that you saw up on the film, the impact of relying on incarceration, the impact on families and individuals and communities. it absolutely neglected that. it neglected the evidence that we know that exists about the kinds of good policies that can actually put people on the road to success that can actually deliver public safety for us, and that can actually be the spine for good policy. so democracy has work to do here in a different way now. we have a job to do over the next decades to turn back what we have built, and so that's why it's good that all of you are in this room and you will go about your work focusing not only on training and education and making sure that programs, the quality programs are, find their

way back into prison and into the re-entry sphere but you're also going to have to do something else beyond just being good professionals. you need to vote in local elections for the das who are running and ask them what they are running on. what is it that you expect these guardians of our justice system to be able to deliver to you. is it more convictions? is it longer sentences for people or is it making better choices about the discretion they have as to who they want to send to the big house. you need to educate yourselves and you need to educate those who are around you about this system of incarceration that we have built for 40 years. you need to talk to your children about it. you need to show people that video, and the father's day video. you need to talk to friends and spouses. you need to go watch ava devarnay's film the 13th and have discussion groups. if you have book groups, have a

movie group. it is so important for all of us to get engaged, to make sure the kind of neglect that led us to where we are now is not going to exist anymore. and in fact, being informed and engaged is the thing that's going to make the difference in the broad complex of policy that we have to turn around. so we have a lot of hard work to do. we need everyone. we need good policy, but most of all, we need inspired and tireless citizens like yourselves. thank you very much for being here. it was a pleasure to talk to you. [ applause ] c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 199 c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. more from this conference on inmate job training and

education. former inmates and analysts talk about academic counseling, mentoring, barriers associated with reentry into society, and the importance of connecting the criminal justice system with other government agencies. >> good afternoon, everyone. all right. so we want to transition to our second panel where we're going to be focused on the topic of reentry. we've had a wonderful afternoon so far together with nick turner setting the stage and giving us framework. we have an opportunity, moment of opportunity to address justice reforms, address intersections of racial equity and most importantly to think about what are the strategies and policy solutions we need to ensure that individuals who are formerly incarcerated, currently have what they need to thrive and can recognize their full

potential. transitioning into topic of reentry. you've heard many stats already from our opening speaker and our first panel. many face the barriers of collateral consequences of mass incarceration. over 40,000 barriers documented by bar association that rely gates to second class citizenship, employment, education, housing, loan borrowing, licensing. those are critical areas to be able to thrive economically and support your family and contribute to your communities. we also know that education and training matters while behind the walls. we talked about that research, the importance of it, the return

on investment. but we also know we need to think about how those things that happen while in prison translate and is coordinated when folks are returning home. we started this day off by seeing a video of young people and children and how incarceration impacts families. as we enter into this next panel, before i introduce the panel, let's keep that in mind, this whole work i'm talking about is really about not just individuals but about families and about communities. so i'm really pleased today to be able to brow our panel. first we have vivian nixon. vivian, all the information is up there in your pack either. she's executive director of college and community fellowship a nonprofit organization that

helps women achieve education, formally incarcerated. next we have terry fazio director of education at the pennsylvania department of directions and she is responsible for educational programming across 26 state correctional institutions in the state. and we have will heaton, director for center for employment opportunities, a nonprofit organization that offers comprehensive employment services exclusively for people with criminal records. and last but not least we have deanna hoskins, policy adviser for reentry and bureau justice division. second chance portfolio which we heard a lot about in the last panel and support for the documents were federal interagency reentry council. join me in welcoming our panel.

's we'll leave a little time for questions from you all before we end our session. as always, please tweet out questions, aha moments, anything you want to reimp size to reconnecting justice. so i'll start off with you, terry. at the state level, i mentioned having the need for strong continuum for education and training while incarcerated while as well as making sure those opportunities are coordinated upon reentry. so in pennsylvania your department has received an improved reentry education grant from the department of education which you're using to focus on career pathways programs. can you talk a little about how that work is going and what do

you see as good things happening and aha moments. >> we at the department recognizes it is important for us to take our inmates and provide them with marketable skills to use on their release. these marketable skills will help them to obtain employment fwu we don't just mean any job. we want them to gain a life sustaining employment where they can help support their families, have some benefits and things when they are released. our focus on this grant is working with many of the workforce investment boards in pennsylvania. we have a lot of employers working with our vocational advisory teams. we have regional advisory meetings and we're working with employers to tell us what jobs are available, what jobs are out there and what certifications they are actually looking for. our goal with this grant is to take our vocational programs and tweet the certifications we are offering so they are matching up

what's out there. many of the employers right now are telling us they actually have more jobs available than they have applicants to fill them. we have the workforce. we just need to make sure they have the correct certifications and skills upon reentry. many of these employers are also willing and able to look at hiring ex offenders and reentrants as we are now calling them as part of their workforce. the next year and two years of our grant are going to be focused on taking our curriculum, textbooks and certification programs and updating them and bringing them into the type of work that these employees will see and actually do when they are in the field. many programs are old, equipment is old and that's not what's being used in the field. this helps us move continuum over so they are practicing and using equipment they will be

using in the field. >> great. build on that with you, vivian, specifically talk about post secondary opportunities. we talked about a lot in the first panel about post secondary and college. so you know connectioning that to the workforce pieces. talk about your work while the women are inside cars rated and returning home. >> thank you. first, thank you for inviting me to this wonderful event. i'm really happy to be here with so many colleagues i've worked with throughout the years. we believe in a continuum of services, so when you think about the expansion of opportunity that is now occurring through the second chance pell initiative, we know there are going to be more people coming out of prison with some exposure to college. it is very unlikely all those people will have earned degrees on the inside. the work we do at college and community fellowship is being

ever more important because what we do is create a bridge from post secondary opportunities while inside cars rated and make sure they are able to connect to similar opportunities in the community. many things have to. so second chance mentoring staff going into women's colleges and talking to them about opportunities. those who had college while incarcerated or those close to getting a high school equivalen equivalency. when they come out there's a pathway from what we call our community sisters program, which is a program who works with people who are not quite ready to enroll in college yet because they have some other housekeeping issues they have to take care of upon release, finding housing. many do need to work part-time,

getting reunified with children, and all the other stipulations that are demanded of them if they are on parole. once they move through that phase, they go into a phase we call future fellows. that is the phase during which we help them apply for financial aid, find the right school, help them fill out the application, pay for the applications, help them find other scholarships. we provide various incentives to people so if a person doesn't have a laptop, we'll get them a laptop. if they need books for a semester, we pay for books. next phase is fellows phase. that's for people who successfully completed 12 credits at 2.5 gaap or higher. they get a little bit more in sent i was in terms of computers or cash scholarships.

we have annual scholarships for those most improved in their academic pursuits to the person with most debts in their academic pursuits, most community involved. we give away about 10 scholarships a year in our graduation event. the glue that holds. we also have graduate program. that's called college beyond. many of our students come through the pathway from community sisters up through fellowship and to graduate school. the glue that holds our work together is really that it's not -- it's not just another door you knock on to get another scholarship." it's not just a form you fill out. it's academic tutor, networking, life skills workshops people take at their will depending on the topic plus community meetings that are mandatory where the community meeting is not always someone standing in

front of the room giving information to our participants but us helping our participants facilitate each other's progress. share information along the way. we have people that really learned how to? >> gate the housing system really well in new york city. that's not an easy thing to do. why not have that student teach other tupts how to do that. the same with child care and others they are involved in. we believe in building social capital, financial capability. every student gets financial capability training. we do home ownership because for us reentry is not the goal. reentry is a specific point in time where people get stabilized. lifelong sustained civic engagement and a life one can enjoy and be proud of and pass that on to their children and to

their communities. i was grateful nick mentioned two gen buzz. it is educational when you provide education to a parent. the last thing i say because i'm probably going on because i can go on, the last thing i'll sa say -- i forget the last thing. >> we can -- >> no, i just remembered, career enhancement program. many telling us on their way to getting a college degree, they are working in a job. it's not at a level that's really economically sufficient to live in new york city but if they get this one certification they can get a promotion while they are going to school. so we've partnered with one of our funders and we're paying for city university of new york

certificates in both health related fields and in business fields, so that's giving our students a boost up in the world of work. >> that was excellent. talking about what you do building social capital, a lot of the work we do in our work is really connecting how you think about the whole families, parents, children, young people and how do you provide the supports they need. in a program added way, supporting programs but also what are the policy solutions that are needed to make sure what vivian discussed and talked about her program can find. i'll turn it over to you, will. talk about ceo you do a comprehensive model as well knowing that reentry is a point in time, not the goal. folks returning home are dealing with a whole host of issue beyond getting a job and

training. talk about your program. what are some of the public policies that will make it better for your program to thrive and for the people going through your program to achieve their goals. >> certainly. i just want to reiterate my thanks as well. it's a privilege to be here today just with all the speakers. really quickly a little background about centers for employment opportunities or ceo. we're a national nonprofit that was actually created as a demonstration project within vera so we have a lot to thank for that institution. we continue to work with them very closely. but we connect with folks coming home within the first three months of their release, usually. there's a lot of research out there that says those are some of the most vulnerable moments in that re-entry as people come home. what we do is we are very, very focused on when they come to our organization, they are enrolled into a one-week life skills education course that focuses on

a number of things. upon graduation from that week, we hire them on as our own employees and immediately provide them with employment through social enterprise model where we provide transitional work crews via service contracts that we have with a lot of government agencies mainly at the state or local level. what that work environment is able to do is it's definitely about the work itself but it's a very constructive pro-social environment that allows people to start preparing for what they need to be able to cope with when they transition into an unsubsidized job. three to four days a week, seven to eight hours a day, they are working with fellow crew members and there's a ceo staff member that's working alongside with them. at the end of each day, they're provided with one-on-one feedback. what went well? what didn't go well? what was causing difficulty?

what's going on at home that may have affected your performance on the job site today. then we also pay them every day. i think one thing that a lot of times people not familiar with this work don't appreciate is, you know, somebody -- it can be very, very hard to manage your finances. and to have to wait two weeks or a month, you know, for us in terms of managing that in finances is very, very difficult. so being able to provide a little bit of income on a daily basis is something that, again, helps alleviate the stress that so many of these individuals are coping with. then, one additional day a week, they come into our office where they have a job coach. they are working on building a resume, practicing their interview skills, how to talk about a felony conviction in an interview. for a lot of individuals as well, they are terrified and, i mean i tell everybody all the

time, think back to when you were, you know, in grade school or high school and walking to the first job interview and never done it before. what was running through your mind? that's what every single one of these individuals is dealing with. after they go through that phase of the program, what we are really, really focused on is not placing somebody in a job, but how we help them stay connected to that job over the long term and use it as a bridge to a much more fulfilling life where they have a much more opportunity ahead of them for a career growth. so for the next year, once we placed them into a full-time job in the local community, they have a retention specialist that we call that works with them over the course of the next year to navigate the array of barriers that all of these individuals have to cope with, whether it's housing, transportation, child care. i mean, you name it. health care. but what all that is, it's focused on helping them create a

more stable life where they can focus on succeeding in that job. another thing i say to people is think about the fact that if each of us have to go into work at 5:00, 6:00, we walk out, we didn't know we were going to sleep. how focused are you going to be on your job when you don't know where you are going to lay your head that night? that's a big deal. so that's what we are focused on. what we are trying to incorporate into that, more and more now, is vocational training and skills. the shorter term stackable skills that are aligned with what the labor market demands are in the local communities where we run our program. for most of the individuals with whom we are working, they have the equivalent of seventh and eighth grade education. they have multiple felony convictions. they are definitely they want to get to that college education, post secondary education but they are not ready at that particular moment.

so to kind of transition over to some of the policy changes that really -- >> give us one or two headlines. >> definitely. i would say what fred referenced earlier is the number of occupational licensing barriers that economist, i mean it's something close to like on average every state has 150 of these and some well over 200 or 300. there's story after story of individuals who have come through our program where they are motivated, you know, beyond belief in terms of wanting to get back into the workforce and they just run into these walls where you can't even become a barber. it's like what does your felony conviction have to do with that? the second thing is take a look at some of the way our current funding programs at the federal and state level could be much more effective in directing resources towards formerly incarcerated individuals or just individuals with previous convictions.

i'll pause there but definitely more to say. >> lots more to say. there's a lot of connections between what you're talking about and the work terry is involved in in pennsylvania thinking about educational and career pathways for folks not necessarily ready to jump into a more traditional college environment. so turn it over to you, deanna. you are at the federal level but have deep experience doing much of this work locally in cincinnati. talk to us a little bit about what do you see for opportunity at the federal level in funding and policy. you're leading in helping to lead the interagency group that's focused on this. what would you say are some of the big opportunities, you know, building from what nick said, this is a moment in time? >> working on a federal level with bureau of justice assistance, number one, comes from community. you have these expectations and you get to the federal level and you see where the levers are. and one of the benefits, i think, is the federal re-entry

intra-agency council. that is all the federal departments coming together to look at the policies that are impeding their organization. so, of course, the department of education, department of labor, usda, small business association. where each individual agency has taken a look to say how can our agency contribute to some of the things to increase the probability of individuals being successful. opportunities that i'm finding overseeing the second chance portfolio is the solicitations are a lot of times focused toward correctional facilities behind the wall. how do we change our solicitations to have greater impact from continuity of care of a hand from behind the wall to outside the wall? so one of the opportunities we are taking advantage of in 2017 is strategically writing what we want correctional facilities to do, no longer opening it up to tell us how we could do the

recidivism reduction. still have the plan but these are some of the elements we want to see in place. we want to see people leave prison with a state id. we want to see people leave the roll of medicaid. if you're a medicaid eligible state. there's a waiver for food stamp eligibility. we want people enrolled in food stamps when they leave prison and not have to wait and be hungry for 30 days on the outside. there's another rule where individuals who get social security disability. you could be eligible and approved 90 days before release. we need to implement those. using the grant funding opportunities to be able to impact some of that change that we want to see that actually doesn't cost to do is actually clasheration and having states replicate what the federal government is doing as well. >> excellent, excellent. a lot of what we heard in the first panel and what we know to be true, we are focused on education and training, the housing issue, food issue and so forth is a huge barrier to becoming stable at your point in time of re-entry.

so leveraging at the discretionary level and at the federal level is very important. i want to turn -- we talked about this in the last panel and of course class work is about lifting folks out of poverty, by also making sure we have an explicit racial justice equity lens. so we'll start with you, vivian. when we talk about universal policies, sometimes we miss the importance of drilling down and talking about specific individuals, especially folks of color. so you are working with women who -- african american and latino women who are disproportionately living in poverty, who have increased consequences of criminal records. so how does the intersection of race and gender play into your work and how do you see it affecting families and communities?

>> how much time do i have? >> well, we agreed on two to three minutes. >> so i just for context about how i look at this issue, these are hard conversations to have. having conversations about race in america is hard because on the one hand we have done so much. we have made so much progress. we have so much more inclusion. but in many ways we are still a very segregated society. we are segregated by neighborhoods. sunday morning is the most segregated hour of the week. despite the progress we made, i think there's a way that we have been conditioned to view what's expected of people of color. so just remember, people of color are historically -- their

role in this country was to provide a low cost workforce. over the years, that has taken different forms, right? from slavery all the way through reconstruction and through industrialization, which, when that phased out caused a problem, a big gap in low wage employment for the population which fed into ghettos and prisons. we still talk about people coast guard out of prison largely because they are people of color in terms of what we need for them to do is work. everybody making that connection? it impacts the way we do work because we teach women not only to refocus their value as human beings from their own center,

not from what is expected of them from our society. one of the first questions we women that come to us is before you got in trouble, however you got in trouble, whether you were wrongfully convicted or not, before that happened, what did you want for yourself? not here's the program and here's what you have to learn how to do. it's what do you want. what do you want to do? what does a fulfilling life look like to you? that traditionally has not been the way we have dealt with people of color in this country. we also believe in political engagement. we have a whole advocacy component to our work. we engage our students to work to restore the real act. we engaged our students to get the state university of new york to take the question of of their admissions application. that is a very empowering experience. now you have women of color learn, hey, i can actually impact what happens to me and my family. i can be engaged in a way that

i'm not just fighting for my every day life on the street but i am fighting for justice for all of my people. that's a hugely empowering framework to do this type of work. >> okay. all right. now you set us off on that question, i want to turn to you, because i know ceo's framework is empowered in communities and you're lifting up your policies through there, but it is also in line to what vivian was saying. >> definitely. i think there's two points i would like to inject into this conversation. i mean, one, i joined ceo in january. my position didn't exist before then. they definitely engaged in the policy arena at different times, but when the board of directors approved a new five-year plan at the end of last year, they created this position because while ceo will always remain a direct services organization and working within communities, regardless of how much we grow

and all the other nonprofits that work in the same space that we do could grow, our ability to actually change this problem and just eradicate it is limited. we can't reach everybody, and there's going to need to be significant policy shifts to -- on a huge level to really reverse all of what -- a lot of what vivian has been talking about. that's really where a lot of what i do now is thinking about how do we use ceos program as a platform to better inform more effective policy change and systems change at the federal, state, local level. and i think where i spent a lot of time working with government officials and in looking at how the workforce system can be much more effective, i think pennsylvania is a great example of when they developed their state plan, they had agency heads from department of labor, department of human services,

and department of corrections was there at the table. one of the biggest things that's allowed us to be more effective and grow within that state is the state actually required local workforce boards to use 5% to 10% of funding to run transitional jobs programs. it's proven transitional jobs programs can be a bridge to get people connected into the work force. then, that's just the starting point. it can be how they continue to build from there. but, that took leadership. but, you know, i think the other thing that really, you know, just to kind of speak more to what vivian is saying here, you know, a big reason that i came to ceo and have been involved in this work is this coming february will be ten years since i was convicted of a felony. when i sit down and talk about my trajectory to that plea hearing and what has happened in the ten years since then

compared with so many of the participants we work with and even a few days ago in chicago when i was talking to somebody that's in a similar re-entry program to what we do, their paths are so different than what i experienced in so many ways. a lot of that is because of the fact i was blessed to be born in a different zip code. i could go on from there. but, you know, somebody, i have heard this on a couple occasions and somebody said it again a few days ago in chicago, where i was. you are almost better off being guilty and rich than innocent and poor in this country. i mean, we have to do something about that. it's not -- i mean it's an obligation that every one of us should wake up every day determined to fix. so my own personal story, and there's many others out there, but it's that difference in what those journeys are.

it's not what we want this country to be about. >> thank you, will, for sharing your story. we have the data to show if you go in this door and you are a person of color, you get this treatment. you go in this door and you are not and you're benefiting from white privilege, you get a different opportunity. we all need to work together. i want to turn to you, terry, and talk about intersectionality in a different way. i know your work, much of your re-entry work talks about young adults and how important it is to focus on young adults, especially communities of young people of color to make sure they are on the right career path as they are coming home as well. >> in pennsylvania, we have a very large youth offender population within our adult institutions. ten of our institutions are designated for those that are under 21 but tried as adults and convicted as adults. in these institutions, all of our staff members are certified

within the department of ed and we offer all types of education from that beginning abe level and ell, esl, up through any of these vocational training programs once they have reached their goal of either a ged, or in pennsylvania we have a secondary diploma program. we worked with the department of education and we work with the individuals. we get their transcripts from school, the high school where they have been. a lot of programs are certified with the department of ed and we do a combination of those they earned plus ours and get them a commonwealth secondary diploma program. this diploma is recognized within pennsylvania now by many of the employers as being the equivalent of a high school diploma or ged, so it is important for these youth to get that piece of credential first. we work a lot with the education guidance counselors and we're looking at different career

aptitude tests to form pathways for them. find out what they want to do with with their lives much like vivian is saying, not we are telling them what they have to do with their lives, but what they want to do and getting them into the correct vocational programming, training. we are working and using a little bit of the second chance pell grant. we are introducing back into our systems some of the post secondary courses. this is giving them a taste of what it would be like to do some of these classes on the outside. we've also traditionally in pennsylvania not transferred inmates from institution to institution for different programs, and we are looking at pulling that back and tweaking that a little bit so when somebody does attain their high school diploma or ged, we give them that aptitude test. we find a vocational program that's not in the prison they're in, stwaerting -- starting to

transfer them for vocational programming to get them what they need when they are out there. >> thanks, terry. i'll turn it over to you now to talk about how can we, you know, tap into how the federal government can be more intentional about applying rational equity lens, thinking about gender and also thinking about the important age and developmental needs that terry mentioned, given that they have so many of their incarcerated population as youthful young people serving adult sentences. >> first i want to say thank you for acknowledging that because a lot of times even on the federal level with our grant funding we create policies or funding opportunities that's as if everybody on a playing field is equal. we are not deliberately seeing youthful offenders between the ages of 18 to 24, here are funding to help support what those individual needs are of

those individuals in that age group. or either saying that communities that are black and brown communities are having a greater impact and these are the things that are lacking that put them at a deficit before going into the prison system let alone coming out. so a lot of times, if we create our solicitations or policies as if everyone is starting at the same starting point, we are going to keep coming to this place of having to readjust. until we get very courageous and very deliberate about saying here are specific funding opportunities or here are specific things that need to assist this population so they can have equity in education, they can have equity in the job market -- but i have to say through this leadership we're getting there. we have to move a little harder. i think innovation, visionary, having individuals at the table

who have the courage to say, you know, we are doing this, we are doing some great work, but now it's time to be deliberate to have a greater impact in what we are doing. basically, the taxpayers are getting a bang for the dollar. we are supposed to be good stewards of money. again, in my position, just taking it a little step further to say how do we help youthful offenders. how do we help individuals of black and brown communities? how do we help women? because a lot of times we still do a cookie cutter approach, even from a policy level. >> that's a really good point. i'm going to turn it over to an open question before audience questions. you know, a lot of people talk about there's a rising tide. lift all boats, right? universal policies work for targeted populations. we all grapple with that. what i'm hearing from all of you here is, that's not the case and we really have to think about, you know, placing the -- how do

we support investments and policies that support social capital first and really communities grappling with all of these issues, but ensuring that state and federal investments and policies are nested around all of that. so, i'm going to turn it over to an opening question from everyone. so we talked about challenges. we have already hit on solutions. because this is a solutions center crowd here and we have talked about some of the silos. so, if each of you could leave us with one, maybe two changes that will bolster a more collaborative or comprehensive solutions that will improve the re-entry point in time of education and employment outcomes. >> yeah. i will be very brief. so, you know, you mentioned the

way we think about the rising tide lifting all boats except the boats that have holes in them, right? so, i think one of the things we can do is find out where the holes are and plug them and understand the interconnectedness with criminal justice policy, health policy, education policy, housing policy all of these labor force policies. these are all very interconnected. the federal reentry council was a brilliant idea because it helps those different components talk to each other. the one thing that i would like to see done at the federal level is for there to be more flexibility in the solicitations for innovation, for things that are working on the local level to be able to be scaled up. so one way to do that is to replicate programs like ceo that has multiple sites across the country.

another way to do that is find out what's really working and then teach other organizations that won't have to lose their own identity, but learn how to do what we do within your organization. you don't have to be a clone of us, but there's some tools we can give you. we just started a technical assistance program at college and community fellowship, and we're putting out an rfp to anybody who wants to learn how to work with reentering college students because there are very specific things we do that are not commonly done in the reentry sphere. there are many ways to implement good practices going forwards. some of it at the policy level. some at the technical assistance level. it's not separate from all the other social policies. it's not separate from poverty. it's not separate from health care or education. criminal justice is infused in every area of our society and we need to treat it as such. >> okay. terry. >> one of the disconnects with

our system had always been we can provide all the services and training and everything to our offenders while they are in there, but when they transition out and go into the community correction centers, halfway houses, there's always a disconnect. we never knew what they were doing. no communication in between. we have now started to work closer with the bureau of community corrections, and we are ensuring that everything that our inmates got when they were with us, certifications, diplomas, anything like that, our systems are now talking to each other and we are providing that information. we have open communication where they can call me if i'm sitting there. i will provide them with anything i have. we are starting to make that connection where we can work, continue to provide help and services to the inmate upon release and helping them make that next step beyond the community corrections center out into the actual world and living on their own. it did require and still

requires more policy change on our side, but it is something that we need to improve a little more. but it's starting to improve. >> excellent. will? >> i think two things. one, as we think about how to write change policy at any level is just keep the humanity of the problem front facing in front of us. you know, there's a mantra in ceo -- and it's not just unique to us, but it's the idea that there's the right program for the right person at the right time. we are all unique individuals. your point, government can be hugely impactful, but it's oftentimes a very blunt instrument. we just need to constantly come back to what individuals need. then, i think secondly, to reiterate what vivian said is, you know, like the second chance act. i think it's done a lot of great things. it provided funding for a lot of programs across the country. you know, the reauthorization is

before congress right now. going a step further and when we find programs that we know work and there's evidence to back that up, be more intentional about providing a pool of funding to help them scale and really replicate across the country instead of just, you know, thinking about we want to keep trying new ideas. we need to do that, but grow the ones we know work. >> deanna? >> for me, it's really simple. if we are making policies about individual lives, the individual lives we are talking about need to be at the table. we can't make decisions and policies without having formerly incarcerated individuals at the table without telling us what is impacting their lives. if we don't have the experience, an intimate other look at that no one at the table can take a look at because we have not experienced a walk through what they have walked through. for me, i'm also pushing on the

advisory committees. we are recommending always a formally incarcerated individual. we are going to make a decision about the lives of individuals who have experienced this, the people who experienced it need to be at the table. >> great. great. we have a number of questions and we'll be able to get to a few of them. but we heard a lot of themes that were reinforced here. you know, supporting innovation, rolling back what we know hasn't worked, you know, over the last several decades, even more than that, as you talked to us about vivian. centering the voices and the folks who are mostly impacted who have been impacted into our work. not just programmatic work but the policy work and really thinking about the role of interactions with state and federal and local policy and programs. so turn it over to some of the questions here. how do we ensure that government

at all levels, state and federal, are working together to achieve progress and a common agenda? you are one example of that with the interagency council. but who wants to take this? >> i can jump real quick. i'll go back to the pennsylvania example. i mean, terry is sitting right here, but i think a lot of the progress ceo has been able to make within this state and right now we're just operating in philadelphia, but we're going to be a -- a new program site will be opening up the next few months in pittsburgh and then we hope to replicate further, but there is real leadership at a number of different levels in that state administration. i think that's allowed programs and funding to be, you know, pulled together in some innovative ways.

a large part of what's allowing us to open the site in pittsburgh is we are being able to take funding from the federal s.n.a.p. employment training program and pairing it up with wioa funding. both started at the local level. the states are allowed considerable latitude in how they administer the programs. i think the more that we can have sort of the, you know, uncommon allies together in a room where they don't necessarily think they should or could be working together. but when everybody gets in that room, you see the overlap and how you can integrate and work together is where the magic can happen. >> that's a perfect example of what you were saying, criminal justice policy intersects with with every other particular piece. talking workforce, talking about food policy, and here we are talking about justice. it's a perfect example. terry, do you have anything else

to add about working together with the state with some of your counter-parts? >> as will was saying, our secretary and executive deputy secretary are extremely supportive of the re-entry efforts that occur. it's not the traditional way d.o.c. had always run in the past. them working with a lot of the different other agencies from department of ed to human services, all of them combined together have come together and pulled a lot of really good initiatives and programs, which are starting to affect the funding that's coming in for us. >> okay. so this is an interesting question. so anyone can feel free to take this. what are your reactions or solutions to research that shows box efforts are actually increasing discrimination against african-american workers or we can open it up more broadly.

how can we make ban the box efforts in the employee, workforce sector as well as in the higher education sector more effective? >> yeah, i want to flesh that happening. people are saying that because employers are being encouraged to not ask about criminal history at the front end of an application process, they are finding other ways, either through written applications or e-mail applications, to try to decipher the ethnicity of the applicant. if they can easily decipher in their minds the ethnicity of an applicant, they will make assumptions about their criminal history so people aren't even getting a foot in the door. i'm not sure of the validity of the concept. but i don't think that's a reason to put the box back. >> yes.

so, more importantly, how can we make the ban the box efforts more effective to connect to the work you all are doing? >> ban the box efforts need to connect to actual state and local policy that disallows the discrimination against people who have criminal records. and, you know, employees need to be held accountable for diversity in their work spaces. because employers cannot start throwing out all applications from black people. they just can't. because eventually the workforce is going to be so devoid of diversity they're going to get themselves in trouble. so, i don't think it's a big -- as big of a problem as people are imagining it is. i think enforcement, having back-up laws like the law we have in new york state, article 23a of the employment law that prevents employers from blanket discrimination.

>> anybody else? yes. >> i think -- i agree with ms. vivian that individuals are fearful of change and who are not for ban the box are the ones speaking on this. i have to say that when you allow an applicant, everybody to be equal coming through the door, being evaluated on their knowledge, skills and abilities in a competitive workforce, the person who makes it to the interview, the offer, is the best candidate for the job. now, if they have a felony conviction, that's when you have to look at the eeoc guidelines of what the conviction has to do with the job in relation to the jock and -- job and what has they done. i share that to say because even on this job, me coming to this position when president obama banned the box, i was convicted of a felony in 1998. but i made it through the federal government based on knowledge, skills and ability of

what i brung to the position through a competitive process in a federal government, and once my felony came up, my felony had nothing to do with the job i was getting ready to perform. when it was said and done, individuals are looking for the best candidate to carry out the job. i happened to bring extra skills that made it pretty good. so, i want to say that with fair policies behind ban the box, it created employment laws that do not allow individuals to have that blanket policy. like ms. vivian said, workforce, it all will be exposed. i hadn't to this point until more research comes out to prove it. >> will, anything to add with connections to wioa and the pipelines you are building and how philadelphia is one of those ban the box cities? are you thinking about connecting those particular policies and opportunities? >> no, we think about this all

the time at ceo. you know, it's a little before i came, but in new york city, we are getting -- we are celebrating the one-year anniversary of the fair chance act. that went a step further in terms of not just government positions, but all positions. you know, it kind of presented a conundrum for ceo because the name recognition of our organization in new york city is so just, you know, in there that when we're calling up employers where they are looking for employees and we are starting to match up our participants, most employers know we are working with folks that have some type of criminal history. we are almost, just by the fact we are getting on the phone, crossing over what the law intended to not happen in the first place. what i would say is, you know, i think, you know, there's a lot of great resources out there

that looked at the two most recent studies that presented part of the conversation. we need to really look beyond just the box. what this is, i really appreciate the fact this spurred this much conversation about this issue, you know, kind of to what some of our previous speakers said about this. this is a unique moment where there's a lot of attention on this. for us, what we are more focused on is how can we work with employers, big and small across the country. and right now we work mostly with smaller businesses. to think about how are you changing your own hiring policies and practices to better reflect a more inclusive, you know, hiring procedure? you know, going just beyond that first step at the door. yes, it's critically important. but it's just rethinking, you

know, that stigma that is associated with the felony conviction from the very, very most basic, you know, thinking. >> okay. i think we have time for one more question. i'll direct it to you, terri and have everyone else jump in. so, in addition to the work you are doing with the workforce boards, credentialing and career pathways, do you also connect folks to substance abuse or drug treatment or recovery services? we know that that is an issue that permeates much of society but especially formerly incarcerated individuals and even thinking about mental health needs. >> all of our correctional institutions have a multitude of different type of treatment programs in them. many of the inmates are required to attend aa or na, anger management, different programs like that. those run side by side with our

education programs. we work very well within the institutions where they can be dismissed from class for an hour to attend a certain group or program they have to attend, and then they come back to school and vice versa. they have ample need to a lot of the mental health. they are identified and we have a lot of mental health programs. a lot of our employees actually go through mental health first aid training and we have cit, critical incident training, to learn how to deal with the different items and things that may happen if we have students in the classrooms that have mental health issues. but each of our institutions does have the availability for all types of treatment programs as well as education programs, and we work side by side in conjunction. and those programs do continue on the outside should they be released to the community corrections centers or halfway houses, different things like that. >> through the department of

corrections or through another agency that you're coordinating with? >> most of ours are through the department of corrections. we have a couple of them that are contracted within the state, but most are department of corrections run and the employees are department of corrections employees. >> thanks. well, anything to add about how your work intersects with supporting individuals who have these needs? and if not, deanna, if you want to add. >> i would say definitely. i mean, while we're very much focused on employment services, those retention specialists oftentimes are trying -- are partnering up with other nonprofits that can connect into housing or other kinds of medical services and whatnot. one of the things we really want to be able to do is just be a part of a much broader holistic solution because at the end of the day, it's not just one thing. it's a whole multitude of things

that when pulled together in a very coordinated way is where we can ultimately see people succeed to the best of beyond their ability. >> and i was going to say through our funding sources there is what we call mandatory requirements. and part of the mandatory requirements is that if you're applying for funding to do re-entry efforts, there must be a connection to nontraditional providers providing housing, substance abuse so we're providing that continuity of care behind the wall into the community again. so within the funding sources, that is a mandatory requirement. >> when you say nontraditional providers, can you explain that a little? >> a lot of times you're talking about correctional facilities and state agencies, we can connect to other state agencies or bigger agencies. but a lot of times in communities, it's the smaller non-profits, it's the mom and pop shops that sometimes are providing services that individuals don't want to -- traditionally aren't aware of.

but individuals are getting the services they need. mentoring is one. formerly incarcerated individuals working with other individuals coming home is a nontraditional service that has not been recognized by federal government or state agencies. so we're encouraging some of that on the ground level to happen and occur. >> vivian, you kicked us off with this series of questions and answers about -- talking about the interconnectedness of criminal justice policy with other forms of social policy, i'm including housing and education and workforce and then landing on mental health. so what are some last words you have to say before we close out the panel? >> definitely connected with the best providers of those services in the local community. so we don't provide substance abuse treatment at our location. we don't have a housing specialist. we don't have medical treatment.

but we did a lot of work to find out who was the best provider of that service for this population in our local community and developed partnerships with them and built into our student tracking system, our data system, so that the referral is not just here's a phone number. good luck. our referrals are it goes into our system, we make the phone call, we make the connection, we follow it to make sure the meeting happened, and a reminder pops up on the counselor's screen. and we have trained all of our direct service counselors in trauma-informed care so we can recognize when somebody may be having an issue, a mental health issue, or substance abuse issue. we've scoped out potential domestic violence situations and intervened because we train our staff to look for those things. i really believe in small community based solutions where people can develop positive relationships, where they're both giving and receiving

something rather than -- and that's harder work to do and it's more expensive work to do. but as deanna referred to -- diana referred to, it works. there are church basements all across the country having aa meetings every night, and people are staying sober. so we need to support that work. it's valuable, and it means a lot. the last thing i want to reflect, everybody, before you leave this room on diana's courage and will's courage and something that i've learned in 16 years i've been doing this work. you are all sitting in this audience, and you're listening to experts talk about the work that they're doing to solve this problem of the connections between criminal justice involvement and poverty and other things. and unless i tell you that i spent three and a half years in a new york state prison, you would not know that.

and i say that as the last thought to get you to understand that people who have felony convictions don't come out of prison with horns on their head. we're just people. and many of us are trying to have a positive impact on our society. and we just really thank the federal government for really opening the door for that to happen in this administration. >> okay. so with that, i want to -- join me in thanking our panel. [ applause ] you will now hear from class executive director olivia golden in a few minutes who will tell you a little bit more about our work. we definitely don't see this event as a one-off. this is the second part of a series. but we definitely are going to delve deeper into these intersections because our mission is all about lifting folks out of poverty and really thinking about the implications

that poverty and all of these things have on not just poor people but communities of color. so once again, let's thank this great panel. [ applause ] later today on c-span 2, israeli and egyptian ministers talking about the middle east and the incoming trump administration. that's live at 6:30. and at 8 supreme court argument on immigration detention. the court will decide if detained immigrants can be held for longer than six months without a bail hearing.

a lower court revealed they must have detailed bond. the justices heard the case this week. we have a special web page at c-span.org to help you follow the savings account. go to c-span.org and select supreme court. once on the supreme court page you'll see four of the most receipt oral arguments heard this time and click on the view all link to see all of the oral arguments covered by c-span. you can find recent aspeerppear by the justices and one on one interviews. there's also a calendar for this term, a list of all current justices with links to see all of their appearances on c-span swell many other supreme court videos available on demand.

follow the savings accouupreme c c-sp c-span.org. december 7th is marks the attack on pearl harbor. this weekend on c-span 3 we're featuring programming remembering that day. sunday, on reel america "know your enemy, japan." >> when the factories of los angeles and detroit were producing for the world's war machine, the rest of the world would fall. >> and just after 5:00 on oral histories, survivors from the uss arizona where 1,177 crew men or killed on december 7th, 1941 recall what they witnessed. and at 6 chris christ:00 on ame

artifacts. >> she's often remembered for one event, that is the surrender of japan. >> we'll tour pearl harbor attack sites and memorials. for our kplooet american history tv skechedule, go to c-span.org. later today a memorial service for former cuban leader fidel castro who died last week. in the years after he ceased power in 1959 n. that's on c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern time. madeleine albright secretary of state during the clinton administration and stephen hadley, national security adviser during the george w.

bush administration on middle east politics and security. instability in arab countries and their ideas for more stability in the region. good afternoon welcome on behalf of the atlantic council. i'm suzanne maloney. i'd like to extend a special welcome to my counterparts. i'd like to extend a spernl wci welcome from the diplomatic community. we're here today to launch a report commissioned by the atlantic council's meddle east

strategy task force who over the past year has convened the task force's working group on politics, govern nans. a bipartisan initiative launched in february 2013, brookings foreign policy has been proud to contribute to the project. not only via tomorrow's report but also through the security and public working group who report was offered last year by kenneth pollack. the report you have here today reflects our own analysis. it helps to explain the collapse n the middle east state system, takes stock of where we are and offers recommendations for the middle east and post-arab spring environment. tomorrow situates tomorrow's break down, that of years of

deteriorating relations. tomorrow argues for them to develop societies and institutions reflective for the long time. must repair trust among the governments and their citizens. dialogue is needed as well as patience, including the united states. these are words of wisdom that i think echo very broadly in washington here today. as the htitle of this event suggests, real stability in the arab world be be determined by the quality of governance that takes place there. share your thoughts via twitter. the report that we're launching here today was cochaired by former secretary of state madeleine albright and stephen hadley. two individuals who need to

introduction. two individuals who know more than just a little about real security. we're delighted to have them and our third panel sis amr hamzawy to join us here today the speak with tomorrow about the report. secretary albright will present some introductory reports and we'll turn it over to the panel. we'll invite the audience to ask your questions and engage in the discussion. thank you so much and welcome, secretary albright. [ applause ] >> thank you very very much. it's a pleasure to be here. and to have the opportunity to share this with brookings. thank you very much for hosting this. one of the things that really distinguished the atlantic councy's middle east task force is the way that we were really

anyone to partner with other institutions and scholars in washington and europe and in the region. and it truly is a collaborative effort. and i think that as we talk about it today, i think that will become even clearer. but it truly was terrific in terms of working together. enjoyed it very much. i think also, just as we engaged a multitude of institutions in the project, we also tackled a multitude of issues in the working groups that we established. and the working groups did produce the papers and so today we are releasing the fifth and final one on governance. and lest you think this completes our work, i want to announce that after we all take a break for turkey eating and cooking in my case, steve hadley and i will be publishing our final co-chair's report next wednesday. and that report is going to attempt to knit together the

topics tackled by each of the working groups into a new long term approach for the region based largely on ideas from the region itself. our sense really has been is that we have all spent a lot of time looking at the region but a lot of it has been fire drills and band-aids. the basis of what we're doing is taking a much deeper and longer look. while we have time next week to address our broader strategy, today's discussion really involves one of its most important components. we're going to be talking specifically about how, in order to find a way out of the crisis in the middle east, the states of the region will need to address failures of governance. and of course the problems brought about by the lack of accountable, responsive and effective state institutions in the middle east as is so well known to people in this audie e audience. i think the role this played in

the breakdown of the region order has in fact been downplayed. what you'll hear from tammy is that governance is a central cause of the turmoil in the midding east, something of which i hardly agree. as he puts it, the upending of the region didn't come from outside intervention or from the top. it really did come from below, millions of frustrated people whose expectations far exceeded the opportunities that were available to them. as we've seen over the past five years, it's far easier to identify the cause of turmoil than to find a solution. and not for lack of trying, but i really do think we have to keep that in mind. and the first challenge in any journey is to have a destination in mind. so for the people of the region, i'm convinced that this destination is governance. build on a foundation broad and stable enough to last. and that by definition,

governments that have the trust of their citizens, respect their rights and respond to their needs. and as suzanne mentioned, tam ma's paper offers a framework for how the region can begin building toward a muddle of sustainable governance and argues that this work has to start now no matter what else is going on. there are many in the region and the united states that have a different view and they argue that these questions of political development can only be addressed after nations achieve security and prosperity. i hope to believe that political development and economic development need to go together. i know that all of us in various forms of graduate school would argue which came first and which came second. and the reason i say that is because people want to vote and eat. and so the governments has to deliver. and they also want to live in peace. one of tammy's main arguments is that the region's security, our

security, depends on inclusive transparent and responsive and accountable governance. and this raises some tough questions about u.s. policy, including whether we still have the ability and the responsibility to exert kind of leverage on these issues. with the transition under way in washington, the answers are more uncertain than they have been in the past. and it's worth pointing that for more than a century, stability in the middle east has been understood to be the responsibility of an external power, whether it was the british empire or the united states of america. yet according to the president of the united states, unstable, and i quote, until stable governments are set up and supported locally, the middle east will never calm down. that pronouncement came from the white house, not of barack obama but of dwight eisenhower in 1956. over the decades we've learned

not to expect miracles, even though that's where they're supposed to come from in the middle east. we've also learned not to give up. while the united states remains in my mind the indispensable nation to the security of the region, i'm always quick to point out that there is nothing in the word indispensable that means alone. so after a period of time in which the united states has been accused of doing too much and then too little, we need an honest discussion about our role and our relationships and our responsibility and that's why i am so pleased to be a part of this middle east strategy task force with my good friend steve hadley. it's been an extraordinary learning experience for both of us and an opportunity to work with some truly wonderful people. one of them is tammy and it's now my pleasure to invite her and the rest of our panel to come up on the stage. [ applause ]

>> thank you for being here. let me begin by thanking my two

fantastic co-chairs, sooef hadley and madeleine albright. when we started this project off, stephen and madeleine told each of us working group chairs not to be afraid to ask the big questions and to challenge our assumptions, i think recognizing that in the middle east this is a moment of truly historic transition. and i think the questions both for the region and those of us outside who care about the region and have a stake in the region, that questioning of assumptions is even more important today than it was when we started the project. so i really want to thank you both for a fantastic process. i want to thank my fellow working group members in the region and all over the u.s. and europe. we managed to meet virtually and in person and i learned a great deal from all of them and they're listed in the report. so i hope you'll take a look and

share my appreciation. it may seem as though today's topic is an odd choice for focus. maybe it's not a good time to talk about governance in the middle east, after all we're dealing with a region in violent turmoil, the vicious civil war, the u.s. and its allies are invested in new military conflict in syria fighting isis. i came back an international security forum up in halifax where the only discussion of the middle east there was framed around terrorism, isis, civil war and refugees. these are the urgent problems that are seen by many governments around the world as a threat to international security and that are driving attention to the region. but it's precisely because of those challenges that i think it's valuable to focus on this

region. to my mind isis and the civil wars are symptoms of something bigger. they are symptoms of a broader break dobreakdown in the region. they're not the disease. what we saw in 2010 was the breakdown of individual states and a state system in the middle east that had listed since the eisenhower administration. a state system that had advantaged american interests and those of our regional partners, a system that the united states sought to defend. and it's that breakdown of the middle east order that has led to the civil wars in libya and yemen and syria and the rise of isis. understanding why and how this regional order broke down i think is necessary to understand how we effectively deal not just with the symptoms of the breakdown but with the challenge of restoring lasting stability to this region.

and that is the premise and the driving question of the report that we're releasing today. so let me focus on just three things about that breakdown that i think it's important for us to understand and what they suggest about the path ahead. so the first thing to understand is, as madeleine noted, the regional order broke down because of things that happened inside states, inside societies because of pressures that built up over many years. and the first part of the story is the story i told in the book i publish i.d. in 2008. "freedom's unsteady march." that's the story of how it began to weaken, the ideological, the coercive mechanisms that these states relied on to survive were becoming less and less effective in a globalized world. they rested on a social

contraccontrac contract. and over time the systems became more and more inefficient on their own terms and then they were challenged from young people on the cusp of adulthood to the effects of a globalized economy and from a radically new information environment prompted first by satellite television and then by the world wide web, 1.0 and 2.0. and so the effect of the citizens in these countries was that the expectations created under the old social contract could not be fulfilled in these changed conditions. and just to give you a couple of indicators of this, the egyptian government had promised that university graduate would be able to get a civil service job.

by the early 2000s, the wait time for those university graduates to get that civil service job was, on average, eight years. so that's eight years of pushing a food cart or driving a taxi or twiddling your thumbs waiting for your life to begin. and in the meantime you can't afford an apartment, you can't afford to get married, you can' afford to be a participant in society. the second thing to understand about the why and how of the breakdown in the middle east is that no one to the runup of the arab uprisings was unaware of the challenges. that's very important to understand. how governments dealt with the challenges ended up in many cases exacerbating the problems, rather than resolving them. and we had a lot of talk and many efforts in the 1990s and 2000s to promote reform of

governance and reform of economies in the middle east. but when many arab governments sought to adjust that social contract, they ended up, instead of developing a more inclusive social contract, negotiating adjustments with political and economic elites, whether it was elites within their own country or external institutions like the world bank and the imf. they reduced government hiring without really liberating the private sector to create growth. they brought new business cronies into their ruling parties instead of opening up politics more broadly. and the result of these adjustments exacerbated inequality, further empowered some groups at the dpens of others and increased the grievances rather than resolving them. and so dissent increased were government's tools to manage politics were weaker.

and the protests broke out. and this brings me to the third thing we have to understand about how this all happened. the consequences of how certain states broke down. when the protests came, many governments responded poorly, in ways that exacerbated divisions, collapsed state institutions and some governments responded with violence in ways that generated demand for more violence. and so it's no accident in this analysis that syria and libya are the places in the region that are most violent and disordered. these are the places where leaders ruled in the most personalized manner. where the destruction of civil society and community institutions, or the making of those things subservient to the state was the most complete. and so having failed to act in a manner that could have prevented the uprisings, when the

uprisings came the leaders sought to reprez their people through the use of force. when basic governance and order broke down, those with guns to impose their will gained power. and when the state used violence against its sidss, it created a market for others with guns to defend those citizens against the state. and that allowed the emergence of identity based sectarian malitilitias with horrific agen. by the time the governments had broken down, the social contract had broken down over a long period before. and social trust, the basic trust of people within communities had eroded. there was very little left to manage peaceful politics. and this is the challenge we confront today in the middle east. beyond the geopolitical competition between iran and saudi arabia, beyond the threat

of terrorism or weapons of mass destruction, this to me is the biggest challenge in rebuilding a stable order in the region, is the breakdown of trust within societies. it's a consequence of the way they were governed and the way they broke down. the paper goes into detail on all of these subjects and offers some specific priorities on a way forward to tackle that problem. let me just give you a few highlights here. first the future of the region will be determined not by the mere existence of governance, although that's what many are focused on in the midst of this disorder but on the quality. because if we don't have more accountable responsive transparent and effective governance, it will not be sustainable governance. it will face more challenge, break down again. conflicts suppressed will reemerge. we have to think about the quality of governance, not just

the fact of governance. it's probably no surprise to you that i think liberal democracy is far more likely than any ore regime type to generate effective governance. but the path between where the region is today and liberal democracy is neither swift nor line linear. and the ambassador can testify to that, although i think tunisia has made impressive progress along that path. the paper lays out a few practical ways to begin rebuild the basis for that kind of sustainable governance. let me mention two key insights. first i don't think the question we face regarding how to build this new order is about territory or state borders or where lines are drawn on a map. it's about what happens within those lines. it's -- remember, it's about social trust. there's no line you can draw between shia and sunni that will

not be fought over. and just as the creation of south sudan did not magically resolve the conflicts inside sudan or south sudan. division will not automatically resolve the conflicts within iraq or syria. it's also not about institution building. after our military victories in iraq and afghanistan, the u.s. and our allies spent a lot of time standing up new institutions, parliaments, courts, political parties, central banks. and the idea is that you build this machine of government and you pop late it and start the gears turning and it should go. but i think we learned from these last 15 years that build institutions is not enough. it mattered how those institutions are populated and by whom. are they inclusive with everyone with a stake in the process. do they have a process that's fair and transparent.

that brings me to the other insight that i want to leave you with before we have a broader conversation, which is that what's most important to effective sustainable governance to effective sustainable institutions in the middle east today is dialogue and conflict resolution. it seems like an obvious thing to say, the old line that war is a continuation of politics by other means but it is true. and i think it's a basic beginning aspiration for the future of the middle east to shift conflicts that are now under way in a violent channel into a nonviolent channel. and also to pay special attention to those places where political conflict is being suppressed, with dialogue is being suppressed for fear that

those places may become violent if there's no room or no capacity or no institutions and forums for peaceful dialogue and peaceful politics. finally, it suggests to me that sustainable governance in the middle east in the future will be much more decentralized than it's been in the past. because you don't rebuild social trust from the top down. you rebuild it from the bottom up. there's a broader need to build governance in a way that citizens can see and feel and buy into. and i think we already see a number of experiments across the region in more decentralized governments, whether it's the power of elected counsels in mur rocco or the way in which lebanese have managed their needs in the absence of a president until very recently. or the way that the government in baghdad is struggling to see

conditions for locally effective government in the areas that are about to be liberated from isis. so i think local governance is what we need to focus on. with that let me stop and look forward to our conversation. >> let me just say a word, thank you, tammy, very much. it's a great paper and i really do urge you to read it. here's what we're going to do for the rest of the time. amr is going to speak for ten minutes or so are, reacting to if the paper, giving you a better sense of what's in it. and then we're going to have a conversation up here with some broad questions and we'll go probably until about five minutes of 4:00 or 4:00. we will then throw it open for questions and comments from the audience and we'll end promptly at 4:30. that's how we plan to use the time available to us.

amr, over to you. >> thank you very much, steve. it's a pleasure to be here. thank you very much, tammy, for having me on the panel. it's a pleasure to join the panel. thank you for being with us today. it's a great paper. i would like to congratulation you tammy and the working group on a spot on analysis and great insights on how to look at middle eastern politics and political dynamics as they appear today. i'm going to follow steve's recommendation and really recommend everyone to take a look at the paper. it offers a detailed analysis and it does not stop where tammy stopped because of time and to engage you, of course. it gives us a great overview of what has been happening in the region since the 1960s all the way to 2011 and beyond 2011.

in that spirit to engage the paper, i'm going to underline three points which i feel are relevant in building on the insights and recommendations of the paper. number one is -- and here i show you analysis with regard to lost trust between state institutions and citizens in the region. and it's across a very wide spectrum, all the way from north africa, all the way from republics to monarchiemonarchiee way from countries which have been doing relatively better social economically and countries who have been suffering from unemployment, poverty, so on and so forth. clearly we have been having a loss of popular trust in state institutions. and that has been happening and unfolding into the background of adept societies, middle eastern

societies lacking alternatives. it's not only the lost of trust in institutions, they did not fashion alternative institutions. they were not put on the ground. we did see conversation between religious based divisions and secular divisions. we did see political conversation based on social and economic preferences, networks of patronage which offer a great analysis of. and conflict between the haves and have nots. in total this did not add up, prior to 2011, to an alternative vision to state society relations, an alternative credible tuiti credible. we were looking at old social contacts which were collapsing and new ones that were looking

to be found, legitimated and pushed forward. i believe this picture has not changed in the last five years ap and the very fact that we're still looking at them in return or apart from the tunisia case or stable or liberal experiments into b it in morocco or elsewhe elsewhere, the dynamics of the last five years where we do not have new social contracts, legitimate new social contracts. number one is how to, how to bridge the gap between state institutions and citizens, groups, segments of populations which have lost trust. the first keypoint i believe we really need to look at is a question of social capital. i would like to rephrase it from trust and to look at how

societies generate social capit capital. and social capital never comes top down. it always has to be bottom up. now when we look at the fabric of middle eastern societies and i'm really focused on adept societies. i'm not an expert on iran. when you look at arab societies as of now, the only way to imagine social capital emerging, redefining the relationship between state institutions and populations, state institutions and societies, is to focus on civil society. if we are looking at state institutions away from the collapsed cases in syria and libya, where trust has been lost, legitimacy is questioned, pluralists deliberations are not out there. and if we do not have, apart from ideological conversation, political actions which offer visions for states, we do not have viable political parties in

most arab countries. we do not have valid political movements. the exception is tunisia. it comes down to civil society where -- as well as in tunisia, civil society has been the leading force pushing the country through experiment of democratic governance. the question is how to empower civil society organization. what are the conditions available, present, in different environments across the region which can help civil society prosper. what are the conditions which are available in some countries which undermine civil society. and here i would like to highlight two key points. one is the very fact that we, in most arab countries, we're still looking at constitutional and legal frameworks which in fact do not safeguard the autonomy of

civil society actors. it under mines the autonomy and to a great deal of state control, typically security lapse control. secondly, because freedoms of association, organization constituency building are not safeguarded in most arab countries with, they end up being urban based focused on small populations of the country and do not have an outreach in any democracy, be it western democracy or an unwestern democracy. two things we have to look at -- once again, i share the analysis of we will not get to leave security if we do not fix governance issues if we do not get to viable stable governments. so two key issues which we have to look at are how to put in

place the real and right conditions for civil society organizations to prosper for civil society organizations to represent people's interest, different segment os f the population and to articulate a new social contract which is badly needed many most arab countries. secondly, how to safeguard free comes, key freedoms. in spite of the fact that this is one of the regions which suffers most from violations of freedom of association and organization. second point i would like to underline is, and once again going to a great insight which you offered, tammy, in the paper on prioritizing justice. i really liked -- it's one of the recommendations which tammy articulates towards the end of the paper. prioritizing justice the way i understand the report is to prioritize the forming security

sectors, prioritize reforming judicial institutions, court systems as well as the paradigm of law enforcement. and why? this is one of the key reasons why citizens lost trust in state institutions. sometimes we pull it aside, the debate about human rights violations and abuses away from citizens. it's not the great political impacts of having regimes or governments which violate human rights and freedoms. it's about citizens and how they look at institutions. it's about citizens and how they look at state security, how they look at police stations, how they look at police officers, how they look at, in some places, the military security, institution governing the country. prioritizing justice means in fact to my mind, and once again to build on the analysis in the

paper, means to my mind, number one, to -- and here, not only internal actors can help, civil society actors, but non-governmental organizations created outside of the middle east can offer some help as well. we do have expertise on how to do that. number one is to look at arab institutions and rules in place governing judicial institutions, security sectors, military establishments and try to push them to reflect two key values for democracy is all about, accountability and transparency. if you follow egyptian events, for example, throughout the last days we have been hearing about citizens, at least two, who lost their lives in police custody. this is not a new phenomenon in egypt. it keeps happening. this once again is a testimony to as long as we're going to

lack accountability and transparency, in security institutions in relation to law enforcement, citizens will continue to have no trust in governments even if they are elected, even if they are democratically legitimated. and here international expertise can help, how to push legal constitution frameworks in direction of greater accountability and transportatitransparency. civil society actors need help. they need the help. they're facing closure of public space in egypt, but they sometimes feel a complete collapse. and they are evacuated of the respective country. egypt's civil society is not only a demeanor set of actors, it's a set of actors which operate in europe and elsewhere.

so here a degree of international corporation. doesn't have to be government, nongovernment, can be nongovernmental orths to nongovernmental organizations to help these actors facing displacement, facing a war of extinction, a war of evacuation to endure. final point and once again, maybe it's not fashionable in the region, but i believe it is and it will hopefully stay fashionable in the u.s. at least for some time. here's the difference between civilian and noncivilian politics. one of the reasons, one of the reasons when looking at questions of governance in the region, why it's important to differentiate and spend some time kcomparing egypt or comparing morocco, different countries where military establishments dominate actors. other countries where we have

civilian politicians or civilian elites managing politics with all of the shortcoming of the political arena is the fact of pushing forward compromise, consensus building and cross ideological alliances, new social contracts where citizens can hold the governments accountable is not, all of that is not easily done if you have military governments in place. but if you have governments dominated by military security establishments in place. one key distinction when you look at arab countries in 2016 is to differentiate between the countries where the military security establishments are the dominant players in politics and countries once again, tunisia, morocco and elsewhere where civilian political dynamics and civilian groups are in charge. we have a track record of civilian groups accepting for

inclusion, more compromise as opposed to military security establishments. here's to -- this has to be a focus when we look at governance and how to push guard democratic governance as your paper suggests. let me stop here. >> amr, thank you very much. i want to ask one technical question because i was i think misled by it and i want to make sure the audience isn't as well. you used the phrase privatizing justice. of course i had if notion of, you know, the private sector taking over the police. but i think what you mean is a transparency and accountability that allows citizens to hold those institution to account. have i got it right? >> sure. citizen accountability interests. >> there we go. >> all right. we've talked about -- and tammy, i want to pick up on something amr said at the end and you said at the beginning. you talked about how the failures of states to govern effectively led to the collapses

or civil wars in iraq, syria, libya and yemen. so one question is, are other states in the region at risk? have we seen the last of the dominos or are there other dominos that potentially could fall. >> and if so, what will bring that about? >> i think that's a crucial question because for all that our international attention is focused on, the eggs that have already fallen off of the wall, there are others that are up there wobbling. and there have been a number of analytical attempts to sketch out what did those broken eggs have in common. you've seen some arguments about republics being more vulnerable than monarchies for example. what i see in the places that i would say are today still vulnerable, it's those places where, as we saw in egypt, you

have an aging leader with no clear succession plan and certainly no transparent, accountable, responsive mechanism for determining succession. those are potential crisis points for any government. and, you know, we've just been undergoing our regular exercise in the peaceful transition of power here. it's -- you know, it is always a delicate moment, even for the most established democracies. but in those places that don't have established traditions, it can be a very dangerous moment. so i would look, for example, at algeria. you have an aging leader in place for a long time and no evident successicessuccessor, n consensus on a way forward. i think you could say the same about the palestinian authority

today. and so you have a looming succession crisis and no connection as amr was highlights between citizens and government where they don't feel like there's any channel to weigh in. that's a boiling pot. a boiling. >> amr, would you agree with that? >> yes. yes. very much. i mean, amy is right in pointing out the historical precedence which we did have in the region prior to 2011. egypt was in a succession crisis where prior to 2011, the country was who is going to succeed former president abu. steve, when you look at it, what is missing is not only ruling establishments, putting forward succession plan of sorts, what is missing as well is how to tackle the lost confidence in any arrangement between governments and citizens.

in tunisia, confidence is understood because they put it in different place. different shortcomings are out there. people are talking about them and analyzing them. you still have institution which makes sense. what is missing in egypt, once awe took crass si is back in, in 2011 were thrown away and we are in between surviving what existed in 2011 and going back to very dark moments in egyptian history. the same goes for a place like algeria, once he is no longer there, no one knowing what will happen. >> this leads to another place and i'm going to ask madeleine to start on this one. it's interesting because the places you picked were algeria and the palestinian authority. those are not traditional monarchical societys.

one of the things you may remember when we started this project, we said this is about a crisis of legitimacy in the middle east and we said, of course, legitimacy comes from the consent of the government and the ability to lead to services. a number of people said, wait, wait, that isn't a sophisticated enough. there are other forms of legitimacy in the region based on tribal associations, religious affiliations, revolutionary ideology. there are a range of forms of legitimacy. so how do you square that? you know, what is -- as we look at the middle east going forward past 2011, what do we say about legitimacy and what do we say to these regimes that may be teetering on the shelf but have not fallen off? what in this post-2011 world, what is the way -- what would we recommend to leaders as to how to enhance the legitimacy of their regimes before they go through what these other countrys have gone through? >> i think tammy mentioned

social contract a lot. and i think we have to remember what it is. i think people think of it as a western concept, but that basically people gave up some of their individual rights to a state in order to get protection and security in some form. and obviously that is different with a monarchy. but still, there is that same responsibility of what is it that the leader owes his people. and i think, when you were asking about different countrys, i think those are interesting ones that were picked, but i would say that this is almost like a virus. and one of the things that we have not talked about enough is the influence of technology. and up with of the things that really did bring up -- i mean, it starts with a man in tunisia who emulates himself and the news gets out and all of a sudden it spreads, and i think that clearly what happened in

the square was social media. i think no place is inured to it. i kind of hate to finger any country, but if you look at a country like jordan, for instance, that is a monarchy, front line state, in one of the most difficult refugee situations, not a rich place, and a king who is trying to figure out the various coalitions and kind of a transit point and it goes to the very point as to whether the state is providing a livelihood to the people. and i think that one of the things -- and really you're right about this a lot, tammy, in terms of what is it that the state owes the people? and initially in all these countrys they were the employer of first resort. and when that is not possible anymore, then that puts in question the trust issue.

and so legitimacy to a great extent, i think, in this day and age, depends on whether the old leader, the new leader, the king, the deputy crown prince, whatever, actually is delivering because technology has made it possible for people to know what people in other places have. and especially, just to bring another point in it, what you said about the younger generation. they are tech logically adept. and by the way, i have been talking about -- this has been a peculiar ten day, but basically in addition to the thing you think i'm talking about, is that i've just spent time with a group of former foreign ministers in silicon valley talking about technology and governance. and what it has done in terms of providing people information as to whether they have a

legitimate government. and it has disaggregated voices in a way that makes some of the organizational things you're talking about hard. now, some of you have heard me say this, and i already -- and i always admit that i stole this line. but the thing that is interesting is people are talking to their governments on 21st century technology. the government listens to them on 20th century technology or hears them but may not be listening actually. and provides 19th century responses. and so that disconnect is what we're dealing with. it was very evident in egypt and the question is, i mean, i think any place could be subject to this, despite the fact that the one use chose are very specifically so. but legitimacy is, what is the government supposed to be doing, whether it's a king or a dictator. >> got that. i just want to push it one more to you, tammy, and that is this.

clearly what is the government supposed to be doing, what is it delivering for its citizens. and you talk a lot about transparent, account i believe including states. does encouraging states to move in those directions, in fact, is it complementary to or supplementary to other traditional forms of legitimacy that, for example, the monarchical states dependent on or does it, in fact, undermine those of legitimacy. you have to answer that question if you go to a monarch and say you need to move in the direction of legitimate transparent responsive governance, that monarch has to be -- have some understanding that that can be supplemental to and doesn't undermine the traditional sources of legitimacy in which the regime is dependent? >> sure. so i actually think that there's an important switch in language that i would recommend in order to answer this question. which is, it's not about what

governments owe citizens. i think that it's really about what is it sevecitizens expect government. it's part of what has change and part of the technology that madeleine was describing. in one of our working group co-chair, chris schroeder, really put his finger on this in his pater which is part of what's happened in the arab world and around the world among this younger generation is what he calls a participation revolution, that citizens, because of technology but just because this generation of arabs, more highly educated, healthier, more engaged than any generation before -- let's remember that parts of the region two and three generations ago didn't even have secondary schools, okay? so the developmental leaps here are tremendous. and this rising generation has a different set of -- a globalized

set of expectations. that means it's not just about making sure they have job. they expect to be able to participate. they expect to be able to set their own path in life and not just have it directed for them by their monarch or their father or their uncle or anybody else. and at essence what they expect is the thing that liberal societys are best structured to provide, which is the opportunity for every individual to find their own path to human flourishing. okay? if i can put it in philosophical terms. so it's not -- governments can't get away with just, you know, offering enough jobs or enough health care or enough free education. check the box and they are legitimate. they have to meet that set of expectations. they have to give people opportunity to find for themselves a pathway. and that means they have to be more open. they have to be more responsive.

now, to the point of congruence or attention, it is a mental shift. if you are a very traditional leader who believes that the only way you can help your society grow is by directing it from the top down. but that is not the only form of legitimacy. even for a monarch. so the traditional pathway may be i am the source of social goods, i distribute them, but you can also be the source of opportunitys, you can be the source of dyamamism and that is a shift in mentality but entirely possible. >> i think one other thing though that has to be put in the mixture, and again, egypt is a perfect example, is to what extent is it the freedom of disaggregated voices