carolina. somebody has to have this discuson. we know schools are struggling. we thr money added. that is not fixing t problem. we have to do something to get this parents engage. whether you look at these social programs, we cannot afford them. we had the smallest amount of paychecks comi from private business and the large number of people receiving government goods and services. we have to wake up and have these diussions. i am the only onest has been out there t bring it for eight years. i am the only one that gave up eir detriment paycheck. over $400,000 for my agency. i am a businessman first and foremost. thank you for being here and i hope you give me my vote -- your vote. >> gresham barrett.

i believe in god. possible.thim all things are%- i believe if we are going to take this nation back, it is one state at a time. if i did not pk the that, i would not be here tonight. u want to see a state with your sons and dauters to get to read and take jobs or the next job is across the street. not across the nation. entrepreneur is are th heart and soul of this company. we have our best days ahead of us. we need a did tt can pull south carolina to get there. i have been blessed to be a congressman for the past seven and half years and i wld be honored to be your governor. tonight, i ask for your support in your vote. god bless. >> henry mcmaster.

>> from upstate to the didn't me o from the mountain to the sea, outh carolina is a wonderful sight to behold. we see it everyday. we are blessed with talented and innovative people and plentiful resources. i lieve we can achieve any dream that we set our minds to. i have a plan to p sth caroli back on the path to prosperity. of the candidates, and they are good candidates, i believe i am the one that has executive leadership experience, a record of aomplishment, where king with the legislature, sometimes fighting them and sometimes pulling them, but a record of accomplishment and the maturity, judgment, and credibility to get it done. as governor, i will lower taxes, recruit high-paying jobs and reunite our economic engis. i want to ask you to join me.

i believe our new day is about to begin and i want us all to work together to show the world what south carolina can do. thank you. >> thank you. nikki haley. >> thank you. this -- the elections matter on the state and federal level. we have seen a lot of republicans that will learn the talking points but did not know the actions. one thing we consistently noticed and my busines is how hard it was to the fifth ohis hits was for government to take it. we have to make government understand that these people pay this money and how we spend it matters. by and the only one on this panel that has opposed the stimulus package. it just ran up the credit card debt. we are going to be in its budget crisis. we will do that. i am in a format that understands that all things are

possible. i am the daughter of immigrant parents that remind us every day how blessed we are. i and the sister of a man who fought in desert srm and i remember what it was like when we did not know if he wld come home. i am the mother of two children in public schools and i care about their education and i care about what type of ovnment they have. i am it legislated that knows what good government is and i want people othe ate to know what that feels like. >> thank you. thank you for being here and your service to our state and to our country. speaking of thank yous, we would like to show our gtitude to all the people of francis marion. we also want to thank our other partners. ny of them are with us tonight. we also -- remember, coastal

carolinaaltic states in jt under 48 hours as the democratic gubernatorial candidates take place in our second day. -- second debate. that is schuled for thursday night. it will be broadcast live on channel 13 and tionally on c- span. that will be 7:00 eastern time. we also want to thank the audience. it is now up to you and all the people watching to have your voic heard at the baot box next voting day. vote, it is so important. the primaries are june 8. for more about -- tha

>> tomorrow we take you live to a debate between the three democratic candidates to replace mark stanford. that is light thursday starting at 7:00 eastern on c-span. -- that is live at thursday starting at 7:00 eastern on c- span. and >> "book tv" continues today with a look at politics. and american spectator founder on the future of the conservative movement, and the university professor from black power to barack obama. all this week on c-span to appear agai2. >> president of, will be in pittsburgh to speak at the university. -- president obama will be in

pittsburgh to speak at the university. host: theree some tax breaks in here for businesses and individuals. what are some of the big ones for businesses? guest: the biggest one is the research tax credit. it helps pharmaceutical companies and technology firms rform research. there are also ta breaks for banks on their overseas income that they earned. tax breaks for restaurant in retail less than less than that get quicker depreciation under the bill. host: there are als provisions to extend lending from the small iness administration. how does that work?

guest: there is quite a bit in the bill. it has grown beyond e traditional tax breaks, tax extenders' package. various small business lending stuff in there, the bonds for local and state government infrastructure, spending that was originally approved as part of the stimulus bill. is it is renewing or expanding that bonding authority. there's a summer jobs program for ars, federal funding for jewish summer jobs -- useyouth, federal funding for youthummer jobs. companies rely on this type of funding to fund their research. it is a tax break for u.s.-based rearch.

congress hasn on a year-to- year basis. everyone kind of assumes that congress is going to renew in, but it has to be reupped every uple of years. it has eired from january 1. host: is in a job creator in the short term? -- a job creator ithe short term? guest: i think it is. to see the bill pass would give a lot of firms come for that they can hire. if there are cut scheduled, that they may not have to make those cuts. host: what about individls, what is in it as far as tax breaks f individuals? guest: a couple of things. there is protection for people who live in states who do not

have a state income tax, such as tennessee, florida, washington. youan deduct your sales taxes paid in theear o aestimate equivalent of that. also, qualified tuition reduction for parents of college students. deductions for teachers, and of pocket classroom expenses. host: special-interest tax breaks in this, there are a couple that have been reported, some four racetracks, a biodiesel one as well. who will get that type of tax credit? guest: these are biodiesel procers mostly in the midwest. the rpose of the tax credit is to encourage aternative sources of energy. ere is an industry that has

sprung up around that, another program that the government has to diversify our sources of energy. host: is that for farms to produce ethanol? guest: it is related. there is a separate industry from having diesel -- biodiesel. host: do we know how much that might say? is there a btom-line figure? guest: iiwould hate to hazard a guess? -- a guess. host: what else is in here? guest: you mentioned racetracks. every few years, they get a tax break. there are about 40, 50 tax breaks that go to individual

industries. those are just a few of the targeted tax breaks. host: how does one get into a bill like this? guest: this one has been around and i have been covering washington. it has been around for many years previous to that. on the house ways and means committee or senate finance commiee, there are constituents who come to make a case that they deserve certain x treatment. over the yars, this bill has picked up tax provisions, that once are in the code, becomes expected that they will be renewed. host: so every year come to deplete these tax brks and it renewed? guest: one of the more reason thingsith the stimulus bill,

congress crted new programs for favor tax subsidy bonds to help state and local governments. that is an example of a newly created program that got picked up in this recent state and local budget crunch and is being renewed here. host: states are now getting a tax breakn the bds thathey issued, in order to fund infrastructure in their communities? guest: yes, these are the build america bonds tt theresident has pushed. they get cash up front from the government to help boost e return on these bonds. host: there are also several tax loopholes that have been enclosed in the legislation. the cost of closing these loophol to corpations is about $50 billion. what have they done here? guest: there is a lotof

pressure to pay forax cuts that congress passes. they have a package of targeted increases on business that democrats say are needed to close loopholes. one area is a carried interest area. this has to do with profits that private equity and hedg fund managers, real-estate investment fund managers earn on their profits. they will see a big tax hike here. they pay abt 15% on mu of these carried interest products. under this bill, that would rise to 39.6%. they would tax ordinary income, whereas now they get capital gains favored treatment. host: let us go to our fit caller. guescaller: good morning. my question this morning is to

fold. the minimum required distributions on the retement ira funds. was that reinstated? i know that w got it last year. guest: id is not a part of this particular package. i do not kno enough about it to address your question. sorry about that. host: brooklyn, new york. joe on the independent line. caller: in this country, we are known to work harder than most other countries. we pay more taxes. it seems hard for me to believe -- earlier, a herd you say that -- i heard you say that it does not make sense for companies to lay off people. these people running these large corporations, the way i see it,

there are making bigger profits every year and laying off more people. americans are producing 60% more than they have per worker than they ever did. it is hard forthe average american to hear about tax cuts for corporations and i think that that is aood idea. host: are democrats pushing this bill as a job creator? guest: that is the message they're trying to send out. these are policies that have been in place for a long time that are simply continuing. mostly, it is continuing tax cutshat have long been in place and people expect th to continue to be in place. not new tax cuts for corporations per say. ving said that, there is some desire to renew these tax breaks and find out which ones

are really creating jobs, wch onesare serving theeconomy, and which ones companies could do just as well without. host: illinois. tom on the republican line. caer: you were tking about s diesel. i am a farmer in the midwest. there is a blending tax credit of two a gallon. sometimes it depends on the price of soybeans, it can be cheaper than diesel. conagra's can extend that. they have not done so since december. -- congress can extend that. people say with ethanol we are taking awayrom our fuel supply. cattle and hog eat soy beans and oil was always a by product.

burning them in diesel engines makes them more efficient, cleaner, and they just run better. it is better than ethanol, but ethanol is still good. it takes more water but does not work quite as well with the engines, but engine are being adapted now to work that way. you do noteem more catastroes with these products. they burn cleaner. host: are you in favor of this odiesel tax credit? caller: they needed, otherwise, these soybean industry's will shut down. i am on the county board. we are goi to build one nearby

in a small town. i use it. i use 20% soybean diesel in my trtors. there is hardly any black smoke. next year, they are coming out with deal motors which will have catalytic converters with so many parts in will be extremely hard to keep running. host: you serve on theoard -- the county board. they are trying to get this type of plant? guest: no, i am just informed abouwhether or not we need to make regulations about it. not only that come in the process, they also used animal fat, fat offf chicken skin. they squeeze the oil out of it,

which can be blended. some people say that it is not as good, but i have been running on it for five years, and i have olr equipment. it runs great. host: next phone call. caller: something that went on 14 years ago, the average c.e.o. in the country made 24 times with the lowest number of the corporation made. now they make 500 times. we have been taken over by greed. we have about 1000 taxing entitie fresh water, sa water fish, and the government, they do not own the bones.

there is even a look through tax on telephones. -- ahost: is there anything in s tactics in their package that addresses that issue? guest: not in this package. ere are efforts to tax bank executive bonuses which have been tied closer to financial bills, financial regulation. that is taking a breather right now. there is a chance congrs may revisit bank taxes, taxes on future, but there is nothing in the bill that deals with the executive cuts. host: another issue that is percolating on capitol hill is

the estate tax. where does the issue stand now? guest: the estate tax is realed in 2010. for those wealthy people who passed away this year, there is no estate tax. that is the good news for the wealthy. the bad news is come in 2011, the estate tax will come back at ratethat were in place, at approximately the same rates as before president bush came into office. democrats in congress did not intend to let the tax being repealed. they were hoping to extend it. hat did not happen. they got caught up on some other priorities, so w they are trying to decide what they want the policy to be starting next

year. host: there are reports that the senate may restore the estate tax with an option for people to prepay their tracks before there -- before they die how would that work? guest: tis idea of prepayment has been kicked around. the idea if you can pay into a trust while you are still alive, you can take advantage of a lower rate, 35%, opposed to the 45% that some lieve will be in effect. the advantage is, they get that money sooner by prepaying into a trust. the government is getting paid, so it makes itasier to pass in a state t bill because it is generating money in the short term. host: when with the time frame be to bring up something for the estate tax? guest: it has been tied with the

extension of middle-class tax cuts. it is unclr whether or not that will happen before the election. some believe it may happen in a lame duck session, after november. most believe that congress will deal with inome fashion this year. if they do not do something wit middle-classax cut, it would expire, and that would mean a tax increase for millions. host: johnson city, tennessee. sherry. caller: i have looked everywhere for a job. i have children and a large family. my job went to mexico. are they going to do anything to help us? host: i know this is not your expertise, but do you want to address this?

guest: this is an important part, what is driving this whole thg, the extension of unemployment benefi. congress wants to extend unemployment benefits that have expired, i believe today. they did not manage to do that before they left town. i expect the senate to come back in and pass a bill to renew them, retroactively. host: according to some repor coming in the house bill that passed last week, -- montego we're leaving this to go live to pittsburgh. president obama speaking on the economy. >> and for the terrific work that he and the administration, faculty, staff to each and every day. i also want to acknowledge your outstanding the year that does not look any older than the last time i saw him.

-- i also want to a knowledge or outstanding mayor that does not list any older than the last time i saw him. and [applause] it is great to be back in the beautiful city of pittsburgh. i'd love visiting the could sports town. last year i stole dan rooney. to make it up, i invented -- invited the penguins and the steelers to celebrate their championships. aseeiig how the black ha/k;%ujp@ headed to philadelphia tonight, i am just glad we're on this side of the state. [laughter] i noticed a couple of people said they were rooting for the blackhawks, which tells the about the rivalry between pittsburgh and philadelphia.

of course, we meet here at an incredibly difficult time for america. among other things, it is a time when the worst environmental disaster of its kind in nation's history is threatening the gulf coast and the people who live there. right now stopping this oil spill in containing its damage is necessarily the top priority of not just my administration, but i think the entire country. we're waging this battle every minute of every day. at the same time, we're continuing our efforts to recover and rebuild from an economic disaster that has touched the lives of nearly every american. that is what i want to talk about today. the state of our economy, the future we must seize, and the path we chose to get their. it has now been a little over 16 months since i took office, amid

one of the worst economic storms and our history. to navigate the storm might administration was forced to take some dramatic and unpopular steps. these steps have succeeded in breaking the freefall. we are again moving in the right direction an economy that was shrinking at an alarming rate when i become predict when i became president is now growing for three consecutive quarters. after losing an average of 750,000 jobs per month, we have added jobs of out of five of the last expense. the taxpayer money that it costs to shore up the financial sector and auto industry is being repaid. both gm and chrysler are adding ships and operating at a profit. -- adding shifts and operating

at a profit. this economy is getting stronger by the day. that does not mean this recession is by any means over for the millions of americans who are still looking for a job or a way to pay the bills, not by a longshot. the devastation created by the deepest downturn since the great depression hasn8 hit people in communities across our country very hard. it is not going to be a real recovery until people can feel it in their own lives. in the immediate future this means doing whatever is necessary to keep the recovery going in to spur job growth. in the long-term it means recognizing that for a lot of middle-class families, for entire communities in some cases, a sense of economic security has been missing since long before the recession began.

over the last decade these families saw their incomes decline. they saw the cost of things like health care and college tuition reached record highs. they've lived through a so- called economic expansion that generated slower job growth than at any price year expansion since world war ii. some people have called the last 10 years but lost decade. -- "the lost decade." the recession has certainly made it worse, but that feeling of not being in control of your own economic future, the sense that the american dream might slowly be slipping away, that has been around for some time now. for better or for worse, our generation of americans has been buffeted by tremendous forces of economic change. long gone are the days when a high-school diploma could

guarantee a job. so many of the factories have moved overseas. pittsburgh, the city that once was defined by the steel industry knows this better than just about anybody. today the ability of jobs in the entire industry to relocate with there is skilled worker and an internet connection has force america to compete like never before. from china to india to europe, other nations have already realized this. they're putting a greater emphasis on math and science and demanding more from their students. some countries are building a high-speedkn roads and expanding abroad and access. they are making serious investments in technology and clean energy because they wann the competition for those jobs. we cannot afford to stand still

while the world wasted by -- races by. we did not become the most prosperous nation on earth by sheer luck. we got here because each time a generation of americans has faced a changing world, we have changed with it. we have not appearefeared our f, we have faced it. we do not stand still, we move forward. that is why i have said that as we emerge from this recession, we cannot return to return to the pre-crisis status quo. we cannot go back to an economy that was too dependent on bubbles, debt, and financial speculation. we can add except economic growth at least a middle-class a win more and making less. -- we cannot return to an economic growth that leaves the battle cosmiddle class working d

making less. for investments in the 21st century infrastructure for america for high-speed roads and high-speed internet. investments in research and technology like clean energy that can lead to new jobs and new exports and new industries. this is a foundation is also based on reforms that will make our economy stronger and businesses more competitive. reforms that will make health care cheaper, our financial system more secure and the government less burdened with debt. in the global economy, we cannot pursue this agenda in a vacuum. at the height of the financial crisis, the corrugated action we took with the nations of the g-

20 prevented a global recession and helped restore worldwide growth. economic difficulties and one part of the world can affect everybody else. that is why e have to keep on working with the nations of the g-20 to pursue a more balanced growth. that is why we need to coordinate financial reform with other countries. it is why we need to open new markets and meet the goal of the export initiative to double our exports over the next five years. it is why we need to ensure that our competitors play fair and our agreements are in force. this is part of building a new foundation. some of you may have noticed that we have been building this foundation without much help from our friends in the other party. from our efforts to rescue the

economy, to health insurance reform, to financial reform, most have sat on the sidelines and shouted from bleachers. they said note to tax cuts for small businesses, no to tax cuts for college tuition, and node to investments in clean energy -- no to investments in clean energy. some of this is just politics. before i was even inaugurated congressional leaders got together and calculated that if i failed, they would win. when i went to meet with them about the need for a recovery act, in the midst of crisis they announced they were against it before i even arrived at the meeting. before we even had a health care bill, a republican senator said if we're able to stop obama on this, it will break him. those were not very hopeful

signs. but to be fair, a good deal of the other party's opposition to the agenda has also been rooted in their sincere and fundamental belief about role of government. it is a belief that government has little or no role to play in helping the nation need our collective challenges. it is an agenda that basically offers to answers to every inch as we face, more tax breaks for the wealthy, and you work rules for corporations. the last administration called this recycle the idea the ownership society. what this essentially means is that everyone is on their own. no matter how hard you work, if your paycheck is not enough to pay for college or health care or child care, well, you're on your own. this misfortune -- if

misfortune cause you to lose your job or home, your on your own. if you are wall street bank or insurance company or an oil play by your own rules,h get to regardless of the consequences by everyone else. i have never believed that government has all the answers. government cannot and should not replace businesses as the true engine of growth and job creation. government cannot instill good values and a sense of responsibility and our children, that is the parents' job. too much government can deprive us of choice and burden us with that. poorly designed regulation can choke off competition and capital that businesses need to thrive. i understand these arguments and is reflected in my policies. one-third of the recovery act

was made up of tax cuts for families and small businesses. when you think back to the health-care debate, despite calls for a government run health care plan, we passed reform that maintains the system of private health insurance. i also understand that throughout our nation's history, we have balanced the threat of over-reaching government against the dangers of an unfettered market. we have provided a basic safety net, because any one of us might experience hardship at a time in our lives. we may need help getting back on our feet. we recognize that there have been times when only government has been able to do what individuals could not do and corporations would not do. that is how we have real roads and highways -- rairoads and hi

ghways and public schools. that is how we have made medical breakthroughs and technological breakthroughs. that is how we have social security and minimum-wage and laws to protect the food we eat and water we drink and air we breathe. that istp w how we have rules to ensure that minds are safe and that oil companies pay for this bills that have caused -- spills they ahvhave caused. there were accusations that social security would lead to socialism and medicare was a government takeover. there were bankers that claimed the creation of a deposit industry will destroy the industry. there were auto makers that argued that in storing --

installing seat belts was unnecessary and unaffordable. there were skeptics that thought cleaning our water and air would bankrupt our entire economy. all of these claims proved false. all of these reforms led to greater security and greater prosperity for our people and economy. what was true then is true today. as november approaches, a leader in the region's leaders in the other party will camppign on the other arguments that have been making for decades. we do not have to look back to far to see how their agenda turns out. for much of the last 10 years we have tried it their way. they gave us tax cuts that were not paid for to millionaires that did not needed. they put industry insiders in

charge of industry oversight. the shortchanged investments in education and research and technology. despite all of their current moralizing about the need to curb spending, this is the same crowd that took a record $237 billion surplus and turned it into a record 1.3 trillion dollar deficit. we know where those ideas lead us. now we have a choice as a nation. we can return to the failed economic policies of the past or keep building a sttong future. we can go backward or we can keep moving forward. i did not know about you, but i want to move forward. i think america wants to move forward. the first step in building a new foundation that allows us to move forward has been to address

the cause and risk that have made our economy less competitive. outdated regulations, crushing health care costs, and a growing debt. to start with, we cannot compete as a nation if the irresponsibility of the few people on wall streetcan bring our economy-- wall street can bring our economy to its knees. it will end the tax payer funded big bailout. protections that will empower americans with a clear and concise information they need before signing up for a credit card or taking out a mortgage. financial reform will not guard against every iistance of greed and irresponsibility on wall

street, but it will enshrine a new principle and are turning into a system -- it will enshrine in new principle in our financial system. that is a competition that benefits wall street and main street. that is why we need to get this legislation done. it is why we cannot afford to go back, we have to move forward. we also know we cannot compete in the global economy if our citizens are forced to spend more and more of their income on medical bills. if our businesses are forced to choose between health care and hiring. if state and federal budgets are weighed down with skyrocketing health-care costs. that is why we finally pass health care reform. let's be clear.

the costs of health care will not come down overnight because legislation passed. in an ever-changing industry like health care, we will continuously need to apply more cost-cutting measures as the years go by. once this reform is in full affect, middle-class families will pay less for their health care, and the worst practices at the insurance industry will end. people with pre-existing medical conditions will no longer be excluded from coverage. people will freeze its people who become seriously ill will no longer be thrown off their thrown- -- people who become seriously ill will no longer be thrown off of their health insurance. businesses will get help with their health-care costs. in fact, small busineeses are already learned there are eligible for tax cuts to cover

their workers this year. with less rates and greater efficiency, this reform will do more to bring down the deficit than any step we have taken in more than a decade. the other party has staked their claim on repealing health insurance reforms instead of making them work. they want to go back. we need to move forward. making health care more cost- efficient is critical because it is also true we cannot be competitive as a nation if we remain dragged down by our growing debt. let me talk about that. by the time i took office we had a one-year deficit of over one trillion dollars in projected deficits of eight trillion dollars over the next decade. most of this was the result of not paying two a major tax cut skewed to the wealthy.

i always find it interesting that the same people who participated in these decisions are the ones that now charge of our administration with fiscal irresponsibility. the truth is, if i had taken office in ordinary times, i would have liked nothing more than to start bringing down the deficit that they created. we took office amid a crisis. the effects of the recession put a th33trillion dollars hole in the deficit before i even walk in the door. additionally, the steps we had to take to save the economy from depression, added more to the deficit by about one trillion dollars. if we had spiraled into a depression, our deficit and debt level would be much worse. now, the economy is still fragile so we cannot put on the

brakes too quickly. we have to do what it takes to ensure a strong recovery. the growing economy will unquestionably improve our fiscal health, as will the steps we take in the short term to put americans back to work, and that is why i signed a bill that will provide tax cuts for small businesses, and to hire unemployed workers. that is what i have urged congress to pass a small business lending fund. that is why i believe it is critical week extend unemployment insurance for several more months. that americans that have been laid off through no fault of their own get the support they need to provide for their families and maintain health insurance until they are rehired. we have to work with state and local governments to make sure that have the resources to prevent layoffs of schoolteachers over the next few months. as we look ahead, we cannot lose

sight of the urgent need to get the fiscal house in order. there are key components to putting our budget on a sustainable path. maintaining economic growth is number one. health care reform is no. 2. the third component is the belt- tightening steps i have already outlined to reduce the deficit by one trillion dollars. starting in 2011, we will enact a three-year freeze on all discretionaryó/ñ spending outsie of national security. something that was never enacted in the last administration. we will allow the tax cuts for the wealthiest americans to expire. we have gone through the budget line by line and identified more than 100 party -- 120 programs for elimination. we had employed a simple budgeting rule called pay as you go. we will charge the largest wall street firms tha fee to pay

back the tax payers for rescuing them during the financial crisis. s fee that will bring down the deficit by $90 billion over the next decade. -- a fee that will bring down the deficit by $90 billion over the next decade. minor-league, the fourth component and improving fiscal health is the bipartisan fiscal commission that i have established that will provide a specific set of solutions by default to deal with their medium and long-term deficit. i have to warn you, this will not be easy. i know that some like to make the argument that if we would just eliminate pork-barrel projects and foreign aid, we could eliminate the deficit. it turned out, such spending makes up just 3% of the deficit.

you combine all foreign aid and all earmarks, that is 3% of the budget. and meeting the deficit challenge will require very difficult decisions about the largely popular programs that make up the other 97%. it means we will have to sort through our priorities and figure out what programs we can do without. on this point i strongly agree with my friends in the other party. what i do not agree with is the notion that we should also sacrificed critical investments in our people and future. tightening your belt, you will definitely sacrifice going out to dinner, but you will not sacrifice saving for your child's college education. it is precisely our investment in education and innovation that will make america more competitive and the 21st century. we cannot go back.

we have to move forward. [applause] that is why i have made education reform a top priority. the countries without education today will not compete tomorrow. we wwnt every citizen to have the skills and training that they need in the global economy. from the day that you are born through what ever career you may choose. last year we launched a national competition to improve our schools based on the simple idea. instead of sunday the status quo, we will only invest in reform. reform that inspire students to excel in math and science and turns around failing schools the steals the future at too many americans. to achieve my goal of ensuring that america has the highest proportion of college graduates

in the world by 2020, we passed a law that will make college more affordable by ending be unnecessary tax subsidies. that means we're saving billions of dollars that will go directly to students, including students right here at carnegie mellon. [applause] it is a bill that will also revitalize our community colleges. in addition to training our workers for the jobs of the future, we're investing in the innovation that will create those jobs here in america. the research, the technology, infrastructure that will secure our economic future. right now, as we speak, the recovery at this putting americans to work building a 20% 3 america. there is no reason china should have the fastest trains or the

pennsylvania should be without high-speed internet access. we have to make those investments. from the first roadfrailroads 3 to compete. we will invest in our infrastructure. advance manufacturing facilities. america's first high-speed rail network. we are investing in the ideas and technologies that will lead to new jobs and untie your new industries. consider what we have done with clean energy. -- and and how your new and histories -- and entire new industries.

the united states used to make less than 2% of the world's aavanced batteries for hybrid cars. by 2015, because of the investments that we have made, we will have enough capacity to make up to 40% of these batteries. this brings me to an issue that is on everyone's mind right now. namely, what kind of energy picture can ensure our long-term prosperity? the catastrophe unfolding in the gulf right now may prove to be the result of human error, or of corporations taking dangerous shortcuts to compromise safety or a combination of both, and i have launched a national commission so that the american people will have answers on exactly what happened, but we have to a knowledge that there

are inherent risks to drilling for miles beneath the surface of the earth. [applause] these are risks that are bound to increase the harder oil extraction becomes. you also have to acknowledge that america run solely on of fossil fuels should not be the vision we have for our children and grandchildren. [applause] we consume more than 20% of the words oild's oil, but have less than 2% of the capacity. we will send billions of dollars to other countries every month.

including countries and dangerous and unstable regions. in other words, our continued dependence on fossil fuels will not jeopardize our national security, smother our planet, and will continue to put our economy and environment at risk. i understand that we cannot end our dependence on fossil fuels overnight, that is why i have supported a careful plan of offshore oil production as one part of our overall energy strategy. but we can pursue such production only if it is saved and used as a short-term solution while we transition to a clean energy economy. the time has come to aggressively accelerate that transition. the time has come once and for all for this nation to fully embrace and clean energy future. [applause]

that means continuing our unprecedented effort to make everything from our homes and businesses to our cars and trucks more energy-efficient. it means tapping into our natural gas reserves and moving ahead with our plan to expand our nation's lead of nuclear power plants. it means rolling back billions of dollars of tax breaks to oil companies so we can prioritize and vestments and clean energy research and development. the only way to transition to clean energy will ultimately succeed is if the private sector is fully invested in this future. apple comes off the sidelines and ingenuity of the entrepot yours is released and the only

way to do that is to finally put a price on carbon pollution. many businesses have already embraced the idea because it provides a level of certainty about the future, and for those that face transition costs, we can help them adjust, but if we refuse to take into account the full cost of the fossil fuel addiction, if we do not factor in the environmental costs and the national security costs and the true economic cost, we will have missed our best chance to the house of representatives has already passed a comprehensive energy and climate bill. there is currently a plan in the senate. a plan that was developed with ideas from republicans and democrats that would achieve the same goal. in pittsburgh, i want you to know that the votes may not be there right now but i intend to find them in the coming months.

i will continue to make the case for a clean energy future wherever and whenever i can. [applause] i will work with anyone to get this done. and we will get it done. the next generation will not be held hostage to energy sources from the last century. we're not when to move backwards. we're going to move forward. this overarching principle that we must invest in it and embrace and the energy and technology of the future applies beyond our energy policy. that is why we have decided to devote more than 3% of our gdp to research and development to and products and businesses that we have yet to imagine. we propose making the research and experimentation tax credit permanent. this helps businesses afford the

high cost of developing new technologies and new products. last year we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history. the possibilities of where this research might lead are endless. imagine a new treatment that kills cancer ceels but leaves good ones untouched. regenerative magnuson -- medicine. imagine a light wasterohjyweighr police officers and military personnel. ÷nñnow the imagine all of the workers and small business owners and consumers who would benefit from these discoveries. we cannot know for certain what

the future will bring. we can't guess with 100% accuracy what industries and innovations will net shape our world. i am sure there are times when the city could not imagine life without steel mills, and when that industry shrank and so many jobs were lost, who could have guessed that pittsburgh would fare better than many other places and reemerge as a center for technology in green jobs, health care, and education? . .

>> the interests of the status quo will always have the most powerful defenders at every level of government. there will always be lobbyists from banks and the insurance industry that doesn't want more regulation, or a corporation3 tax breaks instead of more investments in infrastructure and education. let's face it. a lot of us find the prospect of change scary, even when we know the status quo isn't working for us. but there is no natural lobbied for the clean energy company that made start a few years from now.

there is no natural lobby for the research that may lead to a lifesaving medical breakthrough. there is no natural lobbied for the student who may not be able to afford a college education, but if they got one, could end up making discoveries that could transform america and the world. it is our job as that nation to advocate on behalf of the americc that we hope for, to make decisions that will benefit the next gennration, even if it is not always popular, even if it cannot see those benefits in the short term. we make decisions like this on behalf of our own children every single day. and while it is harder to do with an entire country as large and diverse as ours, it is no less important.

been to plan every detail or predict every outcome. it is best that government not waste the opportunity and laid the foundation for a better future. if we can do that again, if we can continue building the foundation and a those hard decisions on behalf of the next generation, i have no doubt that we will leave our children the america that we all hope for. thank you very much, everybody. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. ["stars and stripes forever" playing]

[applause]

[applause] >> to booktv in primetime continues today with a look at politics. "american spectator" founder r. emmett tyrell the conservative movement, and a professor peneil iel joseph. all this week on c-span2. >> c-span -- our public affairs content is available on television, radio, an online, and you could connect with us on twitter, facebook, and youtube come and sign up for e-mail on c-span.org.

>> we are looking at video from a mile belief the gulf of mexico as bp continues operations there. the cut they were making with a saw is necessary to cap the well. coast guard admiral thad allen said that the goal was to free the saw. here is his briefing. this is about half an hour. >> good morning. the briefing is coming from out incident command post in louisiana, coal located with bp training facility. the incident is the tactical operational in node for response operations in the state of louisiana. from here, we have basis, the most prominent would be the one in venice, the against staging

area for the operations going on -- the advance staging area for the operations going on. i would like to provide a quick operational obeyed and hit a couple of items -- quick operational update and hit a couple of items, and then and jane will give you a brief and technical operation issues associated with miller's role in this. first, let me go right to the containment operations going on right now. over the night, we were able to successfully do not sure cut of the pike, 5000 feet of pipe that used to connect the heads of the mobile drilling unit. we are in the process of trying to do the second cut. the saw blade has been stuck in the pipe and they are working to set it free anyone who is used -- who has used a saw -- that is what they are trying to do

there. the goal is later on today to finish the cotton and be able to put a containment device on the top of the well had -- finish the cut and be able to put a containment device on top of the well head. we are doing that and will continue to provide updates as we go throughout the day. tactical things we are working on right now -- contact in the state of mississippi, mississippi sound, and we had some troubles and xining in alabama. we are -- tarballs and sheening in alabama. we are also redeploying boom to support alabama and mississippi. this requires a lot of tactical movement of the boom in the last few days. louisiana has said the impact and the threat is shifting to mississippi and alabama. some other things that are going on -- someone who works for fem

a has been working claims for us, and she is in grand isle today and is working in the southern part of louisiana to make sure that the claims processing system is working well and that we are responsive to the needs of the people there. this is the follow-up to the meeting we had with the president in grand isle last week and the request from the president and the mayor of grand isle that we make sure that the claims are functioning as respectfully as possible pre carry anything regarding the claims process is available at deepwaterhorizonresponse.com. with that, i would like to turn it over to jane. >> hello, everyone. i am the undersecretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere, and the administrator of the national oceanic and atmospheric administration.

the president made it clear from the very beginning of his administration that good government depends on good science, and that has certainly been the case throughout the federal government's response to the bp the border horizon this bill. president has made historic -- be pete deepwater horizon this bill. there of an historic3 come from research institutions, academic institutions, the private sector, in ways to understand the dislocation to mitigate the spill and also to actually stop the spill. at the president's direction and under the coordination of admiral allen, secretary chu, administrator jackson, and others have been engaging scientists from throughout the federal family, as well as the

academic institutions, and to leverage the best minds in the country to help deal with this tragedy. clearly, our number one priority is stopping the leak or containing it. we are leveraging the best scientific and engineering capacity to do that. at the request of president obama, secretary chu assembled a team of more than to what it soug -- more than 200 top scientists to analyze the response that bp has proposed and recommend additional actions for stopping or contain the leak. team convince to be bt's high-energy gamma rays useonvinced he'd be to high-energy gamma rays -- convinced bp to use high-

energy gamma rays. it is informing the approach of moving ahead. the effort has also focused squarely on mitigating the impact of the oil. on the week of may 17, the white house office of science and technology policy convened a meeting of the some of the nation's zero leading experts from oceanographic research institutions and academia, as well as federal agencies and bp, on measuring and mitigating the impact of the oil in the marine and coastal ecosystem. the discussions focused very much on how to use existing understanding and capabilities. further research is needed to understand what the implications the oil might have for the ecosystems. and how to strengthen the public-private academic partnership to those ends. let me highlight of view of the efforts that are under way on the scientific teams across the

agencies. the administration understands that for environmental, legal, and financial reasons, how important is to get good measurements of the grate of the leak. we put together an independent government over the panel with input from bp to study the flow rate, the flow rate technical group. the team is leading a coordinated effort across the federal government and academia to determine all flow rates of at the stilbite collecting and analyzing data as well as running a state -- of the spill by collecting and analyzing data as well as running a state of the art models. to understand better what the oil is and the impact in might

be having, at a number of efforts are under way. a ship is at sea right now conducting acoustic surveys and collecting water samples throughout the water column and sampling pelagic species throughout the water column. scientific personnel are on board to assist with the acoustics survey and utilize an autonomous underwater vehicle, which is operated by the monterey bay research institute team, to collect a discreet samples at different depths within the water column. this crew on the the id should is like many of the other efforts under what -- on the noaa ship is like many the other efforts under way there. later today, the noaa ship at thomas jefferson will leave new orleans for a 10-day research

mission. another team of government and academic scientists will study the location and the movement of oil and dispersed oil below the surface. noaa has also coordinated research efforts with the university of south florida, and a vessel called weather bird 2, to conduct sampling work to assess am, to the oil spill. other efforts under way include monitoring of air and water quality. many of these are being le b -- led by epa, noaa, department of homeland security, and the department of the interior. there have been calls to share information about this water and air quality sampling to be able to share information in real time fashion with the american public, with stakeholders in the

region, non-government organizations, others who are interested, in an effort to continue to keep people price of what is happening. efforts are also underway to assess any and all potential impacts to human health. these are being coordinated by the national institute for occupational safety and health, and the food and drug administration, all working with different aspects of how humans might be impacted by this oil spill. finally, on the dispersant research front, at the end of last week in baton rouge, university of new hampshire, noaa, epa, and the coast guard conducted research on the the use of nist% oil in the gulf, with over 50 experts -- the use of dispersants oil and the gulf, with ovee 50 experts, on the

larger volume of dispersants in it the deep water effort. tomorrow, june the third, the consortium for a russian leadership is coordinating with with theral family with - symposium in baton rouge to examine issues that are unresolved. what impact is dispersed oil having, what are the short term, medium term, and long-term likely impact of those? efforts are under way throughout the federal government, and i emphasize what we have been our effortsa -- have been aggressive, is strategic, and sustained throughout. within hours after the bp -- the explosion of the deepwater horizon and the sinking, all

rooms at noaa in seattle, washington, stood up with the coast guard on the events, and within it two hours and 15 minutes at issue the first oil is the trajectory -- have issued the first oil spill protectory we had ships and who is on the water, information on line, all with the intent of bringing the best of the science to bear on this issue and moving ahead in a very aggressive fashion. thank you. >> thank you, jane, and thank you for being a breitbart report -- thank you for being a great partner. i have been working very closely with the doctor since last year and it has been a fruitful partnership. we will take any questions you might have. >> you up and talking about the questions out there, where is it

going. why don't you have the answer? >> i can certainly appreciate the urgency and the desire on everybody's part to the have answers. the reality is that we want the right answers. what information that we can trust. -- we want information that we can trust. many of these search crews under way are finding interesting features, a signal of something detected by instruments on board the ship that gives you a sense that something is there, but it does not tell you what. it is really important to collect samples of the water -- hence, the attention to taking the samples at different depths of the water column, to take us back to shore at the end of the cruise and having them analyzed in at the laboratory setting. it is only relatively recently that those ships have been under way doing this sampling.

we are beginning to get the results in, and we are very close to be able to talk about not just what each individual group might be seeing on the water, what the integrated pattern is. that is what we would like to know. >> but that is the question -- why did did seem to take so long to mobilize? >> it is important to recognize what goes into having a research crew. you have to have a vessel that is ready to go. not all of our vessels were -- many of them were out doing othhr missions. many of these vessels are normally engaged in other kinds of activities. you need to identify the equipment that you need, you need to make sure that you have the proper amount of cable to

deploy the instruments at the depths you are interested in. and you need to have the scientific experts on board. that does take time to assemble, and then to deploy the crew to go out and begin working. i would suggest that the effort in fact has been very aggressive, and that we will be getting a very good answers in the not-too-distant future. but i understand everybody's interest in knowing what has happened. >> "washington post." you talked about the possibility of increased -- [unintelligible] have you seen that? >> they have not gotten the second cut down, so we will not know completely until that is done. it isat the point where to minimize the oil coming to the service while we do the cut.

>> you had a meeting that was sometimes contentious yesterday -- people are lobbying hard and fast to get moving to these -- [unintelligible] do you know a time this afternoon when you will get an answer to your questions? what have you learn and it lost 24 or 48 hours that you did not know already -- what have you learned in the last 24 or 48 hours that you did not know already? >> that is a great question. at the meeting we held in new orleans yesterday, which included members of academia, the wildlife service, noaa, and so forth, was convened for specific questions the president hapad.

specifically, he wanted to know the feasibility of constructing proposed barriers and burns, and are they effective as far as the oil response? most of the discussion yesterday focused on at the fact that barrier islands and the prince of the potential to protect a much greater larry of farmland -- much greater area of farmland. on the other hand, as the doctor has noted, we need to make sure that in constructing those barriers, we are not doing it harm to the environment by changing the ocean currents and other environmental impacts. all that was brought forward. everybody made recommendations to find their position. i have brief cabinet officials this morning and we'll looking to get a decision later on today. we are on the timeline, we have just not made the decision yet. >> that you give us a status report on anything the government it -- can you give

us a status report on anything the government did? >> there is a prototype to start moving equipment, and that becomes an issue between louisiana and british petroleum to get that mobilized with the proper resources you would need. the discussion what it was the viability of all six segments that was approved by the corps of engineers permit as it relates to visibility and the efficacy-related oil spill response. we are awaiting the results of that now. >> [unintelligible] the coast guard had no role in forcing bp -- >> at this point, bp is the funding source and the state is the executing its source. we will follow up on that. >> if workers are not allowed to

speak publicly, and they will be fired if they do -- >> i am not aware of that. we will put out a statement and have a press conference. i am not aware of that. >> if the court approved it, why are they getting in the way -- >> what the corps don't established is are they effective in combating the oil spell. most of these are look at in terms of what is the source of the sand, how would it be done, the design characteristics of the barrier islands, and what are the environmental issues associated with that it is consistent with the the fact that there is no harm to the environment, and the corps proper supplement back to the state. we are getting the issues associated the proposal in terms

of the effectiveness it would have in combating the oil spill, because if that is the case, we can direct that to be done by british petroleum. >> there is a sort of -- [unintelligible] why isn't this being done in other communities? why isn't this being done all over? >> i have to check with the other staging areas. it kind of it develops differently, but then on the availability of the work force and equipment to be deployed. i will certainly look into it. >> the details on the saw and what kind of a delay --

>> i will do this in layman's terms. basically, the diamond wire saw is every sharp, intended to get a clean cut on the top of the package, and there are three to four different types of device they can put over. partial to the cut, the saw got stuck will they have to bring in another saw? they're looking at that right now as we speak. phone questions up now. >> operator, are you there?

>> admiral allen, what would happen if the second cut doesn't work? >> it is an issue of how we can make the sec and pot, house with a weekend -- second cut, how smoot week can make it. -- smooth we can make it. we want to optimize that and put eight top cap on it. we can put something like a top hat over it, which is wider fitting, but you have increased chances of oil coming out on the side. it is a question of how much

precision we can bring to it. next question? the next? >> the next question comes from abc news. [unintelligible] >> sorry, we had a bad connection. i'm not sure i understood the question. >> i am just trying to know how soon we will note if the top cap procedure has failed. >> we will know that as soon as we finished the cut of the package, and there is a pause while they deal with the diamond wire saw that it's been at stock

partially through the pipe. we will know later on this afternoon. >> your next question comes from dow jones. >> has oil reach the panhandle of florida? we have no reports of oil on the panhandle of florida. we have reports of tarballs and sheening, but that is the extent of the reporting in the last 24 hours. >> your next question comes from august media. >> now that you have made it the sheer cut, does that mean that the flow of oil has increased? if so, how much? >> we do not expect the flow of oil to increase until the second cut is done.

there is a potential for a 20% increase once that has been made. the link in the riser pipe is being treated with dispersants. next question? >> fox business. >> thanks for doing this, admiral. as you know, eric holder, the attorney general, was there yesterday and had his team of local u.s. attorney's and stayed .e ag's as part of your work there, are you at all involved in helping these attorneys gathered evidence that they might need later on? >> our focus is on the response in dealing with the oil in the water. there is an independent marine board of investigation that has been convened under the joint auspices of the department of the interior and the department

of homeland security and that has been panel in new orleans and they have several weeks of testimony. the facts it generated from the marine board of investigation will likely provide some basis for further action, but that is separate from the response. >> your next question comes from the "houston chronicle." >> just a quick question -- is there a possibility of bringing in the second saw -- is there a second saw on the location that could be delayed? did you say that you would install the cap today? >> as soon as the cut is made that separates it rest of the riser pipe from the package, they will inspect the quality of the cut and move to install the

tighter device with a rubber seal on the top half, which is a little wider and has less of a seal. one of those two would be deployed depending on the inspection of the cut once it is done. regarding the request, secretary salazar and secretary chu are in houston and will report personally. i think what they will do is to extract the saw and bring it to the surface but i don't have the exact details of the location on that, but we will make an announcement later today on it. one more question, please. >> "washington post." >> [unintelligible] has there been any -- [unintelligible]

>> sir, could you get a little closer to the telephone and restate the question, please? >> can you hear me now? >> yes, go ahead. >> some of it washed up short last week -- ashore last week. if any of them have been killed by the oil -- >> this is jane lubchenco. i don't know offhand what the latest number of dolphins is, but we will get that for you and make it public. we have been collecting all the dolphins that have been stranded. the national -- the initial indications that i have seen suggest that there were no evidence of oil internally, but

the tissue samples and necropsies have not been completed. we need to wait for those results to come in to say definitively if oil might be a factor in contributing to those deaths. >> thank you very much, folks. >> admiral allen, you said that he would get back with me -- >> any of the follow-up items, please deal with the 20 right here -- with tony right here. >> the broken well in the gulf of mexico continuee to spew oil. a workers are trying to dislodge a saw said that they can continue with operations to cap the well.

the associated press is reporting that democratic senators charles schumer and ron wyden are pressing bp to delay paying shareholder dividends until the full costs of cleaning up the spill are calculated the shareholder dividends are expected to be worth $10 billion. >> booktv in primetime continues today with a look at politics. john hill on political centers and and the role of government in our lives, the founder of "american spectator" on the future of the conservative movement, and tufts university professor peniel joseph. booktv prime time, all this week on c-span2. >> we have a three new c-span books for you. "abraham lincoln," "the supreme buried ind "who's grant's tomb?"

to order, go to c- span.org/books. each one is a great gift idea for father's day. according to our recent urban institute study, african- american high-school graduates will take 20% longer than white graduates to find a job lasting more than six months. a discussion on this report is hosted by the urban institute. it is about an hour and a half. >> good afternoon. i'm margaret simms, and i would like to welcome those in the conference room and others participating via the web. this forum is entitled, "pounding the pavement, hitting

the books, the black-white to divide after a high-school." the discussion this afternoon will focus on racial differences and the transition to adulthood with the emphasis on differences in post secondary education and employment. if you are paying attention to the unemployment statistics issued by the bureau of labor statistics, you would know that the unemployment rate for teenagers and young adults is higher and that is far more established workers -- i year than it is for more established workers, and the rate for african-americans is higher than it is for whites. 418-to-19-year-old, the average and implement rate was 44%, compared to 25% for whites. for young people between the ages of 20 to 24, the rates were 28% and 15%, respectively. while the rates were lower for the older groups, the 20-to-24- year-olds, the racial gap is

larger. these racial differential are not just products of the recession they have been fairly consistent over time. the date that we will be presenting today concerns young people -- data we will be presenting today concerns young people enterrng the labor market between 1999 and 2005, a period when the rates were considerably lower for both groups that they are today. but even then, the gaps were quite high. the unemployment rate for african-americans was overpriced those for white counterparts. -- over twice those for white counterparts. we will examine possible explanations for these differences and solutions for the gap. we have four panelists, and i will introduce them in the order in which they will speaa. our first speaker will be marla mcdaniel, a research associate with the urban institute center

on labor, human services, and population. her research focuses on family resources, social policy on race and the influence on the child's health and well-being. before she was a researcher, she was a case manager for foster used in chicago. our second speaker will be harry holzer, a professor of public policy at georgetown university and an institute fellow at the urban institute. he is a former chief economist for the u.s. department of labor, and co-author of "reconnecting disadvantaged young men." our third speaker will be the director of youth policy at center for law and social policy. she has experienced any research and demonstration at the state -- experience in research and

administration at the state and national and local level. our fourth speaker, who i am sure will be here shortly, is william spriggs, who became the assistant secretary for policy at the u.s. department of labor in october of 2009. prior to that, he was the chair of the howard university department of economics. he has experience on the hill and other government agencies over the years. so i will turn to marla. >> today i will describe the findings from recent analyses that show significant racial differences and how long it takes african-americans compared to white youth to connect to school or work as they are transitioning into adulthood. i compare black and white high- school graduates and high-school dropouts. by way of introduction, i want

to first say that i am not an economist, and my background is in human development. as such, the questions related to employment in a little bit differently than some -- i look at questions related to implement a little bit differently than some economists might. the transition to adulthood is generally considered to be the time between age 18 and 24 . ]this is up to a lowly important phase, because it is characterized by many role changes -- this is a particularly important phase, because it is characterized by many world changes. -- role changes. some are maintaining our household and are expected to support and care for those and others. there is of value in understanding what the work and school patterns are during this phase of life. first, engagement in work and

school can impact later employment, and future earnings, and job experience. if you cannot -- if you are not connecting early on, this can impact how well you connect later on. second, there can be negative consequences for not connecting early on, initially. you may have a harder time getting and staying connected. these in turn, affec -- can affect the use themselves and others -- loved ones, family members, children. lastly, understanding patterns of employment and schooling and how they differ by race is useful for designing effective policies to address these disparities. in my six-to-8minutes, i would like to describe findings that my colleague and i conducted. -- findings from a study that my colleague and i connected with that jolo from the 818 does it

take -- we looked at how long does it take a youth at the age of 18 to find employment. the six months is not particularly special. it is our way of characterizing -- a way of characterizing stable employment. we could have used a year's time, but we selected six months time, in order to pick up a more youth, given that we are looking at about a six-year window between 18 and 24. so wanted to know how long it would take to attain six consecutive months of full-time employment. we also wanted to look at how long it would take for you to connect to either school or work. it is not uncommon for youth to forgo full-time employment right around age 18 and instead participate in school or work part-time.

we want to know how long it would take for any connection to school or work. at the data comes from a national sample of youths who were interviewed every year beginning in 1997 until 2005, when the youth were between the ages of 21 and 24. the survey asked many questions about work and school and other topics. at age 18, as margaret was pointed out, these youth c- at age 18, it was 1999 to 2002, so it was not the current recession we are experiencing. you might speculate that the disparities i will be pointing out are probably worse now, as margaret also pointed out. why the focus on black-white differences? generally, the legacy of disparity between blacks and

whites -- there has been this long legacy. tracking the shifts and the growth and a narrowing of these disparities is ought way in which we have been able -- it is a barometer for understanding how far we have, or how far we .ave yet to accompcome how big is the divide? we first looked at full time employment. the median length of time it takes for -- it took four used in this sample to attain full time, steady employment for at least six months was about 1.5 years. and this was the median for black graduates, white graduates, and also white dropouts. it was about the same. by age 19.5, on average, use were engaged in study -- youth

were engaged and study our full- time employment. the median time for black drop out was 2.5 years, nearly twice as long. they on average turned 20 before they were working steadily full- time. what does this mean? you have two youth who grew up in this endeavor, and same family income, parents have the same ups -- grew up in the same neighborhood, that same family income, parents have the same situation, imilar academic scores, we found that the black dropout takes nearly twice as long to obtain full time, steady employment. that we cannot explain with the measures that often account for disparity. we could not explain this a racial difference. i will talk a little bit more about this gap later. on a positive note, i don't not want to gloss over the fact we

did not find significantly -- statistically significant differences among high-school graduates. our next outcome, we looked at the time it took african- american and white youth to connect to school or work. when we look at the measure of connectedness, we based the definition -- be relaxed the definition on work. we no longer require them to work full time but we accepted part time, any number of hours, or were in school. our findings are that high school graduates, regardless of race, connect nearly immediately from the time they turn 18. for both black and white youth, it is around one month. since turning 18, it takes about one month on average to be connected to either school or

work. the findings for high-school dropouts, regardless of race, or a little bit longer. for white to dropouts, it takes about three months after age 18 to, on average, be connected to school or work. for black dropouts, it was 5.5 months. nearly half a year. what does that mean? as before, you have two youths who are virtually identical on all the measures that we used. the black dropouts are nearly nearly 83%ake longer to get connected to school wor work. these are not measures that are often used to measure racial disparities. i will address it a little but briefly now, but the panelists

will be addressing what could be contributing to this racial gap. i would like to leave you with three take away points. 0.1 -- if you remember nothing else from what i am saying, you can remember that black dropouts fare worse. they took longer to obtain steady full-time employment, they took longer to connect to either school or work after age 18. what can explain this? disparities could be caused by employer decisions. it is not individual characteristics -- if it is not what the youth are bringing to the table up to age 18, perhaps we need to look at the employer side, what could be affecting the disparities that we see. second, there could be differences and the types of social and community networks

that are surrounding the youth around this time. perhaps black dropouts in particular have fewer networks to drop from to get connected to a school, -- to draw from to get them connected to school or work. point two, a black high-school graduates should note significant events in the amount of time it took for them to obtain -- showed no significant difference in the amount of time it took for them to obtain full time, steady employment. white rats did not have the long gap in the time it took to -- white dropouts did not have the long gap in the time it took to obtain full time, a steady employment. last point, bear in mind that this is happening during a broader transition into adulthood, and how this can affect the stability of the transition into adulthood. less initial connections can affect future earnings and job

prospects and even housing and family stability. thank you. >> thank you, margaret. marla has generated interest in an informative results. what i thought i would do is briefly summarize how i feel about the results and how to interest them, and talk about all that means for policy. very simply, when i llok at marla's results, what i see is that there is a race effect. blacks are disadvantaged relative to whites both in schooling and the labor market. there is a big i spoke right to a defect for whites as well as blacks. -- there is a big of high-school graduate effect for whites as well as blacks. being a black drop out in america it is very problematic. your options and both -- your options in both worlds is very

limited. just the fact we explain it does not mean it goes away. some of them cannot explain statistic in a herd data, but perhaps because the other -- perhaps we can do other research and look at what is going on. a couple of things i want to point out that are consistent with marla's findings that she did not mention -- if you are a black male high-school dropout, there is the very high likelihood he will end up in prison. it is a stunning, a shooking statistic that we continue to live with in america. the other thing is that blacks continue to drop out at much higher rates than whites. that does not show up in mola's data, because she stratifies the sample, but that is a big factor, too. -pdifferent did it tell you very

different things. the number is, i believe, show you that dropout rates among whites is about 20%, which is way too high, but among blacks, it is closer to 1/3, which is shocking and quite upsetting. both of those numbers need to be brought weight down. how do we explain what is going on? some of them are buried in marla's results. some of this is obviously about the achievement gap. i will not talk about the achievement gap today, because it gets a lot of press it is a very important issue, but it gets a lot of press elsewhere. what accounts for some other differences, especially in the labor market? like marlowe, i think about this natural tendency for labor, the demand side and the supply side. the demand side is the employers, the behavior and the perceptioo of the employers, whether they are accurate or not, the sectors of the economy into which they are hiring, and

the skills and attributes they are looking for. the skills and other job seeking and implement behavior as they bring. there is no question that there is still discrimination in the labor market. in a lot of it stays, we sent out matched pairs of black-white testers and all of them show that there is still discrimination out there. i think some of is what economists call statistical discrimination, not necessarily based on racial attitudes but not having good information about the attributes of individual job applicants when people don't have that kind of information, they are likely to fall back on stereotypes and the worst fears come as many employers do. that has implicatioos for policy. but i also think there are large gaps in a whole range of skills, job readiness, that employers broughte between

out that high school graduates and maybe between blacks and whites -- between dropouts and high-school graduates and maybe between blacks and whites. at young ages, blacks start to fall behind with previous work experience, and that sends a negative signal to employers as well but job readiness and whether they make good investments. marla talked about gaps in employment at networks. a lot of high-school dropouts, especially black high-school dropouts, have many fewer contacts and much less information about the labor market and receive less opportunity for success. when they don't perceive opportunity, they are more likely to disconnect from school at early ages. this has behavioral consequences. very early on, people develop problems with the law and are ultimately incarcerated, engage in -- become unwed parents, and the whole child support system kicks in.

the behavior of young people what they lose hope of success, as well as how they are treated by our political and social systems. all of these jobs are low-wage jobs. marla doesn't focus on the wages. >> are some -- are going to face a future of very low-wage jobs. motivation, for a lot of these young people, even though white high-school graduates, to seek employment and keep it is very limited. that might be accounted for. what does this say about policy? i will paint some broad goals for policy. i am sure linda and bill will have a lot to say about how we achieve those.

it is important to prevent continued high rates of high school dropouts and effectively reconnect those who do drop out. we want to bring down those numbers. it is about more than getting people ged's. it is about having real high school diplomas. once we keep people in high school, i think we need to have much more effective pathways. we know how to do some of that. we have some good evidence on the ability of high-quality careers in technical education. i emphasize high-quality. i am talking about career academies. tech preparation. apprenticeship programs that

involve strong programs so that people maintain the option of getting good post-secondary. i have talked about extra efforts once they get the post- secondary. we have to improve the retention and completion rate. the dropout rate is enormous. we are starting develop evidence on how to do that. in the labor market, there are things we can do as well. we are developing evidence on effected sectorial training programs, effective career path away programs. it involves combinations of training and labour market experience. it involves the employer as well. it is important to pay some

attention to the quality of the sectors and the wages offered, all of which will motivate people to get and keep those jobs at a higher level. finally, dealing with the race issues, we can strengthen the eo. enforcement activity -- if we can provide more information on the quality of people, better measures of what they know and what they have done, that might be a better way from preventing -- of preventing discrimination. all of the correlations -- becoming on what parents -- un wed parents, we need to reduce some of those barriers. there will also be people that

have low-wage jobs. we need to enhance those jobs. we have successful models like the earned income tax credit. i think we need to extend that to child thus -- childless adults and improve their incentive to remain connected, and perform in those chaps. i will stop here and talk more about other issues. >> thank you harry. linda. >> i will pick up on several of the themes that harry has introduced. i started my career more than 25 years ago. i started in baltimore. i went on to direct the mayor's office of the employer development. we had a heavy emphasis in dropout prevention and youth recovery.

longevity -- i mean, i was involved in the implementation of everything from the huge entitlement program, all the comprehensive saturation models that the department of labor had. i was there for the use entitlement programs in 1978. -- for the youth entitlement program in 1978. these were at department of labor funded efforts to actually begin to address the problem. i then participated as a coach with the launch of the youth opportunity program, helping other communities with the systemic comprehensive reform. now, i do the national policy

work. that is not to pat myself on the back. we have known for two decades the kinds of things that would work in terms of putting young men of color and disconnected use back on track. there has been researched. there is a lot of innovation about what it takes so that this does not have to continue to happen. what we are lacking is political and public will to make the continued investments so that we do not have to come back to the same question decade after decade. why are black men failing? what we know is that when we prevent these -- present these issues, the discussion goes to it being a problem, then we need

-- then we start to talk about reforming the system and early childhood. that is important, but what we do not do is make the investments. we have half of 1 million young people dropping out every year. there is nothing in place to put them back on track. in a few minutes, i will give you the seven key lessons from my experience in the field and working with communities about what we know we can do so that we do not have to keep coming the things that we have found to work and are documented. if we know there are committees were more than 50% of youngsters fallen out of school, you can not fix this program preprogram with a simple model. it calls for comprehensive community strategy is where the communities come together and

look at how the systems use their money differently to invest in drop out recovery, re- engagement, and creating the pathway that harry talked about. there are examples are around the country about how this has been done so that we can put a few young that men of color on post-secondary pathways. how do we create some of these systemic pat ways to get young people back on track, and how do we get communities to be accountable? that is a very important aspect. it is not a foreign concept. it is embedded in every one of those grant programs. the evaluation of those programs indicated that the strategy was the strength. secondly, changing the dynamic

and the landscape -- you have to have programs that are of a sufficient scale that we begin changing the culture, raising horizons, and compete with street activity, gang affiliation, etc. that is number two. no. 3 is if you build it right, use will come. in the program where moneys were made available, 92,000 people were brought in. 65% of the eligible out-of- school population actually participated. we have never had that level of penetration. the program was wound down in about three years. the young people lined up. they wanted to participate. communities can do this. there is not one single model.

all young men who drop out were not failing. all young men are not criminals. a lot of people dropped out because they were scared to stay yen. we found that through surveys. we need to have a whole set of activities that are built in and concludes community base points of entry. -- that includes community-based points of entry. we need the infrastructure. whinnied multiple education models. -- we need multiple education models. there are ways to accelerate learning. programs that award the high school and the college, building a bridge programs, the ged plus programs, and credit recovery, finding out what they missed, and get those credits for them.

it has to be a part of a comprehensive effort. you cannot keep kids sustained without an betting the ability to earn money and learn. paring stewardship of the professional youth development staff -- you want all of these things together. research has shown you can have a dramatic impact on getting these young people back on track to education and employment. we need to make post-secondary employment and to important part of the equation. there are ways to do that. last week, and i think harry mentioned that -- meaningful employer engagement. this is the hardest part of the equation. we did some surveys. when they got kids ready, it was

still very difficult to get access. we have found that we have to find ways to buy access into the better jobs. we need to have customized training, internships, these are the ingredients that work. we know that if you can put these kinds of things together, you can have a dramatic impact on this phenomenon that we are talking about young people cannot leave school and drop out of school. i can talk a lot more in questions and answers about some of the specifics. we have several documents that are accessible at our website. >> thank you. >> thank you, very much, margaret.

by thank you for the research. i think it is raising an important topic, and you raise it in an portent way. you control for a whole lot of things. we are talking about even with than an education segment, seeing these disparities. it is important not to fall back on quick and easy answers. part of the issue is what accounts for the disparity that we know we can address. i think that is an important context. it is important to remember that this is a longstanding disparity. if you look over time, the black unemployment rate in general has been at 2.2 times that of the

white. this is when the economy is doing well or poorly. this is one of black dropout rate was 50% in the early 1960's, to today, where it is nowhere near that number. this is a deep problem with the disparity, not related to changes in the economy, or the economic environment, not related to when we were more industrial or less industrial, not related to event issues like the much lower educational achievement of blacks compared to whites. this has changed over time, but this disparity has not. by drawing attention to the fact that this is deeper and more and bedded, i think that is important. -- and benedict, i think this

is important. we should be reminded that over last year, as we look at the data that we have in our office of policy, from 2008 to 2009, young black women also have the same disparity relative to young white women. 0 20---u look at 20 tw -year-old, there was a disparity. this problem is not solved easily buy some of the stereotypes that we wish to fall back on as easy solutions. black women have a much lower dropout rate than black men.

we see this kind of problem. what is the department currently doing? we have a host of programs that were there before, but that we are trying to make better. we are all aware of job corps. it is a program that we are working on. we continue to improve the use bill. -- the youth bill. secretary hilda solis has been quite clear that what she wants is good jobs for everyone. within the current administration, there are some things that we are doing that are different. one of those is to concentrate

the way that we approach folks who face multiple barriers, so our pathways out of poverty grants were designed to pick up on many elements of the program you heard mentioned by linda. the program helps populations find their way to economic self- sufficiency. the secretary was very careful in targeting communities that have had very high levels of unemployment, try and to directly get money at the areas that we need help. doing our green jobs, we targeted at our training partnership grants, and --

partnership plans -- job training specifically designed so that we could diversify the pool of people who would be qualified to do the retrofit and green jobs that we think is a part of the recovery act. most of that money went to benefit communities of color because we targeted high- poverty neighborhoods. disproportionately, because of targeting low-income neighborhoods, a great deal of that money targets african- american and hispanic communities. on another track, and this was mentioned by linda, and harry, the little-known observation by folks during the health reform legislation that passed was also the creation of a new strategy around community colleges. the president had earlier made a call to increase our graduation rates in the united states, insuring that we have more people with secondary credentials. when the health reform act passed, that legislation was transformed from going to the department of education and

being focused on community colleges in that way, to go into the department of labor, to dislocated workers, and trade adjustment assistance. those amendments will put a new program in place to help us to increase our investment, as a federal government, in strengthening the ties between what people do at community colleges, and getting people connected to jobs -- building up the infrastructure of community colleges to also reach the populations that we are talking about today, and finding a way to link workers, as harry mentioned, who needed that post-secondary credential. now, in this format, it will not necessarily mean that everyone will go on to a two- year degree, but, at least it does assure that they can get the post-secondary credential that they can use to look for on a job.

all of that is great, but it still will leave in place the disparities that your research highlights. you are talking about things that are not related to simply improving human capital factors. our own work at the department does highlight this issue of job networks, because despite the horrific unemployment rates for black teenagers, there is still low labor force participation numbers, which are very small. the department tries very hard through its summer youth program to make sure that students are getting some exposure, but that is not necessarily the exposure to the job networks that people use to get jobs. so, i think it is important to think not just on the employer side about connecting people, but to look at the structure in which people get connected in the first place. for many jobs, for high-school dropouts, those connections are

word-of-mouth, worker-to-worker. the disadvantages faced by black high-school graduates seemed to be not as insurmountable as those faced by dropouts. perhaps, because the quality of the job means there is a little more equal playing field for access to information about the jobs, relative to those who are high-school dropouts. we really have to look at the structure itself -- how job networks and how the hiring process actually takes place. those are some important elements that i think we have to think about that are not the ready-made the answers to the policy disparities that we can use to help explain some of the gap. so, i think your work is very important from both aspects, that which helps us guide the policy that we are pursuing, the courses we are able to explain, but challenges us to

think about the courses that we are not able to explain. >> thank you. there is a lot on the table. it is probably falling off of the front. i almost do not know where to start, but i will call back to -- i will go back to a couple of points. one came up inadvertently during this discussion. i will come back to eight. that i believe harry put -- i will come back to a point that i believe harry put up. marla, i want to address the first question to you. one came in from one of the people who signed up on the web -- how do experiences after high school differ by gender? i raise that because several of

the speakers inadvertently lapsed into black male conversations, when you did not really talk about gender. related to that the question is, if you did not find statistically significant differences in some aspects, does that meannin those places there are not disparities? >> for the first question, we were looking at -- we did not separate it out by gender. part of that has to do with sample, and following the number of youths we were following through to the age that we were following them. that is an area that we want to get into next, being able to seed out those differences. i am so glad that you presented those numbers. there are disparities among females as well, and even though there are higher employment rates, and higher rates of high school graduates.

the second question, remind me, you are asking about the high- school graduates, whether they are -- >> if there is not a significant difference, then it should we be worried? >> i would say that even though our findings did not find statistically significant differences in the amount of time it took to attain full time employment, it did not tell us much about, as harry talked about, the quality of the job. we don't know about the opportunities for advancement. we do not know whether black and white high-school graduates are getting the same types of jobs that will lead to the same types of future earnings. also, in terms of connectedness, i did not get into it. on average, it takes about one month for both black and white youths to get connected to both school and work. but, what that really turned out to be was about three weeks for white high-school graduates to connect to either school or work, compared to four weeks for black high-school graduates to connect to school or work. that difference was statistically significant.

what that means is that even though we have two youths and we are controlling for all of these factors that are similar among them, there is still an unexplained difference, all else being held equal, that even among a black high school graduate he or she is not connecting to school or work in the amount of time that it takes the average white high-school graduate. i would say there are still disparities. >> one of the things -- and this is a broad question, the panelists can answer it anyway they like -- one of the issues that came up was the question of credentialing -- how you provide credentials to young people so that employers are not forced to fall back on statistical discrimination. there are several things that seem to be on the table, some of which are related to

credentialing that enhances the high school diploma. some are related to community colleges. linda also talked about some outside of he school system ways of providing credentials. i would like people to the elaborate a little bit more on how we would actually get those things in place, and have them reviewed by the employers as have been the value. diploma's used to be considered a credentialed, but apparently, not so much anymore. >> well, in the design of programs we have been going around green jobs, we have been working very hard in this department to figure out adequate credentials in making sure that we communicate with the employers in establishing that. perhaps, it is an unfair area because it is the most vague at the moment, and everyone is looking for jobs.

employers say the same thing. people seeking jobs say the same thing. the challenge is probably in the bigger gray area, where employers themselves are in that same dilemma. harry mentioned the sense of the employers around personable skills, and we do not talk about the credentialing of those in the same way. we might want to think about something like that. i think, in the areas where we can, the department has understood that credentials can matter. so, we have tried to structure those into our program, and that is based on the success you seek out of our apprenticeship programs. the idea behind the community college initiaaive is going to

lean in that same way. some of the high-tech sector has already figured this out, and they do have credentials which are easy for us to follow. i do not think, and i think you are correct for raising the point, margaret, i do not think we want to give employers a fallback position to stereotype. i know it might be more helpful, since everyone here is not an economist, to use the term stereotyped as opposed to statistical discrimination, so that you understand what we are saying. there, i think we do not want this as a fallback position. i do not think you want this as an excuse, but where it can help to create a fair labor market, i think it does help. >> this is an extremely, extremely important arena that we have a lot of work to do in. i think that it is very clear that we have got to figure out how to increase the level of

post-secondary credentialing in some kind of way for our population of young people of color. i do think we have to be very careful that we do not fall into the mistaken notion that simply finding how to give a credential to this group to increase labour market access without us looking at the interplay between the credential, what it means to have labor market value, and, then, the whole question of access. trying to make sure that we are trying to bring all youths to the same place, because if we create a set of credentials, that then become the credentials for youngsters that do not go through the post- secondary process, then we actually create a very different pathway. i think there is a whole lot that we have to learn. people used the term credential and certificates. i think we have to figure out a

lot of that, so that we are not just simply creating a set of credentials that are a lower level, and delivering folks not really where they need to go on the labour market. >> first of all, i think when young people come out of high school, employers need to see much more, what they know, and what they have done. again, part of this is conveying more accurately what work experiences people have come up but it is important that -- work experience is that people had, but it is important that they have had work experience, which many of our young people have not in the formal economy. i think the reason that career academies and high-quality education has powerful effects is because employers look at the the work experience, the occupational training, and they believe it. they trust it. credentials are one thing. the labor market has to take those credentials seriously. i think on the point of post- secondary credentials, there is

such a wide range of certificates, and there is recent research that indicates that labor markets take some of it seriously, but not all of them. that means, not only do we need to get certificates, but we need to get people better information about what the labor market rewards when they are pursuing these credentials, and stronger incentive for the institutions to provide the ones thattmatter. i think right now, community colleges get the same reimbursement from the state, whether they are teaching kids health technology, or basket- weaving, or music. that is not the incentive that the labor market is throwing out. finally, people are experimenting with safer experiments -- stackable credentials, more bite-sized measures of either academic work for occupational training that might be easier for people to get absent a broader degree. again, we do not know how much

of that the labor market rewards. we need a lot more research on how the labor market treats this very wide range of credentials. there is some evidence that it is not just at community colleges. if you look at the wisconsin and regional training -- the wisconsin regional training concept, the service providers are not always traditionaa academic degrees, yet, the labor market seems to reward them quite well. there needs to be more research done. i would like to say one thing in response to bill spriggs' comment. we have had this discussion before -- this notion that nothing has changed, i am sorry, i do not read the data that way. the unemployment rate has been fairly constant over time. when you look at employment out of the population, the numbers have trended downward. the disparities among men have gotten worse, while they have narrowed among women. they are highly correlated with the structure of the economy, they are highly correlated with incarceration -- i think to sweep those positions under the rug pries a fundamental misunderstanding of the factors involved here. i am happy to talk about that more.

those things matter. they matter of more overtime. -- they matter more over time. we have to account for those. >> that would make it worse, harry. road to the education attainment had -- relative education attainment has changed over time in favor of blacks. the trends you say leave the gap that needs to be explained more troubling in many ways. clearly, there are way more black male college graduates. there are way more black males with post-secondary education than in the past it becomes more difficult to explain, not less difficult. i think we have to be clear. one of the important things that marla brings out is that if you worry about relative position, and people worry about relative position today because if the what unemployment rate is going to be 9%, -- if the white unemployment rate is going to be 9%, if you have not changed their relative position of

blacks, you are chasing the black unemployment rate way above what would be acceptable weight -- rate. so, people worry about whether we have solved that relative position, and they worry about whether we have solved that portion, which we do not be able to -- which we did not seem to be able to answer to the typical policies. we have at our disposal, the department, training, our way of tryyto structure of labor markets to address many of the things you have said. we can try to create meaningful certifications in meaningful labor markets, but -- and meaningful labor markets, but it remains a huge task to close those unexplained portions. that is the part we need to be continued -- that is the part we need to continue to be concerned about. >> can i just say that when we start looking at the demographics, and i am not taking a position, the demographics are such that we

know the populations that are growing the fastest. we know that those that are going to be the majority of the labor market are those that are of color. to the extent that we know that the disparities exist and persist, in general, what does that set about the quality of our community and we have the demographics, it is suggests that there is some conversion see, or comparative of figuring out how to close it in this decade. >> i know there are a lot of questions out there in the audience. i would just like to ask one question of linda before i opened it up. you can start thinking about your questions. someone will come around with a microphone when i call on you. you have talked about a lot of programs that serve the need of thinking of people been engage

in more than one program over time. how the foster more cooperation and coordination among programs? i know when i was looking at some programs in the district, there did not seem to be away, perhaps, because their demonstration programs, that i use could be passed on to the next logical group or whatever. >> i think that at the program level, it is hard to build it up. when i talk about doing things systemically, it is more about how you first think about what you need to have in a community? what does it need? what does it look like? what does that set of services need to be? within that context, you have to assemble various programs.

in some ways, if you try and take everybody's program and say "how do we make this come together?" it is very difficult. if you, like a lot of communities have done, begin to say how do we use our education dollars, the state funding that is coming back, some of our other resources to then talk about what we need to have in this community and look different at all of the funding that is coming in, and build your programs based on successful programs within the context of what you need in terms of theefabric within that community to move these young people along. then, at the same time, you negotiate a referral arrangement, the relationship with the private sector. there has to be an intermediary function there. it does not just happen like that. it is complex. there is a different way of envisioning used programming in a community in a way that the whole community participates. we have done a publication where we talk about that convening function. once people, i think, start thinking that way, then it is not about my program, but it is

about how to assemble resources to deal with the problems. >> thank you. audience -- questions from the audience? here. >> hello. i direct the program on race ethnicity and the economy at the economic policy institute. in the discussion, it was mentioned that you control for many things. i was wondering, dr. mcdaniel, if you could tell us what things you controlled for, and what things therefore, do not explained the difference -- do not explain the difference you found. >> i will probably miss some. some of the key variables -- we looked at whether they lived in a distressed neighborhood. we looked at the proportion of the federal policy -- poverty level that their parents, -- that they grew up in as young kids.

as i mentioned, we did not look separately at gender, but we looked to see what the effects were. some of these measures were significant. they would increase or decrease the time it would take for youth to attain employment. even with those measures, we still had the significant race difference. we had a measure of academic ability. we used the military -- that was administered to all that participated. we did not have their grades, but everyone who took this reading and math score. we were able to control for that. we looked at whether the youth had a child as a teenager,

between 16 and 18. that increased the time. even above and beyond that, race was significant. >> ok. i forget which speaker mentioned this. i'm from the howard university school of social work. someone mentioned the lessening of the value of the ged. i was wondering what the options for a high-school dropout -- is it not as important as it might have been? secondly, could you give e the percentage of jobs for graduates, the successful participants in the program?

>> that sounds like bill. the other one could be for anyone. >> i do not want to give you a number. i do not have that in front of me. i will get back to you with a precise number. i will answer the first part. i do not want to imply that the ged is worthless. there has been an academic debate. it is clear that it is not valued the way high school diploma is. it does have some value. the main value it has is that it enables people to get post- secondary access. a young -- a lot of young people get a ged, go off to a community college, to remedial, or developmental classis, where they are stuck forever. they drop out without ever transferring into the real credit bearing courses and curriculum. i think it has some value in

that sense. if you think the value is limited, there are two options. you could strengthen the ged, have a system that is more meaningful. it would make it harder to get. there are a lot of options for people to get real high school diplomas through alternative high schools. these are almost charter schools. you do not want people who have dropped out of high school going back to the same school which they have already failed, and now they're older and less in sync with other students. there have to be alternative methods. the city of new york has developed multiple pathways to graduation. it is a very innovative program. we would like to see more evaluation work on that. that is another option. strengthen the ged, or provide other pathways. this would be meaningful in terms of getting people access.

>> i feel very strongly that we have to, and i do not know if strengthening its is the right way to look at it, it is sort of normal at 60%. individuals that get a ged perform at the same level as high school graduates. i think the perception is the kind of other thing you should wrap around the preparation, to make sure that a person can succeed when they move forward. i do think that ged models that strengthen the ability is something we need to do. i think harry is right. it is not just charter schools, or alternatives, but alternative ways that others allow a young person to get that credential that meets the state

equivalency, so that they are on par with everyone else and can succeed. we have to expand more of those models. the other thing is how do we get the educational resources to support those kinds of models for young people as long as they are under the age of 21? once they drop out, there is no resources. that is another way of looking at things. >> over here. daniel, and then the other general -- the other gentleman. >> i am daniel king from the urban institute. one of the things that marla and i controlled for was the employment while a teenager. that is something that harry touched on. all of these differences are after holding teenage employment. my question is what people think of new-hire tax credits and has this come up in the

discussion, and specifically if he know what these kinds of hirings yield? >> we have not had a chance to evaluate al hunt -- how well it has worked yet. a specific attempt was made to address this specific population. >> two very different models -- one, that you referred to as a new jobs tax credit, which is really an anti-recession device, for any firm, regardless of the employee is, you give them a tax credit. i wish we had done more of that. that tax credit was too mild to make any kind of difference.

there are some nice proposals of their on that front -- out there on that front. the other model, a targeted credit -- that is not cyclical. it is targeted at disadvantaged population. there has been a debate about the positive benefits. some people think they stigmatize the targeted populations. on the margin, they probably do a little bit, but on their own, they do not make a big difference unless they are combined with a lot of services. as a package, they might be more cost-effective. >> my experience was targeted tax credits. it basically does not change the basic hiring decision of employers. that is unless you are dealing

with an employer that can actually work to customize with them. the one-on-one tax credits did not seem to alter behavior. >> over here. >> matthew, with reading it is fundamental. in my work, we work much more on motivating young people on the literacy and of things. with what when dell was discussing, how do we act -- with what linda was discussing, how do we actually -- if money is not the motivation, what community-based motivators are there to get people to want to get their degree? get them back in the system? you will -- what are the

motivators and are out there that gets the youth back into the system, and excited about learning or moving on to learning. >> what seemed to make the biggest difference was at in the community-based used-friendly centers.-- chandro most of the activities were related to getting the young people comfortable to an environment, more of the horizon-extending activities, and have been well-trained professionals work with a youth

on a long-term perspectives and individualized things. they introduced heart and media. -- a lot of art and media. all of a sudden, young people were involved and positive things that became a reason for belonging. i think there are a lot of young people with aspirations for better, but they do not know where to go to do or how to get to it? how do we create that place for them to go? a few do not have a good staff, and places for them to go, it is hard for them to get connected. >> you assume that money does not motivate people. i think it does. it motivates all of us. there is clear evidence that

paid work experience, having a paid work experience component, it motivates yen people to stay engaged. even that short-term reward matters, especially for low- income people with family obligations. besides being a motivator, people need to see a connection between what they are doing in the classroom and the labor market. that is absent for some many people. falling back on some of these programs with strong track records, i think it motivates because they can see the connection. we have let so many of those connections, those pathways dropped away. on the fourth -- unfortunately, if young people do not see it

early on, the disconnect. if they get the motivation later, they are so far behind that they get stuck in these remedial classes. they can have motivation, but if it is not introduced early on, they cannot develop the capacity. i think it is important that it appears earlier on in life. >> this is one here. yes. >> i am annie brown with the howard university school of social work. i'm looking at this from a social work perspective. you've talked about vocational education in high school, and the fact that we needed something better. i am on the board of a charter school.

i have seen some of the excitement of youngsters that have the opportunity to participate in vocational education. i have seen girls get excited about participating in something that is perceived as valuable. to me, then divide starts early on. why not have vocational education in high school? there is a formal waiver system and an informal labor system. i grew up where people build houses. they had gotten carpentry in high school and they were able to do it. >> i agree with you. i just want it to the high- quality. dimension as well as a strong and effective connection to real

jobs. to me, it is stunning. on any given day in this country, which have over 2 million people under lock and key, and we cannot find welders. a lot of these young people that are riding in prison, they couldn't have those occupational credentials -- they could have had those occupational credentials. we have had concerns over tracking. the biggest attacks on vocational education are concerns about why are we tracking low-income kids when the white and middle-class kids can go off to college? we want high-quality, career education that enables them to go a post-secondary route if

they choose to do so. the other concern about vocational education is that you train people for a job that exists today. what if it disappears? you want a strong enough base of credentials that if that sector dries up, they could actually go somewhere else. i agree with you. i want it to be high quality both in the academic and occupational dimensions. >> ok. let's see. there were several questions. some hands that i saw earlier were not up. right here? no, right here. we will try moving across. >> victor stone. my question had to do with alternative methods to get a high-school degree. i want to know if any studies

show what the effect is on getting a job afterwards. they seem like the opposite of what harry was saying. i have known some teachers that go along with teenage rebellion, but they channel them to get a degree. they are not strong on the discipline that the employer is looking for. i have been pleasantly surprised by some of the kids that have later gotten into the workforce. i noticed there body jewelry is gone, their hair is mainstream. >> we have to move on. >> the main question is, is the alternative education working, and we would give -- would we give it a credential by removing

some of these things like at 2- removal -- tattoo-removal. >> i am not seen a lot of evidence. there has spent some evidence, not hard evidence, that they can upper -- improve measures would alternative forces. i have not seen how the labor market would react. it would be nice to get evidence. >> a first of all, there -- first of all, there are a lot of places that are alternative, and not all of them are good. i am not talking about an alternative high school credential. i am talking about alternative methods at achieving the same level of competency, but a different route to getting there.

usually, they are in conjunction with the school system. it is just a different way of getting there. that is the important aspect of what we have to explore. >> i may have to take several questions in a row. >> i am from howard university. a question and comment. did you control for participation in job training? >> no. we controlled for whether they were employed. >> there has been a lot of discussion about whether these things do or do not make a difference. that would clearly be one important next step. the other is, this was wonderful showing the differennial. it would seem that part of what you want to do is reverse everything and say "can i

identified the differences in these very heterogeneous populations, and look at outcomes for these different groups? -- ? if you look at young women who have children. the whole spectrum of what are the different groups. which ones have better outcomes? which ones are in great risk? >> you might want to mention some of the important variables. >> i was going to take a look at one example of one of the cuts.

one question is we know that in the pool of people that i was talking about, some go on to college, and some do not. that is one cut. we do see significant racial disparities there. it is the same story if you are african-american and new dropped out of money -- and you dropped out, among youth that did not go to college, they are fearing worse. .n terms of margaret's about other factors -- point about other factors, we had a measure of mental health. hi mental-health took a shorter time to attain employment. looking on parents -- if your parents have a high school

degree, that shortens the time that it takes for you to attain full time employment. there are aspects of parents' own educational attainment. >> i have four questions. i would like to try to take all of them in a row and see if people could address them all at once. . .

>> there is a question in the back row. >> you mentioned holding a job in high school. unpaid internships. what do you say about the role of unpaid internships? >> ok, front row, and the next one is going to be over there. >> high. it seems to me that the approach now more so is reactionary -- high. -- hi. is there anything being done correctly or in visions for the future on the prevention side -- being done correctly or envisioned -- currently? access to employment. >> last question over here.

>> i do not know if you might be familiar with the early- indicator warnings, the research about early indicators as a preventative measure in preventing the drop out crisis and stemming back, but, i guess, the question also is for the hardest to serve youth. what are the things that need to be in place to improve maybe re- engagement process for dealing with youth or residential delinquent placements. i know the department of human services might be a critical part of the. -- of that. >> all right, all of them seem to be directed in some way, except for the one about unpaid0

so i will move this way and address what you want to do. >> i will talk about the key elements that need to be in place in order to get this problem, it engaged in this problem and solve it, so from a policy -- to get this problem, engage in this problem and solve it. there is the pacific -- specific idea of building communities to structure the kinds of pathways and systemic systems coming together to address this

problem, as we have in the past, but at a level and a scale that is going to do something. we need to make this part of a process, whether we are talking justice, health and human services, work force, eddcation, whatever. we need to look at youth and look at this cohort of young people who are dropping out, and i think that also goes to prevention, the question of prevention. high schools have to be in focus, clearly, and i think they are starting that in education, but you have to have a clear focus on high school and high school reform in our reauthorization but in a way that brings in the other communities and the other systems as looking at directing

the programming around to this population. -- around this population. >> if you suffer someone to work, they must be paid, so people should remember that if you are working for a for- profit, it is very difficult for them to structure an unpaid internships that would be legal, so we just want to remind everyone that you get paid, good jobs for everyone -- to structure an unpaid internship. trying to look at community- based and wrap-around things, harry has raised the issue, and it is very important to remember that at least for at least a young, adult black man, the problem of being an ex offender is a huge barrier. the department has increased its involvement greatly for job training for ex offenders. our increased -- these were

explainable. we must remind ourselves that her report tells that even if you did all of those things, you're left with a gap, and an unfortunate gap. i think we have to look at our labor markets, how labor markets are structured, how labor is shared among workers, some of the things we feel very uncomfortable talking about, because we have gotten on the track of looking at the individual and thinking there is something wrong about the individual, and looking at some of the things that may be more systemic to look at some of the things that he was not able to control for, and that might get to answering the question, which i think is more troubling of the research, which is after you have done all of these programs come after you have made the playing field level, after you have done the summer youth

programs, you will still be left with a disadvantaaed black youth, and that is the challenge i think we all want to commit ourselves to. >> i have gotten great questions about what we have been able to control for, so what i want to tell me is that we are using the 1997 cohort. there were a battery of questions. there is a great segment. i am looking at my colleague, who was involved in designing the survey. there are a battery of questions that ask about the employment that they youth have, and so, i think in future research, that is an area to explore, at least among the youth who are getting jobs. what are they identify? what are the patterns? and what explains -- what are they identifying?

there'll be a lot more exploring of those variables. >> in addition to some of the good suggestions, first of all, margaret opened a talk about the recession, and are very high unemployment rrte, and i think we should not give up on job creation efforts -- and our very high unemployment rate. this is ford youth in general -- this is for youth in general and for the disadvantaged youths. having some skill building attached. i would start there, put that back in the policy agenda. if you're talking about out of school youths or in school youths, the americanngraduation initiative, it is part of the --

the original version, which entailed much more generous grants to states as well as colleges to build effective systems and effective pam's of entry. i think those were good mechanisms -- and effective paths of entry. frankly, so much of the discussion right now, a lot of talk of ratcheting up, this notion that every kid in the country should be taking algebra ii before they get a high-school diploma, i think that is the wrong way to go. i think what we want, the kinds of discussions we had, kid's face a wide range of high- quality options, including both academic and career education options that use these defect -- different mechanisms to expand those. along with continued evaluation, to give us a better sense of what works, and, of course,

putting more resources in and using those dollars definitely to build good systems, as linda said, as well as the programs, so there is a range of things. >> thank you. i would like to think marla for her work -- to thank marla. there is the low income families project, which i direct. and to refer people who want to see some of the written product, the transition to adulthood, there is a series of breaks on our website that feature this work and some of the work that was supported, dealing with the same data set, and i would like to thank all of the panelists putting up good ideas. for our urban, www.urban.org,

and for the department of labor, where you can find the new ideas. >> www.dol.gopv. -- www.dol.gov. >> ok, i am sorry could not spend more time getting more questions on the table. thank you very much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> tomorrow, we take you live to a debate between the three democratic candidates in a race to replace the south carolina governor. that is live on c-span thursday starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern. and you can watch all campaign debates on our website, c-

span.org. >> booktv in primetime continues today with a look at politics. political centrism. the american spectator founder. and a tuffs university president. from black power to barack obama. this is on c-span2. >> i said, "oh, my god. this president is going to be impeached." and i thought that we should not use that word in the newsroom, less people think we had some kind of agenda, but the awe of that moment stays with me. >> watch woodward and bernstein from earlier this year, and see what other key players have said about the break-in and cover-up.

xp ron washington your way. the c-span video library, free, on-line -- export washington your way. -- export regionexplore -- explore washington. from the brookings institution yesterday, this is just under two hours. >> good afternoon. i am a director of government studies here at the brookings institution, and it is my pleasure to welcome you to this forum on "is government broken? strengthening democracy through governance reforms." a recent cnn research survey found that 86 percent of americans found that the government is broken, and when you look at things that have

happened, it is no wonder that they feel that way. in the last year, we have faced a series of governance challenges that have addressed issues such as the economy, health care, climate change, and financial regulation, and our difficulties in confronting many of these problems have led many to question whether it is possible for the united states to face its short and long-term policy challenges. today, we are going to focus on two parts of the problee, the electoral and campaign-finance aspects of the issue as well as the governance issues involved in that. in both of the panels, we are going to look at the problem and some of the reforms that our panelists believe will contribute to our problem- solving capabilities. there are many people who are cynical about the electoral and governance reforms. they believe the system is broken and will always remain dysfunctional, but today, we're going to hear from speakers who

will put specific ideas on the table for improving our capacity, and at the conclusion of those panels, the president of america speaks and my colleague will explain what they think needs to happen in order to improve the performance of our political system. in addition, i want to point out that my colleague has put out a paper today on white institutions matter and his thoughts -- why institutions matter, so if you have not yet picked up a copy, if there are copies still available -- there are copies still available out in the hallway. this forum is hosted by a number of different organizations, in addition to brookings. we're pleased to reckon america speaks, the center for democratic governance at harvard, and everyday democracy. we want to thank those organizations for helping us to organize at this event. we have a broad range of voices

represented here today, and we look forward to a terrific conversation. to launch the forum, i would like to introduce miles rapoport. he has been the president of his group since 2001. i am sure you know that is a public policy research and advocacy organization based in new york city. it focuses on a wide variety of issues, but in recent years, it has looked particularly at issues of economic justice as well as ways to encourage a vibrant and inclusive type of democracy. miles has a long history of involvement in connecticut politics. he has been involved in connecticut politics for 15 pears. for te3n years, he served as a state legislature -- for ten years. he chaired the alexian committee and also served as the secretary of state in connecticut -- for

the election committee. so please join me in welcoming+ miles rapoport to brookings. [applause] >> good afternoon, evybody. i want to thank all you for coming to what i think we an excellent discussion of some of the ritical issues faci our democracy d what we can do about and how we can work together in the best possible way to do it. i want to thank the brookings institution for hosting us. darrell, thank you very mu. and i articularly want to thank e.j. dionne and tom mann who are the people who sort of got this whole conversation going about what we're going t do together today. i also want to very much thank the other three organizations who are cosponsors, everyday democracy and americaspeaks, both of whomwho have in one way or another been leaders of the effort to get genuine civic participation and public dialogue in our cuntry over the last number of years.

at also be asked institute at the kennedy school at harvard where archon fung has been a terrific member of our planning team. so i'm delighted that they have been articipants from the beginning, and i thinkhat we're going to have a really good conversation today. i especially want to ank norm eisen though i will introdu shorut ng in and reversing the white house, we're delighted to have a conversation with you as well. there are eally two strands of developments that have brought uso today' event. the first is a lg history of work in a variety of ways to make our democracy work better. this work has been done overcome him, hundds of years i suppose but just in the last 10 or 20 years on a variety of important issues. there's been work on lowering barriers toparticipation and encouraging people to voteand participate in the process, and to improve the voting process it sell. there has been work crease transparency and accountability and utilizing technology to open up the whole process of

governin there's been a lot of work on public deliberation to create ways, innovative ways, thoughtful ways of involving the public in genuine constant frustration and about the chois we face. there's been work on campaign financerefo, excellent work, seeking to reduce the undue inuence of money in our nation's politics. there's been work to mke our democracy more inclusive to work around civilrights, immigration reform and the inclusion of people have been excluded from the process heetofore. there's been a tremendous amount of work on community and national service seeking to enga people on behalf of their communities and, of course, as a new yoer i would not want to be in washington, d.c.without sang there's been a tremendous amount of work to get d.c. voting rights, o part of our and finish agenda but all of you inwashington, d.c., it ll come. it will ome. in each of these areas has been real pgress.

i think that you can point, if you're a participant in ny of the parts of what i would consider a full democracy movement, you ca point to the real progress at the state level, indication at the federal level as well. but there has been a sense i think that man of a share, that in some ways he efforts to make our democracy work as well as we can in that effort we are less than the sum of ou parts, rather than greater than the sum of our part. too often the work that we've done has been in silos, often without knowledge of what each other is doing, often without even an understandin of the language and concepts that are pa of the other people wh are doing wo make democracy better. and sometimes even competion for what is the most important reform. but we know that in a strong and healthy democracy, it will only be achieved when we have made progress on the full democracy reform agenda. from participation to voting, to evening the playing field. and all of these issues that we

have talked about. it is this reality that the campaign for a stronger democracy is seeking to address. in the summer of 2008, before we know who our next presidt was going to be, had a conference in whington that really discuss awhole ange of issu, 50 representives from various groups actually sponsored religion by the kellogg foundation. cameogether to see if we could develop and articulate a full democracy agenda. we did so with carolyn lukensmeyeas our facilitator. and present it to both campaigns, both the obama campaign and the mccain campaign. to our, t to ou surprise, but to our appreciation the obama campaign, as a campaign, and in the obama administration was president obama was elecd, took up our issues an had -- has been having a real dialogue with us on them. in the smer of 2009, an even

larger group of people came together, over 100 from a wider number of organizations and groupsand continued the work of moving that agenda, discussing with the administration, tryingto make real progress. the progress of that meeting was a report which is in the foder that you ha. and we're not releasing it today because it's been out but we are sort of wanted to make the recommendations in it real and more resident as we go forward today there's also been work with federal managers that americaspeaks has led to make them work and talk to each other and governed in a more collaborative and participatory way. and has been tremendous amount of work onelection reform, campaign financereform in the meantime as well. today, we seek to talk about all those issues, look at where we stand on them, see what the barriers exist, and see if we can make progress. so that firsthand, the continuation of ongoing work on democracy issues, is one of the

reasons at we are here. but the second reason we're here, we're also an extraordinary moment in our nation's publilife. it's nt only a continuation moment as i see it. it's a change mment, even a crisis moment,for our democracy. our country isdebating fundamental, enormous economic and social issues, and is at a deep political crossroads. with have deep and prolond ecomic criis, fight or financial regulation regulation, health care reform, immigration rerm, and our environmental future. and yet, at just the moment when we need our democracy to work a wells it possibly can, there are fundamental ways in which it seems broken in simply not upto the task that history has set before it. there are ma issues that are involved hre and on the panel so you hear about a lot of the different issues, both with the problems are, where they stand and what we ca do and how they relate to each other. we may not agree on every aspect of the situation we face, but we all agree on the need toeleve

these issues t the front part of the public debate. we need energic advocacy for organizations d people and citizens, and communitiesrom the outside. i also need real leadrsh from the administration, from congre, and from people who have the ability at the state and national level to help make things happen. what we hope to acmplish today? no one gabbing can obviously solve our problems or wrap them up in a neat sandwich. it's a wrap. that's it. and serve them as a finished product. but we think w can move the agenda for it in several ways, and that's what we hope to do. mber one, we will explore into panels some of the most important issues we face, the current state of play on them and where they can go from here. the first panel on electoral and campai fance reform we will deal with our election process itself. practitioners with long experience and expand the

franche, lowering barriers to participatn, creating an even playing field. will talk about where we stand and have tese issues can relate to ach other. the second panel will connect to governanceeform, exploring issues of open government, in the legislative gridlock, finding ways to expnd true and positive civic engagement. i think together weill try to make a case, secondly, for a holistic and multifaceted agenda for democratic reform. and try to moe that agenda forward. i think will take some additional steps towards endg the silence nation of the work thatoes on on so many of those issues. sharing information about the efforts woul change, giving ourselves as more as part of a more comprehensive effort for reform and hopefully begin to work even more closely in the future. will also develop some common ideas and thinking about how we message, how we talk about these democracy issues in a way that not only brings them together,

but also resonates withthe public. that has to beenaged in these issues if we're going to make real progress. and lastly, will ask fo some nextpps from the resident and om congress. passing legislation, much of which is up for discussion that will make a real difference. developing a embracing new ways of governing with greater civic participation. what about the idea of a white house summit odemocracy issues? we've had a summit on the fiscal deficit. wh about on democracy stuff is and what we can do about it? what about engaging and leag on these issues going forward? these will not be t easy things to do. tremenus challenges remainor all of us whare in the field. but the stakes are too high, the consequences of continu goes our democratic failure to fighting for us not to make evereffortthat we possibly can to make real progress on thes fundamental democracy issues. it's a tall order, but we have no choice but to attempted. and i want to welcome all of you

who have come here to participate today. we are starting out. if we go to our panels with a real treat, i think him as we begin will hear from nor eisen. let me introduce and properly. knowing hasserved as special counsel to the president for ethicsnd gvernme. reform since the beginning of the obama admnistration. in tt capacity he has helped lead the administration's initiatives on government ethics, lobbying regulation nd open government. his portfolio has also included nancial regular tour refrm, campaign finance, whistblower protection and many other reform issues. prior to joining the administration, he was a general counsel for the presidential transition team, and before that was a litigation partner in the washington, d.c., firm of zukermtated where he practiced for 18 years. you al was one of the founders of the citizens for responsible and ethics in washington, the organization grew, a government wahdogup that said this is a man who has be on both sides of the inside and outside divide and regute he a conversation

with them. he's going to talk about the administration's perspective on these democracy issues and he will have time for questions and aners. norm eisen, thank you very much for joining us. [applause] >> thanks everyone. it is a pleasure to be ere. think my job description is the representative of the first ever to break down the silos. miles was talking bout. of course, thiis the first white house to have a special counsel who wos on th government ethics and reform issues and has been, i think, a useful perspective to tie those together, and the wayin which the different issues that we are so pleased, you are addressing today, inform each other.

i would like to talk today a little bit aboutthe administration's efforts to make our democracy work better. the president, of course, was very eloquent on the campaign trail in constructing his commitment to the aerican people to chge washington. the notion that our democracy is a living and vital enty that, in every eneration, needs to change and grow and adapt in order to meet the challenges that that generation presents. and so that themes of change, which apies across the board is a critical one in the area of, in the areas in whici spent my day, gornment ethics, lobbying reform,government openness and transparency.

and substantive reform issues such as campaign finance reform. so i tught that i would just take a few moments to walk through our experiences, the lessons that we've learned. i think the successes that we have enjoyed very often with the help of folks who are participating in today's seminar, i will tell you that one of the -- not everybody here agrees with everyone of the iniativewe have taken in these ars. as i look around the room, i see friends who have been vcal. sometimes ivately. more often publcly. in articulating their disagreement. that, too, is a part of a healthy and nctioni democracy. and it is ot -- when we talk about the three values that inform our open government work,

for example, ere's transparency, which is a notion that government should be -- government information, what government idoing should be avlable to the people. so they and all of you can see what's going on in government. participation, allowing folks in the nation, experts and ordinary citins alike to participate in the function of government. and i think the highest value of the three, kind of captures all the threes collaboration, which is actually working together, hearkening bck to the spirit with which our nation was founded. every member of the country having a correct investment and experience, and engagement, with the operations of the country. part othat notion of collaboration is candidly to

tell us when you agree and when u disagree. and many of you hae taken that virtue too hard in sharing with those publicly and priately, and in the end of the day, of course there needs to bethere needs to be an assessment of overall how we're doing. and i'm pleased that we hae come overall, the administrati has gotten higharks for is efforts in the executive branch. and i'going to talk about some of them and relive the history of the past 18 months or so with all of you, to the extent that our efforts tomakethese virtues and these valu real in government. i think an form the ongoing discussion that you're having and the arger mission that i addressed by today's meeting. so of course, the very first thing that the president did is

his first full day in office, include commitments into other ars that that we're talking about tody. he sigexecutive der on ethics in front of an international television audience. it actuallywas, this was done at a ceremony on january 21, where all of the white house staff were also sworn in. so we had the ee of the word upon us as we took out old, and then the president signedhe execive order on ethics. among the content of the executive order on ethics with the administration's historic commitment to closing the revolving door in government. as i think all of you know, i hope all of you know, it's bee extensively discussed and

debated and written abut, that this president has asked everyone joining his administration to make a commitment not to lobby the administration for the life o the administration. soe is close the revolving door moving forward, historically. he has also st up a first ever reverse revolving door limitations, wherefore lobbyists and non-lobbyists alike, there are very strict lmits on your ability to work on issues that you worked on befor coming into government so that the american people can be ressured hat folks who ae joining the government will put the interest of the american people first and not the interest of their former employe and tir form clients. this -- these tough revolving doores would not without controversy. they occasioned a vigorous

debate, really a series f debates, which has persied throughout the life of the administration. it was at its strong as in e opening nths of the administration. the debate included whether there should be different rues for for-profit and nonprofit lobbyists, whether the rules as some said were t tough. others thought they were too lenient. whether there should or should i be exceptions to the rules, and a variety of other issues. we come and this is on of the themes of migrating to you, robert lee my overly long greeting to you, -- probably my overly long greetg to you. we welome that debat and one of the objectives of our rules, and we believe very strongly in the content the rules. both thought through carefully and the run up to the preside

taking offi. we of course work on them over the course of the campaign, and and intensively inthe trantion. one of the things that e hope to do with the rules, in addition to having sound, well-founded rules tha fnction as a matter of policy, which we think they do, we think it's critical that the evolving door be clos, was all to inspire a conversation, not just within the beltway, but a national conversation. about how government can be rededicated to the american peop. and we think that the roles have done that, is important, it's important for the american people, not only to know -- important not only for the revolving door to be close, but al for the amrican people to know that the revolving door is closed. a critical part of our mission of the presidents objective is to restore t trust of the american people in their

government. less there was any doubt that this message was getting through, i vvidly remembe veral months into the administration, on the front page of the "n york times there were two articles. one aricle wasa running down the left column, both above the fold. one article was a discussion on the executive order, andthe pros and cons of the executive order. and the on the column running down the right side, of the paper, was a discuion about allegedly mproper lobbying contacts in washington. if you had any doubtthat the "new york times" was engaging in this greatational debate, he only had flip over to page 17 when he put the to stories directly together. so those types of anecdotes bring home for us the reality

thate had joined these issues in a great national debate. and this administration is welcomg of that conveation. indeed, it's part of the reason we are so pleased of this conference, and ones like it. i try to come whenever i can, whenever invited. i have been privileged to appear at a large number of them. pleased that they are taking place. a second pillar of our reform efforts, in our first year and a half was alo commenced that fit full day in office. and th took place when the president signed shortly after signing the executive order on ethics, gned a memorandum on open government. and as i think about the innovations and i do think the

revolving door rules andhe other ethics innovations are crical, we're going to talk a ttle bit aboutome additional breakthroughs that i think we've had in the area of lobbying regulation, but certainly there iso ore, no greater hallmark than the ways in which we have tried to rescue and rebuild and restore governance and democracy, that our efforts in the area of open government. so let me focus on those for a moment. and i will talk not just about the outcome, but alsothe process. and agai as ith our revolving door rulesthe objective ere s not just a set of policies in place. that made sense, but also to send a powerful message to the erican people that this was not business as usual in governme. perhaps the first way in which we tried to do that, we started

work right away on our open government plans. and once again, an many of you, many of the organizations and individuals in the room, were critical really incollaborate with the department in ways that have been, i have blogged about that all of you have blgged about. really extraordinary exchangof government itself. it reflects on our ope government website. and soliciting your ideas. how can governmt be more open? how can it be transparent? how can it be collaborative? how can it be participatory? we did that both at a general level, but als on an agency by agency level, hadcads of not just electroni exchanges, but in pers conversions. ther is no -- we were talking about is an agrement before. therwas no substitute for talking face-to-face to folks. that's part of the reasons the president tries to get out of

washington and talk directly to the american people whenever he can. and the of us wh wk for him y to example by that virtue by talking personally to the experts, the authorities, and to average folks about these issues. while we were doing the work of building our open government plans on an agency by agency basis, we decided that we needed in the white house, that we wanted to seize on opportuniti opportunities, both to send a message to our colleagues in vernment, and also to the american people, that we're going to conduct our business in a more open ad transparent way. and perhaps the best known example of that is a decision of the white house to put its visitor access records on a so-called ways record on the internet for everyone in the press anthe american people to see. so that everyone in the country can know exactly who is coming and going from the white house,

as some of you may know, other adnistrations have fought for many years to rotect just a handful of visitor records ha to do with vari task forces that operate in the white house. we resolved open ltigation, and announced policy moving forward of posting our visitor records monthly. and i'm pleased to tell you, but as of friday, we put up another batch, regular monthly patch on friday. as we do, we had over 350,000 visitor records available on the internet for everyone to review. now, why i that important? look, everybody has a right to know who is coming and going, okay? so that is obviously important in and of itself. we thought it sent a very powerful message throuout government and to the american

people that the white house was wiing to really lead, to take the first step n this new 21st century governance style of beg open andtranparent. so, and it has been, say, with visitor access, postings have been a big sccess. ey are much visted and then a standard part of the reporting on stores to check the ways record that are on the white house website. of course, it's important in and of itself. it since and port message, but that message of openness needs to spreathroughout government. that is why we have really made a cornerstone of our open government efforts. the en government plans. and here weome and those o you are not for my with the open government plans, pursuanto the preident's initial directive, omb, issued a for the directive to all of the agencies

to design an open government plan. and we provided a very,ery detailed list of the information that needs to go in the open government pn. the idea here i that the cabinet agencies will internalize and take responsibility for, not just the cabinet agencies really throughout governmen the agencies will internalize, take responsibility for and implement a sees of steps to open up to the americ people,o the particular folks who have strong interest rlationships with those agencies, too, among other tings, let the world see what is happening inside the ency, to unleash information that is viable within the agencyto engage with substantive experts and ordinary folks in the agency's business so the agencies coerned, better serve the american people. the process, of all of the open government reports, are now on ency websites.

and i just wan to say a word about the processecause it reallyexemplifies this newway of doing business that the president has been sinsient . we, in oing the government what subject matter experts and with the american people, folks who were from all over the country invited to comment on the open government plan, and i see many of our colleagues are non-governmental. i see them in the room. they will see that there is an unprecedented level of willingness to listen. willingness to hear, places we could do better, improving the places we could do better and an ongoing dialogue that is continuing. about these living documents, these open government plans, so

there we have to have a process that matched our product, and i am very proud of that. let me talk for a minute about how these two, about a way that we combine these two different strains of thought, the idea of doing more open governnent but also government that is more ethical. that was in our stimulus lobbying. folks may remember that as part of announcing the stimulus, we had a set of rules to make lobbying related to the stimulus to regulate it. regulate t. and there was, once again, we had this same virtue of participation d colloration. we did something that was very unusuawhen we announced our first set of stimulus lobbying

regulations. we said this is 60 day trial period. and we are, because we're doing something that is new and different, and ving this regulations that goes above and beyond what's required by the lobbying disclosure act, we want to kw what you think about it. and we had a very vibrant public discussion about those stimulus lobbying rules. and lo and behold, we actually learned how there were a number of things that were sunded, both from inside and outside of the goernment. it's also very refreshing to people in government to have an opportunity to comment and tell us what we could be doing better and one of the theme that emerged was that we are, and the president has been, vociferous and calling for improvements to lobbying disclosure act to cover more, more activity. and one of the recurring themes we heard as that the initial stimulus lobbng rules that we

had come up with did not, that they maintain and unfair distinctn between rgistere and unegistered lobbyists. anas a result of heing that, we, for thfirst time ever, wrote down that barrier and inhe final rule that we announced, for every competitive grantfor stimulus lobbying nds, whether you're a registered lobbyist or not, the first set of rules was more focused on registered lobbyist, whether you are a registered lobbyist or an unregistered lobbyist, or what have you,all communications, oe competitive grant applation grant is on file for steam is lobbying funds, have to be put in writing and placed on the internet. and so we broke down that barrr as a result of having participation and collaboration and transparency in our decision-making processes. we were able to break down that barrier between egisted and unregistered lobbyists for the first time.

there are many, many other instances that i could share with you to illustrate our efforts over the course of the past year and a hlf. currently,te white house is dely engaged with the bipartisan leadershi in congress, and in the reform community. and with the american people. in the effort to address the aftermh of the citizens united decision, which opened the floodgates for unlimited corporate expenditures in american elections. first time ever. the american people is the place where the president hashown leadership in speaking out against the decision. the american people have responded. polls show that cross parties, across regions, 0% of the american people disapprove of the decision. and we're working with t bipartisan leaership in congss to come up with a

legislative solution, moving at a rapid clip through the house at the moment, that will address a deciion. i offer this final illustration, together witha theme that i think ties all of these efforts together. all four of these examples, and the many other examples that i could ffer, what the president has done through his leadership s the 10th, is to recognize that there is too much special interest power that is concentrated in washington. weather takes the form of folks writg the revolving door, a of an ecess of lak of transparency so the american people can't participate in the government, too much special interest mey in politics or what have you. his ambition ito level the playing field so that ordinary folks, and the public interest,

have a fir opportunity to have their voices heard in washington. and so the debate is not dominated by the special interest. that does not men that lobbyists and their clients have no right t speak. of course, they do. the president recognizes that, but the unifying theme has been to balance the playing fie out and you create a space in which the public interest and the voices of the public can be heard. we will continue with that effort. we thank all of you in the room for participinin today's scussion, to improve our democracy, to continue the tradition of arican greatness. and we look for to working with you in the months and years ahead on that critical ational task. thank you very much. [applause] >> we have time for three quick question. i ask that you ask about somethg he hs said and not

someing that trannine not touch on in his speech. [inaudible] >> in the case of congressman sosa, open government. [inaudible] >> no. for the details of that, you know, i would direct you to the relays last week, but would not think so. our ambition to in opating as we hve, in terms of all of our regulations, has been to accomplish the nation's business. i think, i will say that as i around the room, there have been folks have been tough graders, but the great overall have been i. i will remind folks, if you didn't read about it, is sometimes is a little touer to get the good news out, that a

coalition of reformgroups, many of whom are represented here, gave us a's or our revolving door polies. ys of ur transparency policy. and i really think in terms of openness, that what you have seen in this administration is a historic resetting of the paradigm. we think that it is, it really sets an agency by agcy basis what we've done with the open government plans really is historic, and we feel real proud of our overall recor >> can you comment on the hrg of -- i write about the financial crisis, hiring of secretary geithner's secretary geithner's chief of staff from goldman sachs. the question goes to the hiring of the secretary geithner's chief of staff. we have tough rules. we have lived up to those rules

and in every instance. i thnk that the hiring in that case, there were a series of recusals ere put in place that have been stctly observed. so i think that we have, we have lived up to our standards in that regard. and, indeed, i thnk in all of our, in all ofourhires, it makes for a lot more work for us when you these tough rules. but we have abidedby those, ided by those rules. and certainly that case is no exception. >> time for one more question. [inaudible] >> what do you think of te adequacy of the obama administration dinitn of high value data sets? one definition basically which is what the obama administration, should we subdivide that so th accountability, fo example for third parties regulated like

people who build baby carriages release thr data. but stinguished that clinton highdata data sets were high level officials in the ageny are made more accountable by the data. should we make that distinction? >> the question, thequestion is about our high-value data sets, which is one of the terms we use in the open government directiv i think, and what the content should be the definition of a high data set. the critical question in high-value data sets is high value to whom? you are right. notion is that there are so many consumers of government data that aually the definition of high-value data sets will be multifaced. so to parents who want to have data sets on nutrition for their

children, or onwhat is a safe car see, that is the highestof hi-value data sets. anwe include we aso include a number of data sets that are critical to high ranking officials. we try to include data sets that are valuable for researche, and others. so we have attempted to leave the definition broad enough to capture everyone's, you know, to capture the multifaceted ature of the users of the data sets. i will say in thategar just one last tidbit. we have and confine ourelves to the every agency needed to come up with three new high-value data sets that were machine-readable, which th did. on a timetable as part of the open government plan, but they haven't stopped there. we started data.gov in the early months of th administration. with less than 100 data sets.

today, there are well over 100,0 data ss on data.gov. so government is releasing data, rapidly across government. and th ds come is part of, i think, the dramac innovation in the area of open govrnment that will unck tremendous value for the american people from for american business, for ur economy. and we bear in mind all of the different uses of at data in releasing it. >> thank y very much. >> thank you, miles. thanks everyone. thanks for having me. [appus >> tee quick things. as our first pel begins to come up. one is, norm, a big thank you to you, not just for coming today but for all the work you hae done. and those of us who are in the

field, knows that you're someone who walks th walk as well as talk the talk. so w appreciate it very much and ve much to be. let me ask the people, secondly, if the people are standing at the back, if ou'd like to come and take seat there is definitely room, and much to come. let me ask the first panel to. while they're doing that i wanted acoupl of acknowledgments. i just want to make sure that people are aware of the people that put this event toether, from americaspeaks, one of the partners, carolyn lukensmeyer and joe golden joe, where are you? regime and. thank you very muc from demos i want to thank brenda white and also acknowledged having the key and the two key leaders of our washington ofce were sitting in the back of the room. thank you very much. from everyday democracy, martha mccoy who's here, and pat scully who could make it today, but has been part of t process everince. d archon fung fro the ash

center at the nnedy school of harvard has been a bad as part. and also jane austen a huge amount of logistics work just last week to make sure we get here. so thank you to all the been part of it. perfect timing. and i wan to introduce karen hobert flynn. you have her bio in your ocket, but karen is someone who is the vice president for state governments and state chapters fo common use. she's also a connecticut, a leader of democracy work in connecticut where she and i worked together for going on 25 years. and it's been a delight to work with her and very happy to have r the panel. eshoo introduced the panelists. karen, come on up. >> thank you, miles. good afternoon, everyone. i'm very pleased to be that i'd like to thank the brookings institution, dems, everyday democry,