that the fundamentals -- there was no obvious fundamental reason for growth to have slowed. and we pointed to fundamentals underlying household spending decisions that remained on solid ground suggesting that maybe this was something transitory that would disappear. we noted that labor market conditions continued to improve, in line with our expectations. and we did downgrade somewhat our expressions of concern about the global risk environment. so i do think that there were hints in the april statement that the committee was changing its views of what it was seeing in a direction we continue to say that we think if economic

developments evolve in line with our expectations, the gradual and cautious further increases we expect to be appropriate. and i suppose i was somewhat surprised with the market interpretation of it. but the june -- the minutes of the april meeting were an accurate summary of what had happened. >> jeremy? >> jeremy with the afp agency, the fed repeatedly vased its concern over the slow pace of wage growth. i was wondering do you think increasing the federal minimum wage could be of any help, could boost the higher wages and eventually drive up the inflation? >> so i think that the minimum wage increases that are gone into effect estimates that i've

seen suggest it is a relatively minor influence on the aggregate level of wage inflation. i would take somewhat faster wage increases to be a sign that labor market slack is diminishing and that the labor market is approaching conditions that are consistent with maximum employment. so i think -- you know, i think we have seen some hints, perhaps preliminariation indications that wage growth is picking up. as must have as anything i think it is a sign of a generally healthy labor market, which is what our mandated objective is to achieve maximum employment. and so it would be a symptom of it. >> okay, greg, and then justine. >> greg rob from market watch. there has been a lot of

discussion in the last couple months about the slow pace of demand in the global economy. and so economists think that central banks should think about using helicopter money. maybe in japan first or europe first. but then former fed chairman ben bernanke weighed in saying he thought it would be a good thing to put helicopter money in its tool kit in case there was a downturn in the united states. i would like to get your comments on that. >> so, in normal times, i think it's very important that there be a separation between monetary and fiscal policy. and it's a primary reason for independence of the central b k bank. we have seen all too many examples of countries that end up with high or even hyper inflation because those in

charge of fiscal policy direct their central bank to help them finance it by printing money. and maintaining price stability and low and stable inflation is very much aided by having central bank independence. now, that said, in unusual times where the concern is with very weak growth or possibly deflation, rather rare circumstances -- first of all, fiscal policy can be a very important tool. and it's natural that if it can be employed that just as monetary policy is doing a lot to try to stimulate growth, the fiscal policy should play a role. and normally, you would hope in an economy with those severe downside risks, monetary and fiscal policy would not be working at cross purposes, but

together. now whether or not in such extreme circumstances there might be a case for let's say coordination, close coordination, where the central bank playing a role in financing fiscal policy, this is something that academics are debating. and it is something that one might legitimately consider. i would see this as a very abnormal, extreme situation where one needs an all out attempt. and even then, it's a matter that academics are debating. but only in an unusual situation. >> justine, and then steve. >> justine underhill, yahoo finance. now that the fed has started the process of raising rates, various fed officials have said, including ben bernanke, that the fed could go cash flow negative in the scenario as capital

losses are taken on the portfolio bond. do you still see this happening? and when might this happen? >> you are talking about our income going negative? >> yes. >> well, it is conceivable in a scenario where growth and inflation really surprise us to the upside that we would have to raise short-term interest rates owe rapidly that the rates we would be paying on reserves would exceed what we're earning on our portfolio. now, even then we have about $2 trillion of liabilities, namely currency on which we pay no interest. so this does require an extreme scenario with very rapid increases in short-term interest rates. so it is conceivable, but quite

unlikely that it could happen. but, you know, if it were to happen, we would have an economy that would be doing very well. this is probably an economy that everybody would feel very pleased was performing well and better than expected and where monetary policy -- you know, our goal is price stability and maximum employment and we would probably feel that we had done very well in achieving that. so we usually make money. we've been making a lot of money in recent years. but the goal of monetary policy is not to maximize our income. you know, in a very strong economy like that, the treasury would be seeing a lot of inflows in the fom of tax revenues. >> madam chair, steve beckner of

market news international. to what extent do you feel constrained in raising interest rates by the low or even negative rates that foreign central banks are pursuing possibly out of concern for what it might mean for the dollar exchange rate? and if that is a constraint, what extent might you also be concerned about the impact long range of low domestic rates on possibly distorting domestic markets? >> so the state of foreign economies, both their growth outlooks and the stance of monetary policy, those are factors that influence the u.s. outlook and influence the appropriate stance of monetary policy. so of course we do look at foreign rates, the prospects and

the prospects for growth in those economies in considering the stance of policy. differenttials between countries in likely policy paths do tend to spill over into exchange rates. that is a standard part of how monetary policy works. and a stronger dollar does have both a depressing effect. it creates channels through which domestic demand is depressed. at the moment, net exports -- well, for quite some time, and probably going forward, they will be somewhat of a drag on u.s. growth. so that's a factor that we take into account. and increases in the dollar that we've seen since mid-2014 have

served to push inflation down as well, can also have impacts on commodity prices that are relevant. so it's -- it is certainly relevant to the stance of u.s. monetary policy and a factor. but when one says a constraint, i really could not go so far to say it is a constraint on monetary policy. when we have an outlook for continuing above friend growth that if we held rates absolutely flat, we have reason to believe in flags would overshoot our target, we would see a case to gradually raise rates over time. at the moment, i think markets do expect -- and this is factored into market prices, a gradual path for rates to increase over time. but for example, if we were to see upside surprises to growth and to inflation, and had to

raise short-term fast, or thought we should, one of the channels by which that would work would be the associated impact on the dollar. that is a standard channel through which the monetary policy transmission mechanism works. and we would take it into account and would not feel constrained but that would be part of how it would work. >> last question will be nancy. >> nancy marshal ginzer from marketplace. how much are you watching oil prices and their impact on inflation and how that could affect the timing of future rate increases? and how much you might increase rates? >> well, oil prices have had many different affects on the economy. and so we've been watching oil prices closely. as you said, falling oil prices pulled down inflation. now, it takes falling oil prices

to lower inflation on a sustainedis base. once they stabilize at whatever level, their impact on inflation dissipates over time. so we're beginning to see that happening. not only have they stabilized. they've moved up some. and their impact on inflation is waning over time. but oil prices have also had very substantial negative effect on drilling and mining activity that's led to weakness in investment spend asking job loss in manufacturing and obviously the energy sector. now, it has different effects in different countries and different sethors. for american households, it's been a boone. we've estimated that since mid-2014, the decline in energy

prices, in oil prices, has probably resulted in gains of about $1400 better u.s. household. and that's had an offsetting positive impact on spending. but in many countries around the world that are important commodity exporters, the decline we've seen in oil prices has had a depressing effect on their growth, their trade with us and other trade partners, and caused problems that have had spillovers to the global economy as well. so it's a complicated picture. >> thank you. >> announcer: cspan's washington

journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, mark price with the economic policy institute joins us to discuss their new report looking at income inequality in all 50 states and how it's grown in recent decades. then former republican congressman and presidential candidate ron paul will be on to talk about gun and privacy laws in the wake of the orlando shooting and offer his opinion on the state of the 2016 presidential campaign. and david drucker, senior correspondent for the washington examiner will discuss the dismissal of donald trump's campaign manager coury loun do youski as long with his recent story on campaign fund-raising. be sure to watch washington journal tuesday morning. on tuesday, federal reserve chair janet yellen presents her semiannual report to congress on monetary policy. she'll also discuss thursday's vote in the u.k. on whether or

not that country should leave the european union and how that vote could impact the global economy and interest rates. janet yellen testifies in front of the senate banking committee, and it starts live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on cspan. here on cspan 3, a hearing examines the status of the public safety broadband network. witnesses look at the cost of deployment in rural areas as well as the broadband network's plans to become a self-funding entity. the events held in front of a senate commerce subcommittee and you can see it live at 9:30 a.m. eastern. next, remarks from ceo anna marie chavez on the future of the girl scouts and its current impact on women in america. 75% of current female senators were girl scouts as well as democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton. held at the national press club, this is an hour.

our speaker, ceo of the girl scouts of the u.s.a., anna maria chafsz chavez is here to mark the 100th anniversary of the gold award. the organization's highest achievement for scouts. girl scouts devote as much as two years in a sustainable community service project. they must design, plan and execute to earn the gold award. chavez credits her experience as a girl scout with kindling her interest in public service helping her to see possibilities beyond the borders of her small town in arizona. she held several positions in the bill clinton administration. and as deputy chief of staff to arizona governor januarity in a poll fanno. she oversaw food distribution programs for hungry and -- since becoming the ceo of the girl scouts of the u.s.a. four years ago, this yale alum has been named one of the world's 50

greatest leaders by fortune magazine. she has take ten organization into the digital age with her digital cookie initiative and badges zbeerd towards cyber etiquette and math learning. please welcome anna maria chavez, ceo of the girl scouts u.s.a. [ applause ] good afternoon. and good afternoon girl scouts. i feel like i'm with family. this is wonderful. first of all, i do want to acknowledge what is heavy on our hearts this morning. to our fend and family in orlando. as all of you i was disdressed and overwhelmed by seeing the tragedy that played out this weekend. for all of us who understand the importance of inclusion and diversity, i stand before you heart broken. i do want to send my remarks and

special thanks to all of the first responders who were there on the scene and to the girl scout families that were impacted this weekend. thank you for the opportunity to be here. it is my second time at the national press club. thank you for having me back. i guess i did an okay job the first time. thank you. i want to thank the organizers of today's luncheon, specifically to my friend here, thank you so much for your leadership and for organizing this amazing luncheon, debra. i also want to thank my colleagues from the girl scouts of nations capital. i know they are in the room. where are you. thank you. to their ceo, lydia soto harmon to their board president, faith fields, and of course for their steering committee members debra and angela, thank you for your hospitality today. and of course to the prestigious members of the national press club who are here in the room and on camera this morning. again, it is an amazing

opportunity to be here, actually, with the room full of girl scout leaders. i share this leadership mantle actually with many people. first of all i'd like the ceos of our local girl scout councils to please stand up. [ applause ] these are representatives of 112 ceost who are doing an amazing job of continuing this movement that's been around for 104 years. i'd also like to recognize the members of our current and former national board. would you please rise. [ applause ] and i do want to acknowledge a special person in the audience, somebody who has also worn this title, marty evans, the former national ceo of girl scouts of the u.s.a. [ applause ]

again, as my wonderful host said, we are here to celebrate something fabulous. tomorrow, we will take on the capitol hill with troop of capitol hill. these are women who serve both in the senate and the house who are going to host us to recognize the major achievement that a girl does and earns when she gets her gold award. it is the 100th anniversary of this very important honor. and i want to spend just a few minutes talking about it. because i can't tell you -- i'm sure many of you in the room have experienced it. as you are talking to people, they talk hey, what do you do in girl scouting. you ask them that critical question. do you know what the highest award is in girl scouting? they kind of pause. they kind of go like this. well i know it's the eagle scout for the boy scouts. so this is our year to really talk about the seminole award. again, it is sort of the hallmark of a girl scout leadership journey. it really encaps lates what she has done in our girl skourt career to make an impact on

local communities. we are excited to be in washington, d.c. to really mark that 100th anniversary. you know, in 1916 when it was established we knew that it was going to be a hallmark for girls. and today, less than 5% of all girl scouts earn this award. they do take action projects that are making, clearly, important impacts, not only if their local community but all over the world. i have been able to actually travel the world and talk to girls who have made this great achievement happen in their lives. and they are doing incredible things. they are thinking about how we continue to have a sustainable food source in this country. they are talking about how to get girls and boys out of sex trafficking. they are taking on unprivileged communities. they are talking about how do we invest in girls so they can take on the leadership mantle for this country in this world and according to our own research at girl scouts, the power of the

girl scout gold award excellence and leadership in life a report that we recently did we found that gold award recipients exhibit more positive life outcomes including a strong self sense of self, life satisfaction, leadership, life success, community service, and civic engagement. and over 90% of girl scouts not only attributed their success in life to this organization that's meant so much to so many of us. they also stated that belonging to girl scouts left a positive imprint on their lives, providing once in life time immersive experiences they could not have enjoyed anywhere else. this year marks a century of talented and selfless girls embracing the opportunity to discover their passions, connect with others to solve community problems, and transforming the world in progress because we know that girls don't wait until they are 25 or 30 years old. they do it now. even when they are 5 years old. [ applause ]

yeah, absolutely. so all of us had some sort of connection, even the men in the room, who were men enough to be girl scouts. you know, whether we bought the girl scout cookie or we were part of a family with a girl scout we all have our own personal story. i have my own. i grew up in a small local community of farmtown in eloi, arizona. it was an amazing place. i thought it was the epicenter of the universe. i thought everything that was great happened in my local community. one day my best friend came to third grade and said i'm going to be a girl scout. clearly i didn't know the significance until i went home and started to explain to my grandmother in spanish what it would mean to me. and when she asked me what are you going to do in girl scouting? well i'm going to go camping and sleep in a tent. my grandmother said why would you do that. we have a bed for you. i said i would do good things

for people and sell cookies. she said you have got a groeshy store. but when i told her i would help other people in our community she said absolutely. she knew the power of our brand and that brand continues to have an impact on all of us. it also opened up a sisterhood for not only me but for the millions of women who have been in girl scouting. 59 million in the last 104 years. what does that mean for us, a sisterhood? it means that we can count on other women to be there as supporters, as endorsers, as people who care. well, i brought one of my friends in the sisterhood. it's a woman that actually invested in me right out of law school. i didn't know much. all i had was a law degree printed on a piece of paper. but there was a woman here in d.c. who took me sight unseen and said i'll take anna. i'll mentor her. joan did that for me. i was very young, and very naive. didn't quite know what the law would bring, not only for myself

but for my community. and joan bond riff took me on. because of her expertise and being the first woman to serve as the general down is for the maritime administration she allowed me the experience to go on and actually create an opportunity for others. i got to go on and work with the department of justice on a case that went to the u.s. supreme court. joan is here today at the head table because not only did she support me. she has continued to support me in my life. my family and i always know that she is there to say, anna, even in tough times you are going to get through it. and when you are on a leadership mantle it is your job to reach back and help others and pull them forward with you. thank you, joan. [ applause ] so, it's obviously an important experience for all of us in this room. but how do we impress upon others about the important economics of investing in girls

here in the united states and abroad? like us, we know what is important for an investment. we look look for the roi. when people ask me, what's the roi of investing in girls? i say not only is it important to understand the return on your investment, but i always talk about and always sort of ponder over the question of what is it return on ignoring a girl? ignoring that investment? you know, today only seven cents on aer dla, philanthropic dollars donated in this country go to girl and women causes. people give more to animal causes today than to girl causes. now, don't get me wrong. i have a brand-new puppy. his name is cody-licious. excuse me. cody. he is a wonderful dog. but he will not be the president of the united states one day.

a girl scout will be. so we need to look at the economics of both investing and not investing in girls. what is the economic impact of a girl's behavior when she's making the wrong decisions? what happens when we fail to give that girl a safe place to thrive and to live? and what happens when we don't put embracing mentors in her life to understand the need that girls have every day? they are constantly looking for role models, people to say you are worth it, that you can do anything even though the data is stacked against you. this is what you can do. this is your power. and what are the prospects for girls and families who can't participate in girl scouting when even a $15 annual registration fee is a barrier? well, what's interesting today, of the millions of girls in girl scouting almost 50% of them are

on scholarship. that means we are paying their $15 annual membership fee. we are paying for their uniform. we are paying for them to go to girl scout camp. but it is amazing to me how hard it's been to convince people in the united states to invest in girls. but we're not done. we will continue to tell the story about what happens when you do invest in girls and women. look at what is happening here today in the capitol. if you look at the women currently serving in the senate and the house, 70% of women in the u.s. senate are girl scout alum. more than 50% of the women in the u.s. house are girl scout alum. if you look at almost every single woman sitting in a governorship in a state capital across the country, they are girl scouts. so for me, that's why i love talking about it, because i get it. i've seen the lack of investment in girls and where that investment ends up happening.

it ends up happening in our correctional systems. it ends up happening in foster care, in child protective services. i would rather invest in girls and see them blossom than invest in these systems. for girls, what does it mean for them? well i have got to tell that you the average age of my boss is eight years old. and they are pretty clear about what they need in life. and what i also get to do is i get to talk to future employers. they tell me the huge gap in the skill set that they are seeing today. and they are seeing, looking out into the future in 20 years and saying what are we going to do? we have all these stem jobs but we don't have enough girls and boys in the pipeline. so that's where we come in at girl scouts. we have developed the most amazing stem programs in the world. actually we've been doing it for over 100 years. a lot of people forget that. some of our first badges dealt with it. our founder julie gordon lowe,

who is amazing, audacious, kreetdive, she had girls doing welding, welding, back in the 1916. and today our girls are now working on their nanotechnology badges. they are learning to code. they are understanding the connection between their lives at the local level and how they can actually have an impact on ensuring that science creates solutions for diseases that exist today but unfortunately will continue unless they engage in science and technology. and of course in girl scouting we're staying relevant. we're listening to our bosses who are saying you know what, we love technology. can you bring it into girl scouting? that's what we've been doing. we have invested multimillion dollars in the last few years to actually upgrade girl scouts in the technology arena. we built the first multichannel e-commerce platform in the history of the united states for girls. and they have taken it to the

next level. they are selling their cookies -- and why is that important, that they are selling cookies on line? because with that revenue they are taking and it taking their take action projects onto higher platform. for us, that's what's important. in addition, i also think it's important to understand what girl scouting does off of technology. we teach girls soft skills. we teach them how to deal with uncomfortable situations, when people are trying to talk them into doing things that they clearly know in their gut they shouldn't be doing. unfortunately, i have seen way too many news articles these days about girls who are hurting themselves, girls who are taking their lives because they cannot stand up to the social pressure of not being pretty enough, not being smart enough, and seeing how people attack them on social media. but that's where we again come in as girl scouts. we create a safe environment for girls to learn those skill sets,

about building grit and resilientsy so that when people who say nasty things or spread rumors around them -- they stand up and say you know what, my girl scout family believes in me, and i will not believe in that rumor. so, again, this behavior is important to deal with because if we don't deal with those issues at a young level, both boys and girls, and we don't teach them to be inclusive, supportive, move athletic people, what happens when they become adults? for any woman who has been in the work force need i remind you of situations where you have seen yourself some fronted with some mean girl opportunities. but that's what we are fighting here today. we're teaching girls that they don't have to be on that dark side of that argument. that they can actually be the light in their community, in that conversation. they can take the side and be allies to other girls who are

being bullied. i loved it. most recently i read on line about a girl scout troop in lake havasu, arizona, who did an amazing project at their local starbucks to raise awareness about bullying in their local community and to take a stan. but that's what we do. so for girl scouts and for families, this is important. but now i'd like to speak to the parents. why aren't your daughters girl scouts today? we are the most ininclusive organization in the history of this country around girls. and for us, we had to study to see and understand why parents want certain things for their daughters. i mean what we clearly learned is that actually parents are looking for groups that will help build resilient see in their daughters. they actually want their daughters to take risks so they understand when they fail -- and i tell girls fail miserably, that's when you learn what you are about, that's when you learn the skill set to pick yourself

up and go on. by listening to parents we are building those lesson into the skill set troop level. for parents, why do you need to come back home? why do you need the reinvest in this organization that has had such a powerful impact not only in this country, but across the globe? and that's because today we need a different framework for leadership in this country. just watch the news on any given day. does that leadership model resonate with you? man or woman? boy or child or girl? personally, i want to see leaders stand up and take the hard stance on being ininclusive. i want leaders to stand up and think about the positive, positive opportunities for this great country versus tearing people down. and that's what girls want to see. their leadership preference is actually not top down. it's all together.

it's building solutions around a table. and then figuring out and delegating who is going to take the lead. but it's going to particular the adults not only in this room today but across the country to understand that's the leadership style that resonates with girls. and we have to continue to invest in this program because we have been doing it the best for 104 years. and what did we need to do next? well, once our girls get into these leadership positions we have got to support them. like the women who are currently ceos of the major corporations in this country. the women who are running major research universities, the women who have been brave enough to put their name on a ballot. so i will end to say that i tend to be an optimist. i've always been glass half full versus half empty. in going back to our thoughts in

orlando, as we continue to try to create a culture of inclusion, a culture of empathy, of possibility thinking, innovation and creative leadership, what a better place to start than in your home town in your community by investing in a girl, by becoming a volunteer, and understanding that anything is possible. when you take a little girl's hand and says, you say to her, you are worth it. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you very much.

now for a few questions. as you might have guessed, i was not a girl scout. however, i was a boy scout. >> okay. >> and when you started talking today, you mentioned that when you talked about the gold award people say oh, that's like the eagle scout. how are you trying to change the conversation from thinking that it is the equivalent of an eagle scout. >> we have to talk about it and also understand that again the name has changed over the 100 years. so we have to understand it is an inclusive award. so there are women who have earned the crabar. they are out there waiting to also come back home. i'm hoping that people today will understand it's the a very important award and we'll continue to highlight it for girls. >> in a leads to the second question. what percentage of girl scouts would you like to see earn the gold award? >> un1 hundred%. >> do you want a high percentage or make it more exclusive so

that it is ahard to get. >> because they don't see it in their local communities, they don't see it unfortunately at the top news cycle they don't realize this is part of their development path. so if more girls understood that if i say in girl scouting eight years, ten years not only would they achieve the ward but they would also get more skills under their belt. when we have found by studying girl scouts we found the longer they are in our program the impact of or program is stronger. and actually if you look at first, especially latina and african-american girls our program has a higher impact for them than most other girls. >> can you tell me a little bit about the girl scouts of the united states membership and fund-raising trends. it harder to get girls to be girl scouts and adults to be leaders. >> what a lot of people don't realize we currently have a waiting list of girls who want to be scouts. the latest count was 30,000

girls on the wait list. for us it's getting the adult to volunteer. we realize it's harder and harder. families have to work two jobs. a lot of single parent households. grandparents raising grandkids. we are trying to make it easier. that's why again this technology investment was so critical this year to allow everything to be simpler. we are digitizing all of our volunteer tool kits on line. so when you are done with your day and like myself when i tuck my son in, my husband in to bed at night i can get on line and do my volunteer activities. we are doing that and we are reaching more girls that way. >> this is a question from the audience. i was a brownie and then a girl scout in a suburban area where scouting seemed natural. how do you reach inner city and urban youth. >> we have been doing that actually for a very, very long time. we clearly understand that our volunteer model was based on model where people could stay home without working. clearly that's not the case anymore. again, that's why we are

investing in technology. we are also understanding that people want to become episodic volunteers. you may not want to be a troop leader but may want to share your expertise with girl scouts. we are encouraging men and women over the age of 19 to volunteer for the organization to help reach more girls. because i happen to work in new yorkcity where we have our girl scout council there, i will till there are a lot of girl scouts in urban communities and both kurl communities. for us again it's meeting their needs now and most importantly showing adults that this is a great place to volunteer. >> you set a lot of goals today of where you want the girl scouts to be and where you have been with the millions of girls who have been involved. how do you measure the impact of the girl scouts? >> that's a very good question. first of all, a couple of data points i am a data geek. so i will share data points. first of all when we turned 100

years old in 2012 we did a research study on our alum. we have 59 million living girl scout alum in the united states and across the world. when we compared them to non-alum we found some fascinating things. if this resonates to you, nod your head for me. first of all, we found that our girl scout alum went on to actually get a higher level of educational attainment. they went on to get their bas, mbas, their ph.d. their jds. they had a great time in school. two, they volunteer more in their local communities. if we actually compared our girl scout alum who are mothers to non-alum. the girl scout moms are actually volunteering more in their children's school. they also, interestingly enough when we asked them questions about are you happy with your life decisions they said absolute loo. and they had a higher level of satisfaction around their partnerships and career goals and staying at home and raising their kids. what's interesting, when i was here a few years ago talking about this to to some of the

white house officials i shared with them that our girl scouts are very communityively and civically engaged and they vote and they vote often. it is a testament to our program again that we've been giving these girls an amazing opportunity to give back. >> the girl scouts of america have a great brand recognized internationally. but that brand is also very strongly associated with cook yeast. other than its asset as a fund-raising tool is the cookie an aset or liability and how do you move beyond the cookie as the brand of the girl scouts in the 21st century. >> the last three weeks a magazine published a list of the most powerful impactful brands in the world. brands that when people saw it they immediately resonated with sort of theettos around that bran. the girl scouts is number seven in the world. so very proud to say that we -- [ applause ] .

absolutely. in addition, i think we have been making headway. first of all, we embrace our cookie program. it is the. >> laest kbrep newership program for girls in the world. they raise money that stays at the local level that they reinvest in their local community. they probably fund most of the non-profits in your cities and towns they use that money to fund their bronze silver and gold award projects. in addition if you look over the last three to four years from the media coverage you can see that one -- for example, we were rated one of the most innovative nonprofits in the world just a couple of years ago. and they continue to see that we're going to be able to use the technology in a way that's going to not only resonate with girls, but also be an amazing opportunity for individuals, corporations, foundations to be strategic partners with us. and we're seeing that more and

more. for example, dell recently invested in us. visa also as well, in our digital cookie program because they clearly saw that this is the necks iteration of girl scouting. and most importantly, that we do bring opportunities for girls globally. >> we both discussed earlier the tragedy in orlando this weekend. how does the girl scouts program help young girls understand and adjust to such terrible tragedies? >> unfortunately, at least in my tenure in girl scouts -- it's been eight years that i have been working as an adult in this movement. unfortunately, i've seen some of these same issues play out in other communities. sandy hook and other local communities. it's heart breaking. unfortunately, today the girls growing up live through the great recession. they have grown up during a time frame when we were at war. they have seen how hard it's been for their parents to make a living.

but what i've also been very surprised about if you take a moment to sit and talk to a grl about issues she cares about. they are very positive about their future opportunities. they don't stay in the dark. they don't stay in sort of ambiguity. they look forward into the future. and what i have found is that girls are very mf move athletic. so when they see, again, sitting down around the kitchen table in the morning they see the news on -- and i had the news on this morning with my son, and i said don't thank that to cartoons, we are watching the morning show. he is also very focused. kids today realize the world is consistently shifting around them. homeland security issues are at the forefront unfortunately. but girls want to create solutions. that's where i see a great connection for them. because we are developing girls who are going to think about inclusion and diversity very differently. they are not going to see it as negative. they are going to see it as a positive. they are the ones who are going

to try to reunite and unite communities and countries around solutions for many diverse communities versus trying to segregate and trying to separate people because of differences. so that's why, actually, i sleep very well at night, because our hands are in great -- our lives are in great hands with girls. they are going to be very vocal and very positive. [ applause ] >> we've talked a lot about the girl scouts. let's talk but for a second. how do you feel being a minority woman in the professional world? can you tell us some of your experiences with that? >> joan saw some of them. i'll tell you an interesting story. joan is here, she'll allow me to do this. you know, it was interesting, growing up in girl scouting i thought i could do anything. i had a family who really invested in me, said you can do whatever you want to do. don't listen to your brothers [ laughter ] . so i just grew up with that mentality that if i was nice and

i was a person of faith, that i could contribute. so i goat d.c. and i'm like gung ho. i've been waiting to be a lawyer since i was 12 years old in girl scouting so i'm ready. and as i said, joan picked mimi up as a novice attorney. i was brand-new out of law school with the department of transportation. and they said where do you want to go? i said i want to go work for that amazing fee mall general counsel in the maritime administration. people looked at me, you are from the desert. i said no i want to learn from here because she had spent a career dealing with issues on capitol hill. if she could have survived capitol hill i'm sure she is going to teach me a few things. i went up there, and they basically gave me the box that had been in storage, this really old case about a crane that had been damaged in egypt buy one of our maritime administration's ships. so i rolled up my sleeves.

long story short, i did my homework and before we knew it joan was getting a phone call because there were two egyptian diplomats coming from egypt to meet with anna chavez. and she goes, anna, what did you do? i said, i did what you told me to do, joan. what was interesting is they came, the state department officials came over. joan and i sat there. but we had to pull out a male lawyer from our general counsel's office to actually conduct the meeting because the diplomats wouldn't talk to us because we were female lawyers. so this was 1995. i think we've come a long way. but this shows you that there is a lot more to be done. and i will tell you i've seen that progress in my career. i rarely now meet unfortunately those situations -- or maybe people just don't tell me what i'm missing. but i also don't dwell on it. for me, it's about what you make out of a situation.

what you learn from that situation. and i hold no regrets. >> let's keep on diversity for a few minutes. you were the first latina ceo of the girl scouts. what do you plan and what do you plan to do to expand the scouts into the latino communities and there is resistance because of unfamiliarity with the concept of scoutings. >> my grandmother probably told everybody, don't go camping. no. here's -- i'm only going to speak to it as a latina who grew up in our movement. first of owl our culture didn't have an affinity to girl scouts. my grand mother grew up in mexico. my other was active in the community but not as a girl scout. when they thought of an opportunity to volunteer girl scouts didn't resonate with emthis. but our bran was so strong that allowed me the opportunity to engage and they trusted the local girl scout volunteers.

i think it is an opportunity to explain to them what we are and what we've always been. what i will say is that if you look back at our history, actually some of our first troops in savanna georgia were made up of diverse communities. some of the first troops were from the local orphanage in savanna. and some were the jewish women leaders in that community. we have had girl scout troops in texas with latina girls since the 1930s and 1940s. and we desegregated troops long before the federal government told us to. that's our dna. i think we have to explain to all communities, immigrant communities in the united states that we are ininclusive, a good investment, that your daughter, niece, daughter will have a positive experience and you are investing in their future. >> the washington post did a story, 5,000 boy scouts, members

of a mosque based troop or members of other religions or civic organizations. is there a responsibility within troops to learn from each other about culture? >> absolutely. people may not know this. we have had relationships with all the faith organizations for many, many decades. we are in all communities. we are in every zip code in the country. you can imagine the amazing group of individuals, local community members who are part of our organization. faith has always been part of it. i'm actually wearing my girl scout catholic award that i earned and was presented to by cardinal dolean on the altar of st. patrick's in new york city because, again, we not only teach girls about their faith. but we also allow girls to learn about other people's faiths. and that is part of our, again, our history, and our future, and again, it builds girls who are move athletic and also understand that there is strength in diversity.

>> recently, the catholic leader of the st. louis, archbishop robert karlsson urged cutting ties with the roman catholics and girl skougtd. he says the girl skouts u.s.a. promotes role models in conflict with catholic values. what does the archbishop's statements mean for the girl scouts? and how do you respond? >> well as the ceo of girl scouts of the u.s.a., as you know i'm non-partisan, and i represent girls in all faith. i happen to be a catholic. and i happen to teach sunday school. and actually, what has also been weighing on my mind is a future in ministry. so for me, this is about girls. it's about communities. it's about all faiths. i will tell you that they have we had over 100-year partnership with the catholic church. we have them in catholic schools. and it is a strong part of our organization, as are girls in other religions. again, what i'd say to anybody is sit down with us, talk to us

about ourprogram, what we do, and what we don't do, and you will see, again, that we are teaching girls about leadership. and most of our girls are young girls, k through 5 and we are teaching them to go camping, light some fires, and also sell cookies on line. it is what it is. >> this next question comes from taylor, my 11-year-old friend who is my girl scout cookie hook up she explains in the new york area most of the troops are community based and not school based. >> i ran a local girl scout council in southwest texas. i knew how hard it was to go into the schools for many different reasons. you know, a lot of schools are cutting their budget. they are having to shut down the schools after school because of the electricity bills. but what's interesting -- and we had our troops actually in the tennessee area just pass a bill in the state legislature which allowed them access to all

schools in tennessee. which is great, for boy skpouts and girl scouts. i think you are going to start to see more schools see girl scouts after school. what i also want to explain is we currently have girl scouting during the day in schools across the country. in communities where transportation may be an issue, where they may not have a local troop meeting in that elementary or middle school we actually bring staff and volunteers to provide the girl scout program during the day. it's been an amazing opportunity to reach underserved communities in a way we have done for many years. of course those programs tend to be a little bit more expensive. going back to investment in girls that's how you can invest in your girls, support our local counc councils, donate to them so they can spread throughout the communities. >> what more can somebody do than volunteering or buying cookies.

>> again, we would love men and women to be part of the organization. because i've traveled the world i met a lot of cookie dads, men who are wearing their t-shirt, man enough to be a girl scout. what's interesting, going back to girls and reference. connecting stem, it's the skill set needed in this country and in this world. we did a research study around gerls and stem. we found that 74% of high school girls love stem. they love science. they excel if math. but subcontract around fourth grade they stopped raising their hand in math class. that's when they start getting messages that perhaps they are not good at math or why do you keep raising your hand? and when wed and girls in high school, we found that 74% of them again loved stem. but when we asked hem to rate a stem career, it actually came at the bottom of their list of potential careers in the future. so there is a disconnect. but we found that, actually, the

largest sort of influencer in that girl's life on whether or not she decides to go into stem was the male figure in her household. that's why it's foreign to get dads and uncles and can you seeins involved in girl scouting, because they need all role models, male and female, to tell them what's problem. >> question from the audience. the boy's program teaches boys how to do things. the girl's program requires them to read it. there is revision in the works to teach girls how to do rather than how to read and study. >> i know there is plenty of members in the audience that say that he actually do do more than read to earn those skill sets. right [ applause ] i have been out in field with girls. i have done repelling off of many walls. i've done amazing things in the wilderness.

but i've also been with girls who are doing stem activities, who are donating their time to help local food shelters. so the girls are doing many things. what i think is excite being the girl scouts today is we are allowing them to actually vote on their badges. just couple of years ago, girls did vote on their badges. over 60,000 girls voted on line. it was interesting. they picked outdoors in their badges. and of course that means different things. for a daisy who is 5 years old, to an older girl skouchlt again, they are also connecting outdoors with stem. they want to do geocaching outdoors. they want to understand areason tomy in a different way. i will tell you these girls are learning not only hard skills but soft skills in girl scouts. >> next question, an audience member said one of her best experiences in scouting was living with nature, the outdoors part of. that but you are also emphasizing career achievement.

how do you merge the two? and you have discussed that in some ways. but how do you also include the nature part and the career achieve men? >> you know, i have been hanging around a lot of doctors lately, talking to them about what they are seeing in the medical field n the science field. and specifically, the impact of technology on kids today. i have a 14-year-old son. he clearly has many devices that he is working on. and what i've seen is, unfortunately, in the research and talking to the medical community is that technology is actually doing things with kids' brains. it's rewiring them. shortening their attention span both for children and adults. right? when was the last time you were able to put our phone down, right? so i think we have a great opportunity to bridge those worlds, of understanding the technologies here and will continue to be here in the future but that the outdoors are important. there has to be a balance. everything in moderation. and i love when i see girls at camp and we're right about to get into camp season for girl

scouts that they enjoy it. they sometimes fight like you mean i've got to give you my phone? three days later they have forgotten it. they have enjoyed getting off the grid. and as an adult who actually has to do this for work, to be on line, to be on twitter, and on linked in, it's a lot that you have to manage. so imagine being a 10-year-old girl and being pressured into being on these systems. so what i love again about girl scouting is we are bridging those worlds and allowing them to be a girl as long as they can be a girl. >> speaking of digital tell us about how successful your digital cookie initiative has been since its release in 2014? and do you plan to do more in that digital space. >> sure. actually dimmingal cookie came from girls. it was an idea that came up when i was sitting with a group of teenage girl scouts in san antonio, texas. we were sitting around the table. they were my catchen cabinet.

i was asking about the program, what did they need more from girl scouting. i asked them, so any of you selling contact yeast next year? not one hand went up, including the young woman who had been my top cookie seller the previous year. when i started talking to them about it. they said we want something different. we want an e-commerce platform. we want the ability to sell to family across bown draers. again, they are global citizens. they don't think in geographic artificial boundaries anymore. and they wanted to think through how they could leverage it into a larger program base for them. that's what happened. that idea in partnership with several organizationingses that again become the largest multichannel e-commerce police man in the world for girls. within the first pilot year it was unbelievable. when we launched it in december -- let's see, it's currently 2016. we launched it in december of 2014. and in three days we had 4

billion media impressions from around the world. the reason people were so excited is they knew the power of our cookie program. they knew the significance of investing in the our girl scouts. but they also saw it as an opportunity to leverage technology andn a brand-new way. what you are going to see with this platform it's the first foreway into girl skourts digital program, it's the first of. what i'm excited to see is what girls do next. we are not designing itible autor. we're taking their ideas and replicateding it and getting adults to invest it. at the end of the day, the ideas are coming from them. that's what i think at the end of the day will keep girl skourts alive and thriving in the united states and on the global if we continue to focus on the girl and we keep the girl in the center. >> what progress have you made to carry out your mission to close the leadership gap between men and women in one generation? >> that was an you a dishaudaci.

i think it's happening. that same year we launched the most ambitious fund-raising campaign on behalf of girls in the world. and we are halfway there, to a billion dollars. in addition, when we talked about again changing the leadership landscape in the united states it was also about bringing men and boys in. because it's not about boys against girls. not at all. again, i happen to be raising a 14-year-old boy, but also 2 million girls. and i know what happens when you create equality in conversations, when you make people from different communities and areas and towns understand each other. over sometimes artificial boundaries. so for me it is an amazing opportunity to talk about what girls can do in the future. and i think we continue to have opportunities to talk about leadership. and of course seeing the current political landscape and what you

are seeing and hearing on the news, our girls are watching, right? they are sitting down in front of the television. they are listening to it on their phones and they are watching how it plays out. but our research also shows that both boys and girls think it is harder for a woman to be a leader today than for a man to be a leader. so we have got work to do. >> someone in the audience is very concerned about our chall a. does that still exist? how does one schedule a visit? can one just show up? >> to explain about girl scouts. our fonder was creativityive but understood she had to create the largest organization for girls in the world. not just some domestic program. from the very beginning we have been part of a global movement of girls across the world, 10 million of them. part of that amazing countedu opportunity is to connect with them around the world. we have given global sites.

one of them happens to be our chall a. we have a cabana in exco. we have a place in india. unfortunately i have not been to those places because i have focused on visiting girl scouts here domestically. you can go on line and sign up to go to any of these amazing locations they are alive as well. and the lodge in england. you can go there as well. being part of girl scouting you are immediately part this global sisterhood. you can go anywhere. i can go to any state in the country, any state in the world, somebody will see my pin and say girl scouts, very cool. >> on that note, tell house how the girl scouts are adjusting to cultural norms for its programs in other countries. has there been much expansion in other countries in the last decade? >> it's interesting. we saw a membership decline domestically in the last 12 years but an increase in membership overseas.

i think we can learn something from there. two, what i love about our global girl scouting the we are serving military families. we are serving individuals who are serving the state department, who are working for american companies abroad. and what i hear constantly about our global girl scouting programming is that it's connecting them back to something that's really important to them. so it's not only a community of american girls abroad. but it's also a group of men and women who are american who are looking for that connection to the united states. and they are great ambassadors for us. unfortunately, as we talk about terrorism and issues impacting the world, i remember sitting in my office in new york city and reading about the paris attacks. you remember this. and thinking immediately oh, my gosh, we have girl scouts in paris and getting on the phone, trying to finds out if everybody is okay. will bely our girls and our volunteers were fine but they were in tears for other people who were impacted in paris through these terrorist attacks. again, i'm cognizant that we

have an amazing platform for girls and they are doing great things. but my heart goes out to them because they are living in trying times. i hope again that they will stay resilie resilient. they will stay focused on a positive future. >> tell me how do you keep older girls involved as girl scouts? is girl scouts -- how do you keep that like it is a cool thing when you get past middle school and into high school? >> that's a hard one. even my son is like, ma. he's like, ma, that's not cool. and i try to say words -- he is like mom you missed that one completely. don't even try. i think there will always be that. when things are cool and adults start saying them, they are no longer cool. part of our community is to continue to try to channel a girl and what's important to them. we are currently doing research on older girl programming to ensure we stay relevant for girls. i think again we need to continue to listen to them. we need to tweak and transform our programming.

and i would love, again, for volunteers in the millennial generation to also come back and volunteer. i think it's very important for our recent graduates to come back to girl scouting torque start troops, to be mentors because the younger girls love it and they think they are cool. >> what's next? the girl scouts has had its centennial, your leadership initiative and the gold award centennial in recent years. what's the next big moment? >> first of all, i think we are going to think about what we've done for 104 years because as girl scouts sometimes we just keep going, right? fushsz first i want to thank everybody for the amazing dedication, your energy, your passion, for those of you watching today thank you for your investment in girl scouting over all these decades. you have made a difference. you really have. i think you are seeing the fruits of your investment by seeing women who are putting their names on ballots.

you are seeing them as they stands up for really important issues in this country. i also love the fact that anywhere i go, i do see men and women who are still very focused on ensuring that all kids get a step up in life. and you know, the next thing in our iteration of girl scouting is again to keep up with girls, to ensure that we are thinking five to ten years, 15 years out. and that's on the cusp. and you know, for me, eight years into this role, i couldn't be prouder of the legacy of not myself but actually the hundreds and thousands of staff, volunteers who have given their lifeblood and soul to this organization to keep it relevant and to keep it at the forefront of our families. because, again, it was important for me. it was important for millions of other women. and we owe that to girls around the world. >> i'm going to take back the podium for just a minute.

before i ask the final question i have a few announcements. the national press club is the world's leelding professional organization for judgists and we fight for a free press worldwide. for more information about the . i'd also like to remind you of upcoming programs. on june 20th, the federal communications chairman. the next day, michael middleton, the interim president will speak here, the next day june 22nd, tom perez will speak and july 14, the head of the national security agency, michael rogers will address the club. i would like to present our guests with the traditional press club mug. [ applause ] i expect cookies in return. my last question. you were selected by fortune magazine as the 24th greatest leader in the world.

what comes next? >> well, you know, i've been praying on that actually. and i think that again the world gives us many opportunities. it gives us many paths. i've learned a lot in the last eight years. i think that i'm going to be called to again ministry. i think that the opportunities that i have seen, the people i've met have taught me one thing, and that's the power of kindness. i hope what i've learned, what my family instilled in me will allow me to take that lesson and have an impact on more people around the globe. and i think being on that list wasn't important to me, it was important to this organization. it showed that the girl scouts is back on the map, that we're doing great things, leaders in many different fields. and i think my grandmother was smiling in heaven because the

pope was on the list too. [ laughter ] [ applause ] >> thank you. thank you to the national prez club staff, the staff of the journalism institute, all of you being here and the audiences on public television and radio. audiences, we are adjourned.

c-span's wauk journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, mark price with the economic policy institute joins us to discuss their new report, looking at

income equality in 20 states and how it's grown. then former republican congressman and presidential candidate ron paul will be on to talk about gun and privacy laws in the wake of the orlando shooting and offer his opinion on the state of the 2016 presidential campaign. and david rucker senior correspondent will discuss the dismissal of donald trump's campaign manager, corey lewandows lewandowski. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal 7:00 a.m. on tuesday morning. on tuesday, janet yellin presents her semi annual report to congress on monetary policy. she'll discuss thursday eesz vote in turks k on whether or not that country should leave the european union and how that vote could impact the global economy and interest rates. janet yellin testifies and it starts life at 10:00 a.m.

eastern. and here on c-span3, a hearing examines the safety of the public safety broad band network, their plans to become a self funding entity. you can see it live at 9:30 a.m. eastern. last week the democratic national committee held its southwest regional platform hearings ahead of the party's convention in philadelphia next month. representatives from a wide range of organizations testified on various potential energy and environmental policies they want to see included in the 2016 democratic platform. this is four hours. >> good morning. good morning. and welcome to the democratic national convention committee's southwest forum on the 2016

democratic national platform. i'm congressman elijah cummings of maryland and it is an honor to chair this panel, participate in this process. and i welcome all of you to these very, very important proceedings. i would like to call this forum, the 2016 platform drafting committee to order and would everyone now please stand to pledge allegiance to the flag? i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> on behalf of my colleagues on the platform drafting committee, i welcome you as we continue the

series of regional events designed to hear from democrats on the key issues affecting their families, their communities, our nation and indeed the world. we will continue this open and transparent process to allow those ample opportunity for every viewpoint to be raised and to be heard. before proceeding with today's events, we must take a moment to recognize the senseless tragedy that took place in orlando last weekend. dozens of innocent americans lost their lives in an act of hatred. together we grieve for those who were killed and the families and loved ones left behind. let us take a moment of silence to honor those 49 victims,

please. [ moment of silence ] thank you very much. before asking the democratic national convention committee ceo, reverend daughtry to bring welcoming remarks on behalf of the party, i want to again thank her publicly for her leadership of the convention and its many components. and it is my pleasure to welcome my colleagues on the committee, other democrats who join us today. and members of the public as we begin these discussions about the future of the democratic party and the future of this great nation. lee gentleman -- leah?

>> good morning. thank you chairman cummings for your warm welcome and your leadership that you have prov e provided over so many decades to this nation and now to our drafting committee. we appreciate you and thank you for your service. last weekend our nation stood still as news of yet another horrific act of violence, hatred and terrorism flashed across our screens. all of our hearts break for the victims of this horrendous attack in orlando and the families who now must daily grapple with the reality that their loved ones have been snatched from them senselessly and too soon. since last weekend we have heard many offer good thoughts and

prayers and well wishes for the families who are navigating their way through this tragedy. and this is good and heartfelt and appreciated, i'm sure. but i would suggest that the good thoughts, while well sbrengsed, and the prayers while well meaning are not enough. faith without works is dead. just as thoughts without action is meaningless. it is unconscionable that in this, the greatest country in the world, deadly weapons can be obtained more easily than the plane tickets we used to get here. but i am a prisoner of hope. and so i believe that if we stand together in one voice with one intention we can make our

community safe again. and we must respond to this tragedy by showing those who seek to divide us who we truly are. an inclusive nation that embraces all americans, not in spite of but because of who they are. in many ways, that is why we are here today, to ensure that when democrats gather in philadelphia just 38 days from now we are able to present a national platform that is representative of our party's commitment to that of americans most enduring value, that of we the people. and when we say we the people, when we profess a commitment to we the people, we mean all the people. as the party that embraces and celebrates our differences, we have committed to addressing the needs of all of our people. and that commitment means that we are intently focused on

protecting the needs of all americans and expanding their access to the democratic process. this is not without its challenges. but it is a fundamental element of who we are. a vital component of protecting access is ensuring that no american is denied the most basic promise of our constitutional democracy, the right to vote. after all, the right to vote is the foundation of our government. and defending that right is part of our never ending effort to create a more perfect union. men and women are fought, marched, bled and died to gain and protect the right to vote. and as democrats we stand firmly against all attempts to prevent americans from exercising their rights. every american should be able to

vote for the candidates that represent them. every american, the least, the last, the lost, the locked out and the left behind, the young and the old, the formerly incarcerat incarcerated, the business owner and the day laborer. every american deserves to have their voice heard. as a person of faith i believe that every person has a devine purpose and divine value. we have a responsibility to treat our sisters and brothers equally and to do everything within our power to help everyone achieve their god given potential. i am proud to join with the members of the drafting committee and members of this community to ensure that our national platform, our party's statement of principles and values is forged with consideration of every voice in our party. today we will continue the

substantive exchange of ideas that we began last week in washington, d.c. and i look forward to hearing the voices today and more important by the hearts of democrats about our policies, about our party and how we can adopt issues that will build on the success we have experienced over the last eight years. as republicans focus on what divides us, we will focus on how we can bring americans together and expand access and strengthen ladders of opportunity for all americans. thank you. >> thank you very much, leah. i like to thank the individuals you will hear from today for making time to share their perspectives and recommendations on the issues confronting americans. beappreciate you sharing your expertise and we look forward to hearing from you throughout the forum. i'm also delighted to thank the

more than 1,000 individuals from 43 states and the district of columbia who have taken the time to share your comments or post written and video testimony on the dncc website. in addition to welcoming those of you here in fee niphoenix, a, i'm delighted to acknowledge those through the dncc live stream of demconvention.com. as democrats we're committed to addressing concerns at the heart of people's lives. the problems that they face every day, and challenges. the problems that their children face, their children's education and the well-being, the health and the safety of seniors, the opportunities available in our communities, in our nation's future. among others we began last week by hearing testimony and recommendations on leveling the playing field, moving america

forward. and america's role in the world over the next two days we will hear from policy experts, community leaders and advocates on energy and the environment, health and safety. and protecting the -- and expanding our democracy. the democrat party platform is not about any one of us sitting around this table. it is so much bigger than all of us. it is about the people. and with the platform being a covenant of our shared collective values, it's important that the process captures the energy and the breadth of the party. this diverse group will allow us to bring together our party's best thinking with a focus on solutions. and so it gives me great pleasure, we are really pleased to have a special guest with us today, that is the mayor of

phoenix, mayor greg stanton. mayor stanton, since taking office in 2012, mayor stanton has worked tirelessly to build a modern economy that works for every phoenix family by boosting trade with mexico, investing in biosciencens and lifting up local small businesses. mayor stanton is leading the way to create an innovation based export economy built to last. mayor stanton is committed to making our community a more welcoming and open place. under his leadership phoenix became the first u.s. city to end chronic homelessness among veterans. phoenix also earned national recognition as the leader on lgbt issues and became the first arizona city to earn a perfect score on the human rights campaign municipal equality

index. mayor stanton, thank you very much for being with us and we'll hear from you now. >> thank you for that kind introduction. members of the platform committee. welcome to the greatest city in the united states of america, phoenix, arizona. we don't give up easy. we fight in phoenix. we finished second in the competition for the 2016 democratic convention. i want to be the first to welcome you here to the 2020 democratic convention here in phoenix. also welcome to the fastest growing big city post-world war ii here in america. phoenix is the future of the united states of america in so many ways. we're blessed to have incredible diversity here in our city and i'm confident with the intellectual and policy fire power than this committee is going to provide to our

party,'er going to be successful in the most important election in our lifetime. and congressman you mentioned a couple of the issues that are so important to the people of this party and therefore the people of this country and certainly important to the people of the city. thank you in advance for your support of the veterans across the united states of america, which i know will be an important part of our platform in phoenix. we were so proud to accept president obama's challenge, challenging every city to end chronic homelessness among or veterans. and phoenix was the first in the united states of america to end chronic homelessness among our veteran population. i want to thank this committee to show support for people. you understand that supporting people is great for the economy of the united states of america. we understand that in cities. that's why when i became mayor the support for the lgbt community was so important.

and phoenix arizona last three years has gotten a perfect score by the human equality index, same as chicago, new york, los angeles or any other cities. phoenix, doaarizona, we accomplished that. we think of climate change in the context of how it affects cities on the coastal areas because of the rising tides, rising ocean lines. but in phoenix with the heat you're going to experience over your few days here, earlier than we normally get, rising temperatures, drought is a huge issue in this community directly as a result of climate change. the policies that you adopt here, the policies of our party, the successful party in this upcoming election are going to benefit us here in the desert southwest on the issue of climate change and climate resill genesee. i want to thank you in advance for that regard. phoenix received the award as

having the strongest climate change policies in the united states of america as a city. congressman cummings, i want to thank you so much for you leadership on comprehensive immigration reform. as i told you privately, when it is successful, no city in the united states of america will benefit more economically from comprehensive immigration reform than phoenix, arizona because of the wonderful diversity that we're blessed to have, including a city that's soon to be a latino majority city here in arizona. also thank you for the infrastructure investment. in phoenix we just passed the largest transportation infrastructure investment in the united states of america by the voters of phoenix, a 35-year, $32 billion transportation infrastructure investment. we're going to trip tl amount of light rails, significantly increase the amount of bus

service, a thousand miles of bike lane, make the city for walkable, dial and ride services for our citizens that happen to have disabilities. we're going big on transportation because we know how important it is to connect people to education and jobs, those that are not in a position to afford a car or those that might not want to utilize their car. how important that is for the future of our economy. for that and so many other reasons, i want to thank this committee. the policy recommendations you're going to make are going to be great for cities across the united states of america and great for our country. welcome to phoenix. have a great few days of meetings. you're going to hear from some of the most talented people in our community, the leaders that i have the benefit to work with as mayor of the city. we have a great thriving active passionate and successful democratic party here. thank you so much for letting me say a few words.

>> i want to thank you. as i listen to you, i was saying to myself so often in washington we hear a lot about what can't be done. thank you for doing things and creating models for the entire nation. we certainly appreciate your hospitality. thank you so much. before i get started i wanted to have them introduce themselves, the members of this distinguished drafting committee. they are putting in a tremendous amount of time, taking time away from their families and from their normal jobs because they want to make sure that we, as a party, create a very meaningful platform, not just with regard to the next four years but for the next generation and beyond. so it gives me tremendous honor to have them introduce themselves, the members of the drafting committee, of the platform committee. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'm warren gunnels, the policy

director for senator bernie sanders. it's a pleasure to be here in phoenix. thank you. >> thank you, plmt chairman. i'm state representative alicia reese from the battleground state of ohio and it is great to be here. thanks for welcoming us. >> debra parker. i'm a member of the tribes and i just want to thank the southwest indigenous tribes for honoring us and allowing us today. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm bonnie shaffer. i'm from two battleground states, florida, north carolina, happy to be here. >> i'm congressman luis gutter reez from the city of chicago. happy to be here with all of you. >> teacher and citizen.

>> i'm president of the center for american progress and it's great to be here. >> i'm wednesdndy sherman delig to be here. >> thank you for the very warm welcome. [ laughter ] >> that was very good. >> paul booth, american federation of state, county municipal employees of phoenix. welcome us all here and i'm glad to be here too. >> barbara lee, member of congress, i represent the progressive 13th congressional district of children. happy to be here in fee mix. my late mother lived in sun city, arizona for many years. i've visited your city many times. thank you for your hospitality.

>> bill mckib bonn from vermont. >> senior policy adviser for hill clinton, honor to be here. >> thank you very much. howard berman could not be with us today and keith ellison will be joining us later in our proceedings. and so again, i want to thank all of the committee members for being a part of this very important committee. also seated with us are two of the many individuals giving us staff support throughout this weekend, andrew grossman and patrice taylor. andrew so the national platform director and patrice is the director of the dnc's office of party affairs and delegate selection. the staff has been absolutely wonderful and done a tremendous

job. let me take this moment also to thank debbie washerman schultz for her tremendous leadership. she and i have been talking almost every day to make sure these proceedings are transparent, open and fair. i want to thank her for her tremendous support. finally, our par men tarn. hopefully she won't have too much work to do. helen is the dnc's par mel tarn and served in this role for many years and can help us investigate any parliamentary issues that may arrive. today and tomorrow helen will be serving as our time keeper. and i remind the audience and members that today we're going to be hearing from 41, 4-1 witnesses. so we're going to be moving kind of rapid he because we want to hear from everyone.

let me just take a moment, too, to remind us that what we do is so important. the idea that just a year ago today in south carolina at emanuel church nine people were slain while sitting in a church basement. and so we have to really look at our nation and try to figure out how do we address these issues. and we can't just continue to turn our heads away from them. though we -- now, the purpose of the hearing today -- and same as the one last week, it's to solicit testimony from individuals and organizations regarding the content of the party's 2016 national platform. each speaker has been given three minutes for a formal

statement. following each presentation or at the conclusion of the last panel speaker, time will be allowed for questions from the committee members. now i want to remind the speakers that we have your written testimony and so you don't have to read your testimony. you can just come and give us a summary. because i think most of the members want to -- they'll have some questions. we're not going to be able to get to all of the questions but we'll do the best we can. we have a busy and compact hearing schedule today. each presentation will be timed and the speakers should adjust their remarks accordingly. once again i'll remind us that the undertaking is a serious business. as democrats we need to keep in mind that the differences we may have are relatively small. while we may be passionate our opinions and beliefs, let us conduct this with respect for

each other and for those who are taking time to speak to us. so we will begin today -- this would be session four. today we begin the energy and environment part of our presentation, a theme that touches each and every one of us, whether we live in cities, suburbs or communities, all americans want to know energy sources -- that energy sources are available and cost effective. and the environment is respected and preserved for our children and our children's children. someone once said that we do not inherit our environment from our ancesto ancestors, we borrow it from our children. our first group of speakers will share with us some of the approaches and vehicles needed to make that happen. our first witness will be madeleine foot, the league of

conservation voters. she's with an organization that work to turn environmental values into national, state and local priorities. during her five years with the lcv ms. foot worked to draft legislation on mnged chemical policy, reform programs and advocated for clean water change. welcome. >> thank you. good morning. >> is your mike on? >> i believe so. there we go. >> it is on. >> great. thank you for the opportunity to testify today. sit an honor for lcv on behalf of our more than 1.3 million members to inform the committee about our top environmental priorities that we believe should be included in the 2016 democratic party platform. these priorities include reducing the pollution that is warming our planet, adapting to

a changing climate, ensuring that all communities have access to clean air and water, invest in the clean energy economy, protecting public health from toxic chemicals and preserving the special places in wildlife that we hold dear. president obama and his administration have made incredible progress in advancing environmental protections, especially on the issue of climate change. as we look to the future, we must continue to build on this progress. we have a moral obligation to protect our planet and the democratic party should lead the way ensuring that we leave a clean and safe planet for generations to come. the urgent need has never been more clear and the platform should include taking aggressive measure to reduce the pollution fueling climate change, including from power plants, the oil and gas sector and cars and trucks. the platform should commend the international agreement forged in paris and recognize the

threats that climate crisis poses to communities across the country, especially low income families and those of color. we must also leave most fossil fuels in the ground. we urge the platform to recognize that the management of federal lands and waters should protect our national heritage whiled a advantages the production and distribution of clean energy. the tragic situation in flint, michigan has demonstrated that we cannot take safe drinking water for granted. cities across the u.s. have experienced elevated levels of toxic lead in drinking water and those fall on those most vulnerable. protecting and providing safe drinking water for all communities should be a platform area as well as for funding necessary improvement to ours drinking water and wastewater infrastructure.

toxic chemicals have become pervasive in our homes and body and environment. fortunate lit congress recently passed legislation to give the epa information on those most vulnerable, children, workers and others who are disproportionately exposed. we must support the epa. lastly, america's public lands and open spaces are some of our nation's most prized possessions. the platform should enchurch landscape level conservation while protecting our wile life. we must also continue to bolster the diversity of the sites, stories, visitors and workforce of our national public lands so that all people in the country feel welcome in them. in conclusion we encourage the

platform community to make safeguard organize environment one of the pillars of the platform and we thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> thank you. any questions? thank you very much. thank you. dr. michael mann, professor of atmospheric science, joint developments in the earth and environment systems institute. he's director of the penn state earth system. his research involves the use of theoretical models and international data to better understand the earth's system. welcome. >> thank you, congressman cummings and committee members. i'm honored to speak to you today about this critical issue, the issue of climate change and climate policy. my name is michael mann. i'm a distinguished professor at

penn state. i spend my time teaching, advising students and engaging in effort to inform the public. i've spent much of my career with my head buried in observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human caused climate change. what is disconcerting to me is that these tools that we've spent years developing increasingly are unnecessary because we can see climate change, the impacts of climate change playing out in real time in our television screens in the 24-hour news psych. . regardless of how you measure the impacts of climate change, food, water, health, national security, our economy, climate change is already taking a great toll. and we see that toll in the damage done by more extreme

floods, like the floods just over the past year in texas and south carolina. we see anytime the devastating combination of sea level rise and more destructive hurricanes which has led to calamities like superstorm sandy and what is now the perennial flooding of miami beach. we see it in the unprecedented droughts, doubling of the area of wildfire, fire burning in the western u.s., and indeed many the record thaet that we may very well see this weekend here in phoenix, arizona. the signal of climate change is no longer subtle. it is obvious. and like the tip of the proverbial iceberg, further changes, line enough melting of the ice sheets may already be locked in simply from the carbon we've already burned, simply from the warming already in the pipeline due to the burning of

fossil fuels. there are some tipping points in the climate system that we may have crossed but there are likely many others that we have not yet crossed and we can still avoid. it is still possible to avert catastrophic and potentially irreversible changes in climate but only in moving forward, building on the progress that has been made in recent years in accelerating the transition away from fossil fuels towards a clean energy economy. the stakes could not be greater in this next election. the future of our grandchildren, our children and grandchildren literally hangs in the balance. nor could the contrast be any more stark. we have a republican party whose standard bear, donald trump and a vas majority of their representatives continue to deny that climate change even kpess. we have on the other hand a democratic party that understands full well that while we can debate the policy specifics, we cannot bury our

heads in the sand and ignore the growing threat. it's my hope that the platform will contain a statement regard the dire threat and the statement about the importance of putting a price signal in the market, a price on carbon. it is my hope that the platform will acknowledge the progress that has been made by the obama administration and promise to build on that legacy by defending the clean power plan against attacks by the congressional republicans. it is my hope that the platform will acknowledge the vital role of the u.s. in helping lead ongoing international negotiations to avert the changes made at the climate summit this last december in paris. it is time to move forward and it's up to the democratic party to make sure that that happens. thank you. >> thank you very much.

thank you. [ applause ] bill mckib bonn. >> my committee members should know that dr. mann has been not just a great scientist but a staunch activist on these issues who has the battle scars to show for it. could you explain why climate scientists increasingly say that we need to leave something in the order of 80% of the coal and oil that we know about underground. >> you are quite a here ro to so many of us in your efforts to inform the public discourse over climate change. the idea that we need to keep 80% of fossil fuels in the ground is actually based on pretty rigorous science. we can calculate how much carbon we can continue to burn, what our carbon budget is if we are

to keep warming below catastrophic levels. what we tend to equate with 2 degrees celsius, if we want to keep warming below that level, we need to keep 80% of the fossil fuels in the ground. we're already more than halfway there. we don't have a huge window to work with. we need to engage in fairly dramatic reductions in our carbon emissions. it is essential that we engage in efforts to transition, exc accelerate the transition to green energy in we're to do that. >> one of the arguments that we hear too often in washington is that it's not going to make any difference, even in light of the paris, what happened in paris. they say well, you know, what we may do here will not have

tremendous impact. what do you say to that in. >> thanks for the question. too often there's quite a gulf between what we hear in washington, d.c. and what we scientists know to be true based on scientific research. >> based on science. >> based on science. if you look at the agreements that were reached in paris, those agreements from nearly 200 nations around the world to reduce carbon emissions are enough to get us to where we would have been heading, 9 degree fahrenheit warming of the globe by the end of the century, halfway to where we need to be to holding that warming below the dangerous 2 degree level. there in that agreement we made enough progress as long as countries made good on their kmutmentes to get halfway to where we need to be. it's easy to see a road, a path where we get all the way to where we need to be by building

on that very important agreement. and indeed, it's part of the reason that this next election is so critical. if we are to build on that agreement, rather than, you know, move backwards, we obviously will need a president and a congress that embraces the objective of avoiding dangerous climate change. >> yes. wendy sherman. >> just a very quick question. how important is american leadership to that purpose that you just named? >> american leadership could not be more important. we in this country have had the luxury of cheep access to dirty fossil fuels for two centuries. and who are we to tell the rest of the world that they too are not entitled to cheep dirty energy if we don't have our own house in order. i think we lend tremendous moral

authority to this discussion and that is so -- why it is so important that we lead, not just in engage in the negotiations but continue to lead as president obama as done and hopefully our next president will do as well. >> this will be our last question, mr. gunnels. >> thank you very much and thank you very much for your testimony. really appreciate it. really appreciated in your testimony you're talking about a price on carbon. how important do you think a price on carbon is, how quickly do you think that we should enact it and what will happen to our planet if we don't enact a price on carbon? >> thanks for the question. really the only reason to achieve the sorts of reductions that we will need to avoid catastrophic warming of the planet is for there to be a price signal. we've been in an environment where we have a congress that is in denial, republican leadership

that is in denial of climate change and there has been an absence of not only leadership but the possibility of climate legislation to put a price signal on the burning of carbon np in the absence of that we've seen them douse progress at the municipal looefl, the local level, here in phoenix and through executive actions, through the actions of the 0 bam that administration. but if we're going to tackle this problem thoroughly, we need to put a price on carbon that will require a congress that is willing not only to accept that climate change is real but to act on it through legislation. >> thank you very much. we really appreciate your passion. peggy shepherd, successfully combined grass roots organizing, environmental advocacy and research to become one of the most highly respected

environmental advocates in the country today. a pioneer in urban communities to ensure that the entitlement of clean air and water extends to all people in all communities. a lead within new york city and the national environmental justice moment, cofounder and executive director of the we act for environmental justice based in west harlem which has a 24-year history of affecting environmental and environmental health policy and practice locally and nationally. thank you. >> thank you very much. morning-to-cumming and the distinguished members. the challenge that i've been offered is that all residents should have access to clean water, clean air environmental protection and equitable distribution of benefits,

burdens and resources. many are sick and dying from disproportionate environmental exposure to pollution, toxins and policies that have scarred the hemt and lang scapes and indigenous areas of america. yes know that place matters. that your zip code or tribal status often determines your health status and the conditions that characterize the communities. for example, cancer alley is 100-mile stretch of land between baton rouge and new orleans that have taken over plantation lands with 700 oil refineries. small african communities of 300 and 400 people are sandwiched between these industrial plantations with no evacuation routs. in new york city, public housing is home to over 600,000 people of color, living in shameful kons of mold, pests and housing

deterioration causing chronic disease. in north carolina, black farmers share a fence line with combined animal feed. don't go outside your home because you might be sprayed with the manure when you go to your car. farm workers in california and their children are working in fields sprayed with a spray banned by the epa but still allowed to be used in farming where the most vulnerable are working. today climate change is our greatest challenge. cap and trade systems are opposed by environmental justice organizations for two reasons. they do not reduce the copollutants and secondly, they can facilitate an outcome of some plants buying credits rather than reducing their emissions which results in

communities not reaping the benefit of reduced emissions. the next administration really advance interdisciplinary approach. we cannot have sustainable communities, a sustainable america without our transportation, open space, health systems environmental enforcement insync. we need to revision the energy future to advance energy investment and infrastructure that keeps housing and homes affordable so low income residents don't lose their homes. we need to launch a federal healthy homes initiative to work with local governments and community based organizations to eradicate mold and truly get lead out of homes and drinking water so there are no more flint disasters. underserved communities need an

advocate at the white house who is knowledgeable and concerned about these issues, not simply about public engagement. but about creating change. and we need a council on environmental quality that is empowered or restructured to provide coordination and outreach that is effective, informed and helps to develop the changes we need. so i thank you and we are submitting longer recommendations today as well. >> thank you very much. thank you. [ applause ] congresswoman lee. >> it's very important that you're here today with your testimony. thank you very much. let me mention first of all, i was born and raised in el paso, texas. npr, some of you may have heard the story several years ago about the smelters in el paso. my cop temporary wes, the majority of them have passed

away or they got lung disease, multiple sclerosis, my sister have multiple sclerosis, all kinds of diseases that led to premature death ore disabilities. and we knew it was the smelters in el paso where we lived that somehow was part of the problem. and that's what happened to my contemporaries. know the issue very well. i wanted to ask you, now here we are in 2016 still with lead in water, toxic dump sites in low income communities. in my community we're talking about transporting lead through the black and -- not lead, excuse me, coal through the black and latino communities. i'm wondering if you've had a chance to look at the environmental and health impacts of coal and then secondly, with

these environmental injustice decisions that have being made, these are decisions that lead to environmental injustice, have you looked at civil rights decisions and do these decisions come under the civil rights act or could they? >> absolutely. there's a title 6 element of the civil rights act and it says that if states that receive federal funding discriminate that federal funds can be taken from them. however, there's been a backlog of title 6 cases at the epa for over 20 years. many of them dismissed out of hand. the title 6 area is one that needs to be strengthened and epa needs to be given the mandate to ensure that these cases are adequately reviewed. >> what about coal? have you studied that at all?

>> certainly we know that burning of coal exacerbates asthma and respiratory disease. in new york city we had an environmental bond act some years ago that actually transformed over 400 public schools that were still using coal fired furnaces with our children having the asthma epidemic that we have throughout new york city. we also know that coal slurry in appalachia has contaminated ground water and waterways there. the impact on appalachia has been very significant. >> thank you so much. not just for your testimony but for a real lifetime of work. one of the things that worries me sometimes is that when people hear about something like flint they get all upset an alarmed, as they should be. but imagine that it's just some

kind of one off anomaly. could you talk a little bit about how we should really thi about what happened in flint in a national context? >> certainly. i think the environmental justice movement believes that it is a prime example of environmental racism. we believe if this had happened in an nx arbor, this would not have happened. they would not have switched to a contaminated water supply. we believe that people of color who complain about these issues are not given the review and attention that they should be. we know that the epa in that region -- let me say that the epa regional directors, that whole epa region administrators need to be restructured because they are not accountable to outcomes and they do not seem to be accountable to the administrator in washington. but we know that the epa had

information that they did not act on. so again, when people of color have these complaints they are not taken seriously. and until a pediatrician came in and did some of the research and began to raise this issue, nothing was done. but the other issue is that we now know that there are at least 19 other cities in this country that have levels of lead in the water that approach flint or higher. so these issues have been going on for many years. and because these cities are not making the investment or because the federal government is not giving the investment and funding that some of these cities that are, you know, have financial issues, because of that, they are not taking care of these issues. so water quality is very key. >> yes, thank you for your testimony. how can we bring back

environmental justice to tribal nations? because we have people of color in different areas, rural areas and so forth but we have tribal nations that have, they have a whole separate set of laws, sovereign nations, government to government. but often we see a lot of the pollutants and big oil and coal companies coming on to reservation lands because often there's a lack of authority or law that protects tribal nations. what have you found in your studies and what can you recommend to our platform committee? >> i know that the national ad visitry council to epa has had strong indigenous representation and has had a separate indigenous working group. and throw that body we have been able to affect some of the issues on tribal lands. but we really need strong voices in congress, because there are

leaders and tribal leaders who have a certain authority that the federal government cannot contravene. so there are those kinds of issues. but there's a lot of strong advocacy on tribes. there's the indigenous environmental network out of minnesota that has been taking on these issues. i think in a very effective way. but we need strong congressional support. >> thank you very much. mr. booth. >> i think your point about the environmental racism in the case of flint, i would underscore it by reference to the fact that the emergency manager who made these decisions in flint imposed by the state was one of eight emergency managers. >> yes. >> across michigan which somehow coincidentally have been imposed on the cities and the boards of education that are majority black population, no coincidence there. but i also heard you reference

the financial dimension of what we learned in flint. could you concur that in addition to the racial dimension of it there's always the austerity economic policy that is at the root of the short sided decisions that were made in flint, the systemic over a period of years depletion of state aid to cities, not just plint but other cities in michigan played a role in straight jacketing the options available and then they made this terrible, terrible decision to save a few bucks by diverting from the previous water supply that's caused this calamity that's going to last for years and years. the kids in flint who are growing up are going to grow up with all of that lead. but the fiscal decisions are crucial here, that we need to invest in the infrastructure of our cities. >> absolutely. we certainly know that our

infrastructure is famg throughout the country. and i'm hoping that the dnc and the next administration will make that investment in our infrastructure. these emergency managers throughout michigan have only be, for the most part, put into cities that are primarily african american or people of color. austerity measures seem to fall heavily on communities of color as well. democracy literally has been snatched from the people in these cities with no review or resource. austerity measure, the financial nevadament by the federal government is very curable to maintaining environmental quality. >> let me just say this. i can't let you go out saying this. when i grew up in a very poor

neighborhood. all of my six brothers and sisters had as asthma. people died early from cancer. we thought it >> i think the things that you're doing that makes people aware that that's not normal and i lot of people don't realize that. there's some folks that are living in situations that they should not. and she talks about poverty. people want to talk about poverty, if somebody is sitting all the time its kind of hard to have -- to move forward. but i want to thank you for your advocacy. but the other thing i wanted to ask you is a president in the congress hopefully will do things but i was just wondering how much of this involves educating people so do they know that things can be better and --

>> absolutely. grass roots education and residents that live in your districts can come in and talk to you about these issues and brief you and your staff about these issues is crucial. we can't have important mobilization without an informed residence. i would also say asthma is not normal. the national institute of environmental health sciences will be crucial. the funding to the children's environmental health centers around this country has reduced incredible research that looked at the impact of air quality of vulnerable populations. it's looked at the impact of air quality on asthma and heart disease. so we now have the research. and now we need the political

will to transform our health. >> thank you very much. thank you. mark ruffalo is an american actor -- is he here? >> i'm on skype. i'm joining you from the low carbon digital world today. >> there you are. >> how are you? >> real good. >> well, it's an honor to be here with the dnc today speak about these issues, especially with the speakers that you have lined up. many of them are my heros and so i am deely honored to be here as a lowly humble actor. so thank you for the chance to speak today.

first i want to recognize the democratic primary that honestly the choices in front of us is each of our candidates share a goal of 100% clean energy. this commitment among others give me hope that as a party we will not turn attention from the challenges facing our country today. unlike others running for president, we will not turn away from each other we will work together to solve these tough problems. we'll give 100% for 100% of our citizens. now the old dirty fossil fuel system and the dark money it pumps into our policies is a toxic mess killing more than 40,000 americans each year. 1,500 of them in arizona alone. researchers estimate that each american will save more than

$8,000, $6,000 for people in arizona every year by moving to 100% clean energy instead of the billions of dollars that are being put into the pockets of the 1%, that wealth could be shared by all. meaning less money spent on wars to protect our dirty fossil fuels and more money on schools, roads and our communities. so the good news is, that we don have to dream anymore about wind, water and sunpowering our lives. scientists from stanford, uc davis and cornell have proven that 100% clean energy is absolutely possible today. it's cost effective and it's possible with the technology that we have today. wind is the cheapest form of energy available in the united states. solar is cost competitive and

the result of making that switch nearly $600 billion saved, okay? not to mention the gains that we'll make in fighting climate change but there's an economic argument to be made and i hope the dnc can understand this. $600 billion saved. let new industries that flourish. 10s of thousands of lives saved a year and a nation where every state develops it's own local god given harvestable and never ending power source. no longer are we sending our energy dollars out of state and out of country the only thing is political leadership and courage. it's simply no longer an economic issue or technological issue. we are not 20 years away from being able to do this. it's happening now.

today joined the ceo of apple, general motors, the mayors of san diego, california, and americans are making 100% energy for employers, neighbors and families across the country right now today. and as a party we can pick up that pace. making sure that every american household, school, and business has access to clean energy all while creating more good stable jobs than we lose in the process. 100% clean energy is not only possible. it's happening. it's a personal issue for those that pay utility bills that have

to go to work for myself. to play out in streams and rivers and have clean air and clean land and clean water. with my father i want them to grow up in a clean environment like you do. like every american tuz. and the quicker the rest of the world will follow us. america leads the way. we all know this. this primary season has shown us that the people of the country create all leadership. in a move to 100% clean energy is not only bold, it's also smart. smart for our health. smart for our employ, smart for protecting our water and air and smar for global kmurt. and our ability to transition away from old dirty fossil fuels and the democratic party should be at the front lines of this transition.

we deserve to have 100% clean energy from 100% of our people. that means everybody. and this also deals with an environmental racism as well. an economic racism. that's why i'm here to urge the dnc to adopt a goal of achieving 100% clean energy from wind, water and sun by 2050. the time is now. thank you. >> thank you. >> i failed to give you a proper introduction so i want everybody to know who you are. >> well, thank you. mr. rufalo is an american actor who has starred in multiple critically acclaimed roles. during his acting career he has received numerous awards and

nominations including an oscar nomination for his role in the 2015 drama spotlight. he always has a long history of activism and humanitarianism and speaks out in support of lgbt issues clean water initiatives and vierenvironmental preservat and he sais also the founder of water defense. nonprofit organization dead kated to clean water and rooted in the belief that access to clean water is a fundamental right. any questions? >> he started turning green in his role as the hulk. mark, just to make absolutely

clear sometimes there are people who have described natural gas as clean energy for america. could you describe what you mean by clean energy. could you talk about the campaign that you helped wage in new york state. >> sure. >> for a long tile people in the environmental movement felt it was going to be the bridge to the future. what we came to find out and what science has proved is natural gas is a more rapidly changing climate. natural gas is 100 times more damaging a green house gas, heat trapping gas than co2 in a 70 year period which makes it particularly dangerous and we

can't seem to be able to keep it from leaking no matter how hard we try and where we try to do it so any kind of gains we thought we were making by transitioning to natural gas have actually basically exploded in our faces. i don't think it's any accident that climate change has accelerated much beyond what many of our climate scientists were saying while at the same time we were building up this giant natural gas infrastructure and shift. we don't need natural gas. we have to keep 80% of our carbon in the ground. we also have technologically advanced such a point that we can leapfrog over natural gas. we can hang glide to the future instead of carrying the natural gas as a bridge.

which leads me he to new york and why new york is such an important example of how to wage this coming struggle. in new york we had the promise of natural gas and this is during the natural gas boom. when there was very scant information on how bad natural gas was and how dangerous fracking was in the communities. we were getting information but we didn't have all the science in yet. while at the same time we understood that we need power. we want to live in a modern world. people don't want to shut off their lights or turn off the air conditioning and so on and so forth. they want to live moderately. we want to come up with a way forward that was equitable to people. so as health studies were coming in and showing that natural gas and fracking were not everything they were cracked up to be and dangerous we were proving we can

take this state to 100% energy and he adopted that and since then new york state is now leading the nation in the build up of solar win and water generation. we are moving faster than any state in the nation and we don't exactly have all the sun that you have in arizona by the way. or people have in florida but we're doing it. we're doing it because we created a space by saying we'll move to 100% renewable energy and that gave politicians a place to move and gave citizens a place to move and it gave a future that is bright. that has promise. the promise is jobs. that doesn't send our kids overseas to fight wars, energy wars and people are linking this

together. people think they have to turn off their lives. they will create more jobs and spread the wealth. >> we are going to take two questions. representer reese and miss schafer. >> thank you for your testimony. i wanted to follow up on what was said earlier and i know that earlier this week in ohio our chairman called in and this was an issue that kale up from those that attended on the issue of racial environmental justice so i guess my question to you as we heard about flint. we heard about low income communities and particularly african americans would get cancer or ms as my mother had ms and they just deal with it and they don't come together and say

what caused these things. do you think in our platform, i know both candidates are firm on the issue of environmental justice but should there be some mention and what is that to deal with racial and economic environmental justice? what would you recommend? because i think there's a disconnect in the urban areas and low income areas about what is environmental justice. they just deal with all the ailments that come from it? >> yeah. so in my travels there's people in plants and drilling in transportation of these fossil

fuels. it's been my aim to empower those people. i think they're putting it together. in los angeles you have hundreds of drilling wells happening in neighborhoods and they're informed and when you lift up their voices they do a good job of speaking to themselves. we have to create a system to rescue these people but these people, they want to fight for themselves too. but we don't give them the tools to do it. we push it off to big organizations. and it's a building around the

issues and because we can communicate through this beautiful tool called the internet. keep it open and free for all people. what i think is what we're speaking about is the economic opportunities by making this transition. i'll make some materials available to you but we'll have a $3.5 million gain in jobs by transitioning to 100% renewable energy. that's a net gain so any job lost in any other sector because of the transition will be gained many fold but, you know i think the more you can tie it to jobs,

opportunities, economic opportunity, and we're seeing an he enormous amount of people of color coming into that field and it's a great playing field and upward mobility and the fastest growing economic plain in the united states. it's where all the new wealth would be and so i think it's a two prong thing. offer the jobs so we understand our connection to the change and give them the tools to fight. >> thank you so much. i was just told by deborah that we're all upset that you're not here in person but call me crazy but what i don't quite understand is if we have the

answers and we're all on the same page and upset about the same issues, why isn't it fast enough? it seems as if we're speaking to you and chasing it. things are happening faster than we expected. i have a hope in florida. i don't see levels rising. and what you're talking about too why aren't we doing it. >> it's been politically as a system that most of our regulations have been built

around protecting. our military mite has been tied to it so we have a system that's very old and we're going to have to make people really uncomfortable. our leaders are going to have to be strong and they'll have to fight. it's literally creating a space where people become so uncomfortable that they have to move off the position they're in. there's so much fossil fuel money pouring into our political system and it's corruptive. it just simply is. so i think we just have to fight. our leaders have to take off the gloves and tell it like it is and be brutal.

when they march make the media take notice. >> thank you very much. thank you. >> an expert on energy policy and economics. specializing in the electric and gas industries. she has consulted to companies, governments, nonprofits and other organizations in energy markets as well as economic and environmental regulation strategy. >> thank you so much. >> it's great to be here. i'm not a movie star but i spend all my time on clean energy issues these days. i recently moved to colorado. i'm a rockies girl now after being in boston for 35 years. that's a big head change but

it's very nice to be in the west. we know that americans want clean, reliable and affordable energy. so the great news i think is that in the past -- well, certainly since the obama administration has come in we have been able to get all three of those things happening. i think that's driven by a combination of factors. one of them is the price pressure that natural gas has placed on coal which has tremendously driven coal out on the market and the carbon initiatives associated with that. and we just heard how strong sitcoming on and that is also contributing to this reliable, affordable and energy mix we've had and clearly dressing toxic emissions from power plants have been a tremendous effect there. let me just give you a couple of

the signs of progress that we have seen in the past few years and these are all me tricks that i hope i won't bore you too much but they are things we have done since the obama administration has come in, into washington. we are 12% down in terms of carbon dioxide emissions. we have had a threefold growth in wind generation. a 30 fold growth in solar power generation. those are tremendous. renewable energy and smart grid technologies on the wires. that enable integration of renewables. those together attacked $450 billion in the last few years. the renewable sectors with smart grid investments are the fastest growing energy related part of the job creation. so t lots of progress and all of

this is happened and they're lower than they were prior to the obama administration coming in and they had world class reliability. access to energy for n a tremendous way. part of this story also makes huge gains in energy efficient sy and that's also contributed to the story i just described. vehicle economy thanks to the administration and other representatives in washington decreased rapidly after being flat for two decades so that's a tremendous increase in the value proposition for americans who have saved billions of dollars associated with these investments in energy efficiency. today compared to 2008, americans get 13% more gross

domestic product out of their electricity dollars so we have seen a much better efficiency. thanks to the clean power plan. things like the fuel economy standards. slated to bring in historic reductions and use of gasoline. we continue to see this platform of progress going forward. so all of those things have helped to provide the united states with the credibility and the leverage that helped us see the historic deal in paris. so we had tremendous progress and i encourage them to recognize the gains that we had and fight together to defend against the push back we are seeing on fuel economy standards on methane emissions control

regulations. i encourage everyone around the table to work together to defend against that flank. and we are already seen in the united states and we have to do so in a way that assures affordable and reliable supply of the energy resources and products and services that americans demand and we have to do that in a way that assures that no one is left behind. to me, and i'm a principle pragmatist that means that we have to use all the tools we have available. as much as i personally would love it, we don't have a magic lever in this area to meet our clean energy and climate goals smart federal standard and appropriate signals to investors in markets and innovation.

personally i think it's very important to defend against backsliding on the climate process we have seen to date and to me that means we have a very strong commitment to ensuring that safely operating existing nuclear plants continue in the mix. nuclear plants today represent 2-thirds of the zero carbon emitting electricity in the country. we have already seen losses in vermont and other places around the country. another announced in the middle of the country. every time one of those plants retired in the real world that's being released with a fossil fuel generation. so prematuring retiring such plants creates a much bigger challenge than we have already gotten. i think that the federal government has so much to look forward to and to continue to do in working with states and

localities. we have heard today about the kinds of progress that those groups have made in this area and they continue to provide us with tremendous examples of the la brother toirs of democracy and they, with the support in washington can be the engines for change in this new energy economy. we need to increase federal investment in energy infrastructure and that includes electricity emission as well as mass transit and invest in research and development for zero carbon resources into the future and that would include seeing the direction of advanced nuclear and carbon capture an sequestration. democrats have so much to offer in terms of leadership on the issues and i really hope that we can keep the white house blue in this fall. too many republicans deny climate change or they doubt

americans ability to address these challenges that we have been hearing about and they ignore the impacts of fundamental targ fundamental market forces on the industries is that is seeing the shift to a cleaner economy in rapid fashion. democrats know american ingenuity and entrepreneurism is up to the task. we hope that we'll work together. thank you for your service. [ applause ] >> being a magic bullet. the platform that's going to be persuasive to the american people do you think that -- and if you can describe it for us, he me here, that there's a way for us to simultaneously commit

the democratic party to the ambitious goals that some of the prior witnesses have properly called us to grab on to. not just the changes that are there but much more ambitious even than those and at the same time, communicates so many workers and working families around the country that we're throwing them under the bus in the transition. there's a path to achieve both those goals and preserve the livelihoods of people that are working in the electricity and other branches of the economy today. >> i can't tell you that i heard every single word and i think i got the jest. and that goes to my point that we have to make tremendous progress on this you are general

issue of climate change. and a world in which energy is in the hands of the private sector in the united states. we need to make sure that we send signals to investors to make the changes that we're describing. and there is big progress and we still need the tool there is because there are a variety of jobs in the new economy an we need working people around the country. and i agreed with many things you said in your testimony. one area we'll have to agree to disagree is nuclear power and senator sanders has been a strong opponent of nuclear

power. and one of the main reasons is where do you store of nuclear waste? we still have not resolved that issue. there was -- i know that there was a situation with the indiana power nuclear plant in new york. which is 25 miles away from new york city where 10 million people live and there have been many errors found to have happened at that plant. one of the main question is where do you store the nuclear waste of our nuclear power facilities. >> it happens to be something that i have been looking at for 30 years and we have a continuing challenge and right

now around the country that is where we're storing it. that said, like senator sanders, for many, many years, i was opposed to nuclear power. look at my age. i was of a group where there was tremendous protests surrounding the nuclear plants. the carbon problem that we have globally is what changed my mind on this issue. and the nuclear waste that exists at the existing plants is existing already. and we have to figure out how to resolve it. science has moved to identify

much more safe in place storage. compared to when i first started 30 years ago but we need a permanent solution eventually. that said, premature retirement of safely operating nuclear plants will put us back so far on our climate goals. >> we're very pleased to be j n joined -- >> i feel like i'm the face of the climate change today. i went out for a run in the heat. i didn't appreciate what the heat would be like and took a tumble. so i am a little banged up. and this will heal.

thank you so much for joining us and thank you for all of your work. and it was something that i posed for a very, very long time but as i took on climate and the dangers of the climate that opposed to me that i couldn't pose a carbon free source of energy at this point in time as we transition and the base load specifically because that is something that is really challenging as we try and transition away from certain types of energy. how do we maintain base load while we bring in the new other carbon sources of energy. >> so right now the nuclear fleet of 99 reactors around the country as i said provides today just under 2-thirds of the

generation without carbon emissions at the plant. those plants tend to operate around the clock. and they operate around the clock. 90 to 95% reliability. when the plant goes out the next day all around the country and that's the thing that is the swing fuel. calculations i have done is in order to replace that base load amount of supply you have to come up with orders of magnitude and more investment in renewable energy just to replace it. renewable wind might have a 40% as opposed to 95% output for every piece that you put in the ground. solar is close to less than 20% so that means that you have to

have four to six to eight times as much investment in those in order to replace something going off line. we need to make forward progress so i would love to see us building a transition on these reactors that enables forward progress that we have already seen on cost reductions on renewables. but replacing on that scale is really hard in terms of backsliding. thank you so much for the honor. [ applause ] >> anthony rogers wright. mr. wright is the policy and organizing director and environmental action. he has taken part in a variety of progressive organizing campaigns for 8 years. he worked as a policy analyst and urban planner in san diego,

hos angelsless and denver. in addition to ensuring that projects complied with environmental statutes such as the national environmental policy act, clean air act, clean water act and emergency planning and community right to know act mr. rogers wright was also responsible for evaluating with executive order 12989 environmental justice. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for this community. it's my hope that you will head this calls from these speakers that travelled to offer you narratives about human's greatest advantage. global climate disruption or climate change. our planet and front line communities of color are looking to be a platform that has the need for radical change. while climate change effects all of us it does not effect us all

equally. as dr. ro bert bullard reminds us communities of color are hit first and worse by tim pacts of climate change. the response of our government is usually pass and last. in their work the wrong complexion for protection remind us that environmental and public health threats from natural and human made disasters are not distributed. healthy places and healthy people are highly correlated and they are the worst health and live in the most degrade and adverse environments. there's nowhere in the country experiencing this reality more profoundly than the fwufl south region of the united states and no industry that has this worse than the fossil fuel industry. it's imperative to call for off all shore grilling operations and specifically in the gulf of mexico as part of the party platform. right now they're considering five year leases that will allow big oil companies to access

designated areas in the arctic and the gulf. while there has been much discussion about the plan to the arctic and it's polar bear and cause for mainstream environmental groups there's been less attention to the plan to the kbufl coast with it's black and brown people. this despite the fact that of the 13 potential leases 10 are in the gulf and 10 in the arctic. this further proves that the gulf is one of if not the preferred sacrifice zone of the united states of america and proves why we must as a global community cease thinking about climate change as a natural phenomenon. it's also a system of oppression that forms the intersection of racial, economic, and ethnic injustice. you cannot address climate disruption without addressing disruption to all forms of justice. the gulf coast includes cancer alley, sinking land, denial of

sovereign tribal nations and tribal lands. it's also the home to the first u.s. climate migrants who have lost 98% of their land to the gulf waters due largely to oil and gas drilling operations and the gulf coast is still one of the poorest regions in the country. these are all the availables that contribute to climate changes in the gulf and communities nationwide including native communities. now while i applaud many of mr. obama and the democrats efforts to address climate change it's still important to distinguish between acknowledging on climate change and acting on climate change and this was on full display last career during the summit in paris. and we believed it will important to be giving global

attention and residents of the gulf coast. while they're offering their narrative to the world, back home the president and lifting the crude oil export ban and in place since the 1970s. and pleas by video by democratic senators and must stand to no avail. and the president and democrats calls to address climate change we knew would lead to more offshore drilling than the gulf of mexico. so here's a truth i must share with all of you. climate denial is not limited to gop boogie men because by allowing it to be lifted democrats too are denying the signs of climate change. we must keep 80% of remaining fossil fuel deposits from the ground and our friends inform us that the five year offshore

programs to over 50 year which is is the equivalent of cars on the road over the next period. and justice was denied and ignorance prevailed and made to feel that society is an organized and neither persons or property will be safe and this is why we're see sog many take to direct action risking their freedom safety and their lives to disrupt the fossil fuels as douglas and has allies used to abollish slavery. climate change pillaged time from all of us including our time to act. there's no time for half measures or proclamations or policies derived. it rekwiers radical action. the gulf coast cannot afford another blowout.

another oil spill and the people will no longer allow themselves to be captive to injustice that robs them of clean air, land, economic elasticity. until we see it in the fwufl and the arctic the words of mr. douglas will be vindicated as communities and nations and the entire planet will be of safety. i'll lead you for these truths as we head into the season. according to a poll, 68% of voters of color favor immediate action to address climate change and a survey conducted by the strategy group and informed us that 85% have global commitments to act on lie mat. also predicted that climate change will be a major issue for our nation's 17.8 million black voters in the 2016 election. and 82% after latino and reduce

carbon emissions. no democratic candidate for the presidency in 1964 with lyndon b. johnson is 39%. the dnc and the democrats are totally dependent on the participation of people of color for success. the dnc must prove hah the health and health of our communities are as important as our votes. it will be an essential step. there's only one choice moving forward. offshore drilling must be replaced by offshore wind. a just transition to a fossil free future. they can no longer use the excuse that energy production is too expensive. even bloomberg news not a progressive bashing of publications concluded that the cost of wind and solar are falling too quickly to dominate the global sale. the only thing keeping us from a

revolutionary and just transition of fossil fuels. a line in the sand has been drawn and i call on the dnc to exercise political valor. write a chapter in u.s. history. write a chapter in world history and include a call for all offshore drilling in the united states as part of the party platform. i welcome your questions. >> thank you very much. >> thank you so much. one of the two or three or high points and that was good fun and that's where i wanted to take you for a moment. you talked about the demographic realities for the party as we're sort of imagining the democratic party of the future can you talk a little bit about your sense of young people and their relation to these issues and maybe help

us think beyond just novembers election, what do we need to have in mind if we're going to be a party that 5, 10, or 15 years from now is competitive. >> absolutely. it was great to see you in paris and thank you for addressing the students. i do think we have seen it this primary season between younger voters of color and older voters of color and i'm turning 40 next week so that's starting to mean something new to me. that said there is a heightened amount of urgency that we're seeing from younger people. they don't like the idea that they're going to be potentially inheriting an uninhabitable planet. we see it in how they vote and disrut and through direct action as i mentioned. as we're moving forward we also have to think about down ballot

elections and i would specifically talk about the senate in this case. in his latest book, steve phillips brown is the new white discussed how a lack of investment in the communities of color largely lead to the loss of senate and house seats in 2010 and 2014. so i would behoove the democratic party to not also treat red states as sacrifice zones because of voting patterns. invest in these communities and you will find that these communities are very, very keen on climate change and that's really important because sister peggy was asked about the civil rights act and unfortunately in -- we won't call it a landmark supreme court decision but the supreme court increased the burden to use the civil rights act so high that it's virtually impossible for especially front line underfunded communities of color to bring suit against the fossil fuel corporations and in the presence of sister deborah here

that that lack of recognition here procolludes them from getting justice from bp and many people think that is politically motivated because had they -- if they were federally recognized they could tell bp they could not drill on their land. and we're seeing the same program happening in seattle washington and native communities all across the country. >> thank you so very much. you have given us a major challenge in terms of the ways in which the democratic party at times itself has been come police sit with some of the things we're concerned about. it reminds me of my beloved colleagues in princeton. they talk about the value gap and practices of inequality. even when we talk about ecological prices and precious life. brother or sister on the

reservation or in the hood has less value than that of a precious white brother or sister in the suburb. so the challenge is twofold. can we seriously deal with impending ecological crisis without there being some diminishment in corporate power and corporate influence on government. we come over an over again in this issue. we don't have the political will. the people want it. the people want it. well, something is standing in the way. there's major impetments here. is it corporate power and corporate greed in which those in the corporate greed are able to deal when they're not as greedy but when they are greedy profit, profit, profit rather than public life, public life, public life and a smaller version of that question is can we deal with crisis and at the same time support ttp? >> thank you so much for the question.

i would be remiss if i didn't say that my mother had my education to enforce your teachings andly also be enforcing your teachings and his education so thank you so much. i want to, you know, you were talking about corporate influence and it doesn't just have to do with our politicians because i mention this transition of urgency. it has to do with how we're fed information and our major news sources are controlled by five or six corporations and for instance we have been talking about flint, flint, flint. we were here. and 7 gallons of water today. we don't talk about it. it's just not a part of our consciousness. that might have something to do with corporations. i think this is very, very important. in my eyes or my view it's all

about the expansion. and you look at the countries involved specifically japan which is one of the largest quarters in the world and that with the natural gas act of 1990 or '92 which compels the united states to fast track national gas exports and you can see where we're going with this equation. i do not believe that you can act on climate while promoting free trade agreement which is are engines and contributors to emissions of fossil fuels and the distraction and use of fossil fuels. and over the safety of them. >> we're about a half an hour behind and it becomes very unfair to the people that come

at the end because they will have no time to testify and no questions. so just want to make that answers brief and the questions brief, please. >> great. i'll be brief in my question. i really want to thank you for your focus on the environmental concerns and how this issue is which is really vital and i also noted your criticisms of president ball balm and i want to ask you what are attitudes of african americans toward president obama's environmental record. >> i would say that environmental justice circles, you'll find some discrepancy and specifically on the one hand,

you know, this free trade agreement could lead or will lead to more fracking an someone else is going to talk more to that but we also know that fracking impacts communities of color including native communities so i think that they would maybe take some with a policy like that and while we were in paris, people like bill an miss brown herself fighting for a global climate policy while this is going on back home watching unfortunately democrats and being lifted and was also very, very disappointing. we always want more of our politicians and of course we want more from our presidents and that's why this election is so important. and we're going to be asking for more. an imple mental policies and all

the approach which the president previously adopted is not going to work to overt global climate catstrophe. >> i want to thank you for bringing this into the conversation and it's hugely important and clearly communities of color and the modern industrial like and that's simply unacceptable and i want to thank you for the work you do and they're a very, very important part of building the movement to address climate change and i beg to differ with you there are many things we can point to and the next president to your point will need a congress. there's things you can do and we should make sure that happens.

and we need a differ congress and i think that your discussion about the down ballot is particularly important. we cannot continue to collect climate deniers to the senate. this is a long way of saying thank you very much for what you're doing and i encourage you to keep up the good work. >> thank you so much and thank you everyone for this tun. thank you. >> i probably shouldn't say this, i'll get slammed but it begs the question that if al gore had won the election way back, we wouldn't be behind the 8 ball. that's my comment. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> sonja. a director of government affairs

for the building and served as the deputy of government affairs. and ramirez served for over 60 years as government relations representative and worked as the federations chief lobbiest and has been a resource to working families in the latino community and serving as community advocate and civil servant and government affairs representative. >> it's an honor to discuss our future and combatting climate change and good paying jobs throughout the country. comprised of 14 national and

international unions representing three million craft skilled professionals in the united states and canada. on behalf of our members we welcome the way to describe our volume based business model in our world class training capacity plays a role in the construction and maintenance of america's production and delivery infrastructure. and 50% of our membership in the united states and canada is employed in energy related industries. and the most highly trained and crafted work force found anywhere in the world and the tune of roughly $1 million annually. a nationwide network of 1,600 local joint nations.

we are also successful of working with community organizations and partners to hef raj public and private investment to create structured career training opportunities for historically underserved communities such as women, communities of color and veterans. through these efforts and others we boast 100 apprenticeship readiness programs which prepare applicants for the challenge of being a union apprentice in the construction industry. it means that in right to work states like south dakota specialized trades members working on energy projects averaged $35 an hour and workers are able to provide for their families while receiving union provided health care and pension benefits. they're committed to building a 21st century energy system that provides affordable and reliable energy for american families and businesses and creates good

paying middle class jobs and meets the climate challenge before us. that's keeping all options of reducing emissions on the table. nuclear power provides 60% of all zero carbon in the united states and supports tens of thousands of union jobs. building trades members are leading the charge and improving efficiency in municipal buildings schools and hospitals. and patients by cutting energy waste. it's the lowest levels in more than 20 years. and health gains by cutting local air pollution all by lowering energy cost to consumers. we strongly support the growth of renewable energy and want to ensure that we're creating the kind of high road jobs that can

he support a middle class family in the process. the kind of jobs our members currently enjoy in the nuclear oil and gas and coal industries. a common sense partnership between labor, industry and government can make that possible. through the engagement of state and local governments are california buildings trade council has ensured that utility scale renewable projects and highly skilled women and men through direct contractor engagement california buildings trades union and incumbent in unemployed workers are retained all to reap the benefits of the economic growth and job creation. these jobs in the energy sector put a noor underneath the middle class. through prevailing wage and

project labor agreements we can guarentee our members rights are protected. the local community concerns are addressed and the safest most highly trained work force in the world is able to build a new generation on time and under budget. we support an energy policy in which the commitment to fwroe our economy and rebuild our middle class and protect our environment all go hand in hand. that means raising working standards. fostering common sense reforms and unlocking the trillions of dollars sitting on sidelines to build the energy infrastructure and it means taking advantage of all options. and to deliver affordable and reliable energy while reducing emissions and meeting the

climate challenges. and over middle class jobs and practical shugss and stop taking options off the table. and leaves this world a better place for our children and our grandchildren an generations to follow. thank you very much. >> any questions? >> yes. [ inaudible ] >> incredibly well versed in what they did and they were great so thank you for all the training. >> thank you. michael is the founder and

president of clean line energy. he started the company to help bring about thousands of megawatts of new renewable energy and founding clean line and wind energy from a two man company to a national leader in u.s. wind industry. buy wroe mass and wind energy projects in central america and global and he is a board member of the american wind energy association. thank you. >> thank you very much. it's an honor to be here. my mom would be very proud. i became a democrat when we -- shortly after we moved here from ireland when i was a small child because my mom wanted to vote against richard nixon so we all

became citizens. i'd like to talk a little bit about the state of play in wind today and where we are and where we think we can get to and some of the challenges that the industry faces as we tackle the challenges that have been outlined today. so to start with, the tax incentives we had for the last 20 years paid off. wind is now the cheapest source of new power in the united states. costs have come down until 2-thirds in the last six or seven years alone and because wind power is so cheap we're saving consumers billions of dollars a year. on the jobs front, there are about 100,000 people working in the wind industry today. those numbers will continue to grow. in fact, the labor department says that today's fastest

growing job description is wind turbine technician and these are jobs that paid well. they almost always carry health benefits because it's a very competitive market and companies work very hard to hang on to the wind techs that they train so it's a fast growing field. most of the wind projects built around the country are built in rural areas and they create an extra crop for farmers and ranchers and it's happening. so we have talked about the different percentages that we can get to around the country. i live in houston, texas. on a good day in texas we get 40 to 50% of our electric power from wind energy. and other states have seen similar levels of penetration. grid operators have now become

accustomed to incorporating a variable resource like wind into the grid and they're getting very good at it. in terms of environmental benefits, the wind projects that we have online today, power the equivalent of 20 million households and that's like taking 28 million cards on the road. because of what we have seen over the last few years on the wind tax incentives we have seen in sourcing of manufacturing. there's over 500 million manufacturing operations for wind in the u.s. and these are job and operations that are likely to stay here because wind turbines are all very large machines and very difficult to transport so it's real natural to make them right here in the u.s. in terms of our priorities and years to come from the public

policy side we have four prioriti priorities. one is a level playing field. an tax incentives for wind will be reduced and over that period of time, at the end of that period of time we hope to see policies in place that would provide us with the same sorts of benefits that polluting sources of energy currently receive. workable permits and this is always a tough challenge for our industry because we're working on projects and we have to strike a balance between different interests and we need processes that have time lines and take into account all of the variables. and that's what our company does. and go from the parts of the country to the coast. these are very complex projects that take a great deal of time. many years to put together and a stable but effective permitting

environment is absolutely the key to getting to the renewable energy goals articulated today and then finally power markets. if we can carey crate markets that effectively tap into the ability of wind and solar to compete in these markets we can see a lot more electricity in some of the areas of the country we see the greatest penetration of new renewables it's areas where you have markets that allow new entrants to participate. thank you and happy to take your questions. >> questions. >> do you have a sense of what that may be?

>> broadly speaking what that will get us is that will address the issue that i mention before and we can have a level playing field so that we are producing electricity that does not pollute. if those folks that do pollute pay the cost of the pollution it will help us compete much more effectively.