prejudice but with opportunities and they worked very hard to be worthy of that great gift. in america, my family discovered a place where no one had to be a prisoner of history, where everyone could imagine and work toward a brighter future. that is precisely the type of country that i want to leave our three daughters and that all of us want to leave the next generation. unfortunately, the financial pressures that are currently undermining the majority of american families threaten this most fundamental aspiration. in september, the wall street journal reported that proctor and gamble, a producer of perhaps the most iconic household brands, targeted to our middle-class. when you think about it, nobody even in needed it the air- conditioner before we had a middle class in this country. [laughter] this article talked about how proctor and gamble is fundamentally changing the way it develops its goods for

middle-class customers. procter and gamble owes much of its success to the growth of the middle-class after world war ii predicted the spending power of motocross families in the united states will continue to erode, and it has decided to change its business model to focus on the very wealthiest americans and on the very poorest americans, because that is where the growth is. is there were ever a canary in the coal mine at signaling the seriousness of our economic challenges, procter and gamble's new business model is it. unfortunately, their assessment is supported by a lot of economic indicators. the new census report found that u.s. median income has fallen in real inflation-adjusted dollars back to 1989 levels, a level two decades ago. although indicators of u.s. gdp

growth and productivity show a little bit of a positive trend, employment and wages lag far behind their pre-recession peak speed of this is very important. the last time we had economic growth in this country was the first time that gdp growth decoupled from wage growth, decoupled from job growth. and that has been compounded in this recession. all of which is combined together to create two decades of economic stagnation for our middle class. but the davis of cartoon that passes for political conversation and washington is utterly divorced from any thing -- to the device of cartoon that passes for political conversation in washington is utterly divorced from anything. in town hall meetings across my state of colorado, a third democratic, a third republican, a third independent, know that the screaming match in washington has absolutely no relevance to their daily lives.

last spring break, i mentioned we had three kids, last spring break, two of them had the misfortune to be sent to spend the week with me in washington. the oldest one got to go to harry potter world, for reasons that are still obscure to me. [laughter] and certainly obscure to the other two girls. but i was so excited because i never get a chance to spend time with them, and certainly not there. so the first day they came, i made him go through every single meeting that i had. which was a huge mistake because they went on strike the entire rest of the week they were in washington. one of those meetings was held in harry reid's extremely fancy conference room in the capital. tiles, mosaics, chandeliers, and views of the capital. we were having a briefing on china. there were democratic and republican senators there. everybody was there to brief us. 40 minutes into this meeting, dick durbin net disney in the

ribs and points to might then it 6-year-old daughter -- he nudges me in the ribs and points to my then a 6-year-old daughter because she was holding up a sign that said "i am board." b-o-a-r-d. [laughter] as a dagger through the heart to the former superintendent of public schools. but, take it from me, that is the way a lot of people feel about what is going on there. you know, they're not spending their time and riveted to the screaming match going on on the table or on the floor. they know how serious these times are. they want to leave this economy and our country in a stronger place and more vibrant than the economy that we inherited. and they are increasingly anxious about our ability to do so. and increasingly disdainful of

the political battles in washington that are only making matters worse. it is hard to be there four days a week, to be honest with you, but the hope that i draw is not from there. it is from the town hall and from the fact that there numerous bipartisan proposals, some of which you have heard before you today, that can change the trajectory of the middle-class and reinforce our nation's economic leadership. we can enact -- we used to have, mr. harry reid said, long-term research and development strategy, a commitment to basic science, to reform our tax code to agree a velocity of job creation here in the united states, reform and strengthen our public education system, at a time that when we know that in this recession, the worst the unemployment rate ever got for anybody with a college degree in the united states was 4.5%. that was the worst it ever was it you had a college degree. but today if you are a child living in poverty in this country, your chances of getting a college degree are nine in

100. that means 1104 children born today, if we do not change what we're doing, 91 of them are going to be constrained to the margin of our democracy and to the margin of our economy from the very outset. we can invest in our infrastructure, and as the mayor said, we can fix our broken immigration system. and we need to. and that is just the beginning. implementing ideas such as these will clearly make us a more dynamic, efficient, competitive country, better positioned to fight for a high-paying 21st jobs that americans need. i understand that our productivity has never been higher than it is today to the efficiency of our economy has never been higher. because our response to competitive threats of a broad because of technology, and in fact, because of this recession, because companies had to figure out how to get through it. our gdp is almost back to where

it was before the recession started. with median family income that has continued to crater in those unemployment numbers i continue to be staggering. and that gdp line is going to cross again with millions of people still unemployed in this country rodney slater was here a few minutes ago, and he and my wife for from the same tiny town in arkansas, and the mississippi delta. i was there this weekend to visit her family and was taken out to the fields to see the new john deere tractors that there to pick the cotton. they pick six rows of cotton and a bell the con, replacing another 20 jobs that have been lost because of this bid i am not arguing that we should have a less productive economy. we should have a more productive economy. but it is all the more reason why we should not be thinking about yesterday's businesses,

businesses that we will start tomorrow and next week's that will employ americans. all the more reason we need to educate people for this 21st century. i have said this all over the state, and i have said include yours truly in this, americans need to hold our elected officials in washington to a much higher standard. should hold our elected officials to the same standard that we hold our local officials. one of the things that i say in colorado is that there's not a single layer in our state, not one, not a republican, not a democrat, not an independent, not a member of the tea party, that would ever threaten the credit rating in their community for power fix or for ideologies. [applause] they desperately, given the seriousness of what they're facing every day, desperately want our elected officials to think fast the closest special interest group, the next election, their own political futures. they want leaders that meet

these very justifiably high standards. i am confident that we can achieve this based on what i have heard from families all across the state, regardless of their background, a political party, or income level. colleagues i have met share the highest aspirations for themselves, their children, and their country. they believe in the legacy of their parents and their grandparents. they want to maintain that legacy. they have no interest in falling down on the job, even when washington is. it is that spirit that should get all of us hope that we will leave our children the same type of opportunities that my mother and her family encountered when they came to america over half a century ago. and on behalf of them and on behalf of my own kids, i want to thank all of you for coming together today to have this important meeting. thank you for having me here today, and good luck with your conversations. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please

welcome president and editor-in- chief of the huffington post media group, arrianna huffington, and "washington post" journalists and special assistant to president george w. bush, michael cargerson. [applause] >> thank you all. it is a real pleasure and honor for me to be here with arrianna huffington. one of the sharpest people i know. in previous lives, we actually go kind of way back. we worked together on a lot of these issues. it used to be called compassionate conservative of the we're on different sides on many things, but actually not on a lot of these values. i am very glad to be with you. it is great thing when the y and lies down with the land. , but the land is not get much

sleep. i wanted to start a discussion with four principles that might be the basis for what we talk about. first, i would contend that economic inequality is justifiable as a reward for effort, but only in an atmosphere where there is social mobility. without social mobility, any quality becomes a caste system fundamentally inconsistent with the american ideal. this set of issues that you're dealing with is actually very important to the moral status of the capitalist, the democratic capitalist system, the kind of basic justification, with more justification as we move forward. secondly, i think it is clear

that that mobility is stalled, particularly on the lower levels of the economic ladder. as others have mentioned, we compare unfavorably in places like canada, denmark, and france. and that this is a serious problem that should have serious political implications. third, i would say that there are many -- people have discussed many complex structure or reasons for this reality. but when you bring it down to the personal and individual level, there are actually certain keys -- research indicates that there's certain keys to mobility. completing high school, having children after marriage, getting and keeping a job. these things are a path to mobility, can be a path to mobility for millions of people. and then i would say, fourth, that i think that both parties have something to contribute on this agenda.

you know, coming from a variety of physiological backgrounds, dealing with teacher quality in failing schools, dealing with the drought crisis, dealing with getting young people to attend college but also to complete college, wealth building, economic literacy, the promotion of on to partnership, child health, a preschool programs, parenting skills these are not really issues that are exhausted by one side or another in the agenda. so i conclude and turn it over by saying this is the economic debate we should be having, and i wonder why we are not. >> thank you, michael. i am delighted to be here with michael, addressing this issue, because i completely agree that this is a debate we should be having and we are not having. and i follow michael on it

twitter. i highly recommend it. he does my favorite kind of tweeting which was called mind mapping, as opposed to life mapping. he says, i am reading emerson's self-reliance, and i want to know the conclusion of that. but before we go there, my view of what is happening is that we're looking at a split screen reality. depending on which side of the screen you're looking at, you can be deeply pessimistic or do we optimistic. on one side of the screen, we have 25 million people lot of work or underemployed. we already have almost 3 million people whose homes have been foreclosed, and it is expected to be 8 million people we have statistics are round upward

mobility that michael alluded to. in fact, we're attend. we are behind france. to me, as an immigrant of this country, as somebody who has lived the american dream, [unintelligible] [laughter] because coming no, upward mobility is sort of at the heart of the american dream. i remember growing up and walking to school by a statute of president truman. we all sort of thought the best american says, you know, people with compassion, and where you can go and work hard and live by the rules and build a better life for you and your children. that is disappearing for millions of people right now. at the same time, on the other side of the screen, we do have an explosion of empathy, compassion, and creativity at

the community level very often. i was speaking to rick warren, and we will hear from him soon, and he will tell me what his children or drip for all the people of the fork. how communities are rising. and how institutions are coming together to make a difference. and at the media group, we also have 857 projects around the country in small communities. the reality is changing. we track food banks for middle- class families to make ends meet. this is what we're facing. it is amazing how people are rallying to make a difference. in terms of the larger debate we should be having, we need to look at capitalism. capitalism, if you look at the founding fathers of capitalism,

they were all fathers. capitalism does not have any founding mothers. [laughter] adam smith, alfred marshall, there were all very compelling and had a moral foundation. adam smith wrote the theory of moral sentiment before he wrote the resignation. i was at the library called the marshall library, after alfred marshall, who developed the concept of economic chivalry. these have disappeared in large sections of our community. it is as though we went from the country that makes things to a country that makes things up, like credit defaults slops, you know, ways to make money that do not add value, which is at the heart of capitalism and how you add value in a way that supports freedom and community? the last thing i want to say is the reason that i am optimistic is because i remember the words

sang we're moving from it being -- [unintelligible] based on collaboration in meaning. people are looking for more meaning in their lives. as people are looking to make sense out of life, they're discovering that there's another part of ourselves. there is a book the road in the 1990's that nobody read, and it is about that instinct, transcendence, meaning. it is going beyond survival, sex, and power. in times of crisis, people tap into these things. the more we tap into it, the more we actually grow, the more we can come from that place in ourselves where we can actually access is the empathy that this in each human being but is also not very present in the current

debate where we see people booing or shooting people are gay soldiers. that is the other side of humility. we had to strengthen the part of us that ultimately brings us together, and the more likely we will be awarded over the crisis and thrive at a higher level. thank you. [applause] >> maybe i can ask one question about why this is not part of the discussion in the way that it should be. it does strike me that there is some of ideological reasons for that. many people on it the right seem to be very, very focused on individual economic rights, instead of the communities that shape individuals and the strength of those communities. i find, and you may disagree, that some on the left are oriented towards consumption

they want the redistribution to encourage consumption. but really, the long-term need is in a lot of areas of social capital. it is what you gain from community, not just from transfers. i am interested in your perspective on what the is the logical limits are in approaching this on both left and right. >> well, i think, first of all, that we, the media, have done a really bad job at putting the spotlight on what is working in the country. the focus is not on what is working, and it is on the latest big scandals or stories, whether it is the balloon voyage for the reverend that was going to burn the koran or now herman cain's sexual harassment accusations. we're wasting an enormous amount of time and energy debating this

sexual harassment accusations about a man who never ever, ever had a chance to be president. so why -- [laughter] and every time i turn on the tv and i hear more kinds of incredible outrage and absorption in evaluating this, i just tune it out. because it does not matter. i feel the media has done a terrible job of focusing our attention where in needs to go. i do not believe it is because of ratings. i believe it is because of laziness. i'd think it is the easy, lazy thing to do. [applause] it is much harder to build programming around real issues but make it incredibly appealing to people. if you look through history,

[unintelligible] before he ran for prime minister, found he had to write a novel in order to educate his fellow countrymen about what was happening in england, england becoming two nations. so people have always known that you need to capture this imagination. you have to move the consensus to another place. politicians have lost that gift, and the media have also lost the gift of being a bird -- of being able to capture what is happening, whether it is for closure or gathering in a dynamic that makes people want to do something about it. so i want to ask you about emerson and self-reliance. how does emerson focus on self- reliance, and how does that come together with what you're saying about the importance of building

capital, building communities, and tapping into those instincts? >> well, it raises an interesting contrast. because in certain ways, you know, emerson's case is an exaggerated case against social institutions. at the time, there were ossified social structures that needed to be challenged. in a certain way, i think america does that pretty well at the top, when we're challenging convention and pushing for technological change, when we're trying to think differently in our society. i am not sure that we do the most basic work properly in the society. we reward genius. i mean, if you look at -- you know, in the analysis of what the great american advantages our, our colleges and universities are just an

extraordinary advantage that attract people from a round the world. but at the same time, we have institutions, particularly in the low-income communities, schools that the trade children every single day, that abused children every single day -- schools that beach rape children every day, that undermine their future every day. there's an expectation that this was just the way that things work. it has not always worked that way. so maybe we need to apply some of that creativity and challenge and questioning of orthodoxy to the way that we do education, the way that we do prepare families to care for their children. i am not sure -- we apply a lot of our national and social creativity to technology and other areas, which are

absolutely essential, but i do not see that as a kind of competition when it comes to the ideas that we're talking about that can transform the lives of people who are stuck at lower levels of the economic ladder. where the american dream no longer applies. >> actually, education is one area that they go beyond left and right, and there is any consensus emerging across the is the logical spectrum about the need to do something around schools, a round tenure, about the ability to find good teachers, and this is in many of our schools. it goes beyond left and right. it very much interests me. it is our position to not see every issue is left to versus right. it is so incredibly limiting.

i was in the country recently that is growing and flourishing, and i talked to conservatives and liberals, and the consensus is that the priority has to be moving people from public and to the middle-class. that is it. you know, it is not -- you do not have to be left wing to believe that you just have to care about a growing, prosperous economy and a stable economy. i think we need to change a lot of the language, the obsolete language, we used around this issue. >> well, i cannot agree more. i think that is a good place to end. thank you very much. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the honorable elaine l. chow, 24th u.s. secretary of

labor -- elaine l. chao. >> i am very blessed to have incredibly inspiring parents who sacrificed everything to come to a new country, to build a new life for their family. my parents are americans of chinese descent. in 1949, they left the mainland of china to resettle in a small island called taiwan. there, they met, they got married, and they had two kids. when i was about five years old, my parents made it the momentous decision to want to come to america. this is such an audacious decision for a young couple who had never been to america and i suspect had never even met white people. but my father had a chance to take a national examination, and

in those days, you get one chance to take one examination, which determines your fate. he scored number 1 in the whole country, broke all the previous records, and got a lot of visibility. because of that, he was sponsored for study here in united states. but this permission to come to the united states only comprised of an opportunity for himself without us. my mother then was seven months pregnant, and then never occurred to this young couple to delay their departure, his departure, for two months, so that he could see the birth of his third child. the opportunity to come to america was so unique that they grabbed it right away. my father went to america alone, and it took him three years before he was able to bring my mother, my two sisters, and me to america. we embarked upon a 37-day ocean journey, on a cargo ship, no

less. we came with the cargo, and we arrived in new york city, and our first home was a small one- bedroom apartment in queens, new york. life was a very, very difficult for my parents, but they never, never demoted anything but optimism, hope, and joy that they were here in this country to have opportunities that they never would have had any place else. when you're young and need to a country, you are so unfamiliar with so many things, so we arrived on july 17. about four months later, while we were at home, after we had gotten back from school, and we were studying -- because we're asian-americans, we study. [laughter] so we hit the books, and the

doorbell keeps on ringing. we do not have any friends in this new country? we did not know any neighbors. we cannot figure out who would be wringing our doorbell. when we open our door, we saw this little witches and goblins -- [laughter] and they were chanting this chant loss arresting these huge empty bags at us. we thought we would -- they were chanting this chant, and they were thrusting these utility back at us. we thought we were being held up. we get them crackers bit of that, we were so frightened. we stopped answering the door. we found out afterwards that it was halloween, and we became the best trick-or-treaters in the whole neighborhood the following year. i started third grade without speaking a word of english. nobody in my family spoke a word

of english, except for my father. what i would do during the day was copy things down from the blackboard in to my notebook, and every night around midnight, my father would come home after his three jobs, and he and i would sit down and go over my lessons for the day, and that is how i learned english. but throughout those times, even though adversity was always present, we wondered whether we would ever make it in america. my parents never lost hope that tomorrow is going to be a much better day and that the future was going to be bright and promising. armed with that hope, we had the courage to go from data gave -- a day to day, month to month, from year to year, and i am blessed to say that my sisters and i have all done very well,

as have my parents, and we're blessed in so many different ways. i think the major route of advancement for us was education. my parents sacrificed everything to bring us to a new country that they knew nothing about and a culture they never experienced. it was a language they were not familiar with at all. but we learned to adapt and to grow in this new country with the help of our newly found friends and neighbors, and with a volunteer society that is so prevalent here in america. america is characterized by strangers helping strangers, and connected by blood or marriage. and that is a wonderful hallmark of who we are as a people throughout the world. i am very dismayed, and when i hear from young people that

america no longer holds the opportunity that it used to. despite what people may say, whenever i travel abroad, america still represents the land of hope and opportunity, and you who are here today are part of the legacy of our country in ensuring that america remains the land of the free and -- the land of hope and opportunity that we also look forward to. i want to make sure that you will -- and i am so grateful that you all are here. but you're really the preservers of the legacy to ensure that our country remains the land of hope and opportunity for everyone, regardless of their background. thank you very much. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome, from saddleback church, pastor rick florin.

[applause] -- pastor rick warren's. [applause] thank you, everybody, for coming out to opportunity nation. a shows everybody that you care about this issue. creating opportunity and jobs for people when so many people are out of work. last friday night, about 10:30 p.m. at night, i was driving home, after having done some hospital grounds that i am driving home, and i come up to an intersection, and there is a van stalled in the middle of the intersection. i stick my head out the window, and i say, can i help you? and i give you a push? and the guy says, yeah, so i gently pull my car and give him a question to the nearest parking lot. i had some jerk tables, so i jumped his car. he got started and wished me well, thank me, and headed off down the road. i left about a minute later. as i went down the road, i

realized the only made it about three blocks and die again. i pulled over and said, what is the problem? he said, my car keeps shorting out. i found but he did not have a cell phone. he did not have any money. and he did not have any insurance. so i pulled out my aaa card, and i called the automobile company. while we were waiting for the company to come to know the car to his house, i began asking about his life. i wanted to know about his family and kids. he said, i am married and i have three kids. he said i am a professional house painter, but i have been out of work for two years. he said, i am losing my home, and we're going to have to go to a cheaper area. i have to move out of the area. and i said, how are you supporting your family right now? you have been out of work for two years. he bowed his head a little bit, and he said, i go and i scrounged through people's

garbage. and i find step that they want to throw away. and i put it in a plastic bag. once a week, on saturday and sunday, i drive two hours across the board into tijuana, and a solid 32 people who have less than i have. i could tell you a thousand stories like that. as a pastor, i deal with the human face of joblessness every day of my life. during this day, you're going to hear some statistics. you'll hear a lot of statistics. but behind every one of those numbers is a real human being, a real face, a real story, a real need. saddlebag is a very large church are and where the most affluent counties in the world. a 11% of my church families are out of work. 11% ins 3000 families in my church are out of work. this means we're feeding thousands of families a week.

they have been out of work, and many are over two to three years. this is the new issue really, not just since the great depression, the new because of the technological reasons why people are out of work. in 1631, my ancestors, my own family came across to america with william bradford in the founding of the massachusetts bay colony. they came to america with a promise, a promise that i can worship god the way on want to. there will be equal opportunity, and there will be upward mobility. there's a chance and promise that my kids will have it better. for 350 years, that has been the promise of america. equal opportunity, freedom to believe like you need to believe, and upward mobility. but it is does not true anymore,

and our economy has stalled, and the american dream has been for many, many people. the runs on the latter are getting further and further apart. i was reading on the airplane, coming out from l.a. yesterday, a new book that i would recommend. it is called "the coming job wars." it is by the ceo of the gallup foundation. they pulled the entire world once a year. they discovered after six years of polling, the number one in need in the world is not i want happiness or security, safety for your kids, all the things you normally expect. the number when they said -- the wonder -- the number one thing they said they wanted was a job, a good job. this is an extremely complex issue. i have about two minutes to talk about it. let me give you some suggested causes and suggested years.

and me give you five words. here the five primary cause is why we are in the situation. number one, of course, is globalization. that has caused job loss. other nations now compete for jobs that our own workers used to half. we all know that. number two is not just globalization but regulation. regulations have limited job creation, overbearing policies, restrictions, protocols, price controls, even subsidies on limiting growth in limiting the creation of new jobs. controls kill creativity, bureaucracies and block the initiative. regulations restrict growth. free enterprise and only blooms in a free environment. globalization, regulation, number three, education. our educators have failed to train workers for the new jobs that we need in the 21st

century. we have graduated a lot of people from school, they're not trained in the jobs that we have in the 21st century. by 2020, two-thirds of the jobs in america will be medium or high skilled jobs. and we do not have that many people who trained in medium and high skilled jobs. we have lots of people skilled in low-skilled jobs. we have a 100 million people trained in those, but they're only 61 million of those jobs, so that means a 40 million persons surplus. globalization, education, regulation, immigration. immigration has created a surplus of unskilled workers, so they're more people competing for the jobs. we know this. every year in america, 1.5 million people emigrated to this country. both legally, and about half a million e illegally. and this creates a surplus.

in the fifth one is the demoralization, which is the problem i have to deal with all the time as a pastor, because people have lost faith in the system. they have lost faith in business. they have lost faith in government. they have lost faith that they will ever get a job. employers are afraid to hire after two and three years of layoffs. they're skittish about it. people who have been out of work have lost hope that there will ever get another job back. and the next generation does not believe they are ever going to get one. even those who have a job, many believe -- they have lost their drive to do the best work. these five problems are so severe, nobody can solve them on their round. it is going to take partnerships. if you ever watch the nfl, you know that some guys are so big, some of the ballplayers are so big, the only way you're going to bring them down as of the team tackles them. one guy cannot do it.

to take down these five problems that are depressing the job market in our society, and they're very complex, it is going to require a partnership between four different areas. business, government, schools, and churches. each of them have a world of the other cannot play, and nobody can do it by themselves. the reason lies because job creation involves political issues, environmental issues, individual issues, moral issues, financial issues, educational issues, global and local issues -- a very complex. the government cannot solve it by itself. business cannot solve it by itself. churches cannot solve it by itself. schools cannot solve it by itself. what do we do? i tried to think of something to say in about a minute, so let me give you this. if we're going to rebuild the american dream, the american dream of equal opportunity, the american dream of upward

mobility for each succeeding generation, we're going to have to rebuild it. build -- five things we need to do. b, we need to believe we can solve it. there is so much pessimism in washington, d.c. there's so much pessimism in main street. we have to attack that one first. we have to believe that we can compete globally. we have to believe that we can in of it again. we have to believe that the power of free enterprise actually still works, and it does. and we have to believe that we can sell it. the u stands for, we must unleashed free enterprise. free enterprise only works in a free environment, so that means we have to remove the restrictions. see, as a pastor, i know that human beings are hard wired by god to be creative. we are naturally creative. in fact, your most like god when

you're creating, because god is our creator. anytime you limit freedom a new limit man's creativity, it depresses him. you put a force that holds back new-product and inventions, new innovations. years ago, i was honored by a state dinner in china. and the leadership of the cabinet of china honored me with a steep dinner in people's call. i got into a very spirited debate with the communist leaders of that country. i tell them, i said, you see, you guys, the problem is, china, you want the economic prosperity of the west without all the moral and ethical underpinnings, and it does not work. you have to have all the freedoms. freedom of religion, which is, by the week, the first freedom in the bill of rights. freedom of religion, freedom of press, freedom of assembly. you need freedom of information. not just freedom of markets.

capitalism without a moral and the coal underpinning is pure greed. but with moral under pending in moral people, it works. it works. so we have to unleash free enterprise. you know, the one thing that does give me hope about our country is you cannot destroy creativity. you can suppress it, but you cannot destroy it. it is kind of like shaking up a coke bottle. you shake it up, one day you remove the cap, it is going to come all about. we have these five issues of engineering. we're holding back the creativity of a lot of people put in assessing the government, business, schools, and churches to remove the cap, let freedom ring, and watch what happens. i stands for identified and empower our entrepreneurs. they are the secret sauce of america. we have got to stop demonizing the successful but we should

make heroes of small-business owners increase 70% of the jobs. it is a myth that big corporations are creating the jobs. about 70% of the jobs are created by small and medium- sized businesses. silicon valley is more than a place. it is an idea and a value that is envied by the world. in the past 30 years, 40 million new jobs have been created by new companies, new companies create new jobs. we've got to identify and empower entrepreneurs. l in build is localized job creation. i do need to go into this in detail, but i will say it this way, all job creation is local. the government cannot create jobs but you cannot create national jobs except temporary ones. and long-term economy requires long-term jobs, and they only have been at the local level. grassroots to do it cheaper, faster, better, and with more accountability. finally, the d in build stands

for, we must develop vocational skills curriculum. schools have to start teaching work ethic again. churches have to teach the value of wealth creation. that is a gift of god. vocation, the idea of calling, the dignity of work, and all of these things. if we do, we will see a change. most of what i have said has been pretty negative, but minute -- let me close with a quote from that great theologian, forrest gump. you remember in the movie, a hurricane came in, and he and his friends started bubba gump shrimp company. he and lieutenant dan are out in a boat and a hurricane comes up in the southeast part of america. during that hurricane, every other boat says, that times are coming. it is terrible, so played it

safe. nothing ventured, nothing gained. every boat tied up in the harbor and said we're going to play it safe. only a forrest gump's boat was out doing what the boats are made to do, fish and shrimp. so he is out in the middle of the storm doing his business -- in the storm. all the others played it safe. batten down the hatches, type in the harbor. and when the hurricane is over, if you remember that movie, every both in the harbor was destroyed. and forrest gump had a monopoly. he dominated the market. at times are good times for expansion. -- bad times are good times for expansion. it is not a time to say the sky is falling. it is a ton to be americans and to what we have never done before or what we have always done and just do it better. thank you. god bless you. [applause]

>> we now bring you the second panel of the opportunity nation summit held earlier this month by new york city. think tank leaders took part in the discussion on ideas for promoting opportunity and social mobility. we will also hear remarks from major-general marcia anderson, the top ranking african-american women in the army. this is a 40 minutes. >> -- business leaders, educators, and mainstream americans, asking them, whether the big levers we can pull to restore opportunity in america? and this political and fiscal environment, what can we actually get done? this has always been about getting something done, not just talk. we reached out to leading thinkers from the left or right, and center, and ask them to engage in a series of conversations about the policy implications of a shared agenda. what do we actually agree upon? those of you in washington know how hard that is in this current environment. what was amazing and hardening

was to see how much willing people were to actually engage in as far -- conversation. by focusing on the past, policies that have worked and failed, and bright spots of innovation, innovative ideas great opportunity, we emerged with a broad framework that can boost opportunity. i now want to introduce the ceo of civic enterprises, former director of the white house domestic policy council under president george w. bush, a member of president obama's white house council for community solutions, and a co architect of a campaign to introduce our next panel. please welcome john. [applause] >> thank you. good morning. it has been a wonderful and exciting morning. are you still with us? ok. [applause] i would like to say a personal word about mark. he was the first person i met in

college after my parents drove 16 hours with me to move me in. i had this horrifying moment when mark was there, and he was so excited to be footloose and fancy free, and my parents that, mark, why don't you join us for lunch, and mark stay with us for two and half hours and treated my parents with such dignity and respect. ever since that day, i have loved mark. i also learned at the time that he was a film producer. and as i was watching this extraordinarily moving videos and stories that were put together by mark and his team last night, i thought, if we could take those stories to capitol hill and in statehouses and all across america, connecting them to the people and institutions that are making decisions about skilling these extraordinary programs and efforts, i think that could be more than many of the things we do. it is my pleasure today -- last november, for reid's a car yet, who were so thrilled to be with us today -- fareed zacharia

wrote a beautiful cover story for "time." is in the grim realities for globalization shattering the middle class. the good news is that a bipartisan policy agenda can return the country to prosperity. opportunity nation heard this challenge and conducted listening sessions and research and the best policy ideas. lessons learned from the past. look at bright spots of innovation, like we saw last night at apollo, lift, europe, and the wonderful story of this connectedness that we have from those who might be upper-income to those who are lower income. we also looked at the leading indicators of social mobility and the excitement around this opportunity index that has been developed. one thing that surprised us was how much common ground we found in our discussions with policy

makers and leaders on the right, left, and in the middle, and how committed they all were to wanting to boost opportunity and make it a top priority. so we worked together and brought policy leaders together to share ideas, to listen to one another, and developed a framework for action, knowing that we would not get agreement on every element of the plan. as you have heard, opportunity nation also listens to low- income americans in the general public and discover how worried and pessimistic we have become. but having listened for a couple of hours at the youth-filled town hall meeting yesterday to young people, they literally had gotten into their cars, and some from 10 to 12 hours to be part of that session. some had very difficult life circumstances. some had been incarcerated. and they stood up one after another and showed the power of

articulate leadership. i have 20 pages of notes of their idea is to inform the opportunity nation plan. and it gives you such hope that these efforts, built on the back of the young, will indeed transform our country. we also -- [applause] yes. they're also very entrepreneurial. i got about 20 cards and indications for lunch and discussions about jobs -- terrific. we also learned interesting facts from people from -- like ron haskins, that only 2% of people who finish high school work full-time and have stable families before having children and in the poor, wellston 5% of the people who doesn't -- a do none of these things in the poor. we talk about public policies and private means to help more

americans realize the american dream. some of the people you will see onstage to i have been working with them for a couple of years are just extraordinary leaders and innovators in developing policy that can help make a difference. let me introduce them now. your eyes are not playing tricks on you. first we have, from the heritage foundation, stuart butler, director for the center of policy innovation. he has been there for almost 30 years. [applause] backstage coming wanted to confirm his seat was on the far right, and we put him there. so there you are. second is the center for american progress, and we think about that institution and all it has done. we had the new president of cap -- congratulations. [applause] also, former director of domestic policy for the obama/biden presidential

campaign, member of president clinton's domestic policy council, and someone who saw the reality of welfare firsthand. next, the brookings institution, belle, a senior fellow and director for budgeting and the office of management at and budget under president clinton. co author of the book "creating an opportunity society with republicans." and a former bush senior adviser. and the book was a framework for our vision for the opportunity nation plan. finally, the white house council for community solutions, the wonder woman. she's a former co-chair and ceo of the bill and melinda gates foundation, current share of the smithsonian institution, and also the current share and putting us all to the extraordinarily hard work of the white house council for

community solutions, which is focused on boosting opportunities through community innovation. [applause] these leaders and a coalition of nearly 200 organization helped develop the framework and policy plan of opportunity nation. i cannot tell you how excited fareed was. he threw down the challenge and said, now we have a bipartisan set of ideas that can bring us forward in a way that we can force action to build. i also want to thank tom friedman and bruce reed, who made our own opportunity nation process bipartisan. it is remarkable that european countries that have -- are announcing higher rates of social mobility. many go all the way down there on the right. what do you view are the most -- looking at what we have learned from history, looking at the explosion of social

entrepreneurship and innovation like we saw last night, what are the most significant levers of opportunity that you believe could be pulled institutionally to make a difference, to boost mobility? second, what you think would actually get done? >> first of all, for a long time, we have been working together on the whole idea of mobility, what it takes to get people to move up the ladder. as you and others have said, of some of these days in school, graduates high school, graduates college today and is in a stable family into the have a culture of saving and thinking about the future, they're likely to achieve some form of the american dream. and if they do not do those things, they're likely never to achieve the american dream. i think we have all recognize that there certain areas of policy or certain strategies that have to be put into place to rebuild confidence in the actuality of the american dream. one of those is encouraging

savings in america. not just necessarily how much you save, but the very act of saving itself. organizations and proposals are out there to expand that to the idea of savings credit, which corporations have strongly supported these kinds of approaches. it is the kind of thing you can do. you give the tax system to not penalize people who save. i think encouraging savings is critically important, but it is something where people on the left and right completely agree, and grass-roots organizations understand completely. second, it is very important, working on a national deficit and debt. we had in debt to ourselves to the nation, and that squeezed out some things, so many programs that are needed to enable people to succeed. we have been on a so-called fiscal wake up tour, trying to educate the american people and the fact that billions upon billions of dollars in america

and with people who do not really needed, at the same time that others do not get it. i think stingy conservatives and these progress is generally agreed that we have to stop giving money to people who do not needed and to corporations and give it to help people to move up the ladder. finally, this is last but in many ways the most important, we must fix our education system. i went through public school in britain. i went through public school in britain. it was a survival course. if you survive, you learned how to succeed. if you did not survive, you never achieved the american dream. if we have to be innovative in those areas. we have to encourage charter schools, school choice -- if there has to be radical innovation. if we do not do that, and i do

not think we can restore the letter to prosperity if the people like me that come from other countries expected america to provide, and is not providing today. >> stuart butler has written a lot of books on destructive innovation. nera, what do you view as the significant leathers for boosting the opportunity -- levers for boasting opportunity and america? >> in the. of bipartisan cooperation, and reaching across the aisle, and trying to stretch ourselves, to gain greater support, i want to tie two things steps toward butler said. -- stuart butler said. hopefully we can work together on ideas around insuring that

our tax system, and the way our government recognizes the need for support of individuals better reflects what was discussed, which is we should be helping people that need it, and a perfect example is the earned income tax credit, a system that rewards work through the tax code that ronald reagan strongly supported, and also eliminate tax breaks for corporations, and i would say restore productivity on the high-end of the taxpayers. one reason why that is important is exactly what was talked about -- there is a reaction in this country that the game is rigged against average americans and middle class folks. sometimes i feel that way, so i can't imagine many americans feel that way. -- i can imagine americans feel that way. the tax code is just one example

where the game seems right. lower income americans who are working three, four jobs, are seen things stacked against them. changing our tax code would restore confidence to some degree in our system. i agree with stuart butler that we should be thinking about ways to innovate in our education system care if we at the center for american progress have led on some of these reforms. in that scenario, we should be finding common ground. i also think we need to the sink through new levers and ways to reform older programs, job- training programs, etc., where these programs had been born in the 20th century, and we need to reform and reworked them for the 21st century.

we need to integrate them more, in insuring that you are seeing the streamlining of programs, ensuring there more customer- friendly. i think there are a variety of ways where we can hopefully find common ground across the ideological spectrum to solve problems people are dealing with. >> thank you. you both could teach washington a lot. patty stonesifer, i want to look at this from a different angle given your background. the millennium development goals have proven much more successful in decreasing poverty and disease, and boosting education. i know the u.s. context is different, but are there lessons we can learn that are relevant to the opportunity nation efforts here? >> the millennium the element goals in 2000 -- most countries

came together to sign a declaration in this town to set eight really audacious goals to end poverty, reduce hunger, reduce disease, improve gender equity, and a series of other important, big goals, matched with specific targets, clear indicators, and getting not only the local leadership to sign up, but those that are donors, those who have policy control, together to say these are objectives we should be willing to hold ourselves to. since 2000, 10 years later, there is real progress in many countries. the reason is they held hands across their country, and said this is something we all all citizens. we measured. there was a spotlight from the media, the think tanks, and the

community organizations to keep pressure on, to keep this ability on these hard data and real improvements. we see results. millions of children with better opportunities for the future. many leaders with bolder plans against some of these problems. >> it is wonderful, this idea of bold, realizable goals, and plans of action to meet them. the opportunity nation plan around education there are these audacious goals of a 90% graduation rate and a civic marshall plan to meet them, and the highest college attainment level in the world. you have thought about what a broader goal would be. would you share with us, belle

sawhill? >> i love the idea of sharing goals. if they create accountability. as mayor bloomberg said, if you cannot measure something, you cannot imagine -- management. by wednesday set a goal for the nation, and use the bully pulpit to talk about that goal. it could have to do with a portion of children that achieve the american dream. we see right now that for less said vantage children, and i am not talking about the very disadvantaged, i'm talking about the over 40% of children that are born into less privileged families in this country, and over a little over half of them have a realistic possibility of achieving what most of us would call the american dream by the time there are an adult. if that is shocking to me. i think we have to work at every level, whether it is post-

secondary, the elementary school, a preschool -- we have to work harder to get more children born into families that are not so disadvantaged. when of the things i want to put on the table is the fact that we have a crisis among 20- something's in this country. they are not getting married. if they do not have jobs. they are getting pregnant. 70% of them are having unplanned pregnancies, and starting families they are not quite ready to start. i would like to see all little more effort put on making sure parents are ready to parent before they are ready to bring children in the world. >> thank you. you have 20 minutes with the president of the united states,

were the leading presidential candidate, which you all have the privilege of doing, actually. what concrete we would you tell them should be done -- the three initiatives, ideas, goals? stuart butler? >> well, a president can do three things. one is set a bold goal. president kennedy did that in the same get to the moon before 1970. we did it. they can instill confidence to ronald reagan did that in 1980 and turned the country around. they can conduct a conversation about things that need to be faced. bill clinton did that on welfare and social security. that is what i would devise the president to do now. whatever is the president really has to set a bold goals the you heard. it is very important the president goes out and talks

about two particular things -- did a culture of savings rooted in this country, which means reducing debt on the other side of the coin. that is why leading a national discussion on that area is very important. a tax code that is considered on fair, that does not reward savings, investment, and works, is not going to be accepted by american people, and if people think it can be gamed, they will not have confidence. there must be a national effort in that area. thirdly, the president should go to the governors, the mayor, and community leaders and focus on what needs to be done to the education system. the president can and should do that, whichever party they are in. that would put pressure on the congress and the state

governments to do the details that are necessary. if you do not set the overall goals, do not instill confidence, and not talk about what needs to happen, it will not happen in the political system. >> wonderful, stuart butler. neera tanden? >> i think we should recognize part of what is creating this overhang on people's sense of whether the american dream will be there for our children and our children's children like it has been for many of oz is we are going through difficult economic challenges right now. we are in the third, for fear of what feels like a recession. so -- fourth year of what feels like a recession. my advice to the president would be to focus on ways you could insure we have a broader growth. obviously, i think the president is doing that, but ignoring that

challenge right now, and only focusing on the long term, i think, would be a mistake for leaders and for ourselves. we should realize that people are hurting right now in ways they have not heard years before because we do not have enough jobs to go around, and i believe policy makers need to address that effect, and not only looked at the long term, although that is important. -- address that fact, and not only look at the long term, although that is important. so we should focus on education in the long term, and also on house to insure there are letters for the middle class, and how working americans can move off into the middle class tests that is traditional support after the -- class. that is traditional support for

the tax code and other means. we should be more mindful of saving now more than we were a few years ago. that is a healthy issue, but we should recognize we are facing a demand problem, and that is something we should be thinking about a growth package helps us do that going forward. >> very good, belle sawhill? >> i would second what neera tanden and stuart butler said about the tax code and the education system, but just a bit more about the tax thing. the best anti-party, -- policy is a job. we have a crumbling infrastructure. it is true. we could put some many people to work if we would simply invest in that infrastructure that

could be done through an independent body a outside of government that would choose those projects on the basis of their merit, rather than politics. when interest rates are low, and people are unemployed, this seems like an ideal time to work on the agenda and it would have a short-term and long-term impact. [applause] >> can i say one thing? talking about the american dream, america has always meant a big country of big ideas and in this day and age, it might be a small issue, but it is a little embarrassing when i landed in india and the airport looks 100 times better than jfk. we are a country that has done great things. we should be able to do great things. we need to put people to work and face the challenges of the

country that will help today's problems and the economy over the long run as well. >> patty stonesifer? >> i will not repeat the many good ideas. the president says he wants to out-educate, and out-innovate, and there are a range of tactics we need to do are wrong those opportunities, but the third one we have been talking about the white house counsel for community solutions is the under-utilization of collaboration in our communities. most change comes at the community level. you can affect hundreds and hundreds of great programs touting great results, yet they are not moving the needle, across the community and coming together with bold goals, clear objectives, statistics we can measure, and saying we are in this together at the community level to out-educate, to find ways to innovate. the pastor said there were four

groups that needed to be at the table. i could not believe the non- profit sector was not in there. [applause] we are 10% of the jobs. if those five groups set at the table and said we had bold goals, and decided to assemble the right resources and put our efforts collectively together, and the president could encourage that a community level with the mayors, the states, those who have the resources, i think we could go a lot further than we are going today. >> there are hundreds of thousands of young americans that want to serve our country, and i see many in the audience today. we have a bipartisan serve america act. why not need the goal of two hundred 50,000 americans in full-time national service?

[applause] >> you put a productive surface -- service to the country. the time has run out, but i want to open it up. could we have a couple of questions? if you ask them efficient the, we will get efficient answers. -- efficiently, we will get efficient answers. >> [unintelligible] this stuart butler, the u.s. economy is roughly 70% consumer- based. >> thank you. the u.s. economy is roughly 70% of consumer-base. if we need to grow to create jobs, and why we would agree with the concept of the savings mindset, we are sort of caught

in a trap of growth through consumption. does this economy not crater, and we reduce jobs if we focus on savings and not consumption? >> if you look across the world and back in history, those countries, including china, that have very high savings rates, and think of the future in terms of savings are those that prosper over the long run. countries and people that focused only on spending and getting into debt do not prosper. so, i do not think we have a problem in america that we saved to much where are we going to pay for the -- saves too much. where are we going to pay for the new infrastructure unless we are holding resources for the future? that is why savings is important. as a cultural matter, even if

you save a little it means thinking about the future, and if you do not think about the future, and do not think the future can be positive to you, you will never achieve that, and you will never get the dream. that is why i strongly feel it will be a mistake if we stop saving and spend everything we have to turn around the economy. that is not the road to a positive future, and historically, and internationally, the evidence is on my side could >> that will be the last word. i am getting a strong -- side. >> that will be the last word. i am getting a strong pop. i would love to continue the dialogue. first of all, let's give a warm round of applause to the panel. we all continue to work really hard together and with a coalition of organizations, to take this agenda to the next

phase. you will hear an exciting announcement this afternoon about the next iteration of this. please stay with us. soon, you will go to the breakout panels to dig further into the policy ideas, bright spots of innovation. the questions posed are what actions can we force within the next year. one year from now, what would be the opposite we give to the nation on progress in boasting opportunity in america, and what does an opportunity society look like in america five years from now? there is a sticker on your name tag identifying your breakout session. after that, grabbed a boxed lunch, come back here. we have an amazing afternoon trade we will hear from father larry snyder of catholic charities -- afternoon. we will have father larry snyder of catholic charities. first, we will take a moment to

hear from an extraordinary person who spent two hours less might listening to young people -- last night listening to young people. such a strong signal of success to them. powerful source of opportunity, please welcome major general marcia anderson. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> thank you. in 1957, a couple of things happened. mafia gibson won the women's singles title at -- the first women's singles title at wimbledon. dorothy heights became the president of the congress of negro women, and in a zip code of 53511, in southern wisconsin, i was born. my parents, my father, was a

korean war veteran. what he really wanted to do while he was serving was work with airplanes, whether it was to fly them, or work on the cruise. because of the limited opportunities at the time, he was a truck driver. my mother was one of the first women, young women, to integrate catholic high school in saint louis, missouri. she was a clerical worker. they had me. my first years of life time managed to flunk kindergarten. that is true. i did kindergarten twice. i like to think that i was left- handed and the teacher did not like left-handed children. maybe there was another reason, but i was tagged them as being slow, and that followed me into first grade at the school there

in 53511. i was put into the slope less. if you remember, we had reading one, two, three, or a, b, c. i used to sit there and watch the kids in the fast group go through the lessons with the teacher. i would get my work done, and be staring at them, wondering why i was still waiting. one day, as teachers did in those days, the teacher had an empty chair for the first group, and wanted to fill it with someone. she said as anyone else done, and i raised my hand. it was interesting. she did not give me one of the books they were reading, so we are sitting there, and there is always a point where they ask what is the word we learned today. if it were all sitting there,

and she put the word on the board, and no one could pronounced it. i raised my hand, and i said the word is he prepared -- secret. she was taken aback. i was not supposed to know that. i did not have the books, and i was one of the slow kids. that was a turning point. if the teacher pay attention to me after that. fest for a few years. my parents are no longer -- fast forward a few years care of my parents are no longer together. we moved to a new zip code in illinois. let me tell you about about this city in illinois. in 1950 it was one of america's best cities, it made the list, but by this time 75% of the population was on some form of public assistance. one-third of the families subsist on less than $7,500 a

year. even today, the median income is less than $11,000. it was once described as america's way full. 98% of the population is african-american. that is where i grew up. my mother scraped together the money to send us to catholic school. she scraped together the money so we could have magazines to read in the house like "newsweek's" and " time " called and f course, "ebony" "jett." my eighth grade teacher, who studied with math tutor me on

algebra because i was awful, i took advantage of that opportunity. i was still mad at the teachers that said i was slow. when i went to college, i enrolled as a soft market if i had an ulterior motive. if i could not afford to go to four years of college, so i was calling to do it in three, which meant i were a lot of part-time -- so i was going to do it in three. which meant a lot of part-time jobs. back in the old days, up in the gym, and you signed up for class as part i desperately needed a science class. -- class is. i desperately needed a science class. i had night jobs, so there was not much left. as i wander around, i see a training -- a officer that's the

reserve officer training corps, military science. i asked him, and he said it was a science credit. you have to watch are for those recruiters. [laughter] >> it was all good. that was also something that provided me with an opportunity. i had an associate professor of military science there. i wanted to go to law school. i did not have a plan, but i wanted to go. i was sweating a class, and he said to me, no one will ask you what grade you got in philosophy, but what will matter is what you did in the intervening 15 years of your life. so, the american dream is available. there are people out there that will support you every step of the way. the way i look at it is opportunity means i can, and i

did. for all of you young people here, opportunity means you can, and i know you will. [applause] >> for all of us seasoned people in the room, the thought leaders and business leaders, opportunity means we can and we must. [applause] >> for america, opportunity means we can or else. [applause] >> i want to leave you with fund -- one final thought from a citizen soldier.

many of you recognize ignatius loyola. he charged his priests with the following. i choose to take literary license and say that opportunity, and this is where he said, opportunity means go forth, and said the world on fire. -- set the world on fire. [applause] >> in a moment, remarks on the life and legacy of america's 30th president, gerald ford. later, a discussion on american southern jews and race relations. after that, the motion picture association of america honors the life and film career of ronald reagan. finally, remarks from anita hill on her testimony alleging that clarence thomas had sexually

harassed her. tonight, all looked at the life and legacy of ronald reagan. we will hear remarks from a former white house chief of staff who highlighted how mr. reagan's acting career played a role in his presidency and political career. see that tonight, added o'clock eastern on c-span. after that, all look back 20 years when anita hill testified to congress alleging that clarence thomas sexually harassed her. she recently spoke about that testimony at hunter college in new york. we will show that at 9 cockle 5:00 p.m. eastern. >> in the name -- 9:05 eastern. >> in the name of the greatest people, i say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever.

[applause] >> for most of his life, george wallace was an ardent supporter of segregation, outspoken against the civil rights movement. he ran for president four times and lost, one of those cut short by an assassination attempt. this week on a cold the contenders call call live, from -- "the contenders" live. >> next, a look of the life and legacy of america's 30th president, gerald ford. we will hear remarks from james baker. from the presidential museum in grand rapids, mich., this is an hour. good afternoon, it is an honor to serve as director of the

museum. this afternoon is a special program in honor of our 30th anniversary and we are delighted to have all of you here. his is a great pleasure to have susan ford bales, daughter of president ford. she is a spokesperson on issues related to breast cancer, and with her mother how to establish october as national breast cancer awareness month. portias been active -- she has been active. she also has a very special role as the official sponsor of the uss gerald ford aircraft carrier that is under construction. the new carrier will be christened in 2013, and commissioned in 2015. susan is also a trustee of the ford presidential foundation, and served as co-chair of the foundation committee. she is an avid supporter of all

we do, the library and museum, and played a key role in convincing our speaker to fit this into his schedule today. along with her brother steve, she a step forward to represent the ford family and many of guns across the country, giving generously offered -- at the many events across the country, giving generously of her time. please welcome susan ford bales, who will introduce our distinguished speaker. [applause] >> good deafening. thank you -- good afternoon. thank you for coming today. welcome to the trustees, special guests, members of the museum's staff, and volunteers, and congratulations on your 30th museum anniversary. uncle dick, i love seeing you as

always ladies and gentlemen, in the twilight of his life, -- as always. ladies and gentlemen, in the twilight of his life, dad always asked to reflect on his legacy and how we thought historians would judge his decades of public service. his consistent -- is consistent response surprised many. he was proud of how he'll our nation following the greatest constitutional crisis since the civil war, and was equally proud of the example of bipartisan leadership he said in congress and as president. part of his legacy about which debt was proudest was a group of men and women formed the core of his administration, who then went on to serve the american people with exceptional and distinguished service. no one, am absolutely no one better illustrates his pride in

this remarkable group that our special guest today. our guest, with his unusual humility, often describes with amazement when bad summoned him into the commerce department to become one of his closest advisor. rest assured, dad knew exactly why this humbled texan was so extraordinary. he went on to serve and as the saying goes, the rest is history. in the years after his service, he served as 61st united states secretary of state, secretary of treasury, white house chief of staff for two presidents, chairman of the iraq study group, personal envoy of secretary general of the united nations, and probably one of our fellow trustees of the gerald ford presidential foundation. a philosopher once observed the

best impression one gets of a leader and his character is by looking at those closest around him. in the end, the legacy and leadership of our guest and his remarkable service to america, please know the 38th president of the united states would be bursting with pride today. thus, it is a personal joy and honored to introduce to you a statesman, a world leader, a man of peace, a man of integrity, and i am very proud to say one of my dead's deere -- one of my friends, ladies and gentlemen, and jim baker. [applause] >> thank you. thank you ladies and gentlemen. thank you, susan for a warm and generous introduction.

thank you for all you have done to nurture and honor the wonderful legacy of both your father and your mother. dik ford, other distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, let me say it is a great pleasure for me to be back in grand rapids. i have been here a number of times and i am delighted to be back particularly to celebrate the 30th anniversary of this library and museum, because they also do a wonderful job of maintaining a legacy, and not just the legacy but the lessons, of a man, a president, who was much more than just a man of his times. gerald ford was a great and timeless american who day in and day out demonstrated characteristics that will always serve, i think, as models for our leaders, those leaders of today, as well as those leaders of tomorrow.

before i talk about his legacy, i would first like to state as a matter of personal privilege, if you will, is simple but obvious facts. i would not be standing here today were not for the faith president ford george -- showed in me when i was his deputy secretary of commerce. at the time, political and public service resume was extremely thin, but he saw something more in me than just a texas lawyer with a modest background in regional politics. following the recommendations of roger martin, dick cheney, stu spencer, president ford selected me to take over for his friend jack styles, after stiles had been killed in an automobile accident. later, of course, after rog

became ill, president ford asked me to chair the committee in the general election against jimmy carter. those of you old enough to remember will remember that those races were historic raises settled by razor-thin margins. both the race for the nomination and the general election. they served as springboards for my career in national politics and public service. so, my friends, i know you will understand when i say thank you, mr. president, for the confidence you showed in me at a critical point in my career, but more importantly, thank you, mr. president, for the confidence you showed in america, and the job you did for america at a very difficult time in our nation's history. [applause]

>> again, for those of us old enough to remember, gerald ford inherited a deeply troubled country when he placed his hand on the bible on august 9, 1974, to take the oath of office. president nixon had been forced to resign. inflation and recession were presenting the country with what at the time was the worst economic time since the great depression. the cold war was heating up as confidence in uncle sam was trending down. americans at that time were quite jaded toward a political system that many felt had let them down and let them down badly. our national psyche was taking a beating. for countless people worried that the american dream was a thing of the past. into this national morass, came

a man with a true moral compass. he exemplified the plain talk of a midwesterners, the resolution of a michigan will bring offensive linemen, the bravery of a pacific war hero, and the intellect of a yale law school graduate. he was all of that, and much, much more. he was not the most glib of our national leaders, nor the most elegant, but president ford had something that was much more important. he had character. gerald ford maintained traits that we associate with the boy scouts. he was trustworthy. he was loyal. he was hopeful. he was reverent. of course, this should not come f -- as a surprise to the american people, because after wall -- all he was the first

american president that earned his eagle scout rank. for president ford, decency and honor were more than merely words that politicians throughout the ages have repeated in their speeches. for president ford, they were ideals to be incorporated into the way one live one's life. today, i would like to example five of his very best traits. traits that contributed to his effected brand of leadership. i think they are instructed to consider this point in our country's history because these traits are needed today in washington, where once again confidence in our country and in our elected officials is waning. let me start with the leadership trait that i think was gerald ford, the most

important -- selflessness. like most politicians, president ford understood that election meant self preservation, but on like to many today, he was on willing to sacrifice his principles -- not willing to sacrifice his principles in order to sacrifice the winds of the electorate. faced with an enormous dilemma about whether or not to pardon president nixon in the aftermath of watergate, president ford did not look to his political advisor to -- for a device. he knew what they would say. he knew they would sit pardoning president nixon would kill you at the polls two years from now, and it certainly did. instead, he did the same thing we tell our children to do when they are confronted with a difficult problem. he looked to his own hard for

guidance, and after he found the answer he explained it this way to his countryman -- "my conscience tells me is my duty not only to proclaim domestic tranquillity, but to use every means that i have to insure it." that courageous act, when the box truly did stop at his desk, allow the nation to move forward from a very, very troubling time, and that characteristic of selflessness, i believe, is the reason president ford was able to heal our injured country, even if it did ultimately cost him his job. a second leadership traits that president ford exhibited was bipartisanship. we hear a lot of talk about that today. a moment ago i told you that president ford was a man of principle, and he was.

he was particularly worried about the influence of an ever- growing government, and the influence it was having on our country. he expressed those thoughts very eloquently. he said that the government is big enough to give you everything you want, it is big enough to take away everything you have, and of course, in that, he was absolutely right. president ford was also a creature of the congress, let's not forget, who served for more than eight years as house minority leader before he became vice president, and then president. as well as anyone, he understood that our democracy is based on negotiation, compromise, and agreement. truce, he once said, is the glue that holds a government together. compromise, he said, is the oil

that makes government go. president ford may have had political adversaries because they come with the turf, but he did not have any political enemies. he knew how to disagree agreeably. president ford understood that bipartisanship is important not only for getting things accomplished, but for making sure they do and not getundone, when there are the inevitable shifts of power in washington, d.c. a third leadership trade of president ford was dignity. president ford was a fair and just human being who seemed to intuitively know what the right thing to do was. i will never forget election day, 1976. the president had overcome a 30

percentage point deficit in the polls, and for the first time almost in that came -- in that campaign had a win seemed possible. he busted his italian a campaign that was stacked against them from the date -- he busted his tail on a campaign that was stacked against him from the beginning. i thought to myself that i must eventually be able to light up the victory cigar he had given me definition. it was not until early the next morning after 3:00, that we learn that jimmy carter had won the closest presidential election since 1916. the election was so close that had fewer than 10,000 votes shifted in ohio and hawaii,

president ford would have won the vote in the electoral college, and thereby the election. despite that razor-thin margin, the president was very stoic in defeat. he had worked very hard, so hard you will remember that he lost his voice -- very, very hard, and yet come so very, very close, yet he graciously accepted the result could his longtime friend, the former saint louis -- could -- results. his longtime friend a saint louis cardinals catcher said he had seen a former teammate get more upset with an umpire same strike two in gerald ford did when he realized he was not going to win a presidential

election. he refused to ask for recounts even though many of his supporters had important to do so. president ford was a man of honor. because he lost the popular vote he did not want to put the country through the agony of a recount. his fourth leadership trade was humor. he had the inner-confidence of someone that could laugh at himself. of course that was important, because hollywood was always trying to make him the butt of their jokes. as americans grew to know him, they witnessed a leader whose sharp, self-deprecating humor, could ease some various serious situations. one of those times came after him accepted the resignation of the agricultural secretary for telling an offensive joke. a little later after being introduced at an event by bob

hope he wisecracked, i have only wanting to say about a program that calls for me to follow bob hope. ridiculous. bob hope has stage presence, comedic timing, and the finest writers in the business. i am standing here in a rented tuxedo with three jokes from earl butts. [laughter] his brilliance was in showing the country that he was not thin-skinned. after all, who among us after being wrongly cast as a clumsy buffoon in contest chevy chase skits' could quip i have never felt this good since i fell down an airport ramp. [laughter] a fifth and final leadership trade is one that he demonstrated side-by-side with

his wonderful first lady, betty. that of course was his perseverance in the face of adversity. life did not always go according to storybook plans for gerald ford and betty ford, especially when it came to her battles with substance abuse, but rather than do the easy thing and give in to her addictions betty ford chose a difficult path. she confronted head on those demons that were her problem, and she conquered them, and then she did something even more her role as. she help others do the same thing. with president ford always supporting her, she was able to turn trials into triumphs. if ever there was an example of how we americans should respond to the inevitable challenges we will all face at one time or another, the fords were in it.

as we reflect on the legacy of gerald ford, it is shortsighted to remember him as the post- watergate president. although he had only 29 months in the white house, he used his time productively to confront the monumental issues that face him when he took office. he helped us restore national senses and sensibility. he healed our nation. in the aftermath of the vietnam war, president ford continued the policy with the soviet union and china, playing a vital role in easing the tensions of the cold war at that time. he did this at the same time that he was helping to restore america's confidence in its role in international affairs following the collapse of cambodia, and the fall of saigon. he was also able to focus his attention on other important

matters. he persuaded israel and egypt to accept an interim peace agreement, the first ever for the two countries. he was the first president to emphasize the need for regulatory reform, and the first president to call for a national energy policy. he was an early supporter of majority rule in south africa. he was a strong proponent of equal rights for women. did he accomplish everything he set out to accomplish? now, but he reversed our course, and he moved the country for against strong in difficult headwinds. if there is a tragedy and president ford's brief term as president, it is not based on anything he did in the white house, nor is it based on anything he did not do. no, the tragedy of the service was the anti-american people did not give him a full term in

office. had they done so, i am sure his already sizable footprint on american history would have been even larger. why do i say that? at his very core, gerald ford was a leader, one who was guided by a clear conscience, and the dogged determination to see his country that its very best -- at its very best. i sincerely doubt there is one person in this room today who does not wish that more of our elected officials demonstrated president for the's leadership qualities. president ford did when he thought was right, even when he knew it was one to cost him public support. he served -- going to cost and public support. he served our nation when bipartisanship was more than just an empty slogan, and he was

a leading practitioner of id. his perseverance and dignity, even in the face of the very toughest of challenges remain examples upon which i think we can all draw, and the american people can draw. more than 34 years after he left an office he did not initially seek but graciously except and, if we remember gerald ford as an honest, ethical, and talented public servant. we remember him as a leader with on questionable character and integrity, but more importantly, perhaps, at least i remember him as a truly lovely human being who always put his country's interests ahead of his own. so, as a result, via maps of

building convinced that history is going to be very good to press -- i am absolutely convinced that history is going to be very good to president gerald ford and will reflect on his tenure with admiration and respect. our country would be far better off today if our elected officials could call upon those traits that defined president ford's leadership as they confront difficult challenges that lay ahead of this country. thank you, all, and may god bless you, and may god bless this country that gerald ford loved so much and served so very, very well. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you very much, mr. secretary. we have a interesting questions that have come in so far, and if you have additional ones, forecast them to the side i'll. let's start with one first ted weschler role did you play in fort's 1976 -- what role did you play in president ford put the 1976 presidential campaign? >>, i had been there for about six months, and president ford asked me to be the delicate -- delegate in the contest for the nomination. that was an extraordinarily interesting convention and primary contest because it was the last really contested convention of either major political party.

1976, kansas city. i think we only won the nomination by 100 delegate votes out of 3000 or so that were on the floor, a narrow win for an incumbent president, but of course governor reagan had run for president two or three times before. he was a tough competitor and challenger, and we felt this fortunate to win the nomination even though we won it narrowly. after the nomination, president ford as me to share his campaign against jimmy carter because as i said rogers martin who had been chairman developed cancer. we started 35 points behind, and by election day the candidates were dead even. the closer elections are tougher to lose than the blowouts. i was chairman in the general

election. >> the relationship with president nixon -- did present for consult with president nixon on foreign policy, and were they friends? >> i could not answer that, because i was in the campaign and not really in the white house. i was over at commerce for six months and i was the acting secretary, but most of my contact with president ford at that time was on substantive economic issues, and very little to do with foreign policy, in fact nothing to do with foreign policy and nothing at that time to do with politics. i do think president ford consulted with president nixon from time-to-time, after the pardon, and perhaps during the campaign. >> ok. what differences did you notice

between president ford and president reagan's leadership styles? >> wait a minute, i worked for four presidents, and i have one rule, i never compare presidents, because the minute you say something good about one, it is taken to be a knock on the other. that is the only question you could ask me that i will not answer. [laughter] [applause] that's not okay, folks, we need to change some of the questions that -- >> ok, folks, we need to change some of the questions that are coming in. there are several along those lines. discussed the tension in the white house during the attempted assassination of ronald reagan. >> there was quite a bit of tension. i was white house chief of staff when president reagan was shot. we have only been there for two months. maybe two and a half. i think it was the first week in

march. we came in january 20. it was a very traumatic time, and nobody knew at first what has happened. we got conflicting reports as to whether he had actually been hit. what most people do not know is that president reagan came very close to dying. not from the womb, quite frankly, but from an infection that set in after they had performed surgery on him -- not from the wound. that is probably well know out there now, but at the time, it was not particularly well known. it was quite a shock to those of us in the white house. a lot of us were new to the job. then to have the president shot and an assassination attempt where you do not know whether he will live or not is very dramatic, very difficult. one of the things that we did or i should say did not do, which has received a lot of attention,

is we did not invoke the 25th amendment, which says that when the president becomes incapacitated, the cabinet is to meet and turn power over to the vice-president. vice-president was in texas when president reagan was shot. he got on air force two and was headed back to washington. i was over at the hospital with other senior white house advisers. we talked about whether to -- president reagan was about to go into surgery. we talked about whether to invoke the 25th amendment, and we concluded it would not be the right thing to do, because he was -- the doctors told us he would only be under the anesthetic for a very short time. remember, this is back in the cold war when the threat of nuclear conflict was still quite a live, but we did not think it would be the right thing today, and -- we did not think it would

be the right thing to do, and the vice-president was not anxious to see the 25th amendment invoked because he had been the last competitor standing against ronald reagan in the nomination fight in 1980, and he did not want people to think somehow he was trying to take over some power. i had been his campaign manager. i was the white house chief of staff. i said we were going to invoke the 25th amendment and the power to george bush, there might have been more than a little muttering in the white house, so we decided not to do that. but i will say this -- i had the concurrence of president reagan 's longtime advisers in taking that course. as it turned out, everything was fine. vice-president bush was so conscious of the fact that he had been the last standing competitor that when he came back to washington, they were

going to take a helicopter and land on the south lawn, he said, cassette i know, you are not. that is where the president plans. we are going to go to the naval observatory -- he said, "know, you are not. that is where the president plans. we are going to the naval observatory." >> what was it like after the 1996 challenge? >> that is a comparison question, isn't it? [laughter] i do not think i am giving away any secrets to say not all that good as that time. it later became better. that was a very tough primary, and it is quite natural that with competition like that, there will be some tension, and there was some. there was some on both sides. i have written two books about my public service peer the loss was about my political service.

there was a chapter where i am is sitting in the oval office with president reagan, adjusted two of us, because i was his chief of staff. even though i ran two campaigns against him -- get this -- i was president ford posted delegate and we won, and then i was george de b. bush [applause] campaign manager against bush in the fight in 1980, and yet, ronald reagan asked me to be his white house chief of staff. somebody explain that to me. [laughter] we were sitting in the white house just reflecting on a lot of these events and i said, you know, mr. president, if president ford had asked you to come on the ticket with him in 1976, it is my opinion he would have been elected. we would have won that election. that 10,000 votes would not have

been a problem. and he might never have been president. he said that was probably right, but he said, but i will tell you this -- if the president had asked you to take that position, i would have felt duty bound to do it. that is not totally consistent with what the reagan campaign told the ford campaign in 1976 when after the nomination fight, we asked for a unity meeting and the reagan campaigns that we would have a unity meeting provided they did not ask governor reagan to be on the ticket. and we said ok because president ford did not ask -- did not want to ask him to be on the ticket and reagan did not want to be on the ticket. you asked about the tension, there it was. >> what was your biggest challenge as secretary of state in the bush 41 administration. >> i said to people that i was extraordinarily fortunate individual to be secretary of

state when i was. we used to live in a bipolar world where we had the soviet union and the united states. it was the cold war. then, the soviet union collapsed. communism -- the soviet union imploded, communism collapsed. the wall came down, and we were in a unipolar war. a united states was the only super power out there and everybody wanted to get close to local whiskers -- uncle whiskers. i was secretary of state and my job was a helluva lot easier because everyone wanted to get close to the only remaining superpower. we got a lot of things done. what did we do? we were able to preside over a peaceful end to the cold war. i did not have to end peacefully. it could have ended with a bang instead of a winter. we had the first gulf war where we keep iraq out of kuwait was really minimal casualties. by the way, we have -- we got other countries to pay for it.

we had the madrid peace conference where israel and all of her arab neighbors sat down face-to-face to talk peace for the first time. we had the unification of germany -- so a lot of things happen. you asked me what the toughest challenge was. trying to figure out -- i really believe this -- where to concentrate because we were in such a position -- we were in a position to get so many things done and trying to figure out exactly what to concentrate on. i am not sure we handled the breakup of the former yugoslavia very well. that was perhaps the greatest challenge. >> as secretary of state, what were your experiences with the fall of the berlin wall? >> we were fortunate to be in power when it happened. i credit every american president, democrat and

republican, going all the way back to the beginning of the cold war, for the fact that america was triumphant in the cold war. every democrat or republican in every administration was steadfast in fighting the cold war on behalf of the american people, and that is why we ultimately prevail. i happen to be hosting a lunch in the dining room of the state department for the president of the philippines when i got a message from the undersecretary of state for political affairs saying that the east germans were going to let people go through the wall. i could tell that was going to be big, big stuff, and it was. by nightfall, it was huge. i picked up the phone and called president bush and excused myself from dinner, went over to the white house, and we spend the rest of the day over there talking about how we were going to deal with that matter.

but i think we did it right. as i said, we continued to work. president bush no. 41 was smart enough not to dance on the wall. the press were all over him asking why he was not showing more emotion. he did not want to stick it in the eye of gorbachev and the continuing leadership of the soviet union because he knew we had to continue to work with them to make sure everything came -- everything ended totally peacefully, and we did that. one of the most important things we did, i think, was to unify germany in peace and freedom as a member of the north atlantic treaty organization. we did not have very long to get that done. we had a narrow window of opportunity, but we got it done. it still down to just one germany and it is important that that get done in that short time frame. >> going to go back to a ford

administration question we talked about earlier today. what do you think was the impact of the helsinki accords on the cold war? >> i think that is one of the most significant accomplishments of president ford, and that is very -- has really been under reported and underappreciated. the helsinki accords gave everyone who wanted to support freedom for captive people -- captive people of eastern central europe or elsewhere in arab countries -- gave them a reason to argue for freedom and human rights and individual freedoms for people because that is some of the things that were contained in the helsinki accords. as i told you when we return the exhibits, one of the things that was in the accords that has been

observed by its breach is a provision in the courts saying that borders will only be changed through peaceful means. that was one of the problems we had in the breakup of the former yugoslavia. these countries wanted soviet union and croatia -- some of them wanted to declare independence, sees the border posts, and i went over to belgrade and said if they did this, they would kick off one heck of a civil war. yugoslavia was only kept together by the authoritarianism and totalitarianism. once they started agitating for separation, we told them we thought it would end up in the big civil war, and it did. but the helsinki accords was a very important achievement of president ford's administration. >> help us understand why bush 41 was not successful in being reelected. >> i would say there are three

reasons. first of all, he had a sari campaign manager, me. [laughter] secondly, there were three reasons. we had been there 12 years, okay? i mean, two reagan terms. bush was reagan's pose a vice president year we have been the two reagan terms and one bush term. the press, particularly, were tired of us. they really were tired of us. we were climbing a tough mountain. there was another major problem. that is reason number one. think a lot of people were tired of us. we have been there 12 years. it is very hard to keep the white house for more than eight years. if you go back for any part of history, there are not many times what it has happened, and we had kept it for 12. second, we had a little jug

geared fellow in texas named ross perot that you may or may not have heard of, and he took -- ross perot took 19% of the vote. clinton got 43%. bush got 38%. perot got 19%. our polling showed us that perot was taking two of every three of his votes from a spirit take 2/3 of 19 and add it to 38, and we had 51 people and when people say he did not cross the election, i just said that i think he did. i will say it again. i thought he did for 20 years, and i still think he did. the third thing was our fault. absolutely. that is, instead of going up to capitol hill in january of 1992, when president bush 41 was at 90% approval rating and saying

that desert storm was a great success, now we're going to do domestic storm and focus on the domestic problems facing this country, and here is an economic program that is going to get that done -- if we had done that, i think we might have won that election notwithstanding ross perot, but we did not do that, and that was a mistake. >> let's talk about another election, and this is the one in 2000 with the vote recount. we have two questions about the common misperceptions about the events surrounding the recount and another on that same. can you discuss that? >> i can discuss the recount. i do not know what people's misconceptions are about it. i can tell you a few factual things. one, we were never behind in any california whatsoever of all the counts that were taken. the press went in. all the hanging chad's and ballots were all save.

"new york times" and a miami paper -- i cannot remember which one -- these are not exactly fans of republican candidates often. they went and did their own survey of these ballots and said under no scenario could gore have one -- won after they look at those ballots, said there is a fairly independent look at it. i used to say that after the 1976 election where we lost by only 10,000 votes out of 81 million, i remember thinking to myself that night at 3:30 in the morning that this was something. this would be the closest presidential election of my left him. well, it was not the closest presidential election of my lifetime. 537 votes. but a couple of other things i

will say about that you're in addition that we never lost a recount. we were never behind in the count. we won any number of court cases and, yes, we won the supreme court, the final case. and a lot of people say the we were just given the presidency on a decision of united states supreme court -- a 5-4 decision of the supreme court, and that is not true. a vote on constitutionality in the supreme court was 7-2. justice brier, a democrat, voted with the republicans, and justice souter voted with the dissenting democrat, i think justice ginsburg -- justice breyer voted with the republicans. you had a bipartisan decision on constitutionality. then they took up the question of revenue. after they said that the scheme that the florida legislature has but in place for a recount is illegal and unconstitutional,

then, they said the time had expired for further recount because by gore's own admission, the critical date was december 12 and this was december 11. they said there was no longer time to count. the campaign may a big mistake. when they asked for recounts in only four counties and they were pro-democratic counties -- all of them, very heavy democratic counties -- they ask for a recount here instead of a state- wide recount. when they did that, that gave us the high ground. their mantra was, "count every vote. count every vote. our mantra was we have counted them five, six, seven times and every time we count them, we've been. finally, the supreme court said that was right. but the supreme court also said that the florida legislature could not change the rules of the game after the game had

started. under the constitution, the legislatures of the various states have the ability to determine how president-elect doors are selected, and florida had a lot. once all this recount business started and all this multiplicity of lawsuits -- and by the way, we had a whole lot of lawsuits. maybe hundreds. the supreme court said you could not change the rules of the game after it has started. >> you will be pleased to know that we're going to move from the presidents with whom you have worked to some current affairs questions. following the post-cold war euphoria, however when did things go wrong, leading to the difficult situation the u.s. finds itself in today? >> i did not by the assumption that the united states is in decline. you go out and you read the papers today, everybody saying it is terrible, we are in such bad shape. we are in such bad shape, why is it that everyone wants to come here? nobody wants to go anywhere else.

we are not in good shape today. we have some humongous problems. our big debt bomb out there. we had debt to gdp of over 100% program for the next five years. that is unsustainable. we continue to spend beyond our means. we have got to find a way to do something about that. but i do not buy the argument that we are on the downhill slide. when i was treasury secretary for president reagan in 1986, the japanese were coming into the united states buying up everything. remember -- they were buying up radio city. everyone was saying japan was going to own the world. it did not happen and they had just had 15 years of terrible economic times. we got a lot of things going for us that others do not. people compare us to china. china's growth is really a very amazing thing.

it is important. we need to acknowledge it. it is significant, but we have some strengths that they do not have. one of them a house -- is our political system. our principles and our ideals. does anybody out there doubt that our political system will be any different years from now than it is today? would anybody has a the same guess about china's? i do not think so. i do not buy all this about how the united states is in terminal or permanent decline. we do have some serious problems. we have to figure out how to stop all this spending. we have to live within our means. that means we have to deal with everything. defense, entitlements, revenue, the whole deal. but i will tell you one other thing that i learned from eight years of service to president reagan.

you do not resolve a deficit problem just by raising taxes. you do need revenue, but if you do not have spending restraint -- i mean, legal spending restraint -- you can raise taxes until the cows come home and you will never deal with the deficit because congress will spend the money you raise in taxes and then they will spend more. the only time we have ever gotten a handle on it to any extent really was during the george h. w. bush administration when we had spending restraint -- legal spending restraint, enforceable spending restraint in the form of the hollings restraints. we had a lot of problems, but i do not buy the argument that something terrible has happened to us. that is simply not true. we ought not to worry about the fact that brazil and india and china are moving up in the world. i think it is more occasion of

their moving up than the united states going down. why are they moving up? because these countries have embraced our paradigm of free- market economics, and we ought to welcome that. yes, they are competitors now. they did not used to be, some of them, and we will have to compete with them, but i think we are positioned to compete with them very effectively. >> how do you view the result of the rat study group report applying to u.s. foreign policy during the era of spring? -- the iraq study group report. >> i did not think i have thought about it in comparison to the arab spring. what was it was at the time we looked at it, we went over there, we were given full access to all of our policy makers, cia, all the others, and what we set was the situation -- this was in december 2006 -- we said the situation in iraq is grave and deteriorating, and it was.

the administration took some serious -- by the way, we had a provision in the report supporting a surge, provided it was short term and provided that the commanders on the ground recommended it. that is what the president ended up doing. it turned out to be to some extent and degree successful. i have to tell you i think the jury is still out a bit on what the final result is going to be in iraq. it is certainly a lot better than it was when we went over there in 2006, but i do not think we have seen the end of it yet, and i hope that things do not degenerate after we are pulling out of there at the end of this year, but we are coming out. it is over. i just hope -- and certainly the world is better off to be rid of saddam hussein, but we do not know yet what the final situation is going to be. we do not know the extent to

which iran may be emboldened and strengthened by what has happened. i think the one thing the iraq study group report did was to focus the attention of policymakers and the country, to some extent, on the fact that we needed to change what we were doing in there. we needed to find a way to do a better job of training iraqi forces so that we ultimately could lead. we cannot stay in all these countries forever. same is true in afghanistan. >> in your role as former secretary of state, could you give us a thumbnail state of the union, predictably as related to national security risks for our country -- particularly as related to national security risks for our country? >> we still have significant national-security risks. the terrorism risk is still very much out there. we have to remain very vigilant

about that. we are targets. we need to understand it. cyber warfare is a vulnerability in my view of the united states. i do not know. i am not an expert in that. i do not know to what extent we are in a position to defend against cyber warfare. i think it is important for us to remember that throughout recent history in any event, our alliances have helped the united states. again, you look at the united states and china. we have a web of alliances out there all across the world, whether in asia or in europe of people that will help us share the burden. freedom-loving countries. that is a strength of our spirit we need to make sure we keep those strong. how we relate to the arab spring is important. that is a really big thing that is happening out there. again, we do not know what the final result of that will be. i will tell you this -- if the

israeli-egyptian peace treaty blows up, you can forget about an israeli-palestinian deal. it will not happen. we do not know who is going to run each of. it still very much in the air. we do not know what will end up happening in libya, whether that will be civil war or something else. syria is a terrible problem now. and yemen. as far as the threat of terrorism, it does not just come from afghanistan. somalia, yemen, other places like that. >> last question, and i thank whoever submitted this -- why did you never run for president? we think you would have been a great one. [applause] am i thought about it. my time would have been 1996. in the years just before that, i

had done two stints as chief of staff in the white house for two different presidents. i had been secretary of the treasury for four years, secretary of state for four years, and i had worked on or lead at a fairly high level five campaigns for president by three republican presidents, and i was dead tired. my wife and i talked about it. i think we could have raised the money, but i was 66 years old, too, as that time, and we did not have it in us. i had never looked back on that decision. it was the right decision and i am very happy with it, but you saw a particularly happy to be back here in grand rapids to stand up for somebody that i will always all my life admire and honor, jerry ford -- gerry ford. thank you all. [applause]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> this past july 4, in a ceremony held aboard the u.s.s. constitution in boston harbor, simon winchester, author of "the professor and the madman" and " capitola" became an american citizen. >> i decided i would take all the necessary steps. -- and "krakatoa." >> i got one of the questions wrong. i had an australian friend also up for citizenship and i rang her and said i got one of the questions wrong, and she asked not the one about what color is the white house. i said that when i got, but i feel a fool for telling it to you, but it is what is the american national anthem and a

bloated up, "america the beautiful." in the immigration officer said in his view it should be, but it is not. >> watch the rest of our interview sunday night on c- span's "q and 8." -- "q&a." >> next, a look at past political intendments over u.s. history. from today's "washington journal," this is 45 minutes. host: the first march of poor people dates back to when? >> -- guest: 1894, and there are some really striking parallels

with what we see. the year before wall street crash which was at the time the worst economic contraction in american history, there were scattered grassroots protest, but it took shape in the spring of 1894 in the unlikely place of ohio in the unlikely shape of a man who partly for political reasons and partly out of labor unrest and partly for religious reasons led this revival set off about 100-plus unemployed fellow citizens who called themselves the army of the common realist. they were not the only army that set off for washington. were from the west coast but they never got as far east as

coffey did. he was accompanied by about 40 members of the press, something that has not changed, either. they had a specific program. they wanted the federal government to do what it had never done before, which was to intervene in a proactive white. specifically, they wanted the federal government to spend $500 million on what it called the good roads program, working and what we would call infrastructure development in our own time. remember that up until that time, both parties, but particularly the democrats who occupied the white house at this time, believed in the jefferson submitted the jeffersonian notion of less government is the best government -- believed in the jeffersonian notion. they tended to believe in depressions as acts of god. the boom and bust cycle was built into capitalism and there was nothing that government could do.

he arrived with his ragtag band at the end of april. 1894. there was a rather cereal, comic ending to this. he was arrested for walking on the grass at the capitol. it was to say, the political system did not respond immediately, but he had the last laugh. 30 years later, president-elect franklin d. roosevelt meets with them in georgia and in many ways, his ideas about building roads were to be incorporated into the new deal and eventually become a state highway system. >> factor 8 to 94, who is the president at the time? >> the president is grover cleveland. -- back to 1894. >> the president is grover cleveland. i guess you could call him the last conservative democrat, jeffersonian democrat, and men

who believe very much in the idea of limited government and who wrote some famous vetoes against any kind of involvement by washington in addressing the needs of states for individuals. host: if you read with the pds it makes aa's page, reference to the "wizard of oz." guest: it may be an urban legend, but it has persisted through the years. l. frank baum witnessed the march through ohio, pennsylvania, maryland, on its way to washington. there are those who find political elements in the oz stories. for example, the scarecrow represents the oppressed farmer. the tin man, the oppressed

factory worker. it is no accident that dorothy is on the yellow brick road, representing gold, which they viewed as oppressive economically and politically. her ruby red slippers were originally silver slippers because, again, they wanted unlimited coinage of silver. they wanted paper currency, which at that time was not common. the cowardly lion is even compared to william jennings bryan. who knows? it is a theory. they were on their way to oz, and it was it who was in this case grover cleveland in the white house. at least the wizard agreed to see them eventually. however disappointing the visit turned out to be. grover cleveland did not extend

that courtesy. host: what is happening in 1932? guest: the depths of the great depression. 25% unemployment of the nation's economic outlook down 40% in four years. there is a real sense of despair taking hold. hopelessness. not only about the president, but about the future. america's world war ii -- i am jumping the gun. america's world war i veterans organized to campaign for the payment of a bonus that had been promised them in 1945. they wanted it now. it began in portland, oregon. across continental march. it grew. eventually, by the time what became known as the bonus

expeditionary force camped out in the anacostia flats south of the capital across the river. there were close to 20,000 people. they were here for a couple of months. they came to lobby congress to move up the bonus. the house passed legislation to do that. the senate overwhelmingly rejected it. at the end of july, violence erupted. president hoover, who had secretly been providing tense -- food, supplies, madison, but who refused to meet with the delegation of the bonus army at the request of the washington, d.c., government, sent troops to clear out constitution avenue that had been occupied.

unfortunately, the whole thing got out of hand. douglas macarthur took it upon himself to treat this as not a police action, but the last battle of world war i. used violence, used a level of force that had not been authorized by the president. it proved in many ways to set the seal on hoover's defeat in 1932. it came to symbolize for millions of people the failure of his depression-era leadership. >> are there comparisons to the two occupied -- to occupy wall street? guest: we do not appear there are some parallels in the sense that an organization that has seemingly come out of nowhere at

has, although they may not have a specific programmatic agenda, clearly has a guiding philosophy. has a viewpoint. the anger that they are tapping into reflects the feelings on the part of many who may not actually be members of the movement, that the income disparities in this country have been steadily growing. there is a real resentment on the part of many toward wall street as the agent of our current problems. and yet, seemingly rewarded rather than punished. there are a lot of political and economic parallels. we do not know, obviously, where it is going. we do not know what its ultimate influence will be. >> what also happens in 1932 our

so-called -- are so-called hoovilles. -- hoovervilles. what are they? guest: that is part of the failure. by 1932, his reputation was in tatters. his name entered the language. in world war i, it entered the finnish language and it meant to help. in 1932, there were shantytowns where the homeless and jobless a symbol because they had nowhere else to live. there were hoover flags. and the pockets turned inside out. hoover hogs -- armadillos that people caught and ate. he had become the personification of economic

hardship. the people who went to live in hoovervilles did not see it as a political act. it was an act of desperation. certainly not in the sense of the arm is setting up an encampment -- that was a political act. they had a political agenda and a specific list of things they wanted from congress. they came to lobby for that. that was a political act. hoovervilles came to have a political connotation to the extent that they had this image that the people had of a failed presidency.

host: we want to talk about other pass politically cadmus, but i want to get some phone calls as well. john, go ahead. caller: i would like to know if mr. smith believes that the occupy wall street movement will jell, if it has any legs. it will get a political foundation some day and something coherent. i will hang up now to listen to your answer. thank you. guest: i do not need to be evasive. i am not a pundit, and i am not a prophet -- i do not mean to be evasive. history suggests that at this point, it reflects a mood that is perhaps larger. clearly, for every person who is

on wall street or in the camps around the country, there are a great many who are in sympathy with their position. whether that organizes into a formal -- what it is against it is as i understand it, the leaders of the movement have been quite even-handed in pronouncing a plague on both political parties' houses. so far, there's not much evidence of the morphing into a conventional political party, endorsing candidates or the like. host: hamilton, montana. caller: yes, i am strongly with the people that occupy wall street. i was in san diego a few days ago and tried to help them as much as i could. they are some freak-thinking,

crisply thinking people -- they are some free-thinking people. we need to help the people understand the absurdity that is happening to our constitution with our rights and everything eroding appeared especially the ripping off of the american public. going way back, some people can remember the s&l crisis. the free trade act and everything. people are realizing there's nothing left. they are being basically economically enslaved. host: references to the constitution. think back to other movements, terrible, as we have talked about. was there a reference to the constitution? guest: in a sense. host: some have said that it is not following -- congress, the government is not following the constitution. guest: i think it is even more

visible than that. i think it goes beyond any document, however reviewed. have you ever seen frank castle movies? jimmy stewart and bodies basic american decency -- embodies basic american decency, the idea that you work hard, that you will succeed. that you will deserve your success. i think that -- that sounds terribly simplistic, but i think there are an awful lot of people in this country who believe that those traditional values have become terribly warps and it is all about money. it is about the money that flows into this town, the money that many people believe buys both political parties. one of the unanswered questions is, given this movement and

given the widespread dissatisfaction that many people feel was the status quo, it is reminiscent in some ways of 1992 when ross perot came out of nowhere and created a third- party around economic issues, and around the need to get a handle on federal spending. that is one issue that congress appears to be ducking. the larger question, it seems to me, is is this a year when a credible third party, whether it is of the left or of the center, enters the ring? host: david washington on twitter wants to know --

guest: history suggests that the odds are against them. if you look at what happened to the bonus army. it is true -- they got their bonus. they got it earlier. they got it in 1936. fdr opposed the bonus, as did hoover, but within the larger context of what the new deal was spending, the bonus did not seem to be as outrageous as it appeared beforehand. coxey was a joke for a very long time. yet, as i said, 30 years later, his ideas found their way into the mainstream. i guess what i would say is -- stay tuned. host: let's go to the 1960's.

guest: there's another effort that has some striking parallels. in 1967, dr. martin luther king touched off a debate within the southern leadership christian conference and the civil rights movement generally. the civil rights bill, the voting rights bill had been passed. a lot of the legal impediments to integration had been knocked out. dr. king believed -- well, as he said, it is one thing to integrate a lunch counter, but if you cannot afford to dine at the lunch counter, what is the point? by 1967, his growing opposition to the vietnam war merged with his awareness that beyond legal segregation, there were fundamental, deep-rooted questions of poverty and economic injustice.

so he said the civil rights movement was moving into a new phase. he eventually persuaded his colleagues to undertake what became known as the poor people's campaign. tragically, he was not around to leave it. he was assassinated, as we know, in memphis in april of 1968, but it was decided to go ahead anyway. out of tribute to dr. king. down in the mall, not far from the lincoln memorial, there arose in effect a shantytown. at one point, close to 7000 people inhabited what was called resurrection city. again, they came to d.c. with a specific political and economic agenda that included, first of all, a greater priority for the war on poverty as opposed to the war in vietnam.

talking about a guaranteed annual income, for example. without dr. king to lead them, they really -- they had some severe -- they had some real problems. the weather was terrible. the camp was almost lost in the mud, which, by the way, with something that happened to the bonus army as well. bobby kennedy was assassinated at the beginning of june. frankly, they were almost ignored. they found it difficult to engage the attention. host: they were ignored by the president at the time, lyndon johnson? guest: lyndon johnson clearly was in sympathy with their goals, but at that point, lyndon johnson was consumed by the war that he did not want to fight at the expense of the war he did

want to fight. at that time, he was consumed by vietnam. the war on poverty, which has had all sorts of critics of the years, but one of the criticisms is that it was underfunded. certainly, that was something that the people down in the encampment believe. in any event, they just sort of faded away. the camp was taken down before the end of the summer. it can be argued that the country has not paid much attention to chronic, grinding, systematic party in the 40-plus years since. the miami, florida, republican. good morning, john. history of political and kamins. what is your question or comment?

-- history of political encampments. caller: it seems to me that they are hurting more of the groups around them that actually helping. i've heard many stories of small businesses -- the stores and restaurants with these people kind of block the entrances and regular customers like me can i go into their shops and buy food and disrupt the place. it seems to me it is more a bunch of people trying to go out and do something other than make a concise or specific stand on some issue. they all seem to want something different. it does not seem to be like these hoovervilles where people needed something in particular. people out there just having something to do, blaming somebody. maybe they are just wrong. maybe they are blaming banks, where i heard about one bank in miami where they just went into one bank and try to shut it

down. these are just for people like everybody else. host: this is an important point. is there political fallout from these types of movements? guest: if this is really at odds with the prevailing political climate of the day. the caller asked earlier about the future prospects and whether they would evolve into a significant political force. one question that we do not know that has to be addressed is to what extent are they interested, for example, in civil disobedience, in blocking the brooklyn bridge? to make a statement. i think the caller reflects an extensively held point of view. it is difficult for people to see a practical usefulness of those tactics.

there are tactical questions waiting to be decided, but the thrust behind the movement, at least as i understand it, is something that i think a great many people sympathize with. host: here's a twist from someone who calls himself oversight of gop -- here is a tweet. guest: that is a great question and it is unfolding. we do not know is the honest answer, though i am not sure that is the answer you want to hear. it seems as we are living history that the tea party has had a significant impact already. certainly on the republican party. occupy wall street seems a

little different. it seems a more amorphous uprising, if you will. less conventionally organized. i know a lot of tea party years will take exception to this, but there are those who see the tea party as an adjunct to the republican party. i am not sure there are many people who look upon occupy wall street as an adjunct to the democratic party. host: independent from wisconsin. caller: good morning. i wanted to go back to the bonus army. i guess they must have accomplished something because we're still talking about them. i think the occupy folks have such a long list of grievances that we cannot boil down the plant, but wanted to give a couple of examples.

one of the free market to work like the politicians say they believe in, but yet, the people were ignored and the bailouts were passed. next, the government made a big promise to us regarding social security. when we take our premiums, we can carve out something in our old age, but now, the stocks of rollbacks and wiping out the program and all this. it is kind of like the bonus army. the government made a promise and now they are backing away. i wonder if you could compare the situations and see if it might be an applicable comparison. guest: that is interesting. i certainly think that you are on to something in the sense that there are a great many people who may not be in the streets but who nevertheless feel a sense of betrayal, who feel certainly a sense of anxiety about their own economic standing or their retirement. one prediction which i can make,

and that is whether we like it or not, american politics for the foreseeable future is going to be increasingly defined by a need to balance changing demographics. against the very promises that had been made to earlier generations. in relative terms, there is less to go around and there are more potential recipients. the globalization of the economy redefines market forces. it redefines competitiveness. politicians who have demonstrated a remarkably bipartisan lack of courage in

addressing even the first installment of these issues. i find it is increasingly difficult to evade responsibility. it is an acid test for american democracy. even if we cut $4 trillion or fidelity and off of the debt, the demographics are still relentlessly piling on. it is not a great time to be a politician. host: let's hear from a democratic caller in new jersey.

go ahead. caller: first of all, happy holidays. i love to hear your program. what i want to ask the professor is -- is it better to have a name change occupy wall street versus capitol hill? i think the problems come from capitol hill. guest: i think a lot of people would suggest the problem is shared, that wall street and wall street money has certainly flooded capitol hill. that wall street influence. we live in what i called the cnbc nation. this kind of been relieved cheerleading for "free market forces" that leave everything to the free market. there is no role for the federal government. regulation is a dirty word, and

you can see where that got us. the two most dangerous words in the english language are either or. to say either wall street or capitol hill -- the fact of the matter is they become caller: i would like to thank the speaker for his comments on capitol hill been one. when i call my congressman, chuck schumer, i get no response. when this whole issue came to be, no response from our congressman. i would like to thank the people on wall street, occupy wall street, i would be there if i

could, but i live paycheck to paycheck. caller: i said the american revolution at trinity college and i'm interested in hearing this today. i participated in the occupied harford movement. i would like to see a comparison between this and shay's rebellion because i think it is very similar. their farms were getting a mortgage and they have fought this war and were very patriotic. and i think that is one of the first times when american voices got silenced. guest: thank you very much. it is a fascinating parallels.

share -- shays' rebellion actually had a very enormous impact, perhaps in some ways that were on intended for rebellion, which the caller says after the revolution there were mostly farmers, but others in western massachusetts who rose up with many of the economic grievances 200 years later. it can be argued that we could create a constitutional convention and replace the articles of convention. it got a huge shot in the arm in reaction to shay's rebellion. thomas jefferson praised those who took part. george washington expressed profound concern about what this portended for the future of this

week, a struggling republic. and the constitution followed. host: when you look at the past protests that we have followed and the roles that have been played, many are commenting that president obama is walking a fine line. the past presidents talk about the movements, or did they do the same? guest: for much of our history, as i said earlier, president really did not think they have a responsibility in terms of economic management. that is when the division between washington and wall street was greatest. dubberly changed in the great depression -- of that really changed in the great depression, and with franklin roosevelt. although, fdr opposed the bonus.

he said his wife to the bonus marchers. it was a way of symbolizing his broad sympathy with this movement and with the dispossessed. and the millions that they in some ways represented. host: john and pennsylvania, go ahead. -- john in pennsylvania, the head. head. caller: this is a great