of eugene v. debs. after that, david axelrod. later, new jersey gov. chris christie's remarks on the economy and education from the ronald reagan library. let me introduce you to our two guests. ernest freeberg's book is called "democracy's prisoner."

it has been 85 years since debs died. why do we care about him? >> he was one of our most important labor leaders at a crucial time of the conflict between labor and capital. more importantly, he was the central figure in the socialist movement at a time it was a viable growing part of the american political culture. >> does he have a lasting legacy? >> i think like many third-party candidates, he and his fellow socialists moved the conversation in very important directions. in that regard, he is of his time but he has also made a lasting impact on us as well. >> we will have time to delve into some of the elections later on. of the five bids he made, are any particularly significant? >> the 1912 bid is the high mark of socialism where he got 6% of

the votes. a different election was 1920 where he was imprisoned in the atlanta penitentiary and got 1 million votes while running from prison. >> in our 90 minute program, "the contenders," we look at people who made an attempt at the white house and failed, but they had an effect on political and american history. we are live tonight from the debs home in terre haute. it is on the campus of indiana state university. he lived here in this house, he and his wife kate, who lived here for years after he died. we will show you more of the house as we continue here. the top floor of the house has an interesting mural. the mural depicts the years of his public life. throughout our program we will be showing you aspects of the artwork to help illustrate

eugene debs' story. let me introduce you to our second guest. she is joining us from what was his bedroom, now is a museum room with a lot of artifacts. lisa phillips -- she is a specialist in labor history. lisa phillips, thank you for being with us. your thoughts on his significance to the american story. >> i think the significance has to do with this activity in labor unions -- the american railway union and the socialist party as well. he has had a lasting effect on many of the laws that were passed during the progressive era as a result of his activism, some of which we still enjoy. he can tell us a lot about his time period through running for president and through all of his labor union activity as well. >> lisa phillips will be showing us some of the artifacts

through the house. she is part of the debs foundation. tell us a little bit about the debs foundation. >> it seeks to keep his legacy alive. it hopes to promote not only the museum, but the policies that eugene debs promoted such as the social justice and equality and the rights of workers. we try to live through the spirit of his mission. >> as we turn to your expertise, this house and what you showcase here, can you tell me a little bit about how the house is financed and functions? who pays for it? who takes care of it? >> it is paid for by the debs foundation and is cared for by dr. charles king and karen brown. both of them are here in terre haute and run tours of the museum on a daily basis. >> for our viewers, in 10 minutes or so, we will open up phone lines and invite you into

the discussion. very interested to hear the questions and discussion about eugene debs and the turn of the 20th century and that period that he represents. let me ask you a little bit about what made him a success. >> many people remember him most of all as a dynamic speaker. this is an era of wonderful stump speakers that can fill two or three hours with a speech. he was really the best in that genre. in fact, so good he could charge admission for his audience and that is how they funded the socialist campaign in many cases. he was very charismatic and had the ability -- i think he began as a staid victorian speaker but became much more comfortable over the years.

he developed a more modern impromptu style that later made an impact on his audience. >> over your shoulder is debs' library. my understanding is that eugene debs dropped out of school at age 14. i am curious about his extensive library and how he educated himself. >> he was very much self-taught. he worked very hard at that. he began working in the railroad union and was interested in literature there. he worked for a while as a grocery clerk in town. he always wanted more education but had to rely on his own. >> how did terre haute shape eugene debs? >> in many ways. mostly through his upbringing here when he was a younger man. a boy and a young man. he always harkened back to terre haute, and he invoked it all the time in terms of the

harmonious relationships that he said developed in old terre haute where everybody could aspire to do something good in their lives, whether it be a business owner, whether you are a worker. everybody had the chance. he always said, in the old terre haute, everybody had the chance to do something and to improve their lives. that is what he held in the most regard. >> when you walk around the house, you can see he was interested in politics from an early age. he made a bid for clerk in his town and made a successful bid for the indiana legislature on the democratic ticket. his early roots were in two party systems. can you talk about that? >> i can say a little bit which is to say he ran on the democratic party ticket when he believed that he could form a relationship between multiple groups of people whether they be business owners, workers, and he believed the party system in that regard. it was not until later in the 1880's and 1890's that he felt the party system through the democrats and republicans were

not working for the best interests of all the people combined. >> when he sought the white house, what was his intention? did he ever really think that he could win? >> he said very clearly he had no intention of ever winning. he was interviewed in 1908 and they said what would it be like for you to be president. he said if the party ever becomes close to winning, i would be the last person who would want the job or that they would put into the job. he really thought of himself more as an evangelist for the cause. he believed in democracy. i think he was more interested in using the campaigns to generate interest among workers and develop class consciousness to deliver his message very powerfully every four years. >> give us a snapshot of the america he was dissatisfied with. >> there was an enormous concentration of capital. that was the big problem of the

time. many people were worried about the labor problem. many workers felt in the face of the rapid industrialization that their skills were less soluble, their wages were being fitted into the international market where they were getting declining wages and a more difficult work environment. there was an enormous sense that labor was deeply unhappy. eugene debs turned it around and said the problem is not labor, the problem is capital. it is not that the workers are unhappy, the root problem is that these enormous concentrations of capital are undermining american democracy. >> socialism was on the rise in europe. how was eugene debs doing here different from over there? >> it was similar at first. they considered themselves internationalists. socialism needed to be a worldwide movement.

they expected it would be. they felt there were distinctive challenges in america to convince workers to do that. there was a stronger sense of a working class in europe on which to draw for socialist organizing there. one of the struggles for eugene debs throughout his career was to convince workers they should think of themselves not as democrats or republicans, not on the basis of their religious affiliations, but of members of the working class. >> how successful were he and his fellow thinkers in convincing the public? at the height of his popularity, how much ground that they make? >> it depends on how you measure that. if you measure it on his success, the high water mark was 1912. he got 6% of the vote. >> never any electoral college? >> no. there was a much broader period socialists were much more successful on the local level. there were many socialist

mayors. city officials of various kinds. there was a vibrant international socialist society for college students started by jack london. a lot of college campus ferment about socialism. there was a lively press, some of our best in journalism from that time period comes out of the socialist press journals. socialism was much bigger than counting the votes. >> today in congress, the united states senator bernie sanders from vermont is a socialist. we talked to him about eugene debs' legacy. let's listen to what he had to say. >> a lot of big ideas that he advocated. he talked about when people get old, there should be social insurance for them. there should be retirement benefits for them. that is what we call social security today.

amazingly, in 2011 there are those same people that want to destroy social security. he believed health care was the right of all people. that battle continues today. i think it is fair to say that many of the huge advances made during the 1930's under president roosevelt, the great society under lyndon johnson, and throughout, those were ideas that people liked eugene debs probably brought to the attention. the first person to bring to the attention of millions of working people. >> let me ask you to add your perspective to the america that he saw and was dissatisfied with. ultimately, whether or not he saw himself as anti-american or wanting to change america. >> i do not think he saw himself as anti-american at all. i think he thought he was advocating through his socialist party activity a kind of america that he harkened back to again in the old days of terre haute, one that was more community centered, one that was less big business. in his early days, he was not anti-capitalist at all in his early days.

it was not until the advent of big business and corporate capitalism that he felt there had to be a movement toward that profit motive that continued to bring everyday workers wages down. >> let me ask you -- you have something to add to that? >> i agree with lisa. one of the things that made him so powerful is his ability to cast socialism as an american movement. it was -- this is a revolutionary country in the first place, we fought a revolution for democracy. in his lifetime he experienced the civil war as a revolution. some of his greatest idols were the abolitionists.

his argument was the country had fought a battle to overthrow chattel slavery. the next step is to overthrow wage slavery. >> a question for you -- who were his workers? did he include women in his view of it? did he include people other than whites? did he include immigrants? what was his definition, lisa? >> he was one of the first industrial union leaders. he was mounting a movement on behalf of the working class which he believed everybody who was a worker who earned wages, which were two-thirds of americans by 1890 was a part, whether they be an immigrant, black, a woman. so he saw them as all members of a working class that needed to be uplifted in some way, shape, or form. there is controversy to this day about whether he did enough on behalf of women and african- americans. he had some trouble seeing immigrants who came over, especially chinese and italian immigrants, who came over temporarily and worked for a very low wages and brought them back to their home countries as part of the same american

working class that was trying to fight for higher wages. he had some trouble over the course of his career reconciling that. as an industrial movement, his was one that recognized the rights of all workers regardless of their backgrounds. >> i understand you have one of the artifact copies of "the jungle." upton sinclair. what is the significance? >> it is a huge significance. sinclair published it in 1905. he was a member of the socialist party himself. he highlighted all the horrible conditions that meatpackers worked in and the conditions. what really riled up the country were not only the conditions, but also the quality of the meat that was coming out of the plants. he was the one who wrote about rats and people's fingers being caught in the processed meat and how horrible that was. he and eugene debs were

supporters of each other. upton sinclair was able to, like debs, demonstrate the problems with the growing of big business. that lead to the revolution of the food and drug administration, the fda. >> the book actually ends with a scene where he wanders into a socialist meeting and here's a character that is supposed to be eugene debs making a socialist speech. for upton sinclair, that was not food regulations but socialism was the bigger answer. eugene debs is actually right in the book.

>> can you tell the story of his first imprisonment and how he got connected with the concept of socialism at that time? >> he was the head of the american railway union which mounted a successful strike against the great northern railroad company in 1893. the aru gained thousands of members with eugene debs as its head. many of those members were part of the palace car company in 1894. the petition for support when they decided to walk out against george pullman who dropped their wages by 28%. they wanted to walk out and they asked for support. eugene debs was reluctant at first. he thought it was too risky. but the pullman workers had a

lot of support not only within the town of pullman which is outside of chicago, but also had a lot of support from railway workers all the way to st. louis. they staged some of the first boycotts or sympathetic strikes along the railway. it became national in scope. as a result of that, president grover cleveland and the clerks got involved and issued an injunction to stop them from stopping the transport of goods, especially the u.s. mail, along that corridor. grover cleveland got involved. he sent u.s. troops to open up the railway depots that had been shut down as a result of the strike that had been called by the aru. eugene debs ultimately did not call the striking workers off and was found in contempt of court for not following the injunction.

he spent three months in prison for being in contempt of court. it was then in prison after the pullman strike that he was introduced to socialist party literature and became a socialist party member and staunch advocate. >> i read a description that he entered prison a changed man for the first time. do you know more about that? >> i think he did come to the realization that when the federal troops came in and smashed the strike -- when he ended up in prison for defending the rights of workers that he made it as clear as could be that the two parties were both working against labor and there needed to be an alternative. he did not go right away to socialism. he was involved in the populist party. he was very active initially. when that failed, the socialist party emerged after that.

>> our two guests are going to begin bringing your telephone calls into the mix. we will put the phone numbers on the screen. we will mix calls in throughout our 90 minutes here. as we take our first call, we want to give you a sense of where the house in terre haute is and on the campus. we will show you that via google maps as we listen to our first caller from north carolina. hi, steve. >> please compare eugene debs to william jennings bryan. it seems like they are appealing or trying to appeal to somewhat the same constituency. >> thank you very much. william jennings bryan was a earlier profile.

in the election of 1912, how did they compare? >> eugene debs was initially an admirer of him. i think they shared some concerns about reform. i think the crucial difference is eugene debs was really a revolutionary. he not only was interested in reform, reform was necessary but they felt something much greater was needed. there needed to be an anti- capitalism and public ownership of the means of production. that was a position that clearly distinguished him from bryan's campaign. >> the election was his first try in 1900. william mckinley, william jennings bryan. he got 0.6% of the popular vote that year. do you know what his early appeals were as a candidate and how they changed over his many bids? >> the real challenge for eugene debs was to try to knit together socialists coming from very different positions. one of the strongest hotbeds of

socialism was oklahoma. people who had been populous started to develop these socialist camp meetings where they would gather together to hear socialist speeches. eugene debs was a real hero there. they also needed to speak to trade unionists in chicago and milwaukee to radical bohemians in san francisco, to jewish garment workers on the lower east side. it was a real challenge to find a way to knit together people who all agree on some level that capitalism needed to change fundamentally. they were coming at this from very different positions. it took a while to build the apparatus. >> another election in 1908 which involved william jennings bryan. he began to understand some early marketing.

he had some campaign tactics like the red train special and the red special ban. can you tell us a little more about that? >> 1908 was a critical year because of the ascendance of the popularity of the labor party -- the socialist party and the federation of labor and other labor unions. his message appealed to increasingly more people from a diverse amount of backgrounds. the red special would have been a good unifying symbol to use to unite what were very different groups of people who were working on farms or in urban areas. it meant to his supporters a challenge to big business, a challenge to capitalism. they would have called it big business or monopolies in that period. that is what red would have meant in the 1908 election. it was a good way to unify

people with just the use of the red special. >> this is a caller named randy. welcome. >> thank you. i just wanted to give you background. my grandfather voted for eugene debs in his election. as i went through school, we never heard of eugene debs. it seems like one thing that is really lacking in our education system is labor history. the fact that people -- many people died for those benefits. they were not gifts. people were literally killed and beaten and jailed for the right to have unemployment insurance. what the neo-fascists that are now running on the republican party want is -- it seems like

to re-establish that message more than ever. we are in a critical point in history where if we are not careful we could go towards fascism. i think his message now is more important than ever. >> a question for you before you go. i am asking you if you talked to your grandfather about eugene debs. which election did he actually vote in? >> the last election i believe was the 1916 election. >> that would be 1920. >> 1916 was the year he sat out i believe. thank you, randy. first of all, why did he sit out in 1916? >> he was in ill health. i think he only ran in 1920 because of the unusual circumstances. he felt it was time to pass on the baton of the movement to somebody else.

he did run for congress in indiana. he did not feel up to the red special. he was giving 15 speeches a day and would come back exhausted to terre haute and collapse in one of the bedrooms upstairs. he would spend weeks trying to recover. 1916 he decided to sit out. >> randy's comments are probably amusing to your ears about the lack of teaching of labor history. you keep the college level. i am wondering what you think about teaching of labor history to america's students. >> of course, i would say it should be taught more than it is. i think there is so much we can learn about working people, about all of us who work every day and try to make ends meet and value them by teaching their history is very important. it gives us a very different

perspective on what it means to fight for some of those rights that the caller was mentioning and not take them for granted. as hard-fought as they were fought for, they can be easily taken a way. we need to really teach those struggles and how difficult it was so we do not take for granted the benefits that we received as a result of them. >> in the early part of the 20th century, was there a middle class? >> yes. a large part of corporate capitalism generated a much larger middle-class. >> of the people he represented, would they be part of the middle-class or enlist the working class? >> there was a large number of middle-class supporters. they went to his meetings expecting to see just working class. people were surprised to find that actually many of the most important writers and political thinkers we can think of from that time period were either members of the socialist party are very sympathetic to their agenda.

he considered it a working-class movement, but it had a strong leadership component from the middle class. >> and in 1900, would it be dangerous to call yourself a socialist in the united states? were the authorities watching you in any way? >> no, there were particular incidents to be involved as a socialist and a particular strike environment was a problem. there was some conflicts over the rights of soapbox speakers. they were big believers of bringing their message to the street. sometimes there were clashes with the police. as far as persecution of the socialists, they were very much a part of the political conversation. >> when did the public at large begin to become more suspicious about intentions?

>> when socialists started to get a lot of votes, that started the conversation. in 1908 and 1912, teddy roosevelt called eugene debs one of our most undesirable citizens, an apostle of bloodshed and anarchy. there was a sense that the forces of moderate opinion were needed to push back against socialism rhetorically. it was not until world war i that the gloves really came off and socialism was physically and legally assaulted

>> why? >> one of the reasons was the wilson administration did just the opposite of what debs predicted. reforms. hour controls for 8 hour day for railroad workers, some regulation of the banking system, some gesture for the right of unions to organize. these were only small steps toward what the socialists wanted, but enough to win along voters. >> let's take our next telephone call. it is from portland, new york. this is sharon. >> i want to thank c-span for the wonderful series. i am enjoying it so much. i am wondering if your guests might comment on his early life, his formative years, and what his parents did for a living. thank you very much. >> thank you. would you like to take that? >> do you know, i am not exactly sure i can remember what his father did for a living. they lived in terre haute. i know he was a great idealist. debs himself -- his middle name is after victor hugo. it was a big part of his upbringing. >> i was just remembering that his father was kind of a processor of pork. he was ill. he could not do that work. there are reminiscences of him being depressed as a worker. his wife -- they had two small children. she was pregnant with eugene debs. they opened a small grocery in the front of their house. he became a successful small grocer in terre haute. his dad was a grocer. one of eugene debs' first jobs was an accountant for the home and grocery line. he had experience with the family business. that enabled him to do that work. that was where his family's income came from. >> why did he have to drop out of school at age 14? >> as i recall, i think it was not common for people to finish high school. he wanted to get a job on the railroad.

the railroads were the newest and exciting thing for young men to get a part of. his first job was a paint scraper for the local railroad that was running through terre haute. it was later owned by william keene. he was a paint scraper first. it was an exciting job in an era where people commonly did not finish high school. >> can either of you tell us about his marriage? >> that was always a source of controversy in the movement. he was deeply loyal to kate debs. it was pretty clear that she married him as an aspiring young grocer and congressman and not as a socialist. she has often spoken in favor of socialism publicly but not enthusiastically. she probably would have been happier if he had not pursued that life. it also kept him on the road most of the time. eugene debs was back in terre haute mostly to collapse upstairs and recover before he headed out on another campaign. she was left keeping the home fires burning in this house. >> so kate spent a lot of time in the living room where we are in this house in terre haute. >> with these down and out railroad workers knocking on the door and hoping they could see their hero. >> did they have children? >> no. >> you said he traveled extensively and she chose not to do that? or was she not invited to come along? i don't know. >> let's take our next phone call. this is tom. here we are in your home town. have you been to this house? >> no, i have not. i work two blocks away from there so i have no excuse. thank you for a fantastic series. i would just like to make a quick comment because there are so many people across america who would love to be calling. i lucked out to do it. i want to say this. when the unions and socialism

came about because of the lack of benevolent employers -- i want to make one point. i live in colorado. i call on the mines of colorado. i used to drive through southern colorado on interstate 25. i would pass a town called ludlow. i would ask ms. phillips if she knows anything about the ludlow massacre. i am not sure when it happened. i am sure eugene debs was alive at the time. i will hang up now. please ponder what i have said, you moguls of america. we need jobs and we need them now. could you please tell us a little bit about the ludlow massacre in colorado? >> the ludlow massacre and several other massacres and riots of the time period were often blamed on the striking workers at the time whether they were miners or whether they were protesting for their rights. what happened in ludlow that happened in other incidents is there would be federal troops or authorities brought in to quell the protest in workers. many of them would be killed. i cannot remember how many people died there, but in haymarket and other riots, in the homestead strike, several people would be killed. striking workers would be blamed for protesting. that is a reason why the knights of labor went by the wayside because they were blamed for the haymarket riot that caused the deaths of several people. it was an incident to where striking workers were killed and >> why? >> one of the reasons was the wilson administration did just the opposite of what debs predicted. it brought in a slate of reforms. hour controls for 8 hour day for railroad workers, some regulation of the banking system, some gesture for the right of unions to organize. these were only small steps toward what the socialists wanted, but enough to win along voters.

>> let's take our next telephone call. it is from portland, new york. this is sharon. >> i want to thank c-span for the wonderful series. i am enjoying it so much. i am wondering if your guests might comment on his early life, his formative years, and what his parents did for a living. thank you very much. >> thank you. would you like to take that? >> do you know, i am not exactly sure i can remember what his father did for a living. they lived in terre haute. i know he was a great idealist. debs himself -- his middle name is after victor hugo. it was a big part of his upbringing. >> i was just remembering that his father was kind of a processor of pork. he was ill. he could not do that work. there are reminiscences of him being depressed as a worker. his wife -- they had two small children. she was pregnant with eugene debs. they opened a small grocery in the front of their house. he became a successful small grocer in terre haute. his dad was a grocer. one of eugene debs' first jobs was an accountant for the home and grocery line. he had experience with the family business. that enabled him to do that work. that was where his family's income came from. >> why did he have to drop out of school at age 14? >> as i recall, i think it was not common for people to finish high school. he wanted to get a job on the railroad. the railroads were the newest and exciting thing for young men to get a part of. his first job was a paint scraper for the local railroad that was running through terre haute. it was later owned by william keene. he was a paint scraper first. it was an exciting job in an era where people commonly did

not finish high school. >> can either of you tell us about his marriage? >> that was always a source of controversy in the movement. he was deeply loyal to kate debs. it was pretty clear that she married him as an aspiring young grocer and congressman and not as a socialist. she has often spoken in favor of socialism publicly but not enthusiastically. she probably would have been happier if he had not pursued that life. it also kept him on the road most of the time. eugene debs was back in terre haute mostly to collapse upstairs and recover before he headed out on another campaign. she was left keeping the home fires burning in this house. >> so kate spent a lot of time in the living room where we are in this house in terre haute.

>> with these down and out railroad workers knocking on the door and hoping they could see their hero. >> did they have children? >> no. >> you said he traveled extensively and she chose not to do that? or was she not invited to come along? >> no. i don't know. >> let's take our next phone call. this is tom. here we are in your home town. have you been to this house? >> no, i have not. i work two blocks away from there so i have no excuse. thank you for a fantastic series. i would just like to make a quick comment because there are so many people across america who would love to be calling. i lucked out to do it. i want to say this. when the unions and socialism came about because of the lack of benevolent employers -- i want to make one point.

i live in colorado. i call on the mines of colorado. i used to drive through southern colorado on interstate 25. i would pass a town called ludlow. i would ask ms. phillips if she knows anything about the ludlow massacre. i am not sure when it happened. i am sure eugene debs was alive at the time. i will hang up now. please ponder what i have said, you moguls of america. we need jobs and we need them now. could you please tell us a little bit about the ludlow massacre in colorado? >> the ludlow massacre and several other massacres and riots of the time period were

often blamed on the striking workers at the time whether they were miners or whether they were protesting for their rights. what happened in ludlow that happened in other incidents is there would be federal troops or authorities brought in to quell the protest in workers. many of them would be killed. i cannot remember how many people died there, but in haymarket and other riots, in the homestead strike, several people would be killed. striking workers would be blamed for protesting. that is a reason why the knights of labor went by the wayside because they were blamed for the haymarket riot that caused the deaths of several

people. it was an incident to where striking workers were killed and where people -- the strikers themselves were blamed unfortunately for that. i think to get to the caller's original point, what eugene debs actually wanted was a return to the benevolent employer. he had been friends with some that owned the railroad that came through there who he supported when they had the best interest of terre haute in mind. it was when they brought in what they called heavy capitalists, and when they tried banking relationships with people out east that eugene debs started to break his ties with smaller business terre haute owners in terre haute and started criticizing them toward their need for profit. it was not small business that

he originally was against. it was the for-profit motive that drove those small businessmen to become business moguls and create conditions that caused the ludlow massacre when they think they had no other choice but to strike. >> were the socialists all across the united states or was it a regional phenomenon? >> no, it was all across the united states. here in the midwest, also out west -- especially with the western federation of miners -- they were big supporters of the socialist party. they were mostly out west, oklahoma, the midwest, places like new york on the east coast were the strongholds of the socialist party. they grew support from rural americans, from urban areas like chicago and new york, from

western coal miners. they drew support from lots of people who were similarly negatively affected by this rise of corporate capitalism. >> did you have a thought you wanted to add? >> i think rather than moving toward more benevolent employers, i don't think he believed that was possible at this point. rather than ending monopoly capitalism and going back to small-scale capitalism, socialists were interested in arguing that business will get bigger and bigger. the important thing is for it to be run by the people rather than individuals for private gain. this was a much more radical proposition as a way to solve the problem. there were many of people including capitalists who were engaged in trying to soften the hard edges of the industrial revolution that was going on. andrew carnegie with his gospel of wealth suggested that there

needed to be more benevolent moguls. eugene debs said that is not the problem. we need to continue to build monopolies and take them for the people. >> we are following eugene debs at his home in terre haute in our series, "the contenders." we will look at 14 men who tried for the presidency and lost, but changed american history. we have 90 minutes tonight to learn more about this period of time. his five runs for the presidency were from 1900 until 1920. our two guests are here. our next phone call is from annandale, virginia, outside of washington. this is john. >> hi. wonderful program. thanks to c-span. i was intrigued by the comment that teddy roosevelt said that eugene debs was the most dangerous man in a america or something to that effect. teddy roosevelt himself is known as a trustbuster, as

breaking up standard oil. it seemed that they would have some things in common. i wondered if your guest could comment on that. >> very good question. roosevelt said, we need to take the sane part of the eugene debs and adopt it, with him and his interest and taking over private industry and try to run it democratically. this was a crazy idea that would undermine one of the pillars of american democracy with private property and free enterprise. on the other hand, he was well aware of the growing concern among workers as well as the middle-class about the problems of big business. roosevelt argued that it was important to take the good

ideas, the things that we now have inherited from the socialist movement in many ways that we have been talking about and to adopt those. these became an important part of his progressive party platform. they were part of the reform agenda for the wilson administration. he said eugene debs was to stir up class workers against their masters in a sense. what he wanted to do was to socialize the country in a different way without socialism. >> do you have more to add on that question? >> i might be remembering this wrong. i do not think teddy roosevelt supported nationwide strikes that happened with pullman. that seemed very dangerous to presidents who were in charge of making sure the country ran smoothly. any time you saw a case where

there was a strike by a national labor union that disrupted the growth of something as crucial as mail, that would put them on opposite sides of the divider and how strong you should be in order to stop business from functioning. >> another topic altogether to understand socialist thinking in the early 20th century, what about the intersection between socialist thinking and religion? >> a very large number of socialist were religious, especially in the south and in oklahoma, texas, there was a strong party there. it was a very strong movement in what was called the social gospel or social christianity. many of those people were supporters of eugene debs. he considered churches to be the enemy, sort of part of the

apparatus of press workers -- particularly the catholic church. he claimed never to go into a church. many christians felt that he and his humanitarian compassion for workers really exemplified just a tremendous number of people over the course of his career said, i don't know what he believes, but he is the most christlike person that i know. his compassion for the underdog is the essence of christianity. this is an important distinction between the eugene debs movement and the communist movement that comes after it. not everybody in the socialist movement was a believer by any means, but it was something where that was an important part of the mix. >> if you signed your name into

a card that said you were a member of the socialist party in this time period, what does that mean the core of your beliefs were? >> that the most important struggle was a struggle between the working class and the owning class. this was inevitably going to result in a victory for the working class as a necessary next step and the evolution of history and for american socialists i think a necessary next step to realize or protect the principles of the american revolution and the dignity of individuals, embodied in their ability to participate fully in the economy. >> so they thought of themselves as patriots. we have touched on that theme before. he spoke of abraham lincoln and also some of the founding fathers in his writings. he saw himself as an extension of early roots of american history.

>> defining the important movers and shakers as being radicals, history is driven forward by people -- he would point back to jesus, to socrates, to thomas jefferson, john brown, wendell phillips. history moves forward by people who start off with an idea that seems deeply unpopular, but that is the next step for moral revolution. >> this is chris on the line. >> thank you for the conversation. it is a great surprise to see on television tonight. i was wondering if you could comment on the relationship with industrial workers of the world and with the general strike in seattle. >> he was a founding member of the iww that started in 1905.

they were a clearly industrial union movement. it was juxtaposed against the american federation of labor which is more of a craft skills worker based union. the iww was a movement among the working class of people. in its size, it is not as nationalistic. it sought to work with workers in other countries. spain, france, italy, and it is a part of -- it never came to be, but they saw themselves as part of the workers' movement with fighters fighting worldwide in not just in the united states. it was eugene debs' later interpretation of what had to be done to promote the rights of workers not only in the united states but in other places in the world as well. >> was he affiliated with them

throughout his life? >> no, there was a split -- it was kind of complicated. there was a split in the iww or the socialist party -- there was a split in the socialist party that affected the iww. he remained very much -- he supported the iww but took less of a leadership position. haywood took over the iww plan and took it in a different position. >> i think one of the most important breaks was over the issue of violence or sabotage. this was a tough bunch in a very tough environment working in mines and lumber fields.

they argued that there were times in order to advance their cause, they needed to use sabotaging or other forms of violence to fight back. >> did eugene debs agree with that? >> he did not agree with that. he was not a pacifist. he recognized there were times when he needed to use violence, but he felt the strategy of advocating violence was not appropriate for american democracy and workers all was lost when they tried violence. most of the power to spread violence belonged to the state. >> next up is minneapolis. hi, ken. >> thank you c-span for this wonderful series. i work in public radio. a little bit earlier your scholars were talking about eugene debs and media. in new york city, there is or was a famous radio station

named wevd, named for eugene debs that debuted in the early 1920's. it was one of the first non- commercial listeners supported radio stations. given his name in the call letters, i am wondering if he had any involvement with the radio station. >> thank you. his demise was in 1926, radio just beginning to come on the scene as a median. did he -- >> as far as i know, it is an homage to him, but he had no connection. >> lisa, we only have 35 minutes left already. this program is going by quickly. a question for you about eugene debs if you can answer it, if he were to walk in this room -- we are surrounded by images all over. can you give us a sense about how tall a man he was.

was he slight? give us the personal glimse of him if you can. >> as far as i know, i think he was 6 foot 2 inches or 6 foot 3 inches, i am not sure if that is correct. >> that is about right. >> he was very thin. he was lanky. you can see that in the pictures. he was that way from his youth on. he was a commanding figure, but not burly i guess you could say. >> he told me he was an advocate of the temporary eating fads of the day. early holistic health. can you tell us a little about that? >> he was often ill. it was hard to pin down what the problem was. some have suggested that it was a nervous exhaustion from the hard campaigns. the stress that he was under. he would often retreat to try to recover. he would find himself to the

sanitariums where he would experiment with walnuts and a ketchup diet and sleeping with his head oriented toward the north and these sorts of things. he would write letters back to his brother suggesting that these things were working out great for him. >> switching gears here in our time period as the nation began to march toward world war i, what happened to the labor movement as all of this turmoil was making these big decisions about its role in that? >> when the war first broke out in europe, most americans, workers and otherwise, were very determined to keep out war. they were isolationists, especially in the midwest. in the south, they said god give us the atlantic ocean for a very good reason. that is to not get involved in the european war. very large immigrant groups were divided about the conflict

overseas, but did not want to participate helping the other side. there was a strong push for neutrality and initially really until things escalated out of control. wilson himself was elected a second term campaigning that he kept the country out of war. that he was a negotiator for peace. just weeks after being elected for a second term, he began to move the nation toward war. >> i want to show all of our viewers your book because we're getting into your subject area. >> in 1917, congress passed a law about speech about the war. will you tell our viewers what the law was? >> it is called the espionage act, and actually was never used to convict any spies during the war.

there were german spies. much of the law dealt with that. there were also provisions that allowed for the government to have enormous control over dissent. the postmaster was given the power to ban any publication not considered supportive of the war. anyone who was deemed to say anything that was discouraging of the war effort was liable to a $10,000 fine and 10 to 20 years in prison. >> first amendment challenges all over this. >> debs was one of the important test cases. about 1200 people were convicted under this espionage act. >> and went to prison? >> and were sent to prison. the supreme court unanimously supported it at that point.

>> he began to be anti-war at what point? >> he was not a pacifist. there is a class struggle where it might make sense to take up arms. he considered the war in europe to be a clash between competing empires over colonies and the only people that would benefit -- there was a lot of money to be made, but the working people were going to suffer. that was the socialists' position. when the war broke out, when wilson and congress moved to war, the socialists gathered a few days later in st. louis and passed a proclamation vowing that they were going to fight the war rhetorically in every

possible way. a number of socialists broke from the party at that point. upton sinclair felt as if that was the wrong move. others worried that the party would be destroyed by this. it would be labeled unamerican. >> we will take a call from nashville, tennessee. your question, please. >> thank you for your discussion tonight. >> thank you for watching. >> unfortunately, socialism means there is a group involved in the central planning of our economy or society.

that leads itself to a small group to decide how citizens should behave. socialism, wonderful in its ideals, it does not actually exist. i believe that james madison described it correctly. we are in competition with each other. that is what leads to individual freedom. it just leads to someone in a small group [unintelligible] >> that was not too far off from his position.

he was arguing that the central planners of his day were the large business owners. they had a lot of political power and influence and were the central planners of the economy. he would have been with you on that. he wanted there to be a more diverse group of people, working people, who had a role in the planning of the economy and how wealth was distributed. he was against the central planning that was being done by very wealthy americans and business owners. >> in the interest of time, we were talking about the draft, but i want to go on to his position on the draft and his famous speech in ohio. it was the speech that ended up having debs arrested --

when he made that speech, did he know that he was going to jail? >> he had to know that it was likely. he knew that there were federal agents, stenographers taking down what he had to say. i think he gave a number of speeches along the same lines and had not been arrested. he said at the start of the speech, i need to be careful what i say. i know that i am being watched. the audience fully understood the situation. he spent a lot of time in that speech announcing the fact that many of his comrades were already in prison. if they are guilty, i am guilty, he said.

>> what was the trial like? was it a big national event? >> it certainly was. he got an opportunity to make two very powerful speeches about socialism. in front of a national audience. his lawyers hope to get him off on a technicality. there were also making a very strong free speech argument in his defense. he felt the system was rigged and in the pockets of big business. it was more important for him to take this opportunity to win a propaganda coup for socialism. >> he ultimately was sentenced to 10 years. >> it is hard to say that he got a break. he was an older man and not in good health. when he went off to prison, many people assumed that if we did

not get out, he would have died. >> about 20 minutes left -- we are going to take a couple of calls and talk about his 1920 campaign. oklahoma, donna, go ahead, please. >> i am so happy to hear this program. i cannot tell you how grateful i am to have this over the air. a little comment about colorado. i have a very good friend and she talked about her parents being part of what happened there. i was going on a road trip with my son, she told me to look for a sign just north of trinidad. all it will say is "this is the place." the second thing i would like to say is about upton sinclair.

upton sinclair was arrested for reading the constitution to the dock workers. that began the southern california aclu. i have moved back to oklahoma, i been gone for about 50 years. i lived here as a teenager. i went to a labor rally in support of the wisconsin public employees. a friend of mine sat next to me with a little sign in latin. she told me that it was the oklahoma state motto. it was from a socialist desire.

labor conquers all. now we are the reddest state in the union, which is kind of an ironic thing. >> thank you for your comments. we will take a telephone call from eric in los angeles. >> i also am enjoying the program. i think that eugene v. debs tried to keep us to our ideals. my question is about job harriman, a christian socialist who ran on the ticket with debs in 1900. later, he was involved with the trials of the mcnamara brothers, who were accused of using sabotage to further their cause. i know that debs defended in print the mcnamaras.

>> is this a period of his life that you can fill us in on? >> i do not know enough about it. i do know that clarence darrow was a big part of using the defense in 1894. i do not know enough about job harriman to comment on his involvement. >> debs did not intend to justify the dynamiting of the building. it was the center of a tremendous anti-labor, anti- socialist at that point. he believed that the mcnamaras were innocent. much of his defense of them was

based on believing that this was a false charge. >> the second sentencing was under the espionage act. he made a speech at his sentencing. he went to prison and in the 1920 campaign -- which he decided to take part in. can you tell me how he campaigned for president from his prison cell in atlanta? >> he was not allowed. it was an awkward situation for the federal government because

he was a seditionist. they allowed him to give a little speech, the socialists did. then the government allowed them only to campaign by submitting eight 500-word letters to the press over the course of the campaign. he was spending the campaign relying on his party to go out and spread the word. >> it is very small, what does it say? >> it says, "convict for president." it is one of the most famous campaign buttons in u.s. history. >> he managed to garner nearly 1 million votes. how did he do that?

>> he did that because he had such a national following. it was 1920, and he had been in the national newspapers for many years. people knew of his message. labor unions continued to support him. despite the fact that he was accused of encouraging people not to enlist in the military during world war i, he still had a following. they believed in his message. he did that because of his national reputation. >> what were some of the other themes of the 1920 campaigns? >> this is a vote for free speech.

this was an opportunity for all americans to cast a vote in protest against the wilson administration. not just socialists, but pacifists of all kinds. during war fever, many americans who thought maybe that was a good idea, started to reconsider that. there were supported by a small group of people who became the american civil liberties union. there were only about 100,000 socialists by this point. i think the number is something in the 20 or 30,000. he got 1 million votes. some of those people were

socialists, but a lot of those people were voting for free speech. >> indiana, this is dave. >> how are you? >> great, thanks. do you have a question about one of your famous citizens? >> i am a graduate of indiana state university. what was his impact on the university? did debs have an influence on the development of the university? >> i do not know, and that is a great question. i do not know if eugene v. debs had any kind of influence on indiana state. i am curious not to find out. >> syracuse, new york, go ahead, please. >> i am a uaw worker from upstate new york.

you got the socialist party and had the socialist workers party and you had the american federation of labor. you never had a unified workers' movement in this country. that was his problem. he was never able to achieve this goal. thank you very much. >> the caller is absolutely right. debs was after a working-class movement where you erase the lines that divided skilled workers from unskilled workers.

the american federation of labor was very tightly organized. it was a very different kind of approach towards representing working-class interest. they did not see eye-to-eye continuing into the 1930's. >> debs campaigning for president can 1920. why did wilson say no? >> it is a little complicated. wilson was open to the idea initially, it seems. as a way to clear the air. he had a stroke.

he seemed to lose his moral compass, many people felt. this was an obvious gesture of goodwill that he might make. he heard from a lot of soldiers and their families that debs was a traitor. he was the embodiment of that dissent. >> was there a movement to keep debs in jail? >> they said this was their priority number one. the ku klux klan was emerging at this point and they considered debs and the other radicals that it was important that they stay in prison. there was a lot of pressure on the president. not a lot of political gain, in his judgment, to release.

>> how did he secure an early release? >> wilson left office and the process of putting pressure on the president began again with warren harding. people in the amnesty movement were a lot less optimistic. harding was a republican who seemed to have less motivation. there were plenty of socialists that supported wilson. harding, he campaigned on the idea of returning the country to a pre-war normalcy, to stop these tensions. the amnesty movement was not just the election, but it was a huge movement. there were petitions being gathered on the streets all across the country. they would have to bring the petitions in on the back of a pickup truck to deliver to the

white house. many people from across the united states -- george bernard shaw, hg wells, helen keller -- many people were involved in this movement to get the prisoners out. for harding, he had no interest in inheriting this mess. he waited a little while, and then he let him out of prison. >> he invited him to the white house. >> that is right. >> and he went? >> yes. what do we know about that meeting? >> neither one of them said anything about it. it was a christmas afternoon meeting, i guess. debs said, harding seems like a very nice man. i believe he said, you know,

the president asked me to cut down on my rhetoric, but i have no intention of doing that. he got back on the train. >> you are looking at some rare footage. debs coming out of the white house and speaking to the media after his meeting with the president. he lived until 1926. we have about 10 minutes left. let's get a couple of calls. michigan, james, you are on the air. >> is it ok if i ask two questions? >> go ahead. >> let's move on, please. our time is short. our next call is from charleston, south carolina. >> i want to know if you think

the movement could exist in modern day america with the development of global capitalism? what do you think debs would think about the tea party movement? thank you. >> this is always a tough thing, for historians to project what the character might think today. >> it needs to be done with real caution. global capitalism is not something new. that was very much an issue with the flow of immigrants and worldwide nature of capitalism. we overstate the global nature of the economy that we live in now. as far as the tea party goes, lisa?

>> he would not have been in agreement with the tea party support of big business. that is the simplest way i can put it. i do not know -- his message still resonates with us today. we're still facing some of the same problems that he was fighting against as a result of workers' wages being driven down by the policies of multinational corporations. not just in the u.s., but worldwide. he would've had a lot to say about the same types of things that had escalated from his period until today. i am sure he would be against the negative impact of multinational corporations globally. >> you have a final artifact for us. look at the size of those. us don't i have you help finish out our program? how is he viewed by the labor

movement today? how do they look back on his time and his contribution? >> i just attended a banquet last week put on by the debs foundation. danny glover was in attendance. everybody remembers him for being a spokesperson for the working class. he continues to carry that legacy for workers in this country and beyond. >> as we think about his final years, i was showing you "time" magazine, the 1926 obituary. here is what they wrote. a month ago, he went to a

sanitarium, where he died, at age 71. what were his final years like after prison? how important a voice was he in the last few years? >> he spent the rest of his life trying to rebuild the socialist party. that was both a self-inflicted wound because the socialist party had a bitter split over communism. it was very difficult thing for him. the communists were trying to convince him to join them. he was the country's most famous, most high-profile and beloved radical and the communists wanted very much to have him on board. he was very enthusiastic about

the bolshevik revolution, but he refused to sign on with the communists, objecting to the idea of a dictatorship and to some of the methods of the bolsheviks. he was left with half of a party. much of the young energy had gone into the communist party. meanwhile, the party had been smashed by legal attacks, as well as mob attacks during the war. he tried to rebuild the party those years without a whole lot of success. >> he is buried here in indiana. we have some video of his grave site and we will look at that as we listen to our next caller from new york city. >> what was eugene v. debs's view on the russian revolution? can you separate socialism from marxism during this time period?

>> he did not visit russia. there was an attempt to get him to go to russia. the bolsheviks considered him to be an american hero. he was an admirer of the bolshevik revolution. in spite of all he had experienced, he still believed in american democracy and still believed the way forward for american workers was to organize in unions and to support the socialist party. >> it is great to have people locally participating. this is todd. >> i would like to thank you for this program. for lisa, who i understand is a

member of the foundation, i would like her to address his continuing legacy toward equality and social justice and let people know how they might pursue their interests if they want to know something more about it. >> certainly. in this age of technology, there is a web site devoted to the foundation. that is an easy way to access more information. he continues to provide inspiration to working people. >> this house is open for visitors. how many do you get every year?

>> i do not know the numbers and how many people we have every year. the museum is open every afternoon of the week. and on saturdays. you can go to the website and contact karen brown, who runs tour of the museum throughout the week. >> we have one minute left. >> another great resource is the indiana state university. they have pamphlets and access to his letters. >> the book is about eugene v. debs and his campaign for president in 1920. thank you to both of you as we close out. telling us more about this third-party five-time pursuer of the white house. as we close out, some thank

you's to the foundation. debsfoundation.org is their website. thank you to all of you for helping us put this program together. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> before the presidential

election of 1916, he was a lawyer and professor and governor. although he lost his bid for the presidency, his impact on his street remained. he served as a secretary of state involvement chief justice of the u.s.. he is one of 14 men featured in "the contenders." for a preview about hughes, watch a number of videos about him online. >> today, ruth bader ginsburg. >> when i was nominated for the good job by now have, -- i now have, the chief justice came to congratulate me. he said that when he became

chief in 1969, his confirmation hearing lasted exactly one hour. i said there was one or the described the difference and that word was television. >> she will discuss her life experience and more from the hastings college of the law in san francisco at 4:30 on c-span. >> the house meets on monday at 2:00. members will consider a federal spending plan for november. at 3:30 on monday, the senate will begin debate on a bill that aims to crack down on china's currency manipulation. they will proceed to consider six nominations including the

u.s. circuit judge for the fourth circuit. you can see the senate live on c-span2. >> david axelrod, president obama's senior campaign strategist, talks about the 2012 reelection campaign in new hampshire. the event was hosted by the new hampshire institute of politics. this is about 40 minutes. [applause] >> i want to thank the institute for inviting me today. i am so impressed with this

program. i cannot think of a higher calling than to expose young people to politics, the issues in public life and service, and hopefully to spawn a new generation of leaders. we desperately need that. places like this are a wellspring. i shook hands with some young people on the receiving line. we will all be working for them sunday. i am sure of that. i congratulate you on your work. i want to thank the new england sel for your long association with this event and for putting this event together. though he could not be this morning, i want to thank ynch as he completes

his term. i understand you have had a number of republicans recently. i am glad to integrate the festivities here. i am happy to be back in new hampshire. jim tries to blunt the t ruth, the my reports in one back to 1976. i was a young reporter covering the new hampshire primary. in 1984, i was assigned to do a profile of the governor running for president. when you are a young reporter, you get assigned to the profiles of people like that. he was a fine man but not likely to be the next president. i went with him to high-school in manchester.

he spoke. i grab a couple of kids after an announced what they thought. a young man said he thought he was impressive. i asked if he would vote for him if he could vote. he was offended. he said he had not heard all the candidates yet in needed to hear from the others. i am a big believer in the new hampshire primary. i think the early states are the only place in the presidential process where candidates, on a regular basis, come face-to-face with the public. they put the candidate through their paces. presidential campaigns are tests for the most difficult assignment in the world. it begins with the very good questions from citizens who take

their responsibility seriously. there's always controversy about that. why should the early states have so much influence? i think the people of new hampshire discharged their responsibility well, even though i do not always agree with their verdict. ole they play ru and how seriously they take it. one characteristic of new hampshire voters i am aware of is their sense of independence. they are concerned with the character of the candidates

instead of just party affiliations. obamas and then and says now that we have to rise above partisanship, ideologies, and the hammerlock the special interests have on our policies in order to meet the great challenges we face. there is no more pressing challenge than that of the economy. people in new hampshire and those across the country live with every day. i do not have to tell you how important it is to meet the challenge with growth. we face headwinds this year from all around the globe that have made recovery that much more difficult. that is where the president is fighting for the american jobs back to that would put teachers back to the classroom and veterans back to work.

it would put construction workers back to work rebuilding roads and schools. it would open the door for people currently receiving unemployment to get valuable tracking -- training and skills as they look for employment. it would put more money in the pockets of working americans. it would also put more money in the pockets of small business people who are trying to make it in this economy. let's acknowledge that beyond the immediate crisis, there is a long-term trend we have seen for decades that we also have to focus on. that is the hollowing out of the middle class in this country. it threatens to change the character of our country and the basic assumptions we have about

our country. for the 35 years after world war ii, wages grew in tandem with the economy. for the last three decades or more, that has not been the case. wages have flat land for 80% or more of the american people. prices have not. there was a census report a couple of weeks ago that said the average white male worker in this country is making in real terms what he was making in 1973. the average worker is making what they were making in 1996. we know that prices have not gone along accordingly.

one example is that the cost of college education has increased by 429% since 1985. that is just one thing people are struggling with. it is very much part of middle- class life, educating our children. health care, housing, all of these things have put enormous pressure on families who grapple with it by becoming double earner families, putting things on credit cards, borrowing against the value of their homes. that was fine as long as the value of the homes were escalating. we know what happened in 2008. that house of cards came crumbling down. our task is not just to rebuild our economy and create more

jobs, it is also to make sure the hard work is rewarded. if you were card, you can get ahead. everyone gets a fair shake and chose their fair share. we are working on two projects at once. we thought only got to washington, we would get cooperation from folks across the aisle. we were in the midst of the biggest economic crisis since the great depression. the day had a different plan. mitch mcconnell did an interview in 2010 that was revealing. he said that we made a decision from the beginning that we were not going to give the president

support on any major initiatives. to do that would be to confer a sense of bipartisanship. we did not want to do that. in the midst of this tremendous challenge the judgment was to let the presidential party grapple with that on their own. you can question the appropriateness of that decision, and i do. the republican party was able to force the president to take a serious -- series of difficult decisions that are necessary but unpopular. the recovery act, the intervention to save the automobile industry, to shore up the financial industry. there were able to go to the voters in 2010 and say that he is being too partisan and the

ideological. in new hampshire and elsewhere, they won a victory primarily because independent voters wanted less partisanship. they wanted more cooperation in washington and thought that if we elected a republican congress, some of the workforce a greater spirit of cooperation in washington. that is the great paradox of 2010. instead of forcing greater corp. -- cooperation, was the they swept in the biggest ideological partisan group of republicans in my lifetime. it culminated this summer in the debt ceiling debacle. these same forces that are in control of congress now are on

the republican side of the congress and the majority in the house are very much a force in the republican nominating process. many of the candidates come through here clinging to the most ardent voices and their party. last week in the last republican debate, a young soldier appeared on the screen from iraq who happened to be a gay american and asked the question relates to that and was booed from the crowd. not one person on the platform, not one candidate was willing to say "do not do that. it is inappropriate to boo

someone serving our country honorably and risking his life." no one said that because they feared the find in the crowd -- defying the crowd in the room. they have sworn oaths of obedience to grover norquist and his basic construct that we should never ask $1 more from any american, corp., -- corporation, or anyone to help solve our problems. they had clung to the tea party line. they have laid out a familiar prescription for america that we have seen recently. that is to continue to cut taxes at the very top and robot the

wall street reforms -- and roll back the wall street reforms. is the same thing we heard 10 years ago that helped to lead to this crisis. you will hear this from this podium and in the debates in a couple of weeks. the republicans will gather in new hampshire in a couple of weeks. this is not new wine in old bottles. this is old wine in old bottles. i believe ultimately it is not going to sell. americans want an economy where everyone gets a fair shake and where the responsibility is broadly shared so that we will meet our responsibilities and challenges together.

one of those challenges absolutely is dealing with our fiscal mess. we have a budget -- we had a budget surplus in 2001 and squandered that. now we have a fiscal crisis. it is a dark cloud over our future. there is no doubt about it. the question is the best way to go about solving that. are we going to do it in a way that is balanced? are we going to do it by cutting the things that will make our country stronger in the future? you have probably heard a lot from people who say we cannot mortgage the future by failing to deal with our fiscal challenges. that is absolutely right. that is why the president went to such lengths over the summer

to reach an agreement that would solve this problem for decades to come. let's acknowledge that there are other ways to mortgage the future. we have to be cognizant of that. if you cut education by 25% as proposed on the other side, you are mortgaging the future. ies that out-ountry' educators today will out-compete as tomorrow. this is a prescription for disaster. when i was a reporter in 1984, i covered gary hart. he always said that if you think education is expensive, wait until you find out how much interest -- ignorance costs. that is a profound statement.

we need to recognize that as a country. if you cut research and development by 75%, if you are mortgaging the future. if the government had not done the things it did in terms of funding research, there would be no internet. there would be no google. there would be no gps. this is how progress happens, when the government takes on basic science that businesses cannot afford to do it and provides the seeds for progress. we know run the world other countries are investing in the research. we see it in china, india, brazil. we have to compete if we are going to maintain, develop, and encourage the kind of economy where good middle-class jobs are available, we have to educate

our work force and make sure we are commanding the high end jobs that will pay the kind of salary that will allow people to live the lives they want to live. if you walk away from our commitment to infrastructure and rebuilding the basic physical plant of our country to make sure it is functional and competitive, then you are mortgaging the future. in one of the early debates, speaker gingrich run himself up into a state of high dudgeon and said we did not need a department of railroads to build the transcontinental railroad. that is true, but we did need abraham lincoln in the midst of the civil war making a decision that when the war was over, we had better have a transcontinental railroad to connect our country or we were not going to grow. he also made the decision to

move forward on land grant colleges in the midst of the civil war when the demands on the government or even greater than what we face today. because he had the vision to do those kinds of things even while he was trying to save the union , we became who we were. his vision helped to set the stage for 100 years of progress. that is a lot of what this election is about. it is about what we do in the short term to spur jobs and growth. it is what we do in the long term to lay the foundation for the kind of economy that will provide real opportunity for the broadest number of americans and reverse the trends we've seen over the last 30 years that

culminated in his collapse. i do not want to leave you with a sense that i am pollyannaish about the challenges. we have the wind at our back in 2008. president obama got 53% of the vote. that means 47% of americans voted against him. we do not have the wind at our back in this election. we have the wind in our face because the american people have the wind in their faces. this will be a titanic struggle. i firmly believe we are on the right side of the struggle. this is a tough time for our country and the american people. the president will take responsibility for everything he has done, but it is not going to be enough to simply point fingers of blame and try to lay on him the responsibility for

all of america's ills without offering credible prescriptions for how we solve them. it is not going to be enough to offer back to the future bromides that have been tested and proven to be failures. the american people want their president to point to the future and offer a realistic plan for .ow to get theire through the process, they will evaluate all of the candidates. they will evaluate their ideas, records, and character. then they will make a judgment about who they can count on to fight for them and the values and vision that are so central to who we are as the country and that hold out the greatest hope for the embattled middle class and for the sense that in

america if you work hard you can get ahead. i very much look forward to that debate. i am very confident it is one that we will win. i know by stating that in this room of sophisticated political observers that i will be held to it in the future. i appreciate the opportunity to be with you. i look forward to your questions. i applaud both the state of new hampshire for the role it plays in the process and this institute of politics with the extraordinary work it does. we are a better country for what you do. i look forward to the leadership that the young people will provide in the years to come. thank you. [applause]

>> we have a primary early next winter. we're not quite sure when yet. near the first secret ballot contest -- we are the first secret ballot contest. we allow independents to vote. after the results are in, i would be interested to hear a call you and the campaign will analyze the results and what he will take from them that you will not get from iowa or south carolina. >> we will look hard at that.

we will look at how the independent voters behave in the primary. there are elements of the primary that are not evident in iowa. there are people competing in this state that are not competing in iowa. we will look hard at that. we will look hard at the level of participation. most of all we will be looking the quality of the debate and what assertions are made during the process. we will ask questions. one will be whether representations being made are consistent with what people have said and done before. are their ideas credible or tailored for specific

constituencies to get through the nominating process? that is what i look forward to. i can tell you there is a lot of criticism of our nominating process. it is pretty barbaric at times. it is very hard. there are a lot of veterans of the process in this room. it tests you, your ideas, your character. it puts your record up in sharper relief. people in new hampshire do a good job of thrashing about. the thrashing that out. in 2008, we won a big victory in iowa. we came to new hampshire for the primary. we spent five days taking

victory laps around the state of new hampshire while senator clinton campaigned closely to the ground and made a compelling case. we've lost -- we lost. it was a great lesson for us. it will be interesting to see how things go in the state. there is a home court advantage for canada. this state is always a test and i think it will be again. i saw your hand shooting up over the cameras. [laughter] >> i am a sophomore politician major. with the economy clearly being the thing to focus on, how do you feel about the amount of money being asked to be raised

on each side and whether you think that is justified? >> you raise a concern in question -- concerning question about the effect of money in the process. we have a new and menacing to mention to it this year because of the citizens united ruling of the supreme court. third-party groups can now raise unlimited amounts of money with undisposed -- undisclosed contributions for elections. there was over $200 million spent in the last election in the midterm election. i expect that number will be up to $1 billion this time. that has never happened before.

it is going to force us to raise more money. we put strictures on ourselves that other candidates have not placed on themselves in terms of taking money from registered federal lobbyists and pacs. i do not regret that. i think it is the right thing to do. it is an unknown question as to what the impact of all of this will be. i suspect these super pac's of undisclosed funds will begin to mobilize in the republican primary. you will see candidates attacked from this stealthy operations. governor. as one. governor romney has one. -- governor perry has one.

they are facing each other in this menacing kind of war game. you will see it close up. i have been concerned about money in politics for a long time. we've tried to combat that by raising as much low dollar money as we can. our contributions tend to be lower on the average. we had over half a million contributors as of the last report. that is one way to fight it, but it is not enough. the question we will all have to ask ourselves as a country is what we can do about this, especially given the supreme court ruling. we risk returning to deal with age. the gilded age -- we risk

returning to the gilded age where groups can purchase the presidency. as we move forward, you and your peers are going to struggle with this. if unchecked, could shape the course of the future in ways that you will not find pleasing. i am very concerned about it. i will not justify it. i have to live with it. we have to combat it the best we can. it is not healthy. anybody who argues otherwise will have a tough case to make. yes? go ahead. [laughter]

that gives him a decided advantage. >> i am with the sheet metal workers in new hampshire. it was interesting to hear your remarks about the middle-class and help our wages have gone down since the 1970's. there is a direct correlation to union membership and density as wages have gone down. the unions to voice support to the middle class and race of the standard of living. right now we're getting beaten up bad. my guys and gals are wondering what we can do to put them back to work. the jobs bill is great. we support it. we need it now. 34 years ago, they were out there and working hard with the campaign. now they are disenchanted. there have been all kinds of problems.

we need help. we need to have something that would grow union membership in the middle class that would give people health insurance. you could hit a lot of problems directly with the employee free choice act. >> i feel strongly about the jobs out the jobs are -- jobs act. we have seen a precipitous decline in manufacturing leading up to the crisis. a lot of folks in a good living in manufacturing moved over to construction. the construction industry to flee to as a result of a house in collapse -- of the housing collapse. you have a lot of tradesmen who

are idle who were working before. we have to get people back to work. we have heard from the folks on the other side of all i will -- on the other side of i will redo the aisle -- we have heard from books on the other side of the aisle that they make a. part of the plan but not all of it. -- that they may approve part of the plan but not all of it. it does not make sense to not raise taxes on the wealthy but raise it on 160 million working americans. the other components of the plan are equally important. the infrastructure elements are very important for the reason you suggest. it will go right to the heart of the people most severely hit by

this economic downturn. it will get people back to work. he will get them back to work for building our schools and run the country that is so desperately needed. this is about putting people back to work doing the work american needs to have done. i am hopeful. i do not think left to their own devices the guys across the aisle will increase any of that. the president has been out and about. he is engaging the american people in the fight. the great thing about democracy is that ultimately the american people have a say in this. to the degree that people make their voices heard, it will be harder to stay know. if they do say no, it will further describe what the battle is about in 2012. as the president said in his speech, your numbers and others

cannot wait 14 months. they are desperate for work now. the country needs them working now. it is important for our economy that they are working now. we will keep plugging away at that. the employee free choice act -- there is a new normal in washington. it takes 60 votes in the senate to pass anything. that makes a lot of things more difficult to do. as the president said in his speech to congress, he is committed to the principle of collective bargaining and understands the connection between the right to organize and the strength of the middle class. >> thank you for being in new

hampshire. we appreciate you being here. i appreciate your remarks. there is a perception on the part of leaders in this state of all stripes and the reality of those down and out that this administration and congress are unable to get control over the economy. with the head winds blowing in europe and in this country, before the election occurs, this gridlock we see in washington is not going to change. as a strategist, how do you deal with that? it is not going to change soon. it is a deep concern to business leaders in terms of giving the capital we need to expand.

the gridlock is something we look at and wonder what will and do it. >> that is a very good question. we have had a number close -- blows this year with the earthquake, tsunami, and the situation in europe. it is-in terms of the impact on our economy for a variety of reasons. -- it is negative in terms of the impact on our economy. that has had a chilling effect on markets and businesses who

express the concerns you have. i am not willing to stand here and accept that it is ordained that we cannot come to terms. there is good reason to believe we cannot based on past experience. when you have leaders who say our strategy is not to cooperate and that our number one priority for the next to the years is to defeat the president, it does not create climate for progress. we have to stop thinking so much about how we tear the other side down and start thinking about how we can build this country up together. the will only happen if people demand it. i am not willing to sign -- assign equal blame for what is

happening in washington. there are democrats in this room that would argue the president was too eager to try to bring people together in the face of the evidence the other side did not want to do that. i do not regret making the effort. people elected him to get things done. they did not elect him to wage a partisan war. his injuries have been almost uniformly rejected -- his in treaties -- intrigue -- entri eaties have been uniformly rejected. ultimately, the american people will have to demand that we do

find the path forward. most people understand we are a better country than we're getting from those who would simply make this a partisan battle, one after another. i accept your premise. i believe if we do not solve this, it will have negative effects on the country. we're going to keep trying to find those paths. as the presence of, every idea he has offered has been offered by republicans at one time. there's no reason why we cannot come together. -- as the president said, every idea he has offered has been offered by republicans at one time. there is no reason we cannot come together. the only way it will happen is if the american people demand it. we are about the business of recruiting the american people

in this fight. think you very much -- thank you very much for having me here today. [applause] >> let me give you a mug. thank you for coming. he is going to spend some time with students. we usually fed the speakers to do that. he actually said he wants to come and spend time with the students. we appreciate that. thank you to all the sponsors whose banners are on the wall. [applause] >> i appreciate it. thank you very much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> when i was nominated for the

ve, theb i now hal chief justice came to congratulate me. he said when he became chief in 1969, at his confirmation hearing lasted exactly one hour. i said there was one where the described the difference. that word was television. >> watch her talk about her life experience and more from the hastings college of the law in san francisco at 4:30 on c-span. >> the house meets on monday at 2:00. the first boats are expected after 6:30. members will consider it a

federal spending plan through november. watch live coverage on c-span. at 3:30, the senate will begin debate on the bill that aims to crack down on china's currency manipulation. they will proceed to consider six nominations, including the u.s. circuit judge for the fourth circuit. votes will follow. you can see the senate live on c-span2. >> new jersey gov. chris christie spoke in california at the reagan presidential library. his remarks focused on leadership and the role of the united states in the world. he also talked about the economy and education. after his speech, he took questions from the audience. this is about 45 minutes. [applause] welcoming governor chris christie.

>> thank you. thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. it is great to be here. we are here. it is an honor for me to be here at the library to speak with all of you today. i want to thank mrs. reagan for her gracious of irritation -- gracious invitation. people become passe after a while about things that have happened. i have a partner year that majors in passe. he says this will even impress you. a written this letter over the phone. i said it is signed by nancy

reagan. it is great to be here. thank you for your invitation. he believed in this country. he embodies the strength, the press serbians, and the faith that has propelled immigrants for centuries to embark on dangerous journeys to come here, to give up all that was familiar for all that was possible. they would be better for more americans in future. it is this vision for our country that guided his administration over the course of eight years. his commitment to making america stronger, better, more resilience. it allowed him the freedom to

challenge conventional wisdom. it dared to put results ahead of political opportunity. everybody in this room has his favor ronald reagan story. it happened 30 years ago on august of 1981. the air traffic controllers went on strike. president reagan ordered them back to work, making clear that those who refuse would be fired. in and, thousands refuse. thousands were fired. -- in the end, thousands refused. thousands were fired. as a parable of principle,

ronald reagan said what he meant and meant what he said. those who thought he was bluffing or sadly mistaken. he was not an empty political ploy. it was leadership. he said he could convince people that i meant what i said. i would have been just as forceful as i thought management have been wrong. i recall this pivotal moment. most americans viewed his firm handling as a domestic matter. this misses a critical point. the whole world was watching.

what happens here does not stay here. this is not in vegas. another way of saying that americans do not have the luxury of thinking that while we have long viewed as purely domestic matters have no consequences before our borders. what we say and what we do at home a backs -- at fax -- affects how others see us. america's role is defined by who we are at home. it is defined by how we conduct ourselves with each other and how we do with our own problems. did it is determined by how we set an example for the world. we still understand form policy.

it is carried out by ambassadors and others overseas. to some extent it still is. one of the most powerful forms of form policy is the example we set. this is where it harkens back to president reagan. his willingness to articulate that he could be predicted to stand by his friends in stand up to his adversaries. if president reagan would do that at home, they realize that he would do it abroad as well. principal would not stop at the water's edge. it supported terror was the same.

it does have a meeting. it is not what it was. it is that what it can be. it is that what it means to be. this is been the case. we pay a price and our political system cannot come together and agree on the difficult and necessary steps to rein in entitlement spending. we pay a price one special interest went over national interest. we're saying justice that made it impossible to reduce our staggering deficits to create an environment in which there's more job creation and job

destruction. this is where the contrast between what happened in new jersey and what is happening in washington, d.c. is the most clear. in new jersey, you have actually seen divided government that is working. it does not mean we do not have arguments or acrimony. you have all seen my youtube videos. there are serious disagreements. sometimes it is expressed loudly. this is what we did. we propose specific means to fix them. we educated the public on the dire consequences of inaction. we compromise on a bipartisan basis.

this is what people expect. how do we do this tax how do we do it? thru leadership and compromise is the only way you can balance budgets. leadership and compromise is the only way. you reform the health benefits system. it is collectively $121 billion underfunded. leadership and compromise is the only way you can cap of the property taxes. there's some of the most powerful public sector unions in america. we have done this before.

the executive france has not set by and waited for others to go first to suggest solutions. [applause] this is happened in trenton. we have done this with the legislative branch held by the opposite party. it is led by two people who often but the interest of our state above the partisan politics of their caucuses. that is why i call them my friends. they set a tone that has taken hold against many other states. it is a powerful message, a lead on the tough issues by telling

your citizens the truth about the deaths of our challenges. tell them the truth about the difficulty of the solution. this is the only way to lead america. we watched a president to talk about the courage of his conviction but still found the courage to lead. we watched a congress at war with himself. they're unwilling to leave campus in south politics at the door. it made our democracy appear as if we can no longer effectively govern ourselves. so we continue to wait and hope that our president will finally stop being a bystander in the oval office. we hope that she will shake up the paralysis that has made it impossible for him to take on

the really big things better so obvious to all americans who are watching and anxious. we hope. his steelyard is our failure, too. the failure to -- his failure is our failure to. it is a report the president asks for himself. the failure to act on the crushing unemployment and ever expanding the entitlement programs, and the failure to discern pork barrel spending from real of-archer investment. the rule is simple. it is the one ronald reagan knew by heart. it is the one he successfully employed as social security and the cold war.

you cannot wait for someone else to do it. we pay for this failure of leadership many times over. as it slows, high levels of unemployment persists. it makes ourselves even more vulnerable to the unpredictable behavior of skittish markets with the political decisions of our lenders. there's also foreign-policy price to pay. we diminish our ability to influence thinking and ultimately the behavior of others. there's no better way to persuade other societies to become more democratic and more market oriented than to show that our democracy and markets work better than any other system. why should we care? why should a matter to us ta?

we believe in democracy is the biggest protector of freedom. history shows that mature democracies are less likely to resort to force against their own people or their neighbors. increases consumer choice and keep their prices down. around the world, people are debating their own political and economic futures right now. we have a outcome in those debates. we'll have a middle east that except israel and is a dependable source of energy. there's no better to enforce the likelihood that others will opt for more social societies than to demonstrate at home that

their own system is working. a lot is being said about american exceptional as some. we are different and better in the sense that our democracy and our people have delivered. for american except journalism, to truly deliver hope to the rest of the world, it must be demonstrated. they will be more than likely to follow our example. if they see what we are doing and are out to emulate it, it is a reflection of our country's innovation, determination, ingenuity, and the strength of our democratic institutions.

one there was a crisis at home, we put aside parochialism and the greater interest first. we did it their strong leadership. we did it through reagan like ileadership. we have failed to live up to the traditional of exceptional as a parent. when the only look at comments from the recent meeting of the european finance ministers in here's what theere finance minister had to say. i found a peculiar that even they have more fundamental data set and the eurozone they tell

us what we should do. without strong leadership, without our domestic house in order, we're taking ourselves out of the equation over and over. we must be prepared to act and lead. it is for diplomacy in common security. the united states will be able to sustain a leadership of the resources are there. it is a security issue as well.

without the authority that comes from real american exceptional as some, burned exceptional as some -- exceptional -- earned exceptionalism, which cannot be a beacon of hope. ronald reagan face today's challenges. we know exactly what he would do. he would face the problems directly with leadership and without political calculation. he would take an honest and tough approach to reforming our programs and our tax code. we would confront our unemployment crisis by giving certainty to businesses about our tax and regulatory future. we would unleash entrepreneurship their long-term tax reform.

we would reform the system by applying free-market reform principles, rewarding outstanding teachers, the demanding accountability from everyone at in system, increasing competition, and making the american public patience -- public education the best in the world. it must always be put ahead of the comfortable status quo of adults. [applause] the united states must become more discriminating in what we tried to accomplish. we cannot force others to adopt

our principles through coercion. local realities count. we cannot have forced makeovers of our societies in our image. we need to limit to what is in our national interest so we can bounces here at home. this needs to be built in part so we can sustain a leadership role. this is not an argument for turning our back on the world. we cannot and should not do that. our economies depended on what we export and import. we are vulnerable to box cutters and bonds and viruses. we need to remain vigilant and be prepared to act with our friends and allies to discourage

or deter against traditional aggression, to stop the spread of nuclear materials and the means to deliver them and continue to deprive them of the opportunity to succeed and kill our people. i realize that what i'm calling for requires a lot of our people and officials. i plead guilty. i also plead guilty to optimism. i believe in what they can accomplish. if they understand what is being asked of them and how we all benefit if they meet the challenge. that's no doubt in my mind's our economy is strong and the largest. risk-taking is a part of our collective dna. there's no better place in the

world for investment. we have a demonstrated record as a people and nation of rising up to meet any challenge. today the biggest challenge we must meet is the one we present to ourselves and not become a nation that places entitlement ahead of difficult troops and not become a people that think so little of ourselves that we demand and a sacrifice from each other. we are better people than that. we must demand a better nation than that. the america i speak of is the america and ronald reagan challenges to be every day.

it is what his leadership helped us to be. there are conduct, indeed, it demonstrated principles and for the greater good of our nation. we become emulated throughout the world. another is because of what we said both home and abroad. american excess alyssum can set an example for freedom around the world. we must lead with purpose and unity. illinois state senator barack obama gave us a window into his vision for american leadership. he said this "even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us to those who embrace the politics of

anything goes. americanot a liberal and a conservative america. there is the united states of america. there's not a black america and a latino america. there is the united states of america. seven years later, president obama prepares to divide our nation to achieve reelection. this is not a leadership style. this is a reelection strategy. telling those who are scared and struggling that the only way their lives can get better is to diminish the success of others. trying to convince those who are suffering that the american economic one is no longer growing. we must tax and take and demonize those who already achieved the american dream. did that may turn out to be a

good reelection strategy. it is demoralizing message -- a moralizing message for america. what happened to state senator obama? when did he decide to be one of the dividers? there is a different choice. it is the way ronald reagan led america and the 1980's. he spoke during a farewell address. he made clear he was not there just making a time. he is theirs to make a difference.

he spoke of the city on the hill and how he made a stronger. he does not know if the ever quite communicated with what i saw when i said that. it is a tall and proud city built on when set -- on people living in harmony and peace. it had freed ports that hong. if there had to the city walls, they had doors. the doors were open to anyone with the will and hard to get there. this is how i saw it. this is how i see it still. that is american exceptional as empyrean r.j. exceptional --

exceptionalism. it made as an american revitalization. we will be that again. not until we demand that our leaders stand tall by telling the church, confronting our shortcomings, celebrating our successes and leading the world because of what we have been able to actually accomplish. only when we do that too finely ensure that our children and grandchildren will live in second american century. we owed them as well as ourselves. thank you for inviting me. bob pleasant view -- god bless

you. god bless the united states of america. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. gov. christie has been gracious enough to answer questions from the audience. i like you to pay attention to

the one role we have. if you could wait for one of our staff to handle your microphone so it can be picked up. with that, let's get on to the questions. >> hello. could you please tell us more about how you think our immigration prices in this country should be handled as well as the education expense associated with this problem? >> thank you. there is some very basic principles that we need to stand by. our borders have to be secure. we have done an awful job of doing that. we had to take every step necessary to make sure that happens. we have to make sure we have a fair way to allow people to continue to legally immigrate into this country. this country is built on

immigrants. my relatives or immigrants. we need to make sure we are a country that expands the american economic pie by expanding the innovation and thought and dreams and hopes of having people coming here of looking for a better life. i doubt this problem in new jersey. i need to be crystal clear. i want every child to comes to new jersey to be educated. i do not believe that for those who came here illegally that we should be subsidizing with taxpayer money to restate tuition. let me be very clear from my perspective. that is not a heartless position. that is a common sense position.

>> you are known as a straight shooter was not giving to playing games. can you tell us what is going on here deck? are you reconsidering? are you standing firmly? >> listen, i to say the truth. you are an incredible this appointment as an audience. the fact that it took the second question. [applause] is shows your of your game. to that is not american exceptionalism. i will be six think about this. i saw something on a political -- succint on this.

i saw something political were they strong my answers back to back of running for the presidency. it is right on the front page of politico. cut on it. it is in the answers. >> you have some grumbling. i have rules, too. item 56 town hall meetings. we have all the same rules, wait for the microphone. to say who you are. we have a role that is really important in in new jersey. even though i am on foreign soil, i will enforce this rule. there could be people who do not like one of my answers that would disagree. we walk and then to stand up. if you express said in a reasonable and respectful manner, you get a reasonable

disagreement in return. however, if this is the day that you decide you want to impress your friends on television and you decide you want to take the governor out for a walk, i will give you the role i given new jersey. we are all from new jersey. if you give that, you are getting it back. >> never mind. >> if you are running the country, what would you do to win people -- wean people off entitlement stacks what would you -- entitlements?

would you do to turn around the country? >> we have examples of what we have done in new jersey. equivalent on the federal level is medicare, public sector pensions, and health benefits provided. i mention that those items where underfunded when i took office. $121 billion underfunded. that is four times our annual state budget. what did we do? i went out september 2010. i put out a specific plan. not a plan that says all of light to rein in these expenses. if i can come to agreement with the other side of will tell you what they are. no. that is not leadership.

[cheers and applause] i set some very specific things. i said you have to contribute more to pensions. we're not going to pay coal as any longer until your funds reach eighties thermos solvency. we will make sure that only full time people get into the system. on the health insurance side, when i came into office many were paying nothing for their health insurance. the drop in to every collective bargaining agreement from the school board all the way of to the state vessel.

i make people unhappy. i honor them for what they do. i went to the firefighters' convention after our proposal. i went to new jersey. about four dozen firefighters were at in room. nots just say that i did get their reception gave me tonight. they continued to boo. when they saw me they really started dbooing. i said you can do better than that. and they did. do not skip ahead to the next jury. [laughter] you're killing me.

this is in essence what i said. i said i understand your scared. i understand you're angry. i understand you feel betrayed. for 20 years, governments have been coming to this convention telling you they will be the more than a band and a bigger pension and do not have to pay for it. every year they voted for increase benefits. they never gave you money. now you sit here and agree -- angry and scared. i understand why. why are you booing the first guy who told you the truth is that there's no political upside for me doing that. [applause] 19 i told them you may hate me now and you may vote me out, but if we do what i'm saying we

should do 10 years from now, you will be looking for my address to send me a thank you notes. you will be collecting a pension. that is what we need to do on the federal level. we need to tell people the truth. medicare, medicaid, and social security are eating away at every dollar we raise and in taxation. we need to get to a common sense approach to reduce the benefits, to test some of this stuff and to get people who do not need it to stop taking it so we can give it to the people at an affordable price to people who do need it. that is common sense. i am no genius, clearly. why can we do that? every time someone says it, every time someone goes near it, it gets vilified.

they read the polls. they say, ok. real leaders to not read polls. they change polls. [cheers and applause] >> i've been there for 2.5 years. you make is so proud to be from new jersey and be americans. and my italian mother told me to tell you they have to run for president. >> and led to press my luck and respond to that.

press my lucko and respond to that. if you're italian mother wanted to run for president, what redoing in california? come home. what are you doing? i have a plane. you can come back if you want. we will take you home. >> get team more taxpayers one at a time. >> i have been listening to your very powerful and eloquent speeches. aquino had to tell the american people what they need to hear. i say this from the bottom of my heart from my grandchildren who are at home, i know new jersey needs you. i really implore you -- i really

do, this is not funny reject we urnnot wait another fo u years. i implore you as a citizen of this country to please reconsider -- do not even say anything tonight. of course you would not. go home and think about it. [laughter] do for my daughter and grandchildren. we need you. your country needs you.

>> let me just say this. there are a lot of people who have asked me about this over the course of the last number of weeks and months. that is all i will say about this tonight, i hear exactly what you are saying. i feel the passion with which you say it. it touches me. i can tell you. i'm just a kid from new jersey who feels like i'm the luckiest guy in the world to have the opportunity that i have to be the governor of my state. people say to me all the time now -- and folks like you say those kind of things for as many months as it is being said --

why don't they to leave you alone? your party given your answer. isn't is a burden? what i say to you and everyone was nice enough is that it is not a burden. anyone who has an ego large enough to say please stop asking me to be leader of the free world -- [laughter] it is such a burden. if you could please just stop. what kind of crazy ego maniac would you have to be to say "just please stop." it is extraordinarily flattering. by the same token, that heartfelt messages you gave me is also not a reason for me to do it. that reason has to reside inside me.

i know, without ever having met president reagan, he must've felt that he was called to that moment to leader country. my answer -- to lead our country. i thank you for what you are saying. i am listening to every word of it and feeling it, too. please do not ever think for a second that i feel like i am important enough that somehow, what you are saying is a problem for me. it is a great honor. this country is a great place because the folks like you. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you so much, governor. on that night, if i could ask

everyone to remain in their seats. governor, we cannot thank you enough for gracing us with your presence. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyri [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> today on "newsmakers," democratic represented chris van hollen. that is at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.

>> the house meets on monday at 2:00 p.m., with the first roll call votes expected after 6:30. this week members will consider the federal spending plan through november. watch live coverage on c-span. at 3:30 p.m. eastern, sunday, senate begins debate to crack down on chinese currency manipulation. then they will consider six nominations, including henry ford of south carolina, to be a u.s. circuit judge. you can see that live on c-span 2. >> get regular updates of what is on the c-span networks with c-span knell on twitter. get a quick program updates, including which programs are alive. it is easy to sign up. go to twitter and follow c-span.

>> next, a look at the chinese global economy, aging population, and the rise of the internet. you will hear remarks from business and academic leaders, from china and the u.s. this is about one hour. >> i am delighted to be here. but just to represent the rest of the world, but to try to help facilitate the discussion over the next hour or so.

i was trying to think, what is the framing theme of this conference in series of panels? what came to mind was one of the comments written in the wake of the 10th anniversary of 9/11. historians will write about the last decade with three important words. not war on terror, but made in china. china stresses that they are still a developing company -- developing country. 150 billion people earning less than $1 per day. the gdp is that one-tenth of the u.s. level. which is, of course, true. but we know that the last 30 years have brought a revolution to the country. and it is a harbinger of

enormous change to the world. because there is another revolution coming. more and more people moving to the cities. 50,000 miles of highway. 80,000 miles of highway. in the daily breeze that was published yesterday, coming out under the brand, they pointed out that by next year, chinese technology will exceed the u.s. level. on this panel, we will try to bring some light to what is driving the changes.

in the recent henry kissinger bulk, he reminds us of the chinese art of understanding matter is in flux. in this panel, we will try to understand the nature of that. in this panel, 2012, a key year of transition for chinese leadership, which knew the cultural revolution, but not the founding revolution. a cultural leadership born into an isolated china. a leadership whose children are global citizens are around the world. the flux in policy as well. many of you have studied the five-year plan that was

published in march. i was there just after it was published. different phrases were used by china. a new chapter. a new phase. but the underlying chapter was fear. the next 30 years will be governed in a different way than the last 30 years. the speed of growth, the quality of growth, domestic consumption , emphasized in contrast. i think that one of the most remarkable things about the chinese leadership, one of the most impressive things, this house self-critical ir. this is not a country -- there is a significant role in the net -- the new five-year plan. secondly, the issue of

environmental sustainability. i hope i can say that i look forward to the day when the u.s. has met its national targets related to low carbon growth. i mentioned being in china in march. the question on the outside is how deep the rhetoric of that area is as it permeates the area. fellows were being given time in the u.k. to work on low carbon issues ahead of a climate change unit. i asked -- how come the central bank has a climate change unit? he said that sustained from crisis created an obvious potential.

he said of course every central bank has a climate change unit. third was political stability, the overriding concern. which i think would be wrong to gloss over. i want to make three final points that will emerge in the discussion. the first is about innovation. the political significance of the phrase one china is obvious. if you look at them economically, there are many china's. making their own way, using their own freedom to develop a distinctive tavis forward. one of the things i would like to tease out, is how that works

in the chinese system. a very senior chinese energy leader said that the lesson for the leadership was that partnerships for the way forward. i hope that we can explore what business partnership really means and to what extent it is a two-way street and a one-way street. as a politician and diplomat, there is a question of international cooperation. the chinese really are concerned about the weakness of international, multilateral systems. there was an interesting article in "reuters" about the power vacuum. in the traditional realm is a

foreign policy security structure, there is much on anything that looks like experience in internal affairs. i do sense that publishers of the international economy, there is a chinese willingness and hunger to engage. i think that over the next five years we will see a much more significant chinese engagement on g-20 issues that i hope we can explore as well. the significance of those issues, in terms of the analysis of the economy today and tomorrow, we could not have two better introduce errors of that discussion. we will speak for 10 minutes each, then we will have a conversation here, and then we will open it to the audience in the hopes that you will contribute questions as well.

i am going to -- >> i am going to use a few slides to get us started here. great. good morning. it is our pleasure to be here. a terrific conversation on this loaded day. the topic is china and the world economy. it was so critical to have david as the moderator, otherwise it would be china, a new master of the american economy. that would be an untenable way to kick off. it is a global impact that we are here to look for. i will highlight three things in the world economy. i will touch on china in terms of consumption and production,

as well as investment flows in the world. set the table a little bit with a few basics of what is going on in china and what it means. this is the slide that gives rise to the question, is china of the new master of the world economy in some way or another? what shows up as their headline gross domestic product. as recently as 1995, china was no bigger than brazil. 2000, china was still half the size of germany. 2005 or so, china was just two- thirds the size of the japanese economy. the slope of this kervin is an extraordinarily rapid. their domestic product has

boomed past these appear competitors of china in days recently gone by to become the world's second-largest economy. it forces us to ask -- is this a completely different economic story and we have never known before? a new master, perhaps, but as one says in britain, maybe the young masters have arrived at the table. we are not entirely in our maturity at. after all of this exceptional nominal growth, that is still my & of $62 trillion in the local economy. still a considerable distance to go in terms of being on par with the united states and being increasingly integrated as well. even in the decade ahead, as china moves towards parity with

the united states, we will not be allowed to forget that the average chinese is just half as well-off. 10 times bert capital of they 21% of all of the people on earth, 3.5% of global outbound direction flows, an opportune indication of globalization, exporting being one thing, but being invested in a significant way in the united states is another. europe is a very different thing, marking a different and more significant level globalization. the fact that china still has a

long way to go is not the bad news. it is the good news. it means that there is a tremendous amount of structural growth before us that, unless china comes off a rails, is likely to deliver most of the growth that we see in the world economy in the years ahead. this is one-quarter of their gdp. there have been very pronounced, bearish bets about what would happen to the chinese economy over the last few years. but these turned out to be bad bets. china has managed to deliver quarter after quarter world- beating gdp growth through the most dramatic events the world economy has seen in a century. good, we have to take stock of that, give credit, and do the best to understand what contributes to that extraordinary growth.

if this stays on track, i probably will agree that this is a political risk to china, rather than economic risks. those are most likely to get in the way of future scenarios. no nation has ever done that without the adjustments to the political system. such as are hard to imagine, of being able to manage over the next couple of years, but we can raise fundamental questions about their ability to keep delivering growth that looks like this. this is the chinese a share of marginal, global growth. of all of the new growth in the economy, how much of it is coming out of china as opposed to the rest of the world? this blue line is us. the united states used to be held sized chunk of global

growth. the baseline is great. whenever i expected to make for living yesterday, i have a better chance this year. new economic activity at the margin. with europe and the united states in crisis, we have dipped into negative factors in terms of global growth activity. from china and india went through the roof. going back to the old pattern, it is not extraordinary, but it is not the pre-crisis pattern either. as theooking at china most important contributor to global growth going forward. three things to consider as we work through the topic of china in our lives today. the first is china as a consumer of stuff.

my colleagues at the peterson interests -- institute have suggested that china might be called the united states within a decade. if we were to measure china in purchasing, power, and parity terms, we could see china across in the united states. consider that china, with its currently 9% headline in domestic growth, that is mostly in and then -- in an industrial economy. as a consumer share, we have 2035 for them to become as large artichoke of global consumption as the united states. of having a which part of economic activity you are looking at, we might have a longer wait to crown china as the new master.

on the functions in, has absolutely been the most exciting story in global production of the last few decades. remember, what china does is only in the middle of the production team. as the scribe of the red line, that is what china inc. does. in a moderate economy, the lion's share of value created is not in the manufacturing process anymore. upstream, we anticipate how consumer needs will be different tomorrow from today. there is innovation to meet those demands. in an increasingly carbon- trained world into how we manufacture things. we will come back to this, i

assure, in many ways. >> downstream, much of the value in his laptop is not the manufacturing and assembly that went into it, but it is the brand value. intel, windows, this is where most of the value of the machine is created. which is downstream of what china inc. does today and in technology, which is where china has not been able to do well for itself. the third thing i want to put on the table for discussion is the out on chinese direct investment. taking off from a small base, we have chinese investment in north america. small numbers compared to the

total overall value. clearly, going through inflection, we are living at the moment where chinese firms are no longer just shipping to us across the pacific, but are ready to come across in the stakeholders in our communities. it brings with it extraordinary opportunities and challenges for our politicians and firms. it is not just one or two industries getting cherry- picked. it is manufacturing and services. high-tech, low tech, and electric utilities. duke is right in the center of this extraordinary surprise and readiness to be part of an investor. this is what chinese outbound direct investment look like in the u.s. in 2003. a handful of deals in a handful

of states. too many people in washington think that this is where the story is the day. -- where the story is today. $5 billion per year of deals being done. that says something about us. that we are open. it says something about china inc.. you want to actually put money at risk. in the kind of market you have never invested in before? did something different is happening and we need to talk about it and invest in it. today will be a good down payment on that conversation. [applause] thank you very much. >> let's go straight on to the economy. >> as been suggested, our task was outlining the political downsides of 30 years of go-go

economic growth in china. i thought i would add a twist to that and highlight what i see as a side trend in political dimensions. but i think it helped to spur economic development and work in china over the past 20 years. now perhaps transforming into obstacles for the chinese economy, possibly requiring policy makers to rethink the balance between opportunity and challenge in these trends. i have moved quickly between what i think are these overall trends that helped to set the stage for the panel. touching on some of the same issues. the first thing that i would highlight is demographic.

i am sure you have heard a lot about this, but i thought i would flush it out a little bit. until now, china has been the beneficiary of a demographic dividend, with more people entering the labour force every year, able to use this as fuel for economic growth over the past 20 to 30 years. because of the one child policy, demographics in china are set to change dramatically in the next 20 years. by 2030, the number of people in the 20's are going to drop by 35%. the numbers of ages 55 to 60 will increase by 65%. over 65%, that would jump by 100%. the truth is that the younger workers are generally the best

educated and most technologically proficient. usually they are the most able to adapt to the rapid pace of economic change in these -- in this globalized world. it will put pressure on the system that, right now, is ill- equipped to deal with that. another interesting thing from frank, he said that what we are witnessing, with this one child policy, is the transformation of the kinships structure in china. grandparents, aunts and uncles, cousins, it has to find socio-economic life. -- it has to find socio-economic

life and we have to think about inedt has the kind -- defi socio-economic life. there will be an increasing need for them to support the elderly. basically, china will become the first country that is old before it is rich. helping to fuel economic growth in the past that may be more of a challenge, the iron rice bowl, and the failure to develop a compensating social welfare net. of course, the outset before was three decades ago when, beijing, i believe the state was enterprises and the economic and children -- burden of the social welfare of their workers.

certainly, that was a boon to those enterprises. it clearly allowed them to manufacture at much lower costs. at the same time, the social welfare system, it was replaced by anything else. the chinese premier, that is what harmonious societies are about. developing a social welfare network. i would argue that they have made no progress to date. that only in the past few years have they started to invest in a way that might make a different. i would say that the jury is still out. some of the discussions around the fact that workers may have to contribute half of their wages in order to pay into the protection of the insurance or

medical care schemes. suggesting that this may be burdensome. still, in many respects, this is a developing stage. also interesting is this issue of social welfare resting heavily on the shoulders of the wealthy as well. many of you saw the study dot -- the study done by the chinese emergence playing -- the emergence bank. 27% of specific chinese have emigrated, with an additional 47% considering it. this was published in "the washington post." why is this the case? they are the most successful people in china today. they cited the same reasons that the poor people are concerned. health care, education, a desire to have