participate on the medicaid expansion. it we need the scientist to make funding decisions for the future of biomedical research to make sure that drugs like the one that saved my life will continue to be developed. we need the public to understand their privileges. tax credits and public exchanges will help reduce the impact of annual premium increases that some employers have blamed on "obamacare," rather than taking responsibility for their own business decisions. as i look back, my illness has completely changed how i look

at health care in america. if you remember anything i say here today, please remember this -- i am just an average person. i am a daughter, a wife, a sister, and a friend. uke, illness was a total fle but it can happen to anyone, even you. our health-care system needs to be ready, both for you and for all americans. thank you for listening. my husband will now speak. >> distinguished members of the platform committee, i would first like to thank all the democratic members of congress and so many others who put their own political careers on the line to support the affordable care act for all americans. you represent the finest

examples set by two of my personal heroes, senator robert f. kennedy, who said there are those who look at things and ask why, i dream of things and ask why not? and senator edward kennedy, who made the passage of health care for all americans his life's work. amy and i thank you from the bottom of our hearts, and are at your service and implored you to please enlist our help in whatever way you deem fit. there has been so much noise and distortion support -- surrounding the affordable care act, which are owned senator tom harkin called one of the most compassionate pieces of legislation in generations. amy and i feel it is our personal and moral obligation to share our story in the hope that by doing so americans will finally be able to put real

human names and faces and stories with the law that has already benefited millions of middle-class and struggling americans. while separating out the truth of the law from the militias, cannas, and inexcusable lies -- yes, lies surrounding this law -- as any so relevant -- eloquently shared, we know the truth about "obamacare," a term i used with the utmost pride. amy and i and have been tremendously fortunate to have excellent health insurance to our employers. prior to the signing of "obamacare," her insurance was capped. hers at one minute dollars. had it not be en for the immediate relief on caps, we

would have almost certainly need it to declare bankruptcy to cover the expenses necessary to save amy's life. i ask q. panelists to please imagine for just one moment the stress of sitting in intensive care, praying with your entire sold for the life of your spouse, partner, or child. this was my agony. now add in worrying how you will pay an immense hospital bill when your insurance finally runs out. imagine a heart trick of telling your partner or a child as they awaken from a life-threatening illness that simply because they're bad luck, the dreams of a college education, retirement, a leading keeping your home are now gone. you may lose everything because you chose to keep them alive.

imagine their feelings of shame and guilt at hearing what their illness has cost their family. finally, imagine hearing why your wife lies in a coma, a heartless pride of let them die , followed by applause during a discussion of a hypothetical situation, eerily similar to ours, and one of the early gop presidential debates prior to our state's caucus. this too unfortunately was my agony. thanks to obamacare these additional fears were not part of the agony i faced. i remember clearly soon after a knee awoke from a,, when it she was just beginning to understand all that happened, her asking me with tears in her eyes, how are we going to pay for all this? what are we going to do?

as i continued stroking her beautiful red hair, i looked into her eyes and told her lovingly, don't you worry about a thing. obamacare does. the republicans would rather have voters hear other than the true stories of the real middle class americans being saved from financial ruin or even death by the president's signature achievement. amy and i both hope that by sharing our personal story about this landmark legislation that has been so ruthlessly distorted for so all that normal middle- class americans will finally learn and listen up to the truth about this wall. i will put our experience is up against any multimillionaire political pundit anytime,

anywhere, to help america do just that. thank you. >>, i want to thank you, amy and ross, for sharing your story. we need to move along because we still have people to hear from. what i am going to do is start inviting maybe a couple up at a time to testify together, and so are there any questions for any or ross at this point? thank you both for your testimony, and what i am going to do is to invite carole bermone and leon to come up together, if they would. carole is a west palm beach volunteer with the national committee to preserve social security and medicare, and leon is the president of the wisconsin alliance of retired

americans. we're happy to hear from the two of you. we'll be holding up the time card at an appropriate time, but please share from your heart and be as concise as you can, and we look forward to hearing from you. >> mr. chairman, i know this comes with perhaps ill grace but if people could diminish repetition, we could get some more done. but we will hear first from carole. >> i am from west palm beach florida. mine is a sad but not very unique story. before moving to florida, i lived in ohio, and while they're my husband became incapacitated with alzheimer's. for two years i managed a full- time job while getting assistance with specialized day care programs and an occasional

paid care giver. to make ends meet, i sold our modest home and moved us to a small apartment. soon after, my husband broke his hip while he was in daycare and even after surgery and some rehabilitation, he could no longer walk. i was forced to place him in a long term care facility. the average cost per month ran up to $5,000, depending on medications and extra services, such as laundry. in each and every month, i was forced to sell something else of value just to get by. fort two more years, i managed by cashing in all our assets, except for my own individual for a one-k, which, since i was not yet eligible for social security, was all i had left. when it became clear that our

funds would not last much longer, and that my financial future was in serious jeopardy, i hired an elder care attorney who advised me to contact a state welfare worker. to my chagrin, this person could not understand why i was concerned about depleting my funds down to the last dollar. she told me the state of ohio would take care of me, by making the eligible for section 8 housing and food stamps and other welfare programs. in addition, it would take care of my husband in the nursing home. i could not believe that after working my entire life this was my only option. it was not what i had dreamed of for my retirement years. i went back to the elder care and attorney and asked him if there was any way at all that i could avoid impoverishment and

taking welfare benefits and still preserve my only remaining one401-k, money, my for and he told me that i would have to do the unthinkable -- i would have to divorce my husband. and so i did. thankfully, since my daily visits to the nursing home never wavered, my husband never knew the change in our marital status. he greeted me the same way every day during this terrible. -- terrible period by staying here comes the pretty lady. it is sad and i feel guilty to this very day that the only avenue left open to the west to take such a drastic measure to avoid party in my retirement years. this is why i simply do not understand why so many in

washington want to cut already modest medicare and social security benefits. we should be looking for ways to improve these programs, including long-term care benefits. so that if we get sick, we do not end up going on welfare to pay for our care. seniors want to remain independent, but that will become even harder if the programs we have paid into our quest our entire lives continue to be the focus of cross-cutting plans in washington. i lived on the edge of financial disaster for a long time, just because my husband needed long- term care. social security and medicare were the lifelines that i needed to come through that very difficult time. and they are lifelines that future generations will also need. they should be protected and

they should be strengthened. they should not be cut and they should not be privatized. and i thank you for allowing me to testify. thank you for your testimony, which has touched all of us in a very deep way. leon, we will be glad to hear from you. >> i am a member of the alliance of retired americans, which advocates for seniors and retirees. i am also president of the 107,000-member wisconsin alliance of retired americans and appreciate this opportunity to say a few words about our organization. the 2012 elections will be the first in american history in which the majority of voters are over 45. 47 years ago, president johnson signed medicare into law and,

we will celebrate the 77th anniversary of social security on august 14, a lasting legacy of franklin roosevelt. social security and medicare are rooted in american values. work hard, saved money for the long term, and when you are older, you will be able to enjoy a break, and you will be able to spend time with family and friends. the passage of president obama's affordable care act was also a victory. millions of seniors and people with disabilities have saved $3.9 billion on medications. last year over 32 million seniors receive at least one new benefit through medicare. discoveredsa tesest,

by cancer, and i am glad to say that i am now cancer free. the alliance for retired americans projects the rendition of the republican nominee that we should turn it into welfare. social security benefits are burned, and you are guaranteed that benefits are there for you. the alliance fully endorses their platform submission also to this committee. to all of us, social security and medicare are promises made to middle-class men and women who worked hard and played by the rules, but to mitt romney, social security and medicare are just two more funds that can be rated for their personal gain. think about romney's secured for raising the eligibility to 70. for me, who has worked for

years, i cannot see myself working to the aim today. what does this mean for workers here in minnesota or in my state, wisconsin, or across the country? this would be a terrible way to treat those who work on physically demanding jobs all their lives. the alliance urges that democratic party to include a strong platform plank, unconditionally committed to preserving, protecting, and strengthening social security and medicare. these programs are the bedrock of the democratic party. we owe it to our children and grandchildren. the future of all americans, that this party, the democratic party, stands ready to keep them strong and vibrant. a queue for this opportunity, and i will answer any questions. me an hour to tell you how to save social security. >> are there questions for either carole and leon?

thank you for coming in your testimony. next, we will hear from charles morgan and karen morgan, asking them to come at this time. they are here to discuss some of the obstacles they are facing as a same-6 couple, despite the fact that they are legally married in their home state of new hampshire. the key for being here and we look forward to your testimony. >> the afternoon. members of the drafting committee -- good afternoon, i am charlie morgan, and this is my wife, karen. i have served our great nation in uniform for more than 17 years. how would like to congratulate representative frank on your

recent marriage. my wife karen is a special education teacher who has been forced to quit work so she can care for our five-year-old daughter as i battle stage for breast cancer. so karen will do most of the speaking today, because as you can hear, my voice is very weak due to a tumor pressing against my vocal chords. >> thank you, charlie. my wife charlie and i have been together for more than 15 years, and throughout this time we have been committed to each other in a way that is similar that you have been committed to your own spouses or life partners. we were joined in a civil unions in vermont in 2000, and when we felt it was safe to be legally married last year, following the repeal of don't ask don't tell, we did so immediately. celebrating our marriage with family and friends, are forming

and strengthening our commitment to one another, and making universal promised to share of life's joys and sorrows together, has made our relationship stronger, and it has made our family stronger. that is just it. we are a family, just like any other family. we have based our relationship on love and respect. my commitment to charlie and our commitment to our daughter is the most important part of our lives. when charlie and i swore our lives to each other, we meant forever. for better or worse. in sickness and in health. we also believe in serving our country, and that is why charlie is an active guard reserve education officer. that is why we saw it as simply part of our duty as a military family when charlie deployed for mobilization training in wisconsin, and then at kuwait.

it is why i took leave for my career as a special education teacher to support her deployment, take care of our daughter, and now take care of charlie during her success. in spite of all that, and in spite of the fact that we are legally married, united states government still treats us as legal strangers. part government will not allow me to excess health and dental insurance under charlie's coverage, meaning we must shoulder the huge expense of purchasing at full cost or go without. frighteningly, right now i without health insurance because we cannot afford it. i am unable to get a military i.d. have access to facilities and services that other families automatically enjoy. when charlie and the daughter go into the commissary on base to buy groceries, i am forced to stand outside and wait for that. it cannot even go inside.

in our government, the one that charley are some it will not provide survivor benefits to me should she not win her battle. and i need this benefits in order to care for our daughter. perhaps this is the scariest part of all. in 2008, charlie was diagnosed with breast cancer, a double mastectomy and multiple rounds of chemotherapy saved her life. in 2010 she fulfilled her duty in kuwait and returned home to our family. last september, there was more bad news, because her cancer was back. it was incurable. multiplendergrouone rounds of chemotherapy. military survivor benefits cannot say for life, but they can make sure our family is able to keep going if she loses her

battle. charlie traveled to washington in february to meet with the staff of house speaker john boehner. she told them about her service to our country and her battle with cancer and asked him to drop his legal defense of the so-called defense of marriage act, which renders a our marriage a second-union in the eyes of the federal government. he ignored her pleas trick during president obama express his support for the freedom to marry in may, we had new hope. here was our commander in chief standing behind our family, asserting that we are just as deserving of the special commitment as any other family. as a military family through and through, we carry that statement of solidarity with us as we keep pushing every day to be treated just like every other family in the united states. we're asking you today to stand with our family and so many other loving and committed st.

essex couples and families by making marriage for all committed couples part of the party platform. we're asking you to take a stand for equality, for love, and for families like us all over the nation. >> ladies and gentlemen, i am not afraid to die. as a soldier, i accepted that possibility when i deployed. but i am afraid that karen will not receive the benefits that we have earned as a family to take care of our daughter when i am doggone. there for the opportunity to share our story. >> thank you so very much for coming and sharing your personal story. you have touched all of our hearts, and we appreciate your service to our country and your commitment to each other. the key for being here. >> congressman? >> no greater service that

people could perform ensuring their pain in the service of try to help other people on board it. we're grateful. i want to put on the record, the house, as barbara remembers, a week ago thursday voted on a motion by republican member of the house to reaffirm the defense of marriage act, namely, federal government does not consider your marriage a second-class union, it considers its nonexistent. it is of no weight whatsoever. the vote in the house to reaffirm doma, 230 republicans voted for reaffirmation, five voted against. on the democratic side, 72 voted to reaffirm doma, 161 voted against. one of the 17 has already lost a primary. we have the republicans, 98% to

continue to invite you rights. -- to deny your rights. when the house leadership which makes its decision voted on whether it or not to go to court, there were three republicans in favor, and two democrats. this is one where we are on the rights are as far as the public is concerned. i want to say when we put this in the platform, as i hope we will, which will reaffirm what democrats already are. >> thank you. are there other questions? ce again -- husband,. >> next we will hear from a

person who is here on behalf of stonewall democrats. he is a minneapolis-based lbgt activist and is here to speak with us about his experiences and about marriage equality. they do so much for being here. >> good afternoon. thank you for allowing me to speak today. i am speaking on behalf of the national stonewall democrats, the national voice of obgt democrats. i represent a number of others who want us to testify today, but due to time were not able to do so. we are here to advocate for passage of our plank that speaks specifically to full marriage equality in the national democratic party platform. some may think this is a leap for our party, that our party is not ready for this, or it may be

politically unwise to do this now. we say as lbgt individuals we are ready for marriage and over 70% of democrats, including president obama, now agree. something that we as lbgt individuals want to change the definition of the word marriage. as we did not have to change the definition of the word army when individuals went into the army, which are not seeking to change the word marriage creek where seeking to join marriage, to affirm the ideals of strong families that are built on love, commitment, responsibility, supported by friends, family, and the larger community. to me, the idea of love and marriage equality is just that, love. to be sure, there are numerous practical matters, provisions in our laws that allow us to care for and protect our families trick in the state of minnesota alone, there are at least 515 loss to which committed lbgt

couples have no access. an examination conducted by the government accountability office in the aftermath of the passage of the defense of marriage act, revealed over 1100 federal regulations from the which lbgt couples are barred. these affect credit, taxes, inheritance, legal releases as, public services, raising children, property ownership, and so on. it is important for me to tell you how much this means to me on a personal level. my brother adam will be getting married this september to the woman he loves, and it is heartwarming to see him plan for the day, but i also have to admit i am a little envious at the same time. i cannot wait that the same opportunity that he does at some day. i cannot wait for that day that we all dream about when i am

unable -- when i am able to get that on one knee, say, will you civil-union-me? today i asked you to say i do to allowing committed, lbgt hubble to be included in the marriage equality. thank you for your time. >> thank you, >> thank you, aaron zellhoefer, and would you introduce the person to your left? >> i can introduce myself. my name is wes and i retired from the military after 32 years. i have five children, 11 grandchildren, and i'm a retired police officer on the civilian side.

that there's some light on what i am willing to say. high and not want to ask for anything from you people, -- i am not going to ask anything from you people, but to thank you for what democratic leadership has done in respect to don't ask don't tell. i want to expect -- i want to express my appreciation for those who persevered. the president will long be remembered for doing this, just as president truman was remembered for desegregating the military in 1950 or so. i just want to talk briefly about this and tell what the effect of them -- effects have them. part of this relates to what admiral mullen said to the senate when he gave his

testimony. i want to read a portion of this testimony from february 2, 2010, which was a brilliant stroke by the president to send him forward to do that and i also believe admiral mullen felt it from the bottom of this art. it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do. the matter how i look at this issue, i cannot escape being troubled by the fact we have not placed a policy is to replace the policy that forces young men and women to lie about who they are to defend fellow citizens. if it comes down to integrity, there's as individuals, and hours as an institution. if i believe great young and men -- young women and men would accommodate such a change in our military. i do not have the words to express my gratitude to admiral

mullen for what he said that day. his strength and resolve will bring about the day that don't ask don't tell will finally end. -- would finally end. we were challenged. it's strengthen our resolve to keep not -- knocking at the door for justice from bombarding congress to -- with phone calls, in the end, they did the right thing and voted for equality, fairness and common sense. since that has happened, the recruiting has not dropped. unit cohesion and morale has continued up, and the world has not stopped rotating the matter what my friend michele bachmann might say. what happened when the repeal came? there were three significant factors. the first was the end of the daily fear of being outed. i want you to put yourself in

the place of a young kid in a different part of the world for the first time in his life and is not sure of his sexuality and that kid just wanted to serve his country, but had the everyday fear of being outbid. what you did was end that fear, and that is a great thing right there. i personally witnessed that when a young man really young man was sent home during basic training -- young man was sent home during basic training. repeal has brought about honesty in service, and justice admiral mullen alluded to when he gave his speech, finally, here is the most important thing. i want you take this back to fellow democrats. repeal gave hope to -- gay y outh.

i told you i was a retired police officer and a father, and too often, gay kids who did not have hope choose a tragic way out. my youngest son was straight and also an afghanistan veteran. in a friend who came out when he was 19 and was -- he had a friend that came out when he was 19, and that man gave up home and took -- gave up hope, and took a tragic way out, devastating a family and giving me the impetus to speak out for equality and hope to young kids. what you have done here is given hope to gay kids that they can live a normal life like their friends and family members. you gave them hope, and that is an incredible thing. you have saved lives. you will never meet these people, but by your action you have saved lives.

finally, i want to dedicate this to a family friend who was killed in action in afghanistan in february of 2011. he was openly gay while serving, but it did not make a bit of difference to those cities served with, and to his memory -- to those he served with, and to his memory i dedicate these words. >> thank you, aaron zellhoefer and wes the thank you for your service to our country. you were a sergeant, and we appreciate that and your testimony. are there questions from the committee? well, thank you both very much for your testimony and for being here this afternoon. our next presenter is tim.

he is a grain and hog farmer in yellow madison county, minnesota. he knew what we he serves as local board and is active in the minnesota farmers union. he is here today to talk about the strength of the rural economy under president obama. thank you for coming, and we appreciate the opportunity to hear what you have to say to us. >> thank you. welcome, minnesota. as just a brief introduction, i am the fourth generation farmer. i farm on the land that my great-grandfather first bought and started farming in 1886. a farm with my son, and i have four kids and nine grandkids, and a couple of my brand sons

are interested in farming, too. one of my concerns is passing the farm on to the next generation in keeping things going. consolidation in agriculture has been growing and growing over the years, going to more corporate agriculture, away from family farms. years ago, the packers and stockyards act was passed and implemented, which said that packers could not be in farming. it kept corporate farming from taking over the family farms. those laws are still on the books, but they're not been completely enforced. i think if we are going to continue to have good, safe food produced by family farms, those need to be implemented. if you want to look at one of the successes that has come in

agriculture, ethanol in biofuels -- we have a home-grown energy product that has helped farmers the more competitive in the marketplace and has also save consumers millions of dollars in less expensive fuel and you do not have to protect a cornfield with a battleship to get the product into your guest tank. home-grown energy is something that is important and vital to this country. one of the important things to the rural economy is agriculture. the farm bill, which i do not know if it should be considered a farm bill -- a farmer part of it is just a small fragment of the dollars, but the dollars are important.

all of them are. the school lunch programs are very important all over this country and in the rural areas. there is a lot of infrastructure being built as far as water and sewer plants in the country. that comes through the farm bill. the total scope of the farm bill is very important. it probably should be renamed so that the farmers are not blamed for the millions of dollars that go into it. the bill that is currently awaiting passage -- the senate tested, the house agricultural committee has forwarded it, but it cannot get air time to get a vote on it -- it is as good of the bill as can be had in these times where they are looking at these cuts. one of the things that

representative frank said earlier about the message that we need to increase the tax on the wealthier people brought to mind my great-grandfather who started the farm that i am on, it came to this country with nothing, and to him, he became successful, worked hard, and april 15 was the best day of the entire year because you can come to this country with nothing, work hard, and all you have to do is pay some taxes. that has followed through in our family. we feel fortunate to be here and we do not see taxes has a bad thing. the other thing that is very important in rural communities -- you said yellow madison county. some of the things and are important to us in my hometown,

which is less than 300 people -- the postal service has been looking at consolidating offices, and our local post office gets to be a meeting site for people. the people living in town pick up their mail. it is a place to congregate and visit. at another place that is important in rural communities that i hope can stay in the platform is the meals on wheels. many of the order -- older people in town to not have access to a grocery store in town. they do not have access to get out of town for their grocery shopping unless someone takes them for a ride, but a meals on wheels still comes to town, and that is still a vital thing for rural communities.

i guess the one thing that all of us democrats need to bear in mind, most of our problems have not been caused by us but could be solved by electing more of us. thank you for your time. i s 22 please continue to remember that in the rural communities, -- i asked you to please continue to remember that us in the rural communities are providing you with good, clean, safe food. >> tim velde, thank you for your testimony. we were happy to hear from a national farmers' union spokesperson yesterday and to have you here today. are there questions? thank you, and especially for my team the importance of smaller post offices. we think that is critically

important. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> our next presenter is melissa spencer, the president of the des moines education association and a science teacher at the north high-school here in the morning. melissa, we love teachers, and we appreciate the you have come to speak with us. >> thank you. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. i'm a high school science teacher. i'm here to speak about the increased resources and school reform we have experienced. i have taught there for the last 10 years, and the success is due to the school improvement grant is what i am going to talk about. two years ago, the north was designated as a persistently low-achieving school because we will the lowest-performing with standard test scores.

the district is similar to urban schools. 25% of our students qualify for english language corner services, and 85% for free or reduced lunch. we received a three-year, $3 million school improvement grant that began with the 2010 school year. in the fall of 2010, a new era began for us. while we were demoralized has been labeled as persistently low-achieving, we knew it was an opportunity to reinvigorate a school that we felt was neglected. we had an entirely new administration, but the staff was the same as it had been before. we put a renewed focus on expectations for students and staff, and started to focus more on student learning and how we can measure and analyze it. collaboration became the norm. teachers and administrators began to work together in every

way. we set aside specific time for teachers during the day to analyze construction in student learning. we reorganized our tester schedule so that teachers that caught the same subject head -- had 80 minutes together every other day. we started with common assessments that we developed together, then we looked at how we could develop a curriculum that would target areas we noticed children need more assistance with. we had four school improvement leaders that we were able to get through the grants and they were able to work with the data team. they have spent 90% of their days in classrooms doing teaching, -- coaching, classroom walk-throughs. another area the grants help was

in literacy. we have 90 minutes a week for professional development through a district-wide early dismissal and we focused on the writing- to-learn and mr. -- initiative, meaning they get activities to further conflicts they learn the concepts they learned every -- concepts they learn in every class. we also have a 45-minute literacy course for students we know need additional focus. all of these issues were led been coordinated by a literacy leader, another position we were able to enter the school improvements grant. you're also able to become a one-to-one laptops school. the goal was to increase engagement in technology and to level the playing field for students and our families. many students did not have reliable access to technology,

and now each student gets a mac book for them to use at school and at home. when they pick up their computer, and to see them use it every day, it was wonderful. we have gained 19 points in reading and science in standardized tests and nine percentage points in math. those standardized test score shuttling be part of what defines the school less successful, we have seen other indicators. higher daily attendance, less officer of referrals and suspensions. we have positive stories about us in the media instead of focusing on the violence we would have. our robotics and rotc team's place in the top-10 nationwide, and our staff is now proud to be part of the north high family. there are takeaways i would like

to see become foundations of education policy region targeted resources and an emphasis on collaboration. -- targeted resources and an emphasis on collaboration. we were stymied by a lack of focus and resources. we had a conversation about what kind of feedback and professional the element needed to grow as educators and leading the discussion. we are able to get the feedback for professional develop and we needed. -- development we needed. i hope you look into the school improvement grants because they found a wonderful way to target improvement in our nation's schools. thank you very much. >> melissa, thank you. you have illustrated what i think is important. if we want to improve in -- education, we need to listen to the people that know the most about it, our teachers. are there questions?

>> more of a comment. i enjoyed hearing about the initiatives you were speaking about, and it is an interesting side way because it is the opening of the olympics and a celebration of title mine from my perspective, has it that extra more women from the u.s. are going to the olympics to be engaged and hopefully bringing home a gold than there are guys, so i think these kinds of incentives and initiatives level the playing field, create opportunity, and are something we should celebrate and actively pursued in our platform and our democratic party. >> thank you, melissa. we appreciate you being here. thank you for sharing with us today. now, what i'm going to do, we have several friends from the labor community. i will ask them to come up together. they might have to bring up some

shares. david, bob ryan, jane, olean, tom robinson and -- lee ann, tom robinson, and adam robinson, we asked them to share the microphones and as they gather i want to tell you about them and what they want to talk about. first of all, david is a member of the united steelworkers local 7263. he has come to talk about his efforts to secure the use of steel from his mill and the rebuilding of interstate 35 west bridge. minneapolis, which collapsed in 2008. -- here in minneapolis, which collapsed in 2008. bob ryan will discuss the importance of fair trade for industrial workers. then, we will hear from james

samuelsson, who is a member of the iaew local 160 serves as political coordinator. james is here to discuss the second american bill of rights, which i think will be revealed in a few weeks. we are happy to have you here. he has a copy with him. then, we will hear from leann, a member of the afl-cio affiliate working america and she will discuss the full employment living wage component of the labor second bill of rights. then, tom robinson, another member of working america, who will explain the secure, healthy future component of the second

bill of rights, and discussed participation in the electoral process component. finally, we will hear from ed m. robinson, who is a member of the international -- adam robinson, was a member of the international union of teamsters local 120 and as an organizer with the labor federation, afl- cio, and he is also the chair of the minnesota workers faith networks, which partners people of faith with unions and the labor movement to call for social, racial and economic justice. so, all of you folks share common concerns and represent common values. we are happy to have you here and we look forward to hearing from you. we begin with david packard >> thank you, chairman. -- david. >> thank you, chairman, governor

strickland, and each of you for giving me the opportunity to speak. and i am appearing as a steelworker and a 10-year employee. i am the father of two children. i've served in the national guard and i'm a registered democrat since 2006, i have been politically active on behalf of my family. the union officer, and also as an afl-cio labor federation vice president. i am on the minnesota fair trade steering committee, and all of this explains why i am here today. excuse me. all this explains why i am here today to advocate inclusion in the convention platform, support for policies that

sustain family support and manufacturing jobs. in 2007, during an evening rush hour, the entire span of the minneapolis bridge collapsed and broke into sections, plunging dozens of cars and occupants into the river. 13 were killed and dozens were injured. the interstate 35 replace the bridge was open to the public on december 18, 2008. as a steelworker whose job depends on making steel for infrastructure projects, i'm joined brother and sisters to workers in been proud to secure the new bridge. my purpose in relating the disastrous bridge collapse and the part played by our steelworkers is emphasizing the importance of all the infrastructure, the strength of american steel, and the skills of all work force and the

economics of all of those things combined as good economic policy. the democratic convention platform must give urgent attention to american manufacturing industries and jobs as the bedrock of our economy and communities. we need to make a national policy commitment to the infrastructure investment of our bridges, highways, water systems and other public projects that create good jobs and strengthen domestic manufacturing. it is a policy growing in importance in the local economy. if the steel industry is strengthening the act, and it is adopted by law individually in each of parlor states. unfortunately, by american laws have been diluted to the free use of waivers, lack of transparency, and loopholes. that means some procurement policies support american

workers, while other states stand hard-earned tax dollars to beijing and said of reinvesting them in our economy -- instead of reinvesting them in our economy. i've studied this issue and. in the minnesota legislature. inve yet to be successful achieving legislation. a new bill introduced by democratic lawmakers earlier this year is awaiting action. other states are attempting to do the same on this policy. research in 2009 found when domestic content is maximized, and employment gains increased up to 33%. at a time when the u.s. manufacturing sector have lost more than 6 million jobs since 2000, and should be a common sense, first step seeking to rejuvenate the productive, wealth-producing sector of our economy.

doubt is spread by spreading myths that is inefficient, burdensome, and will create a trade war. with some understanding of the issues, these myths are easily discredited. critics argue the use of by american policy would cause trade wars with trading partners. most industrialized countries already utilized their own procurement. canada, the u.k. have their own laws. providing a preference for domestic content is fully within their rights of the united states. to remove uncertainty, by american language includes a clause that says the provision should be. out in a manner consistent with our trade and -- should be carried out in a manner consistent with our trade obligations. it is utilizing to the fullest extent possible.

thank you for hearing my comment on behalf of union steel workers and our local president. >> thank you, david, for your testimony. we appreciate you have come to share this with us. i like where you said. next, we'll hear from bob ryan. >> thank you, governor of the members of the committee. thank you for taking time to listen to us. my name is bob ryan and for 30 years i worked at iraq 10 paper mill in -- at the rock 10 . paper mill in -- paper mill in minneapolis. unfortunately, much of the paper collected that we need for our operations, and we consume a large volume of waste paper. we are a 100% recycled mile. we have four paper machines,

each the length of a football field that produced that paper. unfortunate, many communities are working for brokers that ticket paper and shipped it to china. scrap paper is the number one export out of the united states china is paying up to two and a half times market rate to get our paper, and that puts a huge burden on the paper industry. a manufacturing job at the paper mill has allowed me to live a coortable, middle-class lifestyle. i'm a third-generation worker. followed by my stepson, and hopefully next year by 17-year- old son will be able to enjoy a life style there, too. the republicans' vision is to cut taxes, services, and the budget, but the democrats' plans to be about building, competing and sustaining a better tomorrow. we must sustain current

commitments to manufacturing. my mil in place over 500 people. when i started in 80 -- 1981, there were 1300. because of different programs that, particularly walmart, we have lost most of our manufacturing base in this country that directly relates to my bill. if the auto industry in detroit had collapsed, my mail with a shutdown. all the parts that they need to put a car together typically arrive in a box. direct correlation and it is scary to us. every day, china uses currency manipulation and state-owned enterprises to steal our jobs and destroy our american manufacturing industries, a source of the middle-class, standard of living. asian why we lost 6 million jobs since 2000 when china joined the wto. this must stop. we must enforce our trade laws,

support and rebuild our manufacturing base before we become nothing more than a colony to top is china's needs. while all of the class becomes low income on skilled workforce. earlier this year i was active in responding to help keep good jobs and minnesota. a statewide campaign led by democratic representatives of minnesota and my union supported an amendment to the proposed construction of new -- of a new minnesota vikings stadium. it requires the state be built with 100% american steel, which must be mined from northern minnesota. if all goes well, they will win a super bowl. revitalizing american manufacturing should be an urgent national priority. 55,000 factories have closed which results in the 6 million job loss.

factories do not often reopen at their capacity that they were but we have hope. the u.s. now relies on foreign suppliers for everything from steel to cement to batteries and critical high-tech components, to every medical supplies such as antibiotics and penicillin. the risks include not having access to needed materials and products, filling material time, and poor quality. i urge the democratic platform committee to examine a report entitled preparing for the 21st century risks, revitalizing american manufacturing to protect, respond, and recover. i want to thank you for taking the time to listen to us today. please do everything you can to bring the manufacturing base back to the united states, instead of shipping everything is overseas. >> thank you so much. we appreciate the emphasis on manufacturing, certainly, and

everything else you have shared with us. next, we will hear from james samuelsson, who belongs to the great ibew union. you may want to move the microphone a bit closer. >> thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for letting us present to you today the america's second bill of rights. my name is james samisen, i am a 27 member of the international brotherhood of electrical workers, local union 160, here in minneapolis. we have been asked to come here today to speak about the second bill of rights of america. i would like to start by saying it is time to start to change the conversation in america. the dying middle-class, a bird and job market, call it that levels out of control, a living wage, and a secure retirement is

increasingly a thing of the past. i tore process is now open to the highest bidder. these are tough times for american workers, for the american worker, tougher than it has been many generations. as journalists recently wrote, on alternet, over the past 40 years, corporations and politicians have rolled back many of the gains made by working-class people over the previous century. we are at the highest level of income -- we have the highest level of income inequality in 90 years. both private and public sector unions are under a concentrated attack in federal and state governments intent to cut the deficit by slashing services to the poor. we are creating the gilded age, the period of the 19th and early 20th centuries, where corporations rule the nation.

by buying politicians, using violence against usance, reunions, and engaging in open corruption. if there was a time to change the national conversation in this country by focusing on putting the political agenda back on the needs of working americans, it is now. it is now time to change the conversation in america. at the national press club in washington, the afl-cio president richard trumka and the international brothers of electrical union president will pick up the workers and for america, once again, better known as the america's second bill of rights. a national campaign to refocus the national priorities on the needs of the struggling middle class, demanding an economy that works for all, not just the top

1%. we will be asking both democrats and republicans to sign on as supporters. this is our way of asking those in leadership positions, are you with us? what we are saying here today is not new. what is new is how we propose to make the power structure in america pay attention to the needs of men and women whose labor drives this country. a worker stands for america will feature a major rally on saturday, august 11, in philadelphia. i booked my ticket. bring to the working people, union and nonunion, in a run of two democrat and republican national conventions, to urge elected officials to stand with working families in support of a second bill of rights promoting individual freedom and economic opportunity for all. we have chosen philadelphia

because it is the birthplace of the constitution and bill of rights. there is no better place to reduce a second bill of rights inspired by president franklin roosevelt, 1944 economic bill of rights, which includes many of the same issues. fdr said, "true, individual freedom cannot exist without economic tyranny and independence." right now across this country, this holds true than ever. we want to make this part of the everyday discourse on the campaign trail throughout this election and in the media. as president hill made it clear also, this is not about party or partisanship. it is about the future of the american dream. our message is to both political parties to return to the basic values that created america's best days. our economy and our policies have become skewed almost beyond

recognition. the recovery has been geared most entirely to corporations and the wealthiest americans. the rest of us are being left behind and opportunity, the greatest promise of america, is being lost. this is not acceptable out in a nation that was built on generations of labor. a strong and prosperous america cannot be measured by the stock market or the gdp. must be judged by the availability of good jobs, economic opportunity, and hope. hope that our children, grandchildren will have the same shot at the american dream that we did. we have seen what happens when conserve the politicians back billionaires and right-wing ideologies take power. it is time to change the debate going on in this country and good working americans fired up for november and beyond.

it is often said in an election year this is the most election -- most important election of our lifetime, but this time is ever so true. we only have to look at the radical changes in wisconsin, ohio, florida, to see what mitt romney's presidency would be like. august 11 will be the first of toward saving middle-class america. but we have to start somewhere. we hope you can join us in the streets of philadelphia, on twitter, on facebook, and in the months to come, building this grass-roots army to put the country back on the road towards economic opportunity for all. thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. now i want to give my colleagues a chance to speak to the rest of this. >> thank you, james. leann, we are going to hear from

you next. you may want to move over so that we can hear you. leanne is with working america. she is here to discuss the following wage component of labor's second bill of rights. thank you for being here. >> thank you for being here and taking for hearing me. i have heard some fantastic thing sent to -- said today. i agree with a strongly. i want to talk about my family history. i am a fourth generation american. over 400 years ago, my great grandfather emigrated here from mexico. he worked on the railroad here in minnesota. he was a union member. for all the generations, my family has been raised with the importance of people standing together and the solidarity, and strength that americans have when we stand together and ask for our rights. on my maternal side, my great

grandparents also came here both at the same time from czechoslovakia and austria. i grew up hearing stories from my grandfather and parents of all the world war ii era. my maternal grandfather was sent out with the navy to restore pearl harbor. he was a painter. when he returned, there were no jobs. we all know the depression was much worse than what we are going through now. my parents, again, like everyone else in that era, the families had food rations. the government said, you can have this much server -- sugar,

that much food, good luck to you. kids participated in the war effort. they would run around and get tires and tournament so that the military could turn them into weapons. the country was involved in everything going on here. now. my parents, again, like everyone else in that era, the families had food rations. the government said,it was not . ribbon on the doorway of the people that lost someone, and everyone mourned. there were people working together. the nation stood together. at the same time, there were a lot of things -- we are hearing now -- communism, socialism, and a lot of fears. we all know that there were some bad things with that. that lost someone, and everyone mourned. there were people working together. the nation stood together. at the same time, there were a lot of things -- we are hearing now -- communism, socialism, and a lot of fears. we all know that there were some bad things with that. the mccarthy era and so on. looking back, from when my grandfather came back from world -- pearl harbor, he joined the

wpa, a government program put together to create jobs and infrastructure, to pay the people working. we built the infrastructure, yes, on taxpayer dollars. the people that could notit was. when people were killed in the war, you would see a find work with people that did these jobs. in that era, the majority of citizens felt this country was worth investing in. now, there was national debt at that time. i think the main thing there is that we need you and the democratic party find work with to help americans understand the investment, that it is not going to increase the debt. it will bring it back. the more money people make, more taxes they will personally pay. if we want to have people make -- bitter currently not paying in or paying more -- we need to pay them a wage that they can live on so that they can also contribute to the country. when we have companies, like you mentioned, the richest people in the world, sending goes away and keeping wages low, instead of the company paying them a living

wage that they can live off of, and then the employees take -- paying taxes, the employees are forced to decide whether they want to eat or get food stamps, which comes from the taxpayers' dime. if you could help to educate the american citizen, we need to increase wages so that more people can purchase of understa. thank you. >> thank you so much. we appreciate your work with working america. next we will hear from tom robinson. tom is another affiliate with working america. he will talk further about the second american bill of rights. >> thank you for inviting me to speak. the specific issue i will talk about is the voter id amendment. we had one on the ballot in minnesota, there are a number of ballots and other states. it got on the ballot as an

amendment to the constitution, partly because the republican legislature knew that the governor would veto it if they try to propose it as a law, so they decided to offer it as an amendment to the constitution. they did that with a number of issues. most of them were defeated from even getting on the ballot and only two -- the marriage amendment and this one -- got on the ballot. i have been doing some tone banking with working america on this issue, and it is a hard one. it will be a hard one to win but we need to try. many people that i talk to did not know it was on the ballots or they had no idea what that amendment was going to do. what i hear from a lot of people is, what is wrong with it? all we want is a picture i.d. so that people can vote. there is a lot wrong with it. what this really is -- this is really a cynical, dishonest

attempt by proponents. this is being presented as an amendment to protect the integrity of the a lot for process. actually, it is an attack on the electoral process. it is a deliberate effort to disenfranchise a lot of voters and groups of voters. the have the same data we do. our secretary of state has estimated that possibly 700,000 people will not take part -- eligible voters -- will not take part in this election, if this were to happen. the specific groups it would affect our the poor, people of color, elderly, disabled people, are the main groups that this would affect. i think both parties know the majority of these groups tend to vote democratic. so this is purely political. there is nothing about protecting the electoral process here. i find it very distasteful,

because the people know that, or they are really uninformed, which is hard for me to police. how important is this? -- believe. if this was in place six years ago, we would have different people in office. if that is not excited to get you out to talk about this, i do not know what will. you have to present your driver's license, why not for this? so it is hard to combat, but you can do it. we do it every night with our phone banking. sometimes we get people that do not know anything about it, we get them thinking about it. sometimes we manage to change people's minds because we give them the evidence of what is going to happen if this is put into effect. any help that the committee can be, what the platform can do to

help us here in minnesota and nationwide to prevent this amendment in minneta and also other states, would be greatly appreciated. thank you. >> a thank you. we appreciate you sharing with us. -- thank you. now we are going to hear from adam robinson. he is a member of the teamsters union, brotherhood of local 130. he will talk about the minnesota faith network. we look forward to hear from you. >> thank you, mr. chair, members of the committee, thank you for your time. i am the community organizer at the minneapolis regional federation of the afl-cio member teamsters local 120, chair of the minnesota workers interfaith network. i am proud and honored to get to talk to you for a few moments today.

i am here on behalf of those organizations. my brothers and sisters are with the at the front of the room. we ask that the democratic party keep its lawn and additional support for the freedom to form unions and bargain collectively. we know the democratic party policy values are the values of labor. we share those values. the 2008 dnc platform states that every american, what are their background or station of life, should have the chance to work at a good job with good wishes to provide for a family and to retire with dignity and security. that belief, we feel, identifies the core of the american dream. that dream can be reclaimed for millions of americans through the freedom of american workers to join together in unions and to bargain collectively. the 2008 dnc platform for their firms' workers rights by the necessity of organizing for a back of the class.

in 2008, you said democrats are committed to an economic policy that produces good jobs with good pay and benefits. that is why we support the right to organize. we know when you is are a lot to do their job, making sure workers get their fair share, the pulpit of poverty and create a strong middle-class. you continue by saying we will fight vigorously to oppose so- called rights to work costs and paycheck detection efforts were their proposed. mr. chair, members of the committee, we know in this country the freedoms of our doing collectively have been under attack for decades, but it has really been so openly directed as in recent years. we see at the face of these attacks in wisconsin and ohio, across the nation, americans have come together to organize some of the largest and protist label market -- labor mobilizations in recent memory. we have stood united to protect our right to bargain collectively. insidious attacks have come as

carbon copy bills and so-called right to work legislation. they have been pushed onto the floor of state legislatures throughout the nation. here in minnesota, we have seen this attack, in the form of a proposed amendment to our state constitution. these attacks on humans and collective bargaining not only affect union members, but we know and have seen the effects of this in the wider economy. the economic policy institute estimates much of the economy can be attributed to collective bargaining. as union membership has decreased, american wages have stagnated, and that has meant skyrocketing prices of health care, education, housing, and other necessities of life. we know we need to work together to protect the rights of workers to perform -- form unions and to collect -- and to bargain collectively. we know unions are carpal economic actors, but beyond that, unions are more than just

organization that fights for economic justice. they help to bind us together as a community. during one of the conversations i facilitated in the state of minnesota during the battle here in our state, a union member stood up to thank me for bringing the community together. he put it this way. sometimes when they go home at night, we feel like we are alone. noaa shares our bellies or think about making a better future for our kids. but when we are union members, we know we can work together to make things better. to me, it is important that we have the right to form unions and to bargain collectively. i would hope that the dnc include this in their platform as a move for this year. >> thank you. i want to thank each of you for joining together, as you have. you have spoken the truth. i am personally inspired by your

individual work that you do, the work that you do collectively. now, are the members of the committee that would have a question for any or all of the members? >> thank you so much. i just want to thank each and everyone of you for taking the time to come today and for reinforcing what we have been talking about are the boss couple of days, the shared values of the labor movement, families, and the democratic party. a lot of issues that you raised -- james to put it in the context of the second bill of rights -- but many of these issues go to a living wage, an employment, and we can do so with the enforcement of trade policies with president obama has put in place, the importance of buy american. as americans use our tax dollars to rebuild our economy, we know we have to buy american products to the full extent possible to

create good jobs at home. adam, the point you raise is good. the right to a voice at work, which is essential, not just to the economy, but to our democracy. the point that leann raised about strength and solidarity is important. tom, you raise the issue that has come up a couple of times in the past couple of days, the right to vote. the bedrock importance to not just the democratic party, but to the rest of the country, not chipping away at american's right to express themselves at the workplace. at the polling place. if we had time, we could go on and on on each of these issues, but time is limited. i wanted to personally thank each and one of you for coming and sharing your testimony. >> thank you. other questions from the committee? >> you are letting us off easy.

>> well, you were very convincing in your testimony. i hope that means we're all in agreement. thank you for being here and sharing with us. we are nearing the end of our witness list. we have one additional person. that person is can bradley. he is our final presenter of the day. ken is the chair for the solar works of minnesota, a coalition of more than 150 businesses, unions, and non-profits focused on getting minnesota to generate 10% of its energy from solar by the year 2013. a noble. ken, we look forward to hearing from you. >> it is an honor to be here. it is exciting to have an opportunity to present our coalition story as well as

present to the committee members, such thinking for the time. besides serving as the chair for the solo works coalition, i also serve as a director for the environmental groups in minnesota. we were looking at the amount of energy solar could provide our state. poll after poll indicated that solar energy was extremely popular with democrats, independents, and republican, which demonstrated to us the public was once again way out in front with many of our politicians. however, it was also the optimism of the town established by president obama's election that provided us with hope that finally leadership in washington, d.c. would be able to transform our energy system that has been handcuffed by the fossil fuel industry, to a future supported by clean energy technologies for 2 to generations. u.s. imported $400 billion in petroleum in 2008, which accounted for 59% of our trade deficit.

energy plays a significant role in our state and national trade debt, far outweigh the impact of china. minnesota and import $20 billion worth of fossil fuels. i want to think the obama administration for their leadership in increasing fuel efficiency standards to 54.5 mpg by 2025, support of electricity and the electric vehicle and battery technology. today, every major manufacturer , on a manufacturer, is producing hybrid, plug in hybrid, or electric vehicles. we need the same level of commitment that was provided to transforming our transportation center -- sector, applied to our renewable energy industry. over the past few years, americans have installed to begin the more sick man -- solar energy than others, the progress is dwarfed by what is occurring in the global market, in places like germany and china. germany has installed the

equivalent of 27 nuclear power plants worth of solar energy. in one day this year, solar produced half of germany's electricity. china just announced it is increasing its solar boulter 21 gigawatts by 2015, which demonstrates the growth occurring in the global marketplace. last year, the department of energy released the son shot initiative report which outlines how solar energy can provide 14% of u.s. electricity by 2030, 27% by 2015. the initiative is also an important collaborative to make solar competitive with other forms of energy by the end of the decade. an indicator of progress that we have achieved occurred in 2012 when we were able to secure the endorsement of the afl-cio for our campaign to pass legislation to install solar on our schools, hospitals, and other public buildings.

we also have support from the 3m corp., silicon energy, and other corporations. each ticket research to the campaign. these unlikely ally to cover the common good that zoeller can provide our state. as of august 2011, there were over 100,000 so our workers in the u.s.. more than double the estimated employment 2009. in minnesota, we have more than 50 companies providing various solar products and services, including companies located in bloomington, minn.. 10k was founded in 2008 and employs 158 employees. they sell their products across the world. this is one example of a business that did not exist 10 years ago but is a flourishing industry in our state create new jobs. while all the progress is significant, we need to do so much more if we expect to compete in the global marketplace and leave the plan

healthy for future generations. nasa announced that nearly all of green land's massive ice sheets suddenly started melting. a freak event that surprised many scientists. the ice melt area went from 40% of the ice sheet to 97% in four days, according to nasa. the science is clear, the planet is warming. it now requires honest, political leadership to solve the problem. i am not sure what the wake of side need to be to move forward to transform our energy system, but none of us should be proud of the pace we are making. i am asking the platform committee to support tax incentives for solar manufacturers and consumers, encourage you to consider passing aggressive national renewable energy standards to provide 25% of our win. in minnesota, which currently generates 13% of our power from wind. at least 10% of our energy from

solar by 2013. we cannot wait another four years pass without making significant progress. we should expect present and future generations to judge all of us as neglectful, the link with stewards of our nation if we do not take action. i appreciate you listening to me, but please do not retract. >> thank you for your testimony. i could say that we save the best for last, but i will not do that. we appreciate all those that have come to present today. to the committee members have questions? thank you so much. we appreciate you coming. well, my fellow committee members, we have had a good day of intent of testimony and conversation. i know that we all appreciate everyone that has come and presented to us.

conversations like those that we have heard today are examples of what our president has been fighting for and won the democratic party prides itself on being the party of change and inclusion. so at this point, we will break for the day so that we can come back in the morning for a very productive conversation around the actual drafting of the 2012 platform. so we will now move to a member's only luncheon in the university a room. thank you for your attendance and attention. we are dismissed. >> if you go straight out the door and make a right, at it will be on your left hand side. you are welcome to leave your materials here at your seat.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> good morning, everyone. it is time to resume our last meeting of the 2012 platform drafting committee. i would like for us all to please stand at this point or the pledge of allegiance.

please join me. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. thank you. let me welcome everyone to this, our last session. we certainly had a busy but very informative weekend together. the input we have received yesterday will contribute to the drafting of the 2012 democratic platform, which outlines our party's positions on a host of issues, and also highlights president obama's administration's accomplishments, and the president's agenda to keep this country moving forward. at this time, i would ask each of the committee members to briefly introduce themselves.

>> andrew grossman, platform director. >> barney frank. >> associate policy director on the president's reelection campaign. >> deputy director for the national security adviser campaign. >> tom wheeler. >> director of special projects at the new organizing institute. >> form of a special assistant to the president. >> director of education policy and practice at the national education association. >> deputy chief of staff at the american federation of labour. >> congresswoman barbara lee. ninth congressional district of california. >> michael nutter. mayor of philadelphia.

>> susan ness. senior fellow at the site center for transatlantic relations at john hopkins university, former fcc commissioner. >> senior staff attorney at the native american rights fund. >> director party affairs. >> karen kwan blue. i am helping to draft a platform. >> ted strickland, former governor of the great state of ohio. thank you, all. it has come to the time where we aren't going to draft platform. we are fortunate to have karen with us. karen drafted the 2008 platform. she was the principal author and is doing the same for the 2012 platform. karen is well versed in the

extensive range of policy issues that are central to our democratic party. the draft that she had prepared it is a starting point for us and i would like to proceed today by asking karen to give us an overview of the draft for our discussion. before karen does that, does anyone have any questions? thank you. karen, we would ask if you would at this time lead us through the platform. >> thank you, governor. it is nice for you to say that this is a draft i prepared, but this has really been assembled by input from committee members and will reflect the testimony that we heard over the last two days from the witnesses assembled for us. to get started, i thought what we might do is hear from kristin young from the campaign to tell us more about some of the themes that the president is emphasizing in the campaign, so

we have a context as to go through the document. >> thank you, karen. as many of you know, those of you that have been out with the president on stage, speaking with him on stage, much of this sound familiar. but i do think it will be helpful to go over the court vision of this election. we believe this election is about two fundamentally in different visions of how you grow the american economy. our opponents believe in massive tax cuts for the wealthy. they believe in an america where wall street and insurance companies get to write their own rules. they have an agenda that is very much filled with the same policies that got us into this mess in the first place. the democratic party and president obama reject that idea. and we cannot go back to the same failed policies of the past. we have a totally different idea about how we make america grow. from our perspective, we know we need to restore the security that the middle class has lost. we need to out-educate, and a

bit, and out bill the rest of the world, make things up the rest of the world buys to remain competitive. it is making sure that harbored pays and responsibility is reported. the president believes in an america where everyone pays their fair share and plays by the same set of rules. in short, they believe you can grow the economy from the top down, but we know that you broken the middle out. that is the theme we try to build into this election, and that you will see reflected in the draft of the platform that we put together. does anyone have any comments or questions? >> just to walk through the structure of the draft in front of you, there will be a practice at the beginning that will try to cast the document, the choice in this election, not only in terms of the economy, focusing on the economy, but also talking about reform, our values very much so, and our achievements in terms of foreign policy as well. then we will move on to write a

section that does what kristin talked about, rebuilding the middle-class security and the theory of the case that we think, to have sustainable economic growth, you need a strong middle-class. you need to build up ladders for those aspiring up to middle- class. also, we have tried the alternative. this country has tried to top- down policies, and they got us into the mess we are in now. we start with a section on putting americans back to work. talking about what are the immediate steps that have to be taken in the recovery act, what are some of the things that we are trying to do now -- the jobs bill and executive actions -- taken by the president while congress is not acting as much as he would like, so that we can move ahead with recovery.

does anyone want to make any comments on that section? then we get into a much larger -- along perception that make sure hard work is paid off and rewards responsibility. this talks about middle-class security. middle-class tax cuts as a success story of the last few years. obviously, health care, which is enormously important for concerns.ass health one-two hear about the economic repercussions of health care. rejuvenating the housing market. we talked about maybe stabilizing the housing market and market recovery. retirement and medicare, vision of a secure retirement, not privatizing medicare. an economy that out-educates the world and offers greater access to higher education.

we talked about perhaps changing the wording of that. we want to reflect that education is about helping everyone reached their full potential. it is not just about the economy, but it is an incredibly important ticket to the middle- class. does anyone have thoughts on that? >> congressman lee, did you want to talk about how we would want to talk about those not quite in the middle-class yet? >> yes, i think it is important to recognize, while the middle- class right now continues -- while we continue to reignite the american dream for the middle-class, support a middle- class moving upwards, we want to make sure we do not forget low income working people, the poor, and those aspiring to the middle class. we are a big tent party, an inclusive party, and we want to

make sure all americans are included in our platform, moving forward. >> i think that first section does a good job outlining the president's accomplishments and his aspirations for the next term. one thing i wanted to draw attention to that i think would be important, some of the testimony we heard yesterday. james spoke about building on president roosevelt's economic bill of rights for an american second bill of rights. if we can, see those things will interrupt the platform, the right to full employment, living wage, full participation in the electoral process. we heard people mr. did talk about how democrats believe in the right to vote and how every citizen has that right. that is crucial. the right to a voice at work. in particular, protecting

rights to collectively bargain. the right to quality education. that is in this section as well, an important section of the platform that talks about how crucial it is that every child in america have access to a quality public education. finally, a right to a secure and help the future, retirement, health care, and so on. an important section of these are areas where the president has done an amazing job in challenging the economic times and trying to expand these protections, but there is also work that needs to be done. in terms of the testimony we heard yesterday, there were so many interesting and important points made by people. >> thank you. the next section is about the need to reduce the deficit, cutting waste, asking all to pay their fair share. then there is another section about how we build an economy that generates a good jobs, called an economy built to last. there are a few sections to

that. one is all the above energy policy. meaning we do not take anything off the table. talk about some of the successes we have had in reducing our dependence on foreign oil. out-innovating and out-building the rest of the world. successes in terms of the auto industry, the supply chain for the lot of industry, it infrastructure -- infrastructure, and any innovation as well. then we will touch on the insourcing. how the president would like to create jobs here, reverse the process of outsourcing to other countries. standing up for workers and workers rights. opening up markets around the world for american products. that is about our trade agenda, export promotion and enforcement. and then helping small business and often nurse -- entrepreneurs. >> i think this is an example of

what we heard from kristin -- you mentioned the auto industry. there is no better illustration in specific, -- the opposition by mitt romney to saving the process of the automobile manufacturing in the u.s. versus the effective intervention by the president. we have hundreds of thousands of people employed today not just that the automobile companies, but it an enormously successful example. american automobiles are now at the front rank of the world. this is a perfect example of the general theme, which is how you do this. there has been no better way for americans to get into the middle-class and the auto industry, with the kinds of jobs they offered. we want to stress again, while general motors and chrysler

were direct beneficiaries, ford was also a beneficiary. much of the manufacturer has to go through the supply chain. there is just a perfect example of this, of mitt romney's top down approach. his point was, we should have found a few wealthy people that would of been willing to invest, except that none of them, including bain capital, were willing to do that. the automobile industry is really the best illustration of this campaign team. >> congressman, i want to join those remarks and say that ohio is a big manufacturing state, a big auto parts production state, as well as an assembly state. we believe one out of every eight jobs in the state of ohio is related, in some way, to the auto industry. the president deserves total support from the people who have

benefited from this great decision. it was a difficult decision. at the time, certainly, among republicans, an unpopular decision, but the president had the courage to do the right thing. today, in toledo, ohio, chrysler is investing multiple millions of dollars to create new jobs. in the cleveland area, ford is bringing back light truck production from mexico appeared in youngstown, ohio, they are working three shifts a day to produce the cruze. thousands of jobs have been saved, and it was only because of the president's leadership and support he received -- >> and over mitt romney's objection. >> and we should not forget it is not just ohio and michigan parts of the country the benefit. we heard testimony yesterday from a gentleman working here in

minnesota, it in a paperboard packaging company, who said if president obama had not taken these steps with regards to retract -- detroit, his operations in minnesota would have gone bankrupt, because of the way they supply boxes that carry the parts and other things into the auto business. >> i just want to reiterate, too, the insourcing section 3 reads another big accomplishment by the president and contracts between the president and mitt romney. mitt romney want to give more tax breaks to companies that outsource products to that is how he has made a lot of this money. president obama held a day-long form at the white house to celebrate and encourage those companies that are bringing good jobs back to the united states. he has been very supportive of the manufacturing sector, wants to create a tax code that will benefit those families at home.

that is an important contrast. >> very helpful comments. the next section it is the reform section. the first one is the economy. next is reform. again, it is through this lens of creating economic opportunity and making sure people play by the same rules. there are several sections to this. one on wall street reform. there is another one on 21st century government. there we are going to talk about some of the values about government that we heard yesterday and the day before. then we are going to talk about transparency and accountability and lobbying reform and campaign finance reform. does anyone have any comments? the next section we were calling reclaiming america's values. i think there was a suggestion to call it "greater together."

do people feel ok about that? perhaps if he wanted to run through the subsections you mentioned. >> absolutely. thank you, everybody. what is important here in this section on greater together is recognizing that our view of where the country needs to go is a very inclusive view. it is how everyone is to benefit from a growing economy. and how, what ultimately makes america great, is not just its economic power, its ability to project power around world, but its ability to lift everyone up. what we're trying to do is get at the importance of the american community, whether it is a rural areas, urban, families, communities of faith, it is about protecting rights and freedoms for americans so that we can not only enjoy this freedoms today' the past and ono our children. it is also about quality of life appeared making sure that people

have what they need to thrive and contribute. the story we tell here is parley about what has been achieved in the past few years. but it is also about what remains to be done. a good example of that is immigration. americans know the immigration system is badly broken. they understand this is a country of immigrants, and what we need to make progress is an immigration system that serves our country's interests and honors our traditions. what the president has tried to do is strike a balance with everything he has in his disposal. whether it is going after people with severe criminal records or streamlining legalization, at the end of the day, we still have to address comprehensive and aggression reform. that is part of building a stronger american community. >> any comments on this section? >> one of the important discussion we had was working through this section -- of course, it matters in all

sections -- is the republican war on women. this is more than choice -- although candidate ron they said that he would get rid of planned parenthood, which means getting rid of breast cancer screenings for numerous women brought the country. in addition to that, the lilly ledbetter bill, which allows women to get the equal pay for the same kind of work, support for families, health care, medical leave, violence against women, head start, child care services, basic economic security that is just the security it -- cornerstone of families, making women full participants in american society. i was just particularly struck, as we listen to a number of the testimonies that came from women from all walks of life, about some of the importance of these basic values that our party stands up for, that sad day, the

republican party seems to oppose. >> also in the section, we reemphasize our work and the president's burke in terms of ensuring the economic security of the middle-class. in addition to that, removing the barriers and obstacles for those aspiring to the middle class. i thing that has been an important value of the president has demonstrated throughout his tenure, and will continue to demonstrate in his neck to administration. >> i was also delighted to see, based on the testimony that transpired, that we are highlighting the enormous contribution of our veterans and returning veterans, making sure that they reintegrate into our society with all the tools they need to succeed. it is an extremely important role the president and first lady have played. i am delighted to see it reflected here. >> one of the things that i

think is very significant is the fact that i believe, for the first time, our party is taking a stand on marriage equality. that makes this a very historic platform, one that we can all be proud of. >> i am particularly excited that in the document we talk about cities and metro regions, that we understand and acknowledge the roles that cities and metro region type 29% of the country's gdp generated by cities and mature economies. 80%-plus of americans lived in the city or metro area. these are innovate -- incubators of innovation. we're looking towards having a plan to address many of the agenda items that affect cities in metro areas across america. >> this platform also includes

language that restates, stresses, the president's support for those critical safety net programs that address homelessness, poverty, ensuring kids are not hungry when they come to school, that do not think that binds all the time, but are critical for struggling families, both in urban and rural areas and everywhere else across the country. it is agreed that this is reflected in the platform. i think that moves us light years ahead in that debate. >> does anybody have other comments on this domestic portion? >> just one other. i remember it was in this section we stood fast again for voting rights for all of our citizens. the attacks on the most vital and important cornerstone of our democracy, people's ability not to challenge when they go as

americans to the poll, with arbitrary and almost harassing attempts to infringe upon that, i think, is an important statement to be made in our platform and for our nation. >> we talk about the safety net. one of the things we stress is, when we talk about things about the safety net, it becomes more important in bad economic times. that is a dual purpose. it also keeps the economy from going into negative economy. since the new deal we have understood these things are helpful. an example of that is the republican assault on our state and local governments which we have seen which have resulted in government's having to reduce, by 700,000 -- they have laid off people. we have had a pretty good increase in the private sector. the reason the job numbers have lagged, despite the efforts of

the president and many of us in congress, to help the cities and states -- remember, cities take the biggest hit from this turned down because they are financed by property tax. their revenue sources have been cut. as we have tried to come to their aid, we have been blocked by the republicans in congress since they took over. the result is 700,000 jobs lost. we gained 4.4 million in the private sector but we lost about 50% of that in the public sector. a big difference between the two parties. of course, people have lost services, education, police and fire services. it is a different perspective of how we think the economy should work. >> with regard to one of governor romney's statements as it relates to poverty -- let me just remind you. governor romney said that he was not concerned about the very poor. this president has placed the

fight against poverty it as a national party. we saw the recovery act and what that supported, in terms of keeping more people from falling into poverty. we have also seen as president support the earned income child tax credit. many of the child tax credits and all the policies that will move forward in making sure that we -- people aspiring to the middle-class can achieve that by removing these obstacles. >> governor romney has a definition for the very poor. the people that live last on what he would be willing to put into a single bed. >> you mentioned the assault on cities. i am very proud that, by way of the comments of the president made, talking about violence. a critical issue that we must address and be mature enough to

have a serious national conversation about violence, the daily toll it takes in cities, errors across the country. >> this is my last quote from governor romney appeared he derided the president. he said the president believes we need more teachers, police officers, and firefighters. that is a direct quotation from governor romney. of >> one thing i might ask tom to talk about is innovation and entrepreneurship. >> one of the things we called out in this document is how america leads the world in innovation and entrepreneurship. the great contributions that individual entrepreneurs have made to growing the economy and creating american jobs.

theit's like the frog on fence post. so much of what able we are able to do as innovators and entrepreneurs we are able to do because of what we collectively have done as a society. if you look at the mobile phone in your pocket, the microchips that power it are an outgrowth of the original government research. the voice recognition that is so much fun on the iphone is a result of government voice recognition research. the new always canceling had set is a result of government research. all of which were seized upon by creative and innovative entrepreneurs to build good and great businesses. but all of which began with a collective of all of us working

to do together the kind of building of the basis on which others can then build further. it is great to see that represented in this platform. >> i would like to mention that i am very appreciative of the work the president has done attempting to reauthorize the violence against women act. we discussed all lot of the assault against women and this is an example of how republicans are blocking the reauthorization of an act that has been found essential in preventing a buyout -- preventing violence against women and children. i am glad to see it reflected in the campaign document as well. >> thank you. we will be open to any thoughts

you have after this, but why don't we turn to the national security section? >> i think we are all in agreement that we have a president who has advanced foreign policy. is the first time or eight democratic credit -- democratic candidate for president has credibility in terms of keeping america safe and advancing our interests overseas. we have a long record of proud accomplishments we can run on that the platform will highlight. let me say a few words about how the platform is currently organized. it starts with a number of sections that deal with critical legacy issues, some fundamental security challenges we inherited from the previous administration. principal among them is that when president obama took office, there were 180,000 men

and women in uniform serving in harm's way between afghanistan and iraq. there are now fewer than half that number because of the responsible drawdown of our forces and the transition of our activities in iraq and afghanistan. this is a campaign who campaigned on responsibly ending the war in iraq and campaigned on transitioning out of afghanistan while maintaining our interest in combating al qaeda and that is what he is doing. we have a number of sections to talk about and we also talked about the campaign against al qaeda at its affiliates around the world. because of the brave work of our intelligence and military officials and the courageous decision making of the president, osama bin laden has been brought to justice. it is no longer just a robot --

yes no longer just osama bin laden, but if you look at the counter-terrorism successes, it is the most progress we have made against al qaeda senior leadership since 9/11. i think this is a president who believes we can fight smarter and fight a more targeted campaign and it has proven more successful. the first section is focus on those legacy issues. the president feels strongly that as the tide of war recedes in iraq and afghanistan, it frees up resources and a blitz us focus on issues at home and devote more resources to the challenges that have gotten less attention in recent years. one of the top priorities is our effort to prevent the spread and use of nuclear weapons, a threat that has been with us since the end of the second world war but

is among the most pressing concerns in the 21st century. we will talk about the achievement in that new start program which led to deep cuts, making both countries say for as a result, but to prevent nuclear proliferation, prominently in places like iran where the president has marshalled and precedent -- unprecedented agreement to make sure the iranians are living up to their obligation not to develop nuclear weapons and putting pressure on did north koreans. we will also talk about an area that has received some controversy. because of the policy in russia, we have been able to secure agreement on fundamental arms control and putting pressure on iran and north korea, but the president understands there are times in which we're going to

disagree with the russians, as we see with russian behavior in syria and we will continue to call them out and pushed the russians to change their behavior. while we are rebalancing issues, we have to have off emerging dangers, which is why the platform focuses on areas of cyber security and combating clenched -- combating climate change. it's not just the old issues that will anchor. it is new issues we have to address. while we are focusing on not new issues, we have to make sure we are taking care of our alliances around the world. this has been an enormous point of pride for this administration. when the administration came into the office, some of our closest alliances around the world were in trouble. the obama administration has gone the extra mile to solidify

relationships with our partners. our relations with the united kingdom have never been stronger. there are a little weaker because of romney's visit, but our traditional alliances have been strengthened, recognizing those are a cornerstone for global security. but the president recognizes there are new centers of influence emerging and that's why the president has put so much emphasis on asia, not just china, but a australia and countries have fought become into focus. a renewed energy the administration has put into vinyl organizations like the united nations which can help us address some of the world's most pressing problems. finally, three key pillars seen

as essential to sustaining american leadership of around the world in the 21st century. that is the economy and making sure we retain the strongest military in the world even as we make reductions in our budget deficit. and then it is imperative to stand that for those seeking equal rights and we will have sections in the platform that focus on that. with that, i would welcome your comments and thoughts. thank you. >> i am very glad one of the main accomplishments and the foreign-policy area has been the emphasis on women being an integral part of our foreign policy, including the selection of the first ambassador for global women's issues and i am pleased to hear it will be imbued throughout the discussion

of foreign policy. >> i particularly appreciate the way in which we have phrased it -- we have on the republican side, incredibly this measure we can and the war in iraq, phasedown the war in afghanistan and and in a couple of years but still have to spend every dollar we were spending on those two wars on something else. there's a notion he never cut back and if you have an emergency it makes you spend more in the military and even when the cause is gone, you keep spending it. if we have a sensible discussion has as as you deflate both wars, you can save some money. some of that will go to make sure the military is an adequate elsewhere. nobody doubts we will still be the strongest nation in the world. but it frees up funding for domestic needs and deficit reduction. i that there is a great

contrast to year. as i understand, mr. romney is not willing to say we should be withdrawing from afghanistan and by the way, they have been talking have greatly increasing military adventures elsewhere without raising taxes. you're going to keep wartime spending at the levels even on the wartime is over and you're going into new wars and not going to pay taxes, everything we do to protect the quality of our allies at home will be devastated. >> in some ways, it is worse than you suggest. this administration inherited a policy that charged two wars of our credit card, a trillion dollars of spending with no way to pay for. >> we paid for with five tax cuts. >> we double paid for it. but what is interesting about governor romney's position it's not he wants to maintain spending, he would put a floor

on which would guarantee $2 billion of additional expenditures with which -- which the pentagon doesn't even say we need with no recognition to pay for it and a complete unwillingness to have a fair and balanced approach to revenue that would ask millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share. i don't know how someone campaigning as a conservative republican, conservative and fiscally responsible could campaign on that. >> here is how -- by making clear social security and medicare take a big hit. and everything we do, whether it is to clean the water or build the roads or provide adequate public safety, everything else has to be devastated. that is clearly what they mean. the logic is inescapable. >> this last exchange highlights the connections between the domestic and international. one other place this is done is in the discussion of emerging

threats. it's one example of the past record of the administration and the forward thinking we are trying to do here addresses issues that are exactly at the intersection of domestic and international. how can we take care of it if we don't protect the food supply or deal with cyber security threats if we do not strengthen our ability to effectively carry out the functions the government needs to carry out. that is a good example where we are trying to figure out how to deal with those threats. >> there is one thing i've i hope you would take a few minutes to discuss and that is president obama's strong commitment to the safety and security of the nation of israel. would you talk about that? >> part of enhancing our traditional alliances and strike in our partnerships include working with our closest friends and obviously israel is right there at the top. president obama has made clear

his unshakable commitment to israeli security and it's not just words -- what is interesting about president obama is that he means when he says and does what he says. when he traveled to israel in 2008, he was holding a fund raiser. he traveled to a town that had been rocketed by militants from cause of and said if he became president he would take concrete action and that is what he has done. in the last three years, there has been $10 billion and security systems, the highest in history. hundreds of millions to fund the iron dome and that an anti- rocket system which has protected civilians from rocket fire. the largest military exercises in the history of our two nations, standing up for israel at the un and others want to throw them under the bus and taking unprecedented measures

to press iran into abandoning their nuclear ambitions. it is unquestionable president obama has done more than anyone in recent history. if you don't have to take my word for. just listen to benjamin netanyahu and others that have mentioned the steps this administration has taken. the platform will recognize those accomplishments and renew our commitment moving forward to protect israeli security. >> the un has not been a very fair place for israel and the past few decades. the only recent victory israel has been able to get was when the obama administration use extraordinary diplomacy to thwart the effort to have a un declaration of a palestinian state head. if you go back to six months before that vote, everybody was predicting they would get the

vote and they would have to veto it and they went in the general assembly. it is because of that approach the president has taken to israel that they could not get enough votes and we did not have to veto it. it failed to get the necessary votes and they could not do it in the general assembly. that's the only time i could think of where israel has had a success in the un against efforts to delegitimize. >> last september, was working in the pentagon and my office was throwing the baby shower for me because of about to have a kid. the phone started ringing off the hook from the white house because there was a mob in cairo assaulting the israeli embassy in cairo. a number of people were within minutes of being killed by the mob. the administration had run every alarm to get everyone on the

phone with the egyptian military to make sure the israeli embassy in cairo remains safe and as a result of the president's leadership on that which prime minister netanyahu quickly acknowledge, the israeli diplomats were saved. whether it is at the u.n. or supporting efforts to circumvent the peace process back initiations or in these moments of a direct and imminent threat, this administration -- eli >> i apologize. on thursday afternoon, had a visit in my office from the deputy chief for mission from israel to the united states and he made the point of thanking us specifically for that point. they very well remember the intervention saved israeli diplomats from the egyptian mob. >> i want to comment on what other section of this part of the document and that is the

strong wind which seeking to supporting our vets when they come home and are no long-term debt soar in need of health care or other basic human kindness is after the service they have given to our country and in the past, we have not always been as righteous about doing that. this document seeks strongly to make sure there is adequate health care, good education, proper employment opportunities and incentives for businesses to hire veterans, considering the special needs of veterans and i live in one of those states with veterans who live in rural areas. the incredible work the first lady and dr. joe biden have done in pointing out and being welcoming to our vets when they

return. that is an important part of our security and leadership and i just wanted to point that out as well. >> a portion of the platform connected to the domestic planks as it relates to the president's leadership on hiv and aids. we recently held the 19th annual aids conference, 22 years after the last one. in large part, is due to president obama lifting of the travel ban in addition to building on the progress of the previous administration in terms of support for the initiative are -- are global hiv and ash to if as well as unthinkingly president and the platform will reflect this on his hiv aids a national strategy. in addition, the president has

also recognize the importance of responding along with the american people to the catastrophe in haiti as relates to the earthquake and provided an unprecedented response in terms of resources and in terms of the infrastructure that would be best to quickly respond to the crisis at long-term reconstruction and rebuilding of haiti as well as an acknowledgement with the caribbean region and africa being important as relates to trade and foreign investment and united states relationships with those regions of the world. we want to commend the president and build upon his last four years in those areas. >> i would like to state my delight in seeing that climate change was addressed as an emerging threat. the president has taken great

leadership and refocused the dialogue on science-based evidence of climate change. it is one that is in my home state very directly impacted in the way of life, jobs and such. i think we have a good language in the platform as an emerging threat as well. >> thank you. thank you for your ideas and discussions. we have now completed this committee's work on the 2012 democratic party platform and i know we are all excited by the progress we have made in the last two days together. i have no doubts our party's platform will clearly articulate the accomplishment of our president and his administration highlight the values which underlie the democratic party. i would like to thank each of you for your participation. are an incredible collection of

individuals representing the diversity that is america and the national democratic party. i have been humbled to get to know you and work with you and we have all been humbled as we listen to those who came before us to tell their stories and share how their own personal experience and empty their hearts before us. they gave us a lot to think about. now, what is next? on august 10 and 11th, the full platform committee will meet to review the draft that will be reflective of the conversations we have had over the weekend. the full committee will be chaired by mayor cory booker and claudia kennedy will adopt the platform at that meeting that will then be presented for

consideration when we gather in charlotte at the end of this month. before we leave, i would like to thank the staff of the dnc and our court reporter. what wonderful, nice people there are. they nurture us and look after us and help us in so many ways. i want to say to them that your hard work has made this meeting a success and while you're here at this nice hotel, we ought to say thank you to those who have served us and look after our needs and made our stay here such a pleasant one. finally, to all of our fellow democrats, we are less than 100 days from reelecting president barack obama, to keep him in the white house so that he can continue to move our country forward.

i look forward to seeinyou in charlotte and i look forward to seeing you on the campan trail and i hope somebody will come to ohio. less than, this meeting is adjourned. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> the democrats convention platform meets to vote on the platform to be adopted for the upcoming convention. we will show portions tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. taking a look at what is ahead in the presidential race, the national nominating conventions are coming up with the republicans' gathering in tampa. democrats are meeting a week later in charlotte, north carolina. october sees three presidential debates and one vice- presidential debate, all leading up to election day on november 7. you can watch past speeches and

to our meetings, read position papers and see the latest campaign advertisements at c- span.org/campaign2012. >> tonight, we will take you inside the presidential campaign process. first, an adviser for the john mccain campaign as he talks about his experience and compares it to this year's campaign. >> if i am advising mitt, he's not going to win because of the excitement, i would look for somebody who did bring excitement. sarah palin brought excitement to john mccain. chris christie would bring excitement to it romney. that's where i would lean. >> he discusses his time with did dean and obama campaign in using the social media. >> the obama campaign generated

over 200 million pieces of information on the electorate just by going door-to-door. that is all now housed in the database and becomes a foundation with which the campaign can't go back and coordinate its peeled and online out -- programs. >> two different perspectives on campaigns past and present starting tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span to. -- c-span2 p >> coming up, a discussion on women's rights around the world. you'll hear from one of the nobel peace prize winners and a widow of diplomat richard holbrooke and adviser to former president bush. this is about one hour and 15 minutes.

[applause] >> good afternoon, we're glad to be here to talk about economics, finance, regulation, wall street and various other things financial over the next hour-to-hour and 15 minutes. so, hope you stay with us and enjoy it. let me start by introducing the panel. to my near left is ken miller, the president and ceo of ken miller capital who is one of the more prolific writers and best thinkers on wall street. he has also been, served successfully as vice chairman of merrill lynch capital markets and credit credit. credit suisse first boston. he served on a number of boys, viacom, kinder care learning and lowe's corporation. it is a long list. he is an active member of the council of foreign

relations. board member on the committee of u.s. china relations. we'll ask him about china today which is one of his areas of expertise. in the middle here is cyrus amir-mokri, assistant secretary of financial institutions. a post once held by sheila bair in a previous administration. cyrus is most recently served as a senior counsel to the chairman of the commodities futures trading commission where he was also the agency's deputy representative to the financial stability oversight council. he has also been a partner at the law firm, focusing on a complex securities and antitrust litigation. to my far left is one of the legends of wall street, joe parella, chairman and ceo of parella, weinberg and partners. he has also been a, several

senior positions at morgan stanley including vice chairman, chairman of institutional securities and institute investment banking. and of course he was the founder of, cofounder of waser stein pa rella and before that with his late parter, bruce situationerstein, ran first banking desk. memmably in my own experience my very first business story in 1982 was about boone pickens's first takeover attempt of citi service and bruce and joe were on the other side of that deal working for citi service. it was a memorable way to be introduced to the world of business i must say. cyrus, let's start with you. just because this is such a, this is the second anniversary, this weekend of the passage of dodd-frank, the financial regulation bill. and we'll talk a little bit

about you know, how wall street feels about these regulations. whether they make sense or not. whether there's overreach but as a member of the administration that helped push them and pass them and is now in the very, very complicated process of trying to get them up and running just give us a sense, please, of where we stand with dodd-frank at this moment in time. >> sure, joe. i, the bottom line in my view is that very, well first of all, dodd-frank includes some essential reforms for the financial system that were put in place. you all remember where we were in the fall of 2008 with the financial system at the ink about. we needed to strengthen the financial institutions. we needed to reform our regulatory structure.

we needed to put in place reforms to improve some of the shad dough banking system and how it works. bring the derivatives market into the light of day. it's, overall, you know, those, the basic contours of what the financial system should look like have been put in place through the legislature. the regulators have been working extremely hard over the past couple of years to further define those contours. they have, you know, there has been a lot of, articles, especially in the past week for instance, and this has been a criticism that a number of people have mentioned over the past couple of years as to why isn't this going more

quickly? i think there was a judgment made very early on that the results of the rule writing should be the to calibrate properly the details of the reform effort, to get things right. emphasize quality over speed and that's what's been going on. and when you look at where we are two years from the crisis, i think basically in the area of clarity with respect to where the rules are headed there has been significant progress. 90 plus percent of the rules have been proposed. many of them finalized. many important ones have been finalized. many other important ones are soon to be finalized. and also i think our financial institutions are much better off than where they were a couple of years ago. >> well to take one example. if too big to fail

institution was on the brink of failure, would dodd-frank, would the federal government be able to close it down? >> i think what you have, joe, in the legislation and in the rules at the fdic and the fed have put together are the basic outlines of what would happen in the instance of major financial institution whose failure would have financial stability implications. what that basic outline of action is going to be. so if you put title two together with some of the other authorities for instance at the federal reserve and the fdic have you have the basic template for how it's going to happen. >> joe, what is your take on the amount of regulation about, basically what the government has done in a

regulatory framework since the financial crisis? >> well, there's a certain fundamental things that happened to, to the world of finance and it sort of raises a question in my mind, and again i'm speaking personally, not for my firm, and that is whether or not the creativity and ingenuity and in some cases diabolical nature of certain kinds of individuals that exist in all walks of life can be kept up with by regulators? so, you know, impolice it in the word regulation is that somehow there's real regulation going on and that one's able to protect the society from the excesses of

the events that happen on a regular basis and have happened throughout history on a regular basis in our industry. so if you look at the financial system it basically evolved from a very low-tech paper-based system to, and, i might add, privately-owned so that the people who worked in the industry had their houses, if you will, on the table every day up for capture if they misbased and lost money. and that system evolved to one that was very technology-driven rather than paper-driven and one which was publicly held so that the institutions had permanent capital which got pushed to the limits because

of the pressure on public companies to perform. and then that all culminated, and this is a very short history, with the demise of the barriers between the things that were once security companies and deposit-taking, federally guaranteed institutions. and so, and these aren't my thoughts because, you know, i having started a company six years ago that now has 425 people in it, i don't, i have never read dodd-frank, okay? so you know, it's, how many pages? okay. the original glass-steagall act was around 35 pages. so i haven't read it. and i don't spend a whole lot of time obsessing about it, because in a sense i'm in what you call the shadow banking industry and in a positive way. just about every business that commercial banks are in today are being set upon by

new entrants that are picking apart the different businesses they're in, with the exception of two things. market-making and lending. those are, there is nobody trying to get into the lending business in a big way. so, so i'm like, i come from the school that says, these people are so smart and so crafty and so creative, and many times in a very positive way, that it is very hard for people that are sitting in a building reading e-mails and looking at charts and stuff to know what's really going on and to prevent the next debacle and even in the best-run-instutions like jpmorgan. we all heard for months and months that they were the best-run. you know, they woke up one day and some guy called a whale in london cost them $6 billion. okay?

so in other words, i'm not against regulation. all i'm saying is, in the words of henry kaufman, who was the chief economist for many years at solomon brothers and who, a lot of people have a high regard for, who is an economist. he says, dodd-frank enshrined too big to fail. >> cyrus, we'll give you a chance to respond to that in a minute but ken, i do believe, had some thoughts also about, you know, basically what needs to be done to rein in wall street and to regulatory and otherwise, right? >> well i do have some thoughts about it, joe. i think the problem with regulation is that it, as joe said, it enshrines a certain protocol and then people make it their job to get around that. so remember the body count in vietnam. people shoot for a target.

then there are unintended consequences like the whistle-blower part of dodd-frank which tends to chill internal discussions. and then there is the sheer complexity of it. but my basic issue with dodd-frank, and on balance i agree that it is a step forward, a good step forward but my basic problem is, again taking up on joe, it's not going to solve the cycle problem. there will be additional panics because it's in the nature of banking to run businesses on leverage. which means they borrow 10 to $30 for every dollar of equity they can rely on and when people change their mind about the stability of the institution there's a run on the bank. and as merwin king, the bank of england guy said, when there's a run on the bank the only rational thing to

do is to participate. so i have some ideas about what to do about wall street but it gets down to my perception that we've allowed wall street to get away with a worshipping at the altar of short-term greed. i can talk about that later. >> you will get a chance to. cyrus, why don't you respond. >> let me just make a --, joe made a number of very important and interesting comments. there are a lot of them. let me unpack a couple. as to whether there should be regulation or no regulation, i think, i don't think that is really the debate. i think the, there does need to be regulation. i seem to recall that david hume once made this point, i can't vouch for it but he once said rules of road are important for people to understand basically, what's allowable and what's not.

and in fact that could be, that is in fact liberty enhancing. once you know the rules of the road you can act more freely and you aren't dealing with chaos. so that's just at least in my mind, it's not a question of regulation versus not regulation. so, if you're going to have to regulation then you have to think about, you know, what are the problems that you're trying to solve? and one of the major problems coming out of the crisis it seemed to me was, trying to do your best to see to it that the kinds of activities that were just described don't cause what economists call negative externalitis. that is, you know, firms should be free to fail. you can't really ultimately micromanage how a firm takes risks or, you know, tell them that this is a better judgment than, than, unless it has negative externalities,

in that case you're trying to put together a system that contains the negative effects that the firm's behavior is going to have on others and that was essentially what a lot of dodd-frank tries to do. and so to take the example of too big to fail, and going back to the question that you posed, joe, which is, does the legislation provide a framework where you can deal with the situation like that? in fact it does. so, the entire lodgic of title two, the resolution, provisions is as follows. that, if there is a firm whose insolvency is going to have consequences for the financial stability of the united states, a determination is made by the fdic, the federal reserve, secretary of the treasury, and the president, and so it is, it's a very tlibttive --

deliberative, accountable process and it has an entire mechanism allowing for a variety of different approaches to the firm, to, using both, you know loo liquidity measures and other measures to try to contain the problem firm so it didn't have the collateral effects that we saw, you know, in the example of lehman brothers and, you know, even going back to ltcm. that's the way the legislation tries to deal with this issue and so i would respectfully disagree with joe and his, and his assertion that dodd-frank doesn't address the too big to fail problem. >> well, let me, let me phrase it this way. i kind of want to start with ken this time. you know, one of the things,

one of the things about glass-steagall is that it changed the world. it said we'll split these companies up. if you're this kind of company you're an investment bank and you can fail. if you're this kind of company you're a commercial bank and you will be protected but you can't do anything dangerous. it changed the incentive structure of, and actually worked pretty well for 50 years or so. dodd-frank it seems to me accepts the world as it is, and tries to fiddle, fiddle on the margins as, i'm underselling it but it doesn't fundamentally change the nature how wall street operates, how it makes money and it seems to me the london whale, the jpmorgan example, is a really good example how, you know, nothing at its core has really changed. and so, ken, i want to ask you, do you think, the

incentive structure on wall street needs to change and if so, how would you do it. and i want to ask joe the same thing? >> well, i do think the incentive structure needs to change. you know in dodd-frank there is a clawback provision for listed companies. but clawbacks means once you've earned a big bonus, someone can come and get it. that's not quite enough to discourage risky behavior because if i don't have $5 million and i can put it in my pocket and hope for the best, you know, that doesn't solve the problem. i think that the real problem is short-termism. a huge emphasis and excessive emphasis on speed. i think the culture of wall street needs to change. and i disagree, i don't think dodd-frank has solved the problem of too big to fail. i think that when you talk to practitioners in the area they say, well, you know if

this institution goes down, it has a living will. we will do this, we will do that. the problem is it is never one institution at a time. so you have to address the recompense issue. and you can do that one much two ways. you can put a he will seeing on it. you can say it is just a, you know, for example, 100% of base or you can tax it so that people can't earn outrageous amounts of money in short pareds of time. >> all right. joe, what do you think about the incentive structure? and you began your remarks about the extent to which, when you started in the business they were mostly private partnerships and your own money was at risk and now it is the shareholders money. >> right. it is like allowing the croupiers to play with the house's money in las vegas. if they win they take the money home. if they lose, the house blaz loses the money. that is basically what happens in a lot of cases.

and. i spent a lot of time at morgan stanley working with vikram pandit who is now ceo of citi and vikram had a mantra he would always keep repeating because he was a very risk-averse guy. and he came into take over citi after the debacle. he said, joe, don't ever forget it is the traders against the house. that was his warning all the time. so on the other hand, you know, it is kind of hard to, to regulate in the worst sense greed and in the positive sense people's ambition and entrepeneural spirit and their desire to do better every day than they did yesterday. so you have to sort of ask yourself, what's the price of failure? and the airline industry, it's pretty simple. the chief safety officer is the pilot. that's why you see them

walking around airplanes a lot of time before they get in and actually fly you to where you want to go. and they have got a pretty good safety record. and that is a regulated industry. so you sort of, you know, i would be focused on what's the price of failure for an institution? and there's a, you know, a danger there of overreacting, you know. like, jpmorgan has a loss, so people get into this barclays mode and then they want to oh, let's take out the ceo. that is like screaming for democracy in the middle east. you know, be careful what you wish for because it not necessarily going to be better people coming along, if you do that. having said that i think you have to focus on what's the price of failure and focus on, a, the shareholders getting wiped out which i think is, the model you all are following with the fdic.

shareholders get wiped out. the subordinated debt holders get wiped out. the senior debt holders get wiped out and the company is forced to sell assets all with a view toward protecting the taxpayers from having to come in and ultimately bail the institution out. but i think the to sit around and say, well, you know, okay, you can make $500,000 a year but you can't, or you can make $5 million a year, a-rod makes 25 million a year, right, alex rodriguez, but you, lloyd blankfein, can't. i just think that's a, you know, that is not the road we should go down. i think there should be a price for failure. it ought to be high and a ought to be enforced. >> ken, i believe you have an opposite view? >> well, joe, i think the financial sector is different from every other sector.

i think a widget manufacturer is constrained by space and time. you can have a factory and you can run three shifts but there's only so many tractors or batteries or things you can make. but what i think about the financial sector is that it's a place where the rubber never meets the road. in fact there is no rubber and there is no road. the fact is that you can move almost unlimited amounts of money in extremely short periods of time. so i think we need to treat the financial sector differently from other sectors of the economy. >> and how would you treat it? >> i have said, i think that we would make an attempt to change the culture and tell people you can work on wall street at a regulated institution but you're going to earn your money over time

and, it's not going to be a bonanza based on risking the balance sheet in a given year. one of the problems with regulation generally is that, it has to be ubiquitous or, or you create kind of black markets and other places and i'm not quite sure how i would deal with that but in general i think if we're going to change the culture, i mean, if we're going to change short-term greed into at least long-term greed or maybe even just make it a place where you realize you're doing the kind of good you're supposed to do, which is allocate society's resources, where they need to be allocated, and create liquid markets, we're going to have to make some changes that dodd-frank didn't address because it addressed the symptoms and not the underlying cause. >> before i move on, i am curious what you think about this whole idea about the

importance of changing incentives and whether the regulatory framework does that or not? . .

addresses it with respect to potentially dependent on their resolution mechanism with respect to shareholders and coordinated debt holders and so on but also management, too. there will be consequences for management in title ii come and there are also management who has overseen the failure of the firm and is going to have a very difficult time i think what getting another position in the financial-services industry. but going back to your point about incentives before the fact of incentives, it is in the point what do you do after the failure are the consequences of failure and the sufficient deterrent. the point that he raises is before failure how do you lessen the probability of let's say reckless risk-taking, and i

think there are many different ways of progressing and i think the new legislation and the new rules and attitudes that legislators have and even possibly management in the financial-services industry today although i'm not quite sure about. but the capitol rules, the rules around risk-management, there is supervision around the risk management. you mentioned it is risk averse. mabey risk averse less of the kind is going to be at least given the capitol rules and the liquidity rules and counterparty exposure rolls that you have fernald the major financial companies maybe those are going to be the kind of breaks that people are going to at least i think they are with that took us

where we were a couple of years ago. so there are a number of different speed bumps or whatever you want to call them and shock absorbers the you could put into place to try to achieve exactly what ken was describing before the fact. now, whether the ultimate the substitutes for someone's judgment, that is a more difficult question. i don't know that that's the case. and can you -- what is it about compensation that you can do? the legislation addresses some of that as well in the form of instances when a public company has had to restate their financials, there are also provisions where the bank regulators have authority around

excessive pay for the managers of financial institutions. so there are certain measures on the say on pay provision giving shareholders more of a voice, so there are those kind of measures put into place ultimately under the structure of the corporate law how much the agent that is bank managers in these days and financial institutions and public companies how much they are paid in the state corporate law and so on right now is a matter of the shareholders and what they decided but the legislation does put in a number of different mechanisms to address precisely what ken is talking about. >> a couple comments where other pressures can come from first of all if you look at the performance of financial companies these days, they don't look anything like they did

during the days of let's save the early part of the century. so, companies that were then earning 20 to 30% return on equity are barely error lane 5% today. for two reasons. london, there are certain businesses that they are not allowed to go into any more. number two, the capitol, the strict capital rules have been impose on them, and so that then has a derivative out, which is the shareholders are sitting in there as they should, watching their investment decline in value seeing the returns godown and st. yours are too high so there is going to be

a market force that puts downward pressure on compensation that the large institutions because the returns that they were earning ten years ago are not there. second, there is a new force at work in the market and it's called a shareholder activism, and it's a group of people we can mention them him in no particular order or distinguishing one from the other, nelson and others who basically buy the shares in companies in and do things when that the traditional institutional investors who might be thinking the same thing like fidelity for any of the others were but don't go to management and threaten them and raise the roof if something is

going on the don't like. so, i think if the low returns continue and the compensation at the big institutions don't come down quickly enough because they are coming down, i think it is an industry that is right for shareholder activism. right now i think they are being held off because what is called on wall street the black hole. in other words, when people wake up and they find out that an institution could lose $6 billion on a trading position, that makes it to the collectivist investor think once or twice before they want to take the plunge and wonder what they are getting into. on the other hand, nelson did fire from that run by my late

partner, and i think that he hasn't spoken yet as to what he really wants to see happen there. but i wouldn't be surprised on the composition ratio even though it was hard as and affirmed that kind of falls into this too big to fail category because they are not in a lot of those businesses. so to summarize what i said i think market forces are coming to bear on these big institutions because the returns are down and it's printed drive the ratio down and there's also the potential for shareholder activism. there's a lot of anger it's almost four years later and there's still on the one hand and enormous amount of anger in the country at wall street and the wall street firms, and on the ever had, there's a lot of anger on wall street and at the president coming and i guess i want to ask you what do you

think -- why do you think that is either just a fight? >> well i think there is a nuanced answer to both questions as far as the anchor the country feels to the bankers, yes, it is justified. but it's not exclusive, the blame is not exclusive to the bankers. there were many, many constituencies that participated in creating the problem. the people who sold the loans that shouldn't have been made, the rating agencies, we could go over a litany of them. so, the fact that wall street did what it does come and to keep all the blame on the bankers seems to me to be unfair as to the other way around, i don't get it. i think democrats always have a tough time on wall street.

i remember when ted kennedy was on the rise and the silly jokes that were made among us. and i think that bill clinton didn't get his due for all the good things that he did for the economy. so i think -- and i own personal criticism for president obama she made some priority choices about what he was going to fight for but i don't think wall street's criticism of obama is totally fair. he has moved down the populist road cities after votes. but in general i think both sides are being a little unfair. >> you have any thoughts on this? i bet you do. >> i think that he's right. most people on wall street tend

to be on the financial conservative side of things, although you could argue there wasn't a lot of financial conservatism and the bush administration. and i think there were lot of people on wall street that were critical of the fiscal policies there. but i think there's a little bit of not deutsch real, but a let down on the part of a lot of people because the president had tremendous support from people who might have traditionally not supported a democrat three and a half years ago. and i think his -- and all those i talked to i won't bother with the refrains for years a government instead of moving to

the center he seemed every time he was up under pressure which is much more to the left so that troubles a lot of people died on wall street and that is his tendency to steer it towards the left rather than towards the center and i think that is where -- it's not so much that he criticized wall street for the behavior because a lot of people think that they haven't even had there, things yet unclear that seems to be far removed from the center and that troubles a lot of people that are supported for years ago and i don't know if he would regain their support, but those that i know that i'm close to one are pretty convinced they

are not going to support him this time around. that is a way of yet. >> the one to respond to that -- >> i will just a couple of observations. i support the president and i want to address the two questions that you mentioned that maybe in a slightly different way. i think that one of the things that happened four years ago was a decline in the trust with respect to the financial system. there is no question about that even financial institutions when they dealt with each other as you remember when the credit market for example closed in 2008 people just didn't know whether they could trust their risk management of another financial institution to lend them money what kind of relationship they are going to have with them and the policies

the president has pursued, the stress testing has been really to try to restore this trust among the financial institutions in the first place, and also our society generally and financial institutions and how well managed and sound they are going to be. so, i think you're right. i think there was a decline in trust, and i think the policy of this administration has been to try to restore that trust. >> one thing our country has done much better than europe for instance is shore up the bank capital, and our banks are in fact much healthier now than almost any bank in europe which causes me to want to shift gears and ask my camel for their views

on the crisis whether it is salvageable and what kind of destruction it could bring if it came to that. anybody want to start? >> no? i think it could be pretty bad myself. >> i will start. >> it's obviously something that is a serious concern to financial stability oversight council report mentioned it, chairman bernanke mentioned it in his testimony before congress the house something that is of a concern with economic growth going forward in the united states the secretary of treasury all engaged with the europeans assessing a significance i don't think there is any question. the couple of points that i

would make in addition to your assessment are the europeans have come a long way since august 11th. we were not sure where they were headed. i think they've made tremendous strides to at least put together an outline or a direction in which they are heading. there will be bumps in the road as you know that there is an outline for at least bringing together the banking regulation which is very important, they're has been a lot of progress made in trying to build a credible financial walls. there are regular meetings between the authorities at different levels and so, all of those are extremely positive signs.

there is a natural aspect of unless something is done you don't know where it is going to end up, but i think that a relevant baseline of reference is where we were in the summer of 2011 and how much has changed since then. >> woo-hoo getting back to the question about the president, i think in fact the president has done quite a bit of job on the economy in terms of getting things back on an even keel. i think the treasury department as first rate from top to bottom, and i think that they've been very favorably disposed to business in particular inappropriate way. the president tends to get blamed for everything if it rains the president get blamed. when the crisis first broke out, a friend of mine said to me this

is like trying to get 30 hank paulson to agree with nancy pelosi. it's a very complicated situation on the ground without a fiscal union. my impression is that angela merkel is starting to move a little bit. i think that arnall is pushing her and is doing a great job. but with a situation can be solved and the world of the united states has to play is a much more difficult issue and i think the president has a good team on the case but i have no idea what they are going to be able to solve the problem and i'm with you, if they don't i don't think that the uncertainty has been discounted in the market. i think that a pyrotechnical blow up in europe would set back our recovery plans any major way. >> i'm not so sure that there is

much that the united states can do about it. it is a european problem, and what it does is makes the u.s. with its problems look relatively attractive to people around the world. so, i have a sort of fundamental view of life and that is if there is a loan out there somewhere in other words somebody has borrowed money, one of two things happens. it gets paid back or somebody loses. and everything that has gone on has sort of then movement towards preventing someone from losing with good reason because if you are kingstown to what they were, the institutions were worthless. so, you know, there is this

dance going on or decades now, o there is no stopping that. i think that there is very little for the united states to do that except for the average for the good outcome, which i think would eventually get to because the alternative was probably worse than what they are going to get to. >> the president running for reelection you have a situation that you are basically not in control of in any way, shape or form that could blow up on you and that is just kind of life. we've been going for a while. i wanted to see if there were questions from the audience and i'm not sure how we do this.

are there microphone's the you hand out? no, yes? all right. let's start there we will get their let's just get a microphone. >> there are four microphones up here. >> we will start with some questions and we may internet sometime from time to time. we want to hear what is on your mind. please ask in the form of a question, that is my one request. thank you. yes, right here. you had your hand up first. >> i would like to question the idea that true capitalism is at work on wall street. under true capitalism the attractiveness of the industry should draw so much competition that no company could get too big to fail and if it did fail, the penalty would be on the company and its stockholders, not on the public since those

important tenet of capitalism are not working, i would say capitalism is not alive and well on wall street. further evidence of that is the corporations are too big to fail. they are too big to regulate. the man in charge of regulating them, senator dodd said he wasn't even aware that she was getting a break from his bank on his own mortgage. if the person in charge of regulating the banks didn't know that -- >> let me finish. >> the final piece of evidence is that when something goes wrong on wall street. the question is coming. besio -- [laughter] you can't have a question without evidence. the ceo comes to the congress and he says i have no idea that happened to use of the two big to fail and regulate and to bid

to manage to come here is my question. what is the conclusion? >> well, it's not just too big to fail. it is complex and interconnected. so, if i could have imagined a piece of legislation that says you can only have to rule floodings of x on the balance sheet. i don't think that was solved the problem. but generally you're right. the essence of capitalism as it is laid out is created destruction and if there is no destruction for what's happened we say in the private sector bad stuff flows downhill so you get a problem to the c.o.d. and he gives it to the senior vice president or the vice president or the associate and the is as yet finally solved the problem, but in the financial crises around the world, that stuff

flows uphill, and because the system was at risk governments around the world had to step in and grab the problem and in that sense, the questioner is absolutely right. anybody disagree? the point of the questionnaire are important ones and questions we have to think about the size and the consequence and the risk taking i intend to agree with a lot of what ken says but i wouldn't necessarily discount the competitiveness that exists

currently on wall street and in our financial system. i think the banks compete every day for a number of different line of products and their business what is on the institutional side or the consumer side. it doesn't mean that we should not be policing them all the time very vigorously that there should be formerly and now may trust lawyer they can be aware of the importance of both having a competitive playing field, but also making sure that there is no anti-competitive behavior to distort the markets. so these are very important points that are raised and we should constantly be policing them. yes, sir? >> yes, the first secretary of the treasury under fdr and was a man who was president hall so i felt that that should come out.

my question to you is fdr came in with a clear question and secretary was right behind him. i came in with a clear idea that i would have huge change the commission had a lot of information out there. is the problem that we have had the result of the fact we have and have the same clarity of who was at fault and what needs to be done. [laughter] >> of the kennedy for along time and it's not like people woke up in 1929 and said we've got a problem and we know how to fix it. it took awhile however bad our

problems were four years ago, they are a whole lot worse back then. the very first thing fdr did as president was call a bank holiday to stop the run on the bank so the legislation that followed established things like the fdic which by the way roosevelt himself didn't even like, and we had a much -- there's a much lower regulatory free-market there was a much deeper need to i think for the creation of rules that didn't really exist, which is not to say i am not a total fan of dodd-frank. i do think it is overly complex and so on. but, i don't think that it is

completely parallel to say that we should have followed the aaa followed how och and questions and why certain things and that is not the same world as 1930 and it is in the same world as 1950 and i don't think people today would want to trade the way they live for the way people used to live that is one guy i would make. second it's a lot larger today and a lot more complex, what is ge that used to be relatively simple and has to be over 50% of their business outside of the united states and a financial institution and this is the point i was trying to make early on which is i don't think the regulators can keep up with the

way in which these institutions more for and the gulf and i agree that you need to have rules of the road and try to please them as well you can't ten. but ultimately, let there be a high price for failure. a price that the management's pay, the boards and directors' pay, the owners and shareholders pay because without hitting over their head, that should modify or at least hold their behavior to achieve the objectives that the policy makers want to achieve. is there a hand? yes, sir. >> i want to ask about the consequences of the two kinds. one is let's take the movie inside job which is right on topic to what we are talking about and i think it won an academy award.

and just take all of the characters in there that were responsible for the financial crisis. you have the two leading professors. one is the dean of the major business school in new york and they've really did some pretty bad things. they were okay in icelandic bonds and they admit to this or they actually live on camera that they weren't but they were. okaying those bonds, and those two faculty members were here on cnbc as if there were no consequences. the anyone watch that movie? >> can you let me respond to that for a second? the academics did were embarrassing, and nobody has really taken on the academics before the way the inside job did but not necessarily illegal. having said that i've written a

number of columns and i feel very strongly that one of the failures of the justice department has been a failure to prosecute big fish who helped bring the system down. [applause] there's been an incredible lack of action on mortgage fraud and so on and so forth. so i think that's a failure of this government. i'm not going to ask to agree or disagree with me that i do feel strongly about that, and a consequences if you create a company that systematically rights from event mortgages, somebody has to go to jail. [applause] and nick i once asked a justice

department is anybody from countrywide on any level of four down had been prosecuted and the answer was no. sprigg even the board of trustees had a business school can't take any action it's as if the movie didn't even exist. and one other question if i may was been watching for 40 years, and i think every year the republicans have always tried to cut down -- i used to work at the sec. the use to cut down the budget year after year after year and finally when you have a case of bernie madoff and you see what happens when you have insufficient funds to have a good enforcement staff you think that the consequences in the 2008 election are the consequences and wall street now of the regulated community would be regulation is a good thing. how can the people who probably

invested that there wasn't enough regulation still skew so far to the right against regulation. [laughter] >> the -- i sometimes say that on capitol hill the financial crisis is like the eighth season of dallas. if anybody remembers that season, the ninth season began with one of the characters making it and realizing the entire agency had been a dream and hadn't actually happened. [laughter] but, you know, one of the ways the battle was being fought between democrats and republicans right now is that democrats are trying to push forward on dodd-frank and republicans are trying to squeeze the budget of the regulators to make it more difficult to carry out the regulations. that is just a fact.

>> let me ask you a question. you are calling for criminal prosecution of the various wall street figures. without naming names, and obviously a fraud is something that people should go to jail for. is their anything besides fraga that you think the leadership of the financial sector should be criminally liable for? >> i think that is a really hard question, and i do for my own sort of investigation from the book by roche, you know, there were certainly people what wall street firms who knew that they were creating tripoli their lives that were full of junk and putting it on their own balance sheet. was that a mistake in judgment or was that fraud? i think it is a pretty hard

call, but i would also like to know that during the s&l crisis over a thousand people went to jail. >> sometimes what happens in life is that there is a shift in popular sentiment and all of a sudden what was within the guidelines is outside of the boundaries and when i was in my most active years on wall street we had a thing called structured finance, and the job of these guys that work at rocket science level intelligence was to interpret the accounting rules and the tax rules to get the most favorable treatment under growth and that meant sailing very close to the line they were in change and there were dogs and some of them got into

trouble. so i think one of the problems with this idea of criminal prosecution is that it is very easy to agree that when people sold crack and called it a gold, if they knew it, they should be prosecuted but there were so many things done by rating agencies and lawyers and accountants and international this and that. to grab one of these you have to grab somebody that was a egregiously in the wrong i would think. and it hasn't been done. >> one of the reasons is because some people would argue that it all started with pressure from the political class to do certain things that these creative people figured out how to do and make money in the process. so, you know, if you sort of --

when you have something like this happen there is plenty of blame to go around. it's not just somebody running a wall street firm and that is to blame. somebody comes in and says we want you to make loans and marginal neighborhoods and these guys are rocket scientists and figure out how to do it and then duped the rating agency into giving it a triple a rating. i think ultimately if you wash all that laundry out there are a lot of people but got subsidized loans for mortgages and that won't look good. so i think that is a part of the problem that the reason it has been all washed out is because they don't know where all of the roads will lead and some people may be don't like it leading to their back door. >> you know, in our mythologies of corporate democracy, the buck really stops of the board of directors. when i look at the lehman

brothers crisis, i say where is the board of directors? shouldn't they have placed besio before the problem? what you have countervailing issues. you can't -- if you throw the whole board in jail or you prosecute them who is going to want to serve on the board of directors? >> its more fundamental than that. when we started this session, i mentioned there is a long history to how we got to where we were and that wasn't the purpose of the session about jim markets is sitting here in the front row and is a partner of the old goldman sachs, and he can attest to the way the firm used to run and the way the other wall street firms use to run. it was a different world all the firms were private. they had a different risk profile, and there wasn't pressure for quarterly performance that the public

firms are subject to. once you transform an industry from private ownership where people's money is on the line every day to the public ownership with permanent capital, and all the pressure for performance, it is very hard for a regulator to monitor every little thing that is going on in these companies and that's why you have to sort of bus tours of the more fundamental question and that is a question about the structure industry what businesses they should be in and shouldn't be in and which former chairman of the federal reserve paul volcker tried to address and i think it is going to be hard to go back to the

glass-stegall era and the old goldman sachs and the old morgan stanley and the old lehman brothers, the crisis of the time and when i left business school there were firms like dillon read, horned lower, dozens and dozens of firms. from time to time they went under but it wasn't in the earth shaking event other than the people that worked there lost their jobs. so, that's not the world we live in today. >> in that little time we have left just want to ask each one a few. what's going on out there and thinking about whether they are slowing down and whether that is granted be a problem for us and more about our economy to you see signs of hope and where do you feel like we stand?

>> in china i'm looking for some serious near-term preservation is. i think the housing market was basically they'd get the low hanging fruit. they have a model of investing and stimulating the economy through cheap capital it's also about the chief capital they get from this financial repression they are in the negative interest rates on that and that money is funneled into the economy, and roads, bridges and tunnels are built, housing is built, people move from the countryside to the city and productivity goes up. but for now the chief environmental input has been used so i think they have to go

through a period and they are trying to slow down the housing bubble so that they can start providing cheap housing for the people. in the long run, china is a powerhouse. they've got a lot of problems to solve, and of the party is feeling very insecure right now. what's your take on our economy? >> well, i think that we're feeling very insecure. we have a trillion sitting on corporate balance sheets. we can't print our way out of this problem. we've got to find a way to stimulate the economy and get the velocity of money out and the fundamental problem i would see as the political economy, which is you've got 8% of the electorate that hasn't decided. both presidential candidates are named in the battleground

states, and so neither of them is willing to say anything bold or to get anything bold going. i think one of the problems we are feeling is we have a president who came in on a bold change platform and we didn't get that. and so, the economy is just a above zero growth. the jobs are not there. i would personally look for some political boldness. ausley laughed when we heard about the idea from new gingrich about building a colony on the moon but at least a was bold. >> i think first of all i just want to mention that we have had positive job growth since that trust that we have in a 09 every quarter. it's not been enough for sure.

but, just so we are on the same page on that, you know, there are part of it probably is the phenomenon that is hidden we have your opinion out there that may have an impact. we also have fighting some of our fiscal issues. i think we need to put that house in order. i think, you know, there are these certain major uncertainties of the outcome is going to be that has an impact and the clearer the picture becomes in the outcome.

>> well, you know, i hate to be mr. down be, but americans tend to be in patient, and i feel in my lifetime become more instant gratification, and you mentioned something happened four years ago that started more than four years ago, but of the bottom line result of what happened was that a lot of wealth was wiped out from the middle class by relating that to agnes and donna who were from italy and where i was born in newark new jersey and when they could they bought their own home in the religiously made their payments and that was basically the savings account for the average american citizen, and so, that

system pretty much reigned in place until this crisis and there is only one thing that happened that didn't happen to my parents and that is one day the average american woke up and this nest egg that they thought they had didn't exist, and when you have that amount of wealth destruction, it doesn't get cured or overcome overnight and it has an impact on people's behavior, buying habits and the like. and so, i don't think there is a messiah held there that's going to come along in the slow return to normalcy, whatever that is, and i think that is one of the reasons you are not hearing anyone making any bold claims. having said that, i think to say you are going to raise taxes is pretty bold because most people don't want to hear that. and there are a lot of things

that could be done to incentivize people to behave in a certain way like repatriate earnings that exist in american corporations if they bring it back and invest in the united states. a lot of college kids i talked to today can't find a job. so you could provide an incentive for corporations that higher college graduates. i mean, there is a lot of things that could be done besides building and calling on the moon. , but i think we need to keep in mind all the time that this was a very profound event that had a very fundamental the impact on the net worth of the average american family, and it is going to be a long time before that is recovered. >> the colony on the moon would be a stimulus plan, however. we are out of time. i would like to think you all for being here. i want t

>> need 6:00, the national press club speeches from the past year. you will hear from douglas shulman. speeches later this week include patrick kennedy on mental health issues. the ceo of the girl scouts on their 100th anniversary and on friday, billie jean king. the national press club speeches at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. at 7:00, more from our "q&a" series, michelle fields. that is this week on c-span2. >> sunday, look for our interview with andrew nagorski on "hitlerland." >> i have no idea of my predecessors, the correspondents in berlin. i had not spent a lot of time

thinking about what it had been like to be a correspondent there in the 1920's and 1930's. how would you have operated? what would have noticed or not noticed? much less, how would you have acted? >> sunday at 8:00 on c-span's "q&a." >> political parties will be holding platform hearings in advance of the conventions. democrats vote this weekend on final platform recommendations in detroit. republicans will begin at the tampa convention site. see the complete coverage of the party convention beginning monday, august 27th, with the live coverage of the republican national convention in tampa in the democratic convention from charlotte, n.c., starting september 3rd. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979 and

brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> of dartmouth college recently hosted a discussion with admiral william fallon and u.s. policy in the middle east. he was the commander of u.s. central command from 2007-2008. he was forced to resign after an article showed him as challenging president bush on policies against iran. this is one hour, 8 minutes. >> i am the assistant professor of government here at dartmouth and i'm a coordinator of the war and peace program. it's my great pleasure to welcome to dartmouth and introduce to you admiral william fallon. admiral fallon has spent more than 40 years serving in the united states military and began

his career as a naval aviator in the vietnam war and served in a variety of positions and command commissions culminating first in combat and the commander of the united states pacific command, the position responsible for all u.s. military forces, plans, and operations in the entire region of asia. of asa. he was subsequently the combatant commander of the united states central command which has the same responsibility but for all u.s. forces in the middle east. these are arguably the two most important positions in the united states military, and had oral fallon is the only person that has served in both positions. since his retirement, from the united states navy four years ago, admiral fallon has begun a second career of public service and served in a variety of boards and commissions and panels related to higher education, related to various congressional commissions and also for the private sector.

admiral fallon is an expert will only on u.s. national security policy but u.s. foreign policy. about two minutes ago, before we walk out here, he said what are you going to say in the introduction and i gave him a 22nd version of this and he said forget all that stuff. just say to use to fly airplanes and he wishes he still did. [laughter] with that please join me in welcoming admiral william fallon. [applause] thanks for the kind introduction short and sweet and following my mother's good advice to be seen, be seen and be gone. i hate to op making excus but as you can probably hear, i just spent an hour and a half a bunch of undergruates here and i was screaming at them to make up for an hour and a half. that is actually not true.

i think this comes from chasi my grand kids around montana last week. come back here. come back here. anyway i'm delighted to be here with you today. at the dartmouth this is my last visit to the campus and i like what i see. i particularly like the factor that's about 40 degrees cooler and very grateful. timing is everything. let me get into it. just to talk a little bit about the middle east and our interest in the policies related thereto. it's an area of high interest and a fair amount of my path that's been in the area. but what i would like to begin with isthis. american interaction with the extent of the middle east actually came early to the young

nation through the u.s. navy and its deployments against part in the 19th century and in fact until recently the u.s. presence and focus in the middle east region has been primarily maritime overseeing u.s. economic and security interests with only a small footprint. now, my first personal experience in the region was about 35 years ago and i was actually visiting in the capacity and a professional capacity as a naval officer. this 35 years ago is not very distant at least for some of us at a certain age, but it is a relatively recent from the historical perspective considered but from this course

back a couple hundred years ago sustained u.s. engagement as recent has only been predated by my visit for about 30 years. it's pretty upsetting. i was arriving at the mediterranean seaport he might ask what is the admiral know about the middle east and west we pay any attention to them at all and there's an awful lot written and written on the mpus and many people know many things my perspective is a little bit different than some might have encountered and i visited every country from the arabian peninsula through southeast asia and all of the waterways. much as occurred on this part of

the world in the last four decades and for better or worse by an unseen for most of it and it's the most vivid experience in life revolved around people to the diverse culture of this region a woman by the name of dela so let m set the scene. 1977 and on the first aircraft carrier to ever visit the state of israel and the u.s. navy ship to ever call in this country so we enter the harbor, and a couple of us went to the shore to set up some things and we are greeted by this short energetic woman that seems to be

everywhere and she comes up to me and cubs my hand and hugs me and says my name is gela and i am pleased you are here we are so happy you come to visit us fifth and we have people that want to share your enthusiasm she was a wonderful woman from azerbaijan in the early country, and she seemed to know everybody in the country. it doesn't matter whether they are jewish or arab or christian who were visiting she seemed to know everybody and her

enthusiasm for people and the possibilities of people doing things together is quite contagious. i asked her what she down here employed at the israeli government or the u.s. navy hired her. she looked at me strangely. no, i came because i want to welcome you. we want to welcome you. meet my friends. i stayed in touch and have seen how many times and the last 30 some years and remarked to several people that if she were the president, maybe not likely to be the prime minister, if she were the president of this country, things would have happened probably a lot faster. she showed me what was possible. she would take me out when we have time and introduce me to people every religious an

cultural and travel persuasion we could imagine and it's actually a pretty diverse country and people are in lebanon and jordan and egypt and in turkey and st about every place else in the region i have to tell you i have to confess she is not quite so enthusistic today about the longer-term as she was back in those days. but she still has an optimistic view of people. so i took a lot of lessons from that first meeting and i keep in mind. anything is possible if people are willing to work for it. and she certainly is. i digress. back tthe policy. the policy-making and execution in this region has been shape and pressurized by political and economic and security factors. you might ask so what. what's different. for this reason and legislatures. while the middle east is

complicated by acutely conflicting religious and ethnic and social issues and there's land, the sand, the vast desert areas, millions of square miles of mostly parched earth, rocks and sand. sand on the move, shifting constantly in the wind coming and there is the silence, the emptiness, the solute absence of sound in the desert that envelops the census like a shroud. i didn't appreciate this until i actually experienced it. i've vented asserts many places. they've never been keeping that in the desert as i have in several places in the middle east to have this feeling. it presses down on one everywhere. it is an assault on the senses.

it is an ever-prent reminder of the unforgiving environment in which the survival is a today where people wth with a shrewd interaction. ..

>> alliances often shifting. and now with the u.s., a little more than half a century of experience in the region from half a world away has inserted itself to craft policy. the major factors driving them can be grouped into three main categories, economic, security, and political. ouped into three main categories. economic, political and security. in the economic sphere, the defining issue the participated in renewed american interests in the 1940s and continues to shape engagement today can be expressed in one word. oil. the energy sector, by vast petroleum and natural gas, reserves in the region of the industrialized another development in the nations of the world.

>> recognized by the u.s. and on other industrial countries, created a harjo carbon dependency that magnify the influence of this region of the world economic and political status. the middle east embargo in the 1970s and the returning spike in the 1980s sent shockwaves rippling through the financial market. persistently high price of oil was a result, and resulted in small behavioral changes from the u.s., japan and western europe. namely reduced consumption, albeit slight, in a pursuit of alternative energy sources. you demand from china and india to power the developing country

has had baseball in the middle east and identity resources. the ripple effect of supply and sensitivity ve maintained a high level of u.s. interests in the region. a major factor in the energy business in the available supply since the 70s has been the international oil cartel, opec, the organization of petroleum exporting countries, which has fluenced supplies with a resulting impact on supplies on other nations. by the way, replacing the railroad commissioner of texas, for those with memory. as the arbiter of world oil prices. of course, this country tends to act in its interest, unanimity will not act in opec's behavior. the track record of the group in line with various wars and

international tensions have resultedn higher prices and is a major factor in the world economy. with high impact and high interest world leaders. opec has blamed a new factor in the past decade, which has supported the unusually were on a historic basis, high prices would be interesting will futures is an asset class and world financial market. i believe this is truly becong a factor in eping the markets up. u.s. policymakers have achieved only spotty success in moderating oil price fluctuations. supply and demand fooil and gas will continue to be at or near the top of economic concerns regardless of declining u.s. imports from the region because of worldwide energy needs. virtually all of these are conveyed by sea, along with other commerce in the region.

these commercial lifelines are the economic lifelines of the world and special interest of the u.s. and its identity for addressing this interest, the u.s. navy. of pticular concern are the three major merits. potential choke points through which they are all energy exports in the region. strait of hormuz, and the suez canal. more than haf of the oil and gas coming out of the golf actually continue around through india and through northeast asia. the straits are high interest all throughout the world. as we are aware, these points, namely iran,