afghanistan, where people who want to be in charge are ready to see the people they want to be in charge of die in large numbers, and do not see it in their interest to turn it around. it must be maddening to try to create alliances on the ground that deliver aid, that deliver developments when there is a >> i always get the tough questions. i know it is always good to have a friend on the panel. what you are referring to is, i like to think about how to approach the entire area. what you are describing is this third-generation, where the global leadership is in a state of flux. we certainly had leadership in the united states in terms of our strength, but we also had

many new actors. that makes it much more difficult to try to resolve these conflicts. i think that our colleague from yemen is a good example of the civil society role which is increasingly getting a voice through the twitter readership -- the expansion of the ability to express dissent is so much larger. the ability to reach out technologically with other people create something that i do not think even the individuals who want to stay in power can relate to. i think that is the hope in many of these cases. we came full circle. we started out thinking conflict attention was a nice idea, but we now have tools that really work. development agencies are working in ways which protest -- prevent conflict, not only wars, but

also dramatic constitutional crises. these are political conflicts. >> let me add something. i hate to be old enough to be able to look over a period of many years, but i can. i think you are absolutely right. those situations exist all over the world, but there have been some unbelievable changes. one, as was just suggested, these crises do not exist in the dark anymore. i cut my teeth during the famine in ethiopia. nobody would talk about the famine behind the lines. i used to break into un meetings and be very disruptive and say, there is another famine behind the line. there was not twitter.

there was not e-mail. that is a huge change. the second is that, again, we are not where we need to be. these issues are discussed and out there on the internet -- it used to be very lonely work to try to get people to pay attention. now combination of the internet -- a huge factor has been activism and the interesting -- interest of young people on advocacy. the third is that for as many people as there are who want us to a press and to deny people even their survival, we're seeing a huge uptick in the people who will push in the other direction, whether it is in yemen or elsewhere. you have the government speaking up about this. 20 years ago they would have casually let it happen. none of that is enough, but the trajectory is one that, over time, it will be more and more

difficult to be able to perpetrate the kind of abuse that we have seen. i do not want to overstate it. but i think the trajectory is quite exciting, potentially. >> can you do everything right and still end up not making the kind of progress you hope? when i look at yemen, it is one of the most water-short places on earth, so you could do the government's mind, you could create local links, you could create planning and relationships, but if it does not rain all that will not matter that much. >> well, working in conflict environments, you do not see the change sometimes. it is frustrating. but then when you work with the communities, you work with structures, you invest in

systems, you also see a lot of opportunities. yes, yemen is one of i think seven countries that are water- restricted in the world. but we also have resources that are not invested, mainly because of security. we have mining that is under developed in yemen. the tourism sector -- is a beautiful country with an ancient civilization. we have zero other -- over 2,000 kilometers of mines. what we are doing is creating some changes in the community level. demand for governments. demand to make the government accountable to the people.

in my opinion, if anything could and yemen's problems, it would be legitimacy. a state that is seen as the people as responding -- by the people as responding to their needs. >> this is a pretty complicated time right now, though, isn't it? one regime leaves, the other is not quite set up. and other parts are in control anti-state forces. >> we are one step forward. there are huge challenges, definitely. it is not going to be an easy transition. we are aware of that. but we have seen similar problems in the past. most of the areas of the country are outside the state's control, but they are under control of tribes. i see, from my experience, i

believe that the tribes can be a force that is very supportive of change. the tribal indigenous systems have been evolving a lot of systems in the country. 90% of tribal conflicts over resources and land are resolved by the indigenous system. there are a lot of resources and in yemen. bringing in resources rather than ideas from somewhere else, i think, there is a big chance for the change that we desire. weyemenis -- we yemenis are very hopeful.

we think we will come out of the transition and be on the way to being a strong country. >> i am glad we brought up ready-aid solutions from somewhere else. -- ready-aid solutions from somewhere else. they are ready-made because they were fast, but they do not have longitudinal power. unless you want to do them forever, they end up as an institution. when i have done up reporting in the developing world, i have seen that conflict over and over between creating local capacity and doing something a lot slower than you would want to and seeing the results a lot more slowly, but also knowing that, unless you do it this way, if you come back into ben years, there'll be nothing left of your

work. -- in two years, there'll be nothing left of your work. >> if you have not read this 1960's classic in a while, "the ugly american," i highly recommend you read it. it is everything wrong and it is exactly our point. there is a wonderful vignette about creating a local solution moving water using bicycles and locally manufactured panels to move the water, etc.. the first point is that idea of local solution. we heard that remark -- we heard that from our heads of state earlier. i would not underestimate the power of technology, democracy, and the social networks. when we put those things together -- water, for example.

d georgeiamata -- george diamatas has published a new book called "abundance, or why things are not so bad as you think." it looks at the impact technology will have on that salinization of water, on farming, the advent of social networks and their impact on moving to democracy. there is a lot of good that is happening. i would not underestimate that peace. >> i was going to add another point. that is that we do not have a lot of patients as a society. .ur memory is very short perio the timeline to implement these changes is not short. there's a five-year planning cycle that we have. that is the first thing. at the second poindexter point

second -- the second point is that one size does not fit all. many people on the ground me feel that there is progress. there are three things you need in the united states to move forward. one, we certainly need additional capacity. the world will have more crises, not fewer. we also need to be legitimate. that means listening to the people on the ground and their solutions so that after there is a military action legitimacy is help. we have to be willing to share burdens in the sense of letting others, the private sector, the humanitarian sector, other intergovernmental organizations, work with us. we have done that well but we have to do more. i see a lot of these things coming together, but patience is

not only a virtue but something that we lacqua we are trying to get things done -- that we lack when we are trying to get things done. >> someone concluded that post- conflict transitions are supposed to last two years. i do now to that person was. [laughter] -- i do not know who that person was. a lot of people in rwanda were saying, let's just get on with it in 1995, 1996. development is not something that happens unless we are there. people tend to seek solutions to the short-term in their lives whether or not we show up. one of the changes we have seen -- i do not think we can get away with one size fits all anymore. i find myself in very few circumstances, whether you have a government in the game that

you might shape or influence, community leaders -- if you look at changes in implementing agencies and local partners, there are a lot more local partners. it is not is because they tend to have -- just because they have a better sense of what they need, but because there is demand. we are seeing a turning of the tide. where it looks very different is where you mentioned things water. that is the kind of development discussion, whether it is post- crisis or preventing the crises we may see, nobody has a ready- made solution and it will take everybody coming around the table. we spend a lot of time thinking about the fact that yemen has an acute water shortage. that affects yemen and will affect us in the entire region. >> let me get in there for a second.

all right, you have made good presentations for wide -- why to pass the creation on the ground is important in development. -- y. capacity creation is important on the ground in development. if you add on conflict, if you add on humanitarian crises, you do not have the same sort of time available to you. one of the most wrenching moments i have had in my life as a reporter was to sit by in one of the tent cities outside port- au-prince after the earthquake. there's the airport -- cyclone fences and razor wire -- and you are sitting in a bed sheet can not -- tent with someone.

they can look across the road and see pallets piled high with water and food. they say, we could just run across the road and air defense down. we have been waiting for days. we have been waiting for weeks to get out of this camp. we really want to. i am like an american flag to them. it is hard to explain that i am a journalist, i am not supposed to have the answers. they say, tell me why we are not getting that stuff. the real answer is that i do not now. you do not have that same kind of time line in conflict and disasters. >> in the case of haiti, where you start with a country that did not have great logistical

operational capabilities on the ground to begin with and have a crisis of that magnitude -- i totally understand the frustration with the delays, but it took some time to understand and set up the operational system to deliver to that many people. >> you know that that answer did not cut that much ice in the tents. >> one thing we could do more of is how much people who are the direct targets or objects of sums huge humanitarian crisis can themselves manage a relief population. i remember, i was a reporter once. being in a refugee camps in eastern sudan where they were in excess of 300,000 refugees from ethiopia and eritrea in the camps.

this and relief workers and set up clinics. the rescuers went on strike. -- the refugees went on strike. they said we can run our own clinics. we do not need you to run in and do it. people were flabbergasted. you are supposed to be a passive, helpless individual. we are supposed to be there to help you. figuring out how we can rely more fully on people to organize themselves is one of the most important things, i think, of an effective humanitarian operation. there is some of that in haiti. there was no airport one day, then you guys went in and there was an airport the next morning. >> a factor that we have not mentioned is the discovery, though it should not be a discovery, of the critical role women in these activities play. in haiti, where i spent a lot of

time, in colombia, in african communities, women organize these tent cities. they did not break down the fence, but they organized the food chain. i know there will be panels later on in the program and that focus on the importance of addressing women as a mantra for norris, development agents -- we cannot under -- women as how they becomeurrs, the agents of moving things forward in a terrific humanitarian crises. we see time and time again, whether it is for security or development, women are out in the front. >> if i can add another thought, maybe two thought. one is to exercise, one is to practice this kind of thing. we do this a lot in the military, but i think if we could do more exercising and practicing with our partners in

advance of crisis, that would be helpful. we have a number of small initiatives we are working on with my particular command. i think that exercise and practice is one thing. the second thing -- again, technology. it is having a confident -- competent crisis center, one that can manage this. our technologies are so vastly better than they were even 10 years ago. i do not think we grew the technology into a crisis management centers. we have not done that fully in the military. we are working on that. i would say those things. those are ways that we can do better to avoid putting you on the spot like that. [laughter] >> i'm sorry, i cut you off. you were about to say?

>> i was going to follow through with what gail was awith regards to development. the most important thing in any country is built and legitimacy -- building the legitimacy. it is a mistake to try to created immediately. -- create it a media. one important thing for development systems is to go in the line with each other. foreign policy should support development systems. i'll bring the case of yemen as an example. counter-terrorism policy in

yemen have, to some extent, undermined development. over 10 years, the counter- terrorism efforts of the former regime have helped to give power to the current regime over the military and resources. it made him a stronger dictator. at the same time, usaid does a great job of helping yemen improve health and infrastructure. but no matter how much development there is, if your government is helping a dictator, it is not going to work. it will work in the immediate term, but in the long-term, it will not work. i'm not judging intentions, of course. i think that the lesson learned

-- the biggest lesson learned from this is that dictators are not good agents for change. [laughter] dictators' create problems. working with them is not a good investment. >> people were -- people wanted to applaud what they were looking around to see who was sitting nearby. that brings us to another juncture. i think we have time to hear from everybody on this. a tremendous amount of value is put on a collaboration. a tremendous amount of talk about finding partners from outside and on the ground. nobody wants to do everything by themselves. that makes a lot of sense. but the reason why people are doing these various things are

different. what they want in the end is different. some are really doing this to be able to give up bibles. if they have to give out food first, that is okay. some want to make sure that a place is not going to be a locus of instability and state failure. otherwise, they are not really that worried about how people are getting by day to day. would we rather have more people read them last? sure. would you rather have fewer people dying of thirst? sure. but beyond those very simple metrics, the only reason we are in there is so that the place is not become a source of potential problems and further problems down the road. yet here we are, a religious group over here, a secular group over here, a governmental group over here, and international n.g.o. over there, all doing things for slightly different reasons, perhaps sharing many

goals. you have to create partnerships right there in the seat of the battle. is it as easy as i am told that it is -- i cannot believe it. i am told it is actually pretty easy. are there times where, suddenly, there are tensions between the different agendas that become quite apparent and you have to renegotiate the terms of the arrangement and the terms of the relationship? >> i feel like i should have an answer -- it is an impossibly complex mass. but i do not think it is. there are three ingredients. they have made it less complicated than it may appear. there are three ingredients that are necessary. one is transparency. if these programs and interventions that are arranging partners are not transparent, you get into conflicting intent.

then you run into a number of problems. the second is data and facts. it is quite extraordinary -- it is quite a good thing. facts have gained increasing currency in relief efforts, so that haven't data which shows -- you may reference to 90% of internal conflicts been resolved within the system. that kind of data is available now so that opinion, while still potent, is not the driving force as much as it once was. the third thing -- this is really big -- is demand from the bottom. you have constituents on one side or the other. but it has been my experience that there is a demand for accountability that is growing,

made easier by twitter and everything else. there are a lot more people involved than there used to be. this pushes up against this. the place where i have seen a lot of incredible transformation is in global health. you have got motivations that are multiple. there are motivations that people need to have secure health systems. there are faith-based perspectives' across the spectrum. there is this and that. these transparency -- it is transparency, data, and demand that have transformed this field. you have extraordinary constellations of factors working together in the same direction. is it that need? absolutely not. but i find it is a lot less difficult than your question suggests it might be.

that has been my experience. >> i guess i have been in and around this type of operation for over 35 years and it is much better than it was. you need only look at one of many examples, the war at -- the war in vietnam. you look at the battles between eight and the military. it was incredibly conflict will. -- conflicting. you can find other examples down the road. today, when i look at the cooperation between secretary clinton, secretary panetta, and secretary gates. secretary gates was for a much want to be totally supportive. there is an ins -- instinctive integration of diplomacy, defense, and development. thirdly, it is better because, again, technology. the transparency that gail was

talking about allows us to have liaisons' on video teleconference. in haiti, one of my favorite pictures is hillary clinton as ken keene, the three-star general who was supporting them, and sean penn. bringing in the private sector. they were working together. that was real. it happens relatively quickly despite the frustrations and failures and the missteps. i'm with dale. it is way from perfect but it is also a way better than it was. >> i think that the world has not stood still over these years. many countries that are not the major players are contributing to development as well. brazil, turkey, india -- they contribute to peacekeeping. there is a multicultural dimension that not only has our own armed forces working in

these theaters, but side-by-side with others. there's a new language of development that these countries are bringing. we know that you have to have security to move forward. but they are bringing the language of health, access to health. access to education. access to legitimate decision making. these are extremely important. 20 years ago, there was a study comparing rule of law in different countries in supply vs. demand. they could not immediately understood -- understand why alternative dispute resolution got a high grade as opposed to building courthouses. access to justice, the ability to resolve conflicts and walk away without shooting one another was the biggest gift one could give in a community. this is what we have learned and applied. we have made a lot of progress in that sense. listening to the demand side,

this is important. >> when i was at the central hospital in port-au-prince, this wild and encouraging ad hoc way, jeeps would roll up. nurses and doctors would pour out. they would put equipment on private planes and so on. there were traffic cops, basically, who sent people where they were needed. the two most heroic nights i have ever seen in my life. but even the traffic cops did not quite know what to do when a huge church of scientology team arrived. they said, what you guys do? there were a large number of people on the ground to were traumatized from the violence, and you are all the people who

do not believe in psychiatry. they sort of quickly put their heads together and the team that set out to do massages, which they did for the next several weeks. but it worked. [laughter] instead of saying, we do not need you or go home, there's a feeling, look, some people showed up, let's let them do work. i thought, all right, good for you. scientology practitioners giving massages and not psychotropic drugs. [laughter] we have just about one minute left. is there anything that someone was dying to say? >> yes. at the risk of being sentimental -- i was meeting on friday with the president of liberia. for all the cases were look at

these humanitarian crises and say it is impossible. the president talked about the progress they have made in nine years. i would like to have you all remember that, as painful and ugly as these things are, nine years ago liberia was one of the most dangerous places on earth. a lot of capital has been expended and blood has been spilled, but what keeps us going is the successes. i would like to leave us with that thought. it takes patience, time, and political leadership, but we have been able to see in our lifetime that it is entirely doable. [applause]

>> on "washington journal," former -- education secretary william bennett talks issues in the 2012 presidential campaign. then in the head of the federation of teachers talks about the role of unions following the failed recall of scott walker. then, -- washington journal, live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c- span. >> watergate was not a caper. it was about a fundamental decision to misuse and abuse the

constitution, obstruct justice, and more than anything, to try and undermine the electoral process. >> it has been 40 years since the watergate break-in. >> they tampered with everybody's vote by saying that this was not just dirty tricks, it was a strategic plan aimed at getting the weakest nominee. they did it. >> what more from the two reporters who broke the watergate story online at the c- span video library. the latest u.s. chamber of commerce study of economic performance in the state's shares promising signs in the areas of energy production, manufacturing, and high-tech industry. the authors present their findings at their annual jobs summit in washington.

this is about 20 minutes. [applause] >> thank you. we're going to talk a little bet about what some of the takeaways were. i'm not want to say the private sector is doing great, but i have to say -- what are opportunities are going to be in the future. the key thing for states and communities is that you can hear all the news, you cannot do this, you cannot do that, but a lot of states and communities are overcoming these problems and taking advantage of bigger trends that we see.

the first one -- let's see if we can get there -- we take a look at what is going on in agriculture. agriculture -- people do not think of it as an important industry, but mostly people around the world do need to eat. we do not have a growing number of consumers in developing countries who are demanding higher and higher quality feared. american agricultural experts -- exports are going up. we have the largest amount of good arab land of any country in the world. our agriculture sector is the me world. this drives a lot of employment in food processing. some of the agriculturally-based states have very strong economies. this is one of the key things the u.s. economy can really perform and stay ahead on in the years to come. remember, there will be a lot of people.

a country like china which has a very large population and does not have the agricultural capacity to feed the population at the level they are expecting. there's an enormous opportunity for us throughout the world. probably the biggest game changer right now is happening with natural gas and oil production. if there's any critical issue in this election people should be thinking about, it is how we take advantage of the fact that the united states has now really researched as a major energy producer. i've spent time in places like louisiana and texas, where you can see how jobs are being created. the important thing about u.s. energy production is that it produces about 200 -- to order and 50,000 jobs in the last decade. they are high-paying jobs. -- 250,000 jobs. they are very high paying jobs. there are many good blue collar jobs. you can get a job at an oil

refinery that pays $90,000 a year. we do not have to have gone to stanford to get it. this is extraordinarily important. the other thing is that, as we begin to become a more self- sufficient company and in some areas and exporter, particularly of natural gas, we cut about half of our trade deficit. anybody who is really interested in the long-term future of this country has got to be looking a low -- oil and natural gas as a driver. you can also see as we look at the report -- you see those states that have the strongest gdp growth, many of them are in the energy belt, particularly the areas between texas and north dakota. that is beginning to spread to parts of the midwest carried it will be a real game changer and a great opportunity for a lot of states. the other thing that is very related to this is

manufacturing. the shell boom alone will create roughly 1 million to 2 million jobs. there are all sorts of support services, in parts of ohio, for instance. they're opening up steel mills and places where steel mills have been closing. you have tremendous growth beginning to take place. the industrial resurgence is also driving something that people do not generally pay attention to. when we look at stem at jobs, science, technology, engineering, mathematics -- those are jobs that generally pay pretty well. you find that states that have very strong manufacturing growth also have the strongest stem growth. the idea that high tach is just a bunch of guys with hoodies and bogus stop -- stock offerings is not the future of the economy.

the gs ability is that we have the ability to do things done traditionally and add to them differently and better, whether it is agricultural or energy. when we look at stem job growth, some of the fastest are in states like michigan. the out the industry today, manufacturing industry today, aerospace, they are much more high-tech oriented. driving those kinds of jobs is going to create the kind of high-tech future that is much broader base than the high-tech future that you have in -- a bunch of software companies. that is great, but what you really want is an industrial base that will lead to those goods and services and will be a more steady, long-term player. the last advantage that we have in the united states is the fact that we still make babies. probably our best product.

although, as anybody who is a parent knows, they can be a pain in the butt. the united states is the only major industrial country in the world that is now producing anything close to what we call replacement rate -- 2.1, i know no one ever had a 0.1 kid, but mathematically you have to have about 2.1. right now our birthrate is to trim down or because of the recession, but for lots of reasons americans still have kids. a lot of it is that we have space, single-family homes. some do not think we should. we have a stronger belief in religion. for whatever reason, people who are religious tend to have kids more than people who are not. it has been one of the great positives of this country. immigrants have more children than native-born, but what this means over the long run is something that will be a very

important fiscally. that is, the number of retirees relative to the people who are working. down the road, countries like japan and germany are going to be in a situation where they are going to have, in some cases, more people over the age of 65 that under the age of 15. but 2030, that is where singapore will be. that is where spain will be. you have to have a system which is almost impossible to support the needs of the elderly. as you can see in this chart, the u.s., although we are aging, is not agents nearly as rapidly as many of our competitors. this leaves us to one last thing, both a great blessing and a great challenge. this is what this summit is all about. that is the question -- the united states has an expanding work force. the children are one of these is going to move out of the house.

the fact of the matter is that we have children. day of innovative and sometimes crazy ideas, sometimes good ideas. it will have new ideas. a society like japan, is rapidly aging, it is hard to generate new ideas. where we have a future market? you look at companies like germany and japan, they have no growth in their domestic market. it is hard to stimulate their economies internally. united states is going to have about 37% growth in the working age population. japan, you are talking about a close to 40% decline. the eu, 21% decline. china will bear a 10% decline. but what you will have is societies that are aging extremely rapidly, including some of the developing countries. what we have in america is this

great wealth which is our children. it is our job, our generation's job, to be able to drive the economic growth so that our children not only can end up staying along the house plan videogames, but can contribute to the future greatness of the country. i hope we can focus much more on the question of jobs. that is really the legacy that we need to leave our kids. >> this is his last slide on the labour force growth he was talking about. i would like to take a quick look at some of the highlights of the 2012 state study. we look at five major policy areas, entrepreneurship, innovation, infrastructure, talent, regulation, and exports. i will talk about some of the recent developments in each of those. i would like to begin by talking

a little about the difference between last year and this year. in 2011, this was really a year where there were a lot of hard choices made. ways to bring spending under control, ways to monitor -- modernize government. this year, the governors of states really began to crystallize their agendas for action. we found it very interesting as we look at what was happening, what was going on. a lot of states were addressing the disadvantages in their debt, leveraging natural resources and industry strength, and looking to improve an enterprise-friendly environment. these are the major themes that we study. the first one -- the first team out like to talk about is taxes and regulation, particularly the wave of uncertainty.

many states have moratorium on new rules and regulations. they of ways to eliminate rules and statutes that our job killing and impact statements for newly proposed regulations for government services. i would like to highlight a few things for the state i'm representing. in utah, for example, the cabinet reviews of business regulation and either modified or eliminated three runs -- 368 of them. in wisconsin, all-new rules and regulations were subject to impact analyses related to jobs. governor walker was recognized by the chamber for reform in that state. on the tax and regulatory front, we also see that these were used as incentives in some fashion.

we saw a lot of tax credits for investors in start-ups and expanding businesses. tax credits for hiring employees. there was a lot of targeting of investment and tax credits in the particular industries -- for example, data centers, aerospace, manufacturing. we also saw the regulatory environment curtailed on spies of the industries. we will talk about some of those. we saw those in financials, energy, and vehicles. in california, they are very strong on targeting zero emission vehicles. in delaware and nebraska, personal income tax relief was provided. in nebraska, there were tax incentives for data centers. in utah, they were very interested in industrial banking. that really has contributed to

driving financial service sector growth. tax and regulatory systems are the -- incentives are part of it as well. on the infrastructure side, we saw increased expansion of access to broadband, targeting and incentivizing specialize infrastructure, data center is being one of those grid systems for energy and power distribution. four states where ports and airports are important, and they are important in all states, they are making improvements across the board. some states established state infrastructure banks and funds. across the board there was a lot of encouragement of public and private partnerships. build a nebraska will generate $70 million per year for infrastructure investment. in delaware, they have a new

jobs infrastructure fund that is capitalized at $55 million. those are a couple examples of what is going on in that area. skilled work force is very important for economic growth and job creation. we saw more and more industry- specific programs at colleges and universities. one that sticks out is in washington state, where they have created programs at 11 universities and colleges related to aerospace. we have seen stem initiatives -- secondary and post secondary. we've seen decreased emphasis on middle-skill jobs that require less than a four-year degree. finally, a number of internships programs that have been successful. in delaware, for example, they have the stem council and the blue-collar training program, which is directed at providing skills across the board.

wisconsin wins, the unique program that connect businesses directly to the unemployed. we see a lot of those kinds of programs across the table. in the area of exports and international trade, i think that this year we have seen a lot more emphasis by the governor's as economic diplomats. their agencies are identifying high potentials in foreign markets. governors are traveling there making the pitches and connecting with partners abroad. they are also doing the same for opportunities in their state for foreign firms to take advantage of. i've seen a lot of increase in foreign direct investment this year compared to the rest of the world, where we have certainly benefiting a lot more than the rest of the world. a lot of the states are creating international trade representatives in foreign countries. that tapered off for the last

three or four years. now is building up steam again. each state is kind of evaluating where the highest potential opportunities are and putting representatives there. the final area is entrepreneurship and innovation. this year we have seen an increased emphasis on targeting firms and emerging growth companies and high-growth firms. that is the 7% of companies with the potential to create the most jobs. a lot of programs to support those companies. economic gardening initiatives -- this is a spreading national program developed in colorado. this works with existing firms that have great potential to expand. they put support resources around those firms to help them grow. we have seen technology-based economic development programs in

states. some are very targeted, designed to develop the system surrounding the entire financial, technology -- all the support systems going into those kinds of things at various -- it varies by state. investment funding for start-ups and expansion. almost every state has got some program to spawn university, business, and government partnerships. in delaware, they have a strategic fund focused on start- ups and growing companies. nebraska just passed and innovation act which focuses on technology transfer from universities and helps startup companies. utah is in a very unique situation. they have a highly educated, multi lynn gul population -- a multi-lingual population.

wisconsin has an expanded loan a support program for smaller companies. the wisconsin manufacturing sector is doing well due to the business environment factors in that state. that is an overview of the highlights of what is going on this year. we have been very gratified by the number of states that give us a call and say, we have looked at the report, we find that the study is very useful to them. we are gratified by that. so that is the highlights. i encourage you to look at before report. thanks. -- the full report. thanks. [applause]

>> at that same conference hosted by the u.s. chamber of commerce, a panel of governors expressed concerns about the european debt crisis. as well as the supreme court's impending health-care decision and federal requirements attached to medicaid funds. this is about 90 minutes. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> is my pleasure to introducemajor garret. he is a highly respected correspondent who has been on the forefront of challenging national issues for more than two decades. he recently joined the "national journal" white house team to cover the 2012 election campaign. prior to returning to his roots as a print journalist, he was a member of the white house team at cnn, and later became the chief white house correspondent for the fox news channel. he has written four books. the third, "the enduring

revolution -- how the contract of america continues to shake the nation" is being called one of the best political books of our time. he covered president clinton's impeachment in -- as well as the 2004 presidential election, the war on terror, and the war on iraq. he has a broad understanding of the issues that confront us. please join me in welcoming a majorgarret -- major garret. [applause] >> thank you, margaret, bir much. tom, as i listen to your talk about the the value of failure i thought, wow, tom watched a lot

of my early live shows on cnn. i would like the governors to come up now so that we do not have an overlay of formality. you can see there nametags in front of me. i will briefly introduce them. one thing that i think is probably well understood but i will just underline it is -- do you see these white cards on the tables? i will start this conversation and moderate this panel. but at some point, i am told, the people at the chamber will bring up these cards to me. there are for your purposes to jot down questions that i will pose the four governors. they're on the table. avail yourselves of them if you are so motivated. let's start from my right, your left. in television the right and left from the perspective of the audience. on my far right is governor --

>> that is the first time you've heard that. >> mar governorkell -- governormarkell. i want to describe to each governor the on employment rate at the state and what it was at the worst part of winnow commonly referred to as the great recession. -- what we now commonly referred to as the great recession. in delaware, the unemployment rate was 6.8%. -- is 6.8%. it was a high of 8.5%. to his left is the governor of nebraska. an employment rate there is 2.9%, second in the country. it was at a high of 4.9% january of 2010. to my left is governor gary herbert of utah. his -- the unemployment rate 6%.

down from a high of 8.2%, also january of 2010. i think we're beginning to see a pattern. on my far left is governor scott walker of the state of wisconsin. the unemployment rate is 7%. down from a high of 9.1%. that's a scene setter for the unemployment rate. we will talk a little bit about how they got it there and how their economies adopted. i want to start with an opening question for all four governors. it is, you saw the study. you referred -- you heard the commentary about the most important ideas that have driven economic growth in the states. what has been the most important driver of economic development in your state? here is a variation i would like you to take seriously -- what is the best idea you have encountered as governor that was

not yours to begin with? something brought to you that made sense, that you inc., that made a huge difference. >> first, thanks for the opportunity. i want to thank the organizers for putting the beautiful delaware mountains in the scenes here. [laughter] first of all, i thought the study was great. the focus on energy, infrastructure, energy, exports, the tax issue. all the right areas to focus on. tom, your comments on innovation were spot on. i went to taiwan a year ago and spoke to an entrepreneur who was born and raised there. she came to the states about 30 years ago and had a great career in a great career. went back to taiwan to start a

drug, research, design, and manufacturing. she said the u.s. would always be number one in innovation. i think this is one of the questions of the day. i think that many of the things that tom talked about are spot- on. there are lots of things that can make a difference. i will give a specific answer to your question. beyond that is added to. i think attitude is as important as anything else. businesses have more choices than they ever have before. there are 3 billion people in the world looking for jobs and

1.2 milliobillion jobs availabl. the jobs are going to go with the talent is. businesses have more choices than they ever had before. one of the interesting things is a lot of our constituents ask us why our businesses sometimes deciding to put jobs overseas. we can talk about our own state of delaware. astrazeneca, north american headquarters in delaware, its company based in england. 400 jobs, the current company based in russia. we lost a poultry company last year. i think we have to recognize that businesses have lots and lots of choices. number one, they have to feel like you will do anything you

have to do to make them successful. part of my job is to make sure we understand the industries in our state better than anyone else. i think with all of the other programmatic pieces outlined in the steady and with the right attitude you will go far. in terms of your specific question and it is an answer about long term, i would say it is something that i saw in utah when i was out there about a year ago for the national governors' association. it really came home to me. this has to do with the idea that it is absurd that we expecte no matter where we go to do business everybody can be able to speak in english. year,e went to utah last a number of chinese governors and party secretaries.

gov. herbert brought in a group of elementary students who spoke to these chinese governors and secretaries in mandarin. and according to the chinese, very good mandarin. i talked about it about six months before that. we are going to open up over the next five years in a state 20 emerging schools where students will spend half their school day learning in a different language. there was some push back. we sold it on economic development. cigna has 500 employees in delaware who serve the expatriate market for hundreds of thousands of around the world. they have this unit in delaware and a similar one in belgium. the average number of languages spoken by the people in belgium

is 3. part of our job is to make sure when companies are deciding when to hire their next employees, our state is at the top of the list. we have to make sure for those businesses, our folks can speak in other languages. i think in terms of looking forward, it is one thing that maybe people are not thinking about. it is about that attitude and knowing he will do whatever it takes to facilitate their success. >> a lot of people around the country and ask me you must not be telling the truth when you're unemployed rate is 3.1%. we are very proud of it. how did you do that? that cannot be possible? let me share a few things with you. we have focused on four issues.

it all starts on a fundamental principle that we believe in nebraska. we do not spend money we do not have. we passed the largest tax relief package in the history of the state. we balance our budget by doing it that way, not by raising taxes. we invested in education and jobs, including $25 million in new campus at the university of nebraska at lincoln. when you do those things, you can spur your economy. let me give you a couple of examples. you can now get your driver's license in our state in under 10 minutes. 9% of our citizens filed their

income taxes electronically -- 90% of our citizens filed their income taxes electronically. five years ago, we used to hire 200 people for five months to process returns. now we do not hire anyone. more efficient, more secure, and you'll get refunds earlier. we have seen an impact on our cash flow because refunds are going out earlier than ever before. if you do these kinds of things, you can move your state forward. we have the fourth largest agricultural economy in america. that has helped us. but so has a number of other industries, including insurance and finance. again and warren buffett is trying to buy everything in america -- it is likely to own a lot of america. we're proud of our state and what we do. education -- i just learned today that the mayor of denver,

who you would hear from, is a proud college graduate of nebraska. we're glad we can help out the state of colorado, that they are headed in the right direction because of that. but if you look at our act scores and state similar to us -- every year we are number one or number two. if you put all those factors together, i believe you can move your state forward. major asked what main idea i learned from another governor -- that is an easy one. early on, when i was governor, another governor told me about the concept of building a reverse trade mission. we have done two of them since i have been governor of nebraska. we call it bringing the world to nebraska. the end result is that we have chinese, japanese, german -- all sorts of companies from other countries are investing in nebraska.

it has been amazing. i am told that if you get 25 or 30 people you'll be lucky. but a bar conferences we had approximately 125 business and government leaders from around the world. particularly for our asian friends, it is all about relationships -- taking a picture with them is very important. for an entire hour, i took a picture with every single person visiting our state. the university of nebraska was involved in this. a major business in our state. we will continue to try to do that. the final announcement i would make -- anybody who would like to relocate to nebraska, 4 number is02 471 2204. we will give you that number one more time before we wrap up, i assure you.

gary, go ahead. >> thank you, maj. fenty to the u.s. chamber of commerce to share some ideas on what is making our state more successful. i can only say amen to what has been said already by previous speakers. as i look it utah's success, i am reminded of my father, who was raised on a farm. because of that, we have always had a large garden where we have lived, even though we have been in more and more urbanized area. growing up, he said, gary, if you want to have a big crop, you first have to have good, fertile soil. it does not matter how good your seeds are if you do not have a fertile soil -- to plan your season. i see that as a metaphor for what we need to be doing for of this country if we need to have success economically. when major asked what is the

driving factor for economic success, it is a simple answer for me -- the private sector. you have got to have a fertile field in which to plant the seeds. if you believe as an entrepreneur that you will do that if he played by the rules, water, fertilizer, and we it -- at the end of the day you will have harvesttime and grow a crop. that is what we have tried to do in utah. we have done what everybody would do in trying to create a fertile field for the business entrepreneur out there. that means having a regulatory environment that makes sense and is not aggressive. we have gone through and done what they ought to do here in washington. we have accounted -- we counted our regulations in our state. we found that we have 1969 regulations.

we then got public input from everybody who had a stake. we found that we had 368 regulations that have no public purpose. did not protect the public or level the playing field. they are simply a drag on the economy. we did what any sane person would do. we eliminated or modified those in this past legislative session. it is an attitude. we are saying to the marketplace, we value the entrepreneurial business person. we want to make sure we have a government that gets off your backs and out of your wallets. the second part is tax reform. we have cut taxes in utah. we have cut the taxes from 7% to 5%, we have flattened the the only deductibility as we have our mortgage interest.

our corporate and individual taxes are the same period where competitive when it comes to income tax rates. we cut taxes again. when it came to the unemployment insurance rate tax -- all of our 85,000 businesses in utah got tax relief. tax reform, regulatory reform. we understand the importance of energy. we developed a 10-year energy plan in utah that gives a pathway for. all of the above. we believe in a free market system -- you have to compete. the marketplace determines the winners and losers. opportunities to succeed and fail -- consequently, our energy costs in utah are 31% below the national average. that gives us the ability to

create jobs as we develop our natural resources and energy capability. it also gives us a competitive advantage to manufacturers and business entrepreneurs. costs are lower in utah when it comes to energy. last but not least, probably an area -- what is something we have done that did not originate with me as an idea? there was a study that was done by georgetown university. i think they did it for other states. they said that if we did not increase our educational performance in the state of utah over time, by 2020 our economy would underperform. utah has always fired education. the chamber of commerce -- utah has always valued education. we get high performance out of our schools. we have 43% of our adult population who has done some kind of post high-school certification or degree.

that is not adequate enough. is a global marketplace -- we are competing with the chinese. that is 1.3 billion people who want are jobs. we need to adjust our skill levels to line up with the demands of the marketplace. we need more engineers. we need more stem -- science, technology, engineering, math. so we will set a goal in utah of 66 by 2020. that means that by the year 2020, 66% of the population aged 2264 will have some kind of post high-school certification or degree. it is not a matter of wanting to do it, it is a necessity. it came out of a study out of georgetown. we said, we will do something about it. it is an ambitious goal, but it is something that we can and will reach over the next eight years. we have had great results, as

we mentioned -- our economy in utah has turned around from 8.2% unemployment rate to 6 percent now. we're down to 5.7%. we have more people engaged. people think there's opportunity out there in the marketplace. people were sitting on the sidelines are real engaged. our economy is growing at two times the national average. steven forbes of "for" magazine named best -- of forbes magazine named as the best date for businesses. i believe that if every state is what we are doing, we will all have what i call the rising tide of economic expansion which -- i do believe states need to take the lead. thank you. >> governor walker?

>> i think the timing of nebraska getting down to 3.9% unemployment coincides with nebraska getting into the big tent. if there is a reason for that -- i did not say who won that game, but i was smiling at the end. we hope you are as great a host this year. i also want to begin by echoing what gary said. attitude is a big part of that. a year and a half ago in january 2011, every time you came into the state of wisconsin on one of our major highways, there is a big sign that says wisconsin welcomes you. historically, underneath the sign there was a shingle with the name of the governor. when i came in last year, i replaced the shingle with a new predecessor that just said open for business. it raises your point about

attitude. for people coming and -- people coming in from illinois are thinking it is finally a stay open for business. for people in the state, i want to send a clear message, symbolically, but then follow up with the action. in terms of stability -- that ties read into that. i will give you a couple of examples. most of us last year had economic challenges and fiscal challenges as well. in our case, it was a $3.6 billion budget deficit. it was one of the biggest deficits we have ever had. we sought to balance it without raising taxes, without massive layoffs, without cutting things like medicaid. i put more money into medicaid than any governor in wisconsin's history, not only to preserve -- protect families and children, but in the past

medicating cut became a hidden tax as lower reimbursements that passed on to everyone else who pays for health insurance. instead, we put in place long- term structural reforms that help us balance our state budget and help everyone in our local governments balance budgets for today and years to come. what i said in the capital was that me to think more about the next generation than the next election. fixing or stabilizing our fiscal house also implies stability about financial john does. we knew we had to make it easier for employers. we over -- lowered the overall tax burden. property-tax went down. we saw an overall reduction -- we had a 100% exemption on capital gains in our state if

you make an investment in the wisconsin company. we did things tied into growth and prosperity. we ease the regulatory building and barred things that gary has done in terms of looking at antiquated regulations. we are doing more in the future so that there are not even more burdensome regulations. we did major reforms went into frivolous and out of control lawsuits. bill stood in the way of us adding more jobs in the private sector -- of those stood in the way of us adding more jobs in the private sector in wisconsin. we hear time and time again from our employers, we hear rouble say that i have jobs but not enough skilled workers to fill them. you want to counter had against the wall when you hear that. the thing, i have got people. whether it 3.9% or 6.7% in my case, you would be -- you would like to be closer to 3% or 4%.

so we tried to take a series of actions to pop connect people looking for work with the skills they need -- machinists, fabricators, welders, and others. we were taking aggressive action there. we have taken aggressive action to be a better partner with cost-effective and reliable sources of power. the state government had taken more than a billion dollars out of the state transportation fund. we start to restore that to build our business -- bridges, roads, freight rail, and airports. we knew that we could compete globally if we do that. we saw as -- exports, almost all%. that was tied in to enhance and transportation. -- enhancing the transportation. we site change in attitude.

two years ago, 10% of our employers felt we were heading in the right direction. two months ago, that same survey came out -- 94% of employers of reducing the right thing. i'm still scratching my head about the 6%. i want to know what was bothering them. it is about providing certainty -- proving your open for business. we are proud of the fact that we -- we used to be in the bottom 10 on nearly rank when it came to the best and worst dates of -- for doing business. we were 43. this year, we are in the top 20. i would love to compete with gary and others in the top-10 best kids to do business and. it is a change in the attitude

and -- states to do business in. it is abt change in attitude. the best idea that wasn't yours? i forgot about that. sonny perdue did a program called georgia and winds in georgia. -- georgia wins in georgia. we worked on that in wisconsin. unemployment compensation was a barrier to implement -- it was a lot easier to collect unemployment and get a job. for a lot of people, if they had to have some training to get into a job, if they -- if that did not work out, they would not be able to go on unemployment. we treated a bridge of about six weeks where you can stay on unemployment and still get assistance but can get the jobs

you need, particularly in advanced manufacturing without risking losing unemployment until that time frame is up. seven or eight weeks ago iran -- i wrote a column about "the national journal" about the lame-duck session, all the things that it was clear congress would ignore dealing with. ben bernanke came up with a much more vivid metaphor, calling it the fiscal cliff. i want to ask the governors -- i hear this all the time in washington. it sounds true but it may not be true. i want to ask you because your innovating and creating jobs in the actual, real economy -- does this element of uncertainty with tax policy and all of the things due to expire at the end of the year actually create tension, anxiety, and a drag on economic development, or is this something that, like

washington tends to do, obsesses about that -- but may not have as much of a consequence? >> one difference is that all four us are required -- all four of us are required to have a balanced budget. also, about certainty -- a big thing we have to do is make sure that employers in our state, businesses in our state, know what they can expect with respect -- to policy. with respect to tax policy, improvement in schools -- this is all the issues that we talked about earlier. generally, uncertainty is absolutely discouraging to business investment, whether it is that a national level or state level. one thing that we absolutely have to do is to provide that level of certainty, not just in one level, but across a or range of areas.

>> do you agree? do you think it intensifies the closer we get to this termination date for many of the tax provisions in the code, december 31? since you are here in washington -- would you urge congress to get on the stick sooner? >> any of us who spend time talking to business now that any of us -- and the uncertainty -- uncertainty in europe, around the world, plays an impact. in our state, june is a big month in terms of settling uncertainty. we got a clear answer in terms of what will happen in wisconsin with a recall election. 94% thought we were heading in the right direction -- a similar survey said that 87% of employers said they would add jobs in 2012.

the biggest thing that was keeping them from doing it was the recall election. that is a good example where employers, even last week, -- i visited two or three employers who said they are ready to add more jobs. we feel good, we like where you are headed, we know it will continue. on the national level, i hear from employers -- it was about the other thing the nation will be looking at is what the supreme court will do when it comes to the affordable care at. there are a lot of employers -- the uncertainty. they're probably more against the mandate, but in general the uncertainty of not knowing what is coming next to the supreme court, the fall elections, anything that can be done to provide greater uncertainty -- certainty for our employers would be effective. on last part, yes.

here in washington, they look too early, they do not get the big picture. president reagan's economic impact him into effect, it brought about the largest peacetime economic boom in american history. they slashed taxes and put money into american entrepreneurs hands. the only way you can improve is not through attrition but for growth. if you want to promote growth, you have to put more money back into the hands of the people who can make it happen. the launch bernards, the consumers of america -- the entrepreneurs, the consumers of

america. >> uncertainty does impact the market place. he will hear from the business people out there. we can play by the rules if we know what they are. forbes indicated he thinks it is up to $2 trillion of venture capital sitting on the sidelines because of the uncertainty. we are going to sit back and play it close to the vest until we can decide how to invest our money. i will give you an example. the patient protection affordable care. we have an lot of medical device companies in the state of utah. we export those devices are on the world. our export business has grown by 41%. we have embraced the nature of the global marketplace.

in the affordable care act, there is a tax that is imbedded in the program that says we will tax you on your revenue. not-for-profit. on your revenue from those devices. that will stifle us to have research for new devices. it is going to cause companies in utah to say we need to go outside of america to do our research and development and manufacture our devices. that is the part that ought to be repealed regardless of what happens to the affordable care act. that is stifling innovation and ability for us to produce products here in the united states of america. it is causing a lot of uncertainty and angst. the uncertainty clearly is a

stifling economic expansion. >> go ahead. >> there is absolutely no question about the uncertainty of taxes, regulation, and health care having a significant impact on businesses across america. the best thing the president and the congress could do right now, but i do not expect this to happen, they could stand up tomorrow and say at the end of this year we are not going to raise taxes on it and the american and put in place a two- year moratorium. jack and i are respectively the chair and the vice chair of the nga this year. a couple weeks ago we were doing an editorial meeting. what most governors would like out of the federal government is them to make a decision, the tough decisions that we make

every day, realizing you cannot please everyone. when are we going to get a balanced budget from the federal government? when are we going to know the funding of the various programs that we depend on? it is difficult to do when it is always a continuing resolution for a couple of months. then the new federal health care program. the big thing that disturbs me is we have our bullebudget in balance and the affordable care act is an on funded medicare mandate. i think that is very unfair. the federal government send me a bill for $500 million. there are things they can do. they need to make the tough decisions. >> the bottom line is i think there is no one in the room who

thought the status quo before the affordable care act was acceptable. i heard from small businesses throughout our state every single day that they could not afford the increases. young people who were not on their parents planned unemployed were having difficulty getting access. we are moving ahead. we are planning the exchange. we will see what happens with the lawsuit. if the supreme court rules against it, it is not like we could go back to the way it was. the way it was was miserable. my view is we do not have a health care system in this country anymore. we have more of a sick care system because most providers are getting paid based on how many procedures they do. i do not know another industry where there is so much of a

disconnect between what we feel in our pockets and what that service actually costs. if a doctor tells us to go get a test, we will go get a test but we do not know what it costs. i am very interested in what gov. patrick is doing in massachusetts. i do not know how it is in these states, but in our state -- if you think about all the people who have health coverage, taxpayers pick up the cost for 40% of them. taxpayers pick up 40% of the people. who have some kind of health cost. we have to do a better job in delaware of leveraging oru roles in health care. regardless what happens to the affordable care act, there is a lot of work to do.

>> under this umbrella question of uncertainty, let me ask you. we do not know what the supreme court is going to do. if the supreme court overturns the law, does that create more uncertainty for your residence and your businesses? >> i think there is plenty of uncertainty. the health care issue is the single most complicated challenge that we have. more than education or transportation. i think this idea of dealing with the cost and making sure we are doing a better job of paying providers to keep us well rather than doing procedures when we are sick -- if we do not get there, i do not see how this could be sustainable. >> i hope the court rules it

unconstitutional. either or because anything in between will create more uncertainty and complexity. the second issue on health care -- i think the debate was focused on the wrong issue. we should have been focused on cost. in my state, we are trying to focus on wellness and prevention. we have a common platform. if i was sitting in beijing, china, and i needed my medical records in 24 hours, i would die before they got their. we do need this electronic medical records system. we have been focusing on wellness and prevention which can help drive down cost.

>> i think the vast majority of utah would appreciate a reset and start over. >> even with the uncertainty -- >> yes. going back to square one is a better place than where we are at now. frankly the biggest mistake that happened was this was a 2500 page bill that nobody even today know all that is inside and what the meaning of the law is. we're still getting uncertainty. i believe that it should be state-driven. i understand the need to have health care reform. we have tried to find ways to improve health care. we have probably the lowest cost health care with the highest quality in the nation. nobody even asks us what is your

opinion or what you could contribute to the debate. the governors were shut out of this discussion. i would like to press the reset button and allow the state to find a way. i have a very young population in utah. the governor in nevada has the opposite. he has an older age population. his needs are different than mine. we created in exchange way before the affordable care act. all privately driven. it introduces the fine contributions and proposed benefit. companies out there competing for their customers. it is not perfect but it is a way. if we were all of their doing that, we would learn from each other and our successes and failures.

we would have health care reform that could have a positive result. in my view, the patient protection of the affordable care act has divided the nation. we need to push the reset button and start over. >> there is no doubt whatsoever that if the affordable care act was thrown out, it would create greater stability for our employers. i hear all the time. one thing in particular you said -- even if that were to happen, we cannot go back to the way things were before. one of the first things i signed into law, a small step into the right direction. a repeal of our state tax that tax savings accounts. that is one option. anything that allows consumers of health care to have more skin

in the game are better off. it is about their health and wellness. the better off we are. if you reach in your pocket and you pull out your phone, you probably know more about your plan for that cell phone then your healthcare plan. having to do teenagers, i have to have unlimited texting or i would be in the poorhouse. ask most people about a procedure and they cannot tell you, but they can tell you what is in their cell phone coverage. health care is much more important. i think about already, granted not everything is elected. most of us do not have emergency situations. most of us have elective

procedures. one of the best examples is years ago corrective eye surgery cost a couple grand per eye. now it is a lot less than that. you want quality as well. the balance that two out. good people involved knew if they lowered the cost and made it affordable for those in the middle class who could save up for it, they found out it was more cost effective and could get more consumers using the. the quality was still a key component. there has to be better ways for us to do that that our market- driven and the government could play a role in forcing greater transparency. i think as governors we can play a direct role and that is when we look at medicaid and other

programs where many of our employers across the country could help us out. one of my big employers in wisconsin -- they are a model for a lot of of the companies that are trying to adopt wellness as a factor. we can learn a lot from employers like that who would help us better engaged in wellness. >> i want to talk about because it does come up a couple times in conversation -- tort reform. that issue rises and falls with some regularity but never gets too far. you have both done this in recent times. what lessons have you learned? how valuable relative to other things you have done in building economic growth or encouraging

-- >> i followed my lead very much from the visits that i paid to delaware businesses. i probably visited 750 cents a i became governor. i asked one question. what can we do to a facilitate your success? that is the only thing that matters these days. if a governor is not asking that question and acting, we are probably not doing what we need to do. they talk to me about making sure they have access to great schools, a good work force, reasonable taxes, and a decent cost of doing business. they want a terrific quality of life, communities with higher education and local companies, and a place with a response of government. in 750 conversations, i do not think a single one brought up for reform. maybe in other states it is a

bigger issue. these visits are democrats, republicans, independents -- i could care less. those issues that i just mentioned particularly around work force and making sure there are workers who are skilled to do the jobs that are needed today and the future. that is numbers one, too, and 3. >> i am guessing you had a different experience in wisconsin. >> i do not hear much now because our special session last year involved lowering the tax burden and a number of things that were bottled up for eight or 10 years. i do not hear much about it now because we have corrected much of that. i hear a couple things. number one issue all the time is workforce. i have jobs but not enough skilled workers to fill them.

it is frustrating. if we can get that, we can leave the country and the world and plug people in to improve the economy. i was visiting a small company. they make the buckets for those gigantic pieces of mining equipment. the employer there said he could add a third shift and a whole other wave as well but he does not have a guaranteed enough skilled welders to fill those positions. he went to figure out a way to connect that because we know we have people who have the work ethic and the willingness. we just have to connect them to the jobs. i hear about stability. in general, what i hear is not

just about tort, but the cost of doing business in our state. the burden of complying with regulations and out of control lawsuit. we try to tackle all of those. particularly for small businesses, i hear from manufacturers who say i would like someone who can just focus on sales then all of the risk- management things that we have to do. if we can get that down, we can focus on sales and production. it does nott reform, appear to be an issue because we did tort reform several years ago. what i hear every day is the tax and regulatory burden environment. the recent study ranked the

states and among existing firms and new firms. among existing firms, we were the ninth best in the country in terms of the regulatory environment. for new firms, we were ranked number 1 in the country. i hear that every day from my businesses. >> did that change the business climate? the people identified that as a new reason to move to wisconsin? >> it had a big effect. we do not allow trial lawyers in nebraska. [laughter] in all seriousness, we put down a great environment 20 years ago and we stayed away from these frivolous lawsuits and some of the others that you see. no question it made a huge difference. >> similar to what david said, this darkly a pretty good

environment that has not been accessible in terms of taking advantage of the issues, but it is a growing concern in utah. we have doctors who are saying i am practicing preventive medicine. they are trying to prevent themselves from being sued. rather than doing one or two tests, they are doing 10 or 15 to make sure they prevent themselves from someone coming back and saying you were somehow negligent. because of that, i had the lieutenant governor go out to do a study in utah to see if we need to have tort reform for an environment that is fair for attorneys and those who have claims and still not inhibit the practice of common sense good medicine. we're looking at the "i am sorry" law.

we are going to take a look at that and tort reform to see where it this task force leaves us. it seems to be a growing concern for our medical doctors. >> gary reminded me about something. on the medical side, we passed part of that in our overall package which enhances the quality of care some medical professionals are not afraid to get together. they actually have the assessment to try to improve quality. what we found were some of the changes we made in the past in improving medical malpractice. it was access to quality health care in our impoverished and rural areas. one of our biggest draws was the

fact that they felt comfortable practicing in the state because we now have a fully funded compensation fund with reasonable standards when it comes to medical malpractice cases. that was not just about jobs. it was about quality of life and access to care. hard to believe it is only a year. a lot has happened. before our changes last year, we had examples where we had -- they went back 25 years and because of lead paint, anybody who made paint at that time was not liable for that. i think that is one of those common sense checks. are you crazy? that just does not make any sense. thos