constitutional right against discrimination, an absence of any constitutional remedies. this leads to what justice fish mentioned -- if you look at the first 130 years -- i will not take you through it -- 1867 to 1982, you see that there is a preoccupation with the division of powers between the federal government and the powers otherwise known as the power process, legal federalism, rather than the limitations on the exercise of power, otherwise known as civil liberties. which of the two jurisdictions has authority over the subject matter? the former chief justice of the supreme court of canada put it best when he said that the real question is which of the two levels of government has the power to work the injustice and

not have the in justice itself prevented. i don't want to suggest there were no protections for civil liberties. there were statutory protections but there were no constitutional rights and remedies. all that changed with the advent of the canadian charter of rights. on the 10th anniversary of the charter, the former chief justice of the supreme court spoke of it in rather her were times when he said that the charter of rights and freedom was a revolutionary document comparable to metric system, and penicillin. even allowing for rhetorical enthusiasm by a judge, he was not wrong in terms of the revolutionary impact. another justice of the supreme

court said five years after the charter was enacted, the supreme court of canada had stretched the accords of liberty more in five years than the supreme court of the united states had done in 200 years. , allowing for a certain enthusiasm and the rhetoric. there was reference to certain precedents like constitutionalizing affirmative action in our charter or constitutionalizing what would be the equal rights amendment on gender equality. let me make reference to the canadian charter of rights and freedoms. is a revolution in five acts. it may suggest why in a recent article that canada was referred

to as a constitutional superpower. the actual act of the adoption of the charter was transformative in that we moved from being a parliamentary democracy to being a constitutional democracy. the judiciary move from being are biters of public resolutions which they still are to being guarantors of rights. it was because parliament given that power. groups now have a panoply of rights and remedies that were hitherto inconceivable. that is the first act. the second act was the revolutionary dimension of the involvement of civil society. the charter we have is not the charter of rights that was proposed. the charter of rights that was transformed as a result of representations and submissions

made in the year of the constitution were hundreds of individuals and groups came before a joint senate committee on the constitution and literally transformed every tradition of the canadian charter of rights and freedoms. it makes reference to specific provisions from other jurisdictions, international human rights and the like that became part of our charter. the third revolutionary act had to do with the relevance of international law to canadian constitution and charter law. our charter was drafted with international covenants in mind and drawn from those international covenants. it was also influenced by the human rights movement which led a former chief justice of the

supreme court to say that the court has international law as a persuasive argument for authority for the anticipation and application of the charter of rights and freedoms. international law emerged as an important dimension. we have only one case in the history of canadian constitutional law in which international law was site to be for the charter. it was only one. 40 cases were cited after the charter. 400 cases were cited. there were simply too many cases in which international law has been cited. that is a revolutionary component. the fourth is the principles and precedents by the courts themselves. a reference was made to the

same-sex marriage legislation. it is instructive to note that there were unanimous decisions from nine provinces and the territories regarding same-sex legislation as to its constitutionality. prior to the supreme court giving its advisory unanimously about how same-sex marriage legislation should be accorded with the rights but would be a breach of the charter. the important thing to realize is that pre-charter law, you would have a standing issue before the court let alone have the issues become judicial before the court. the final part of this revolution has to do with the

role of the minister of justice and attorney general. i had occasion as my first job to serve as a special assistant to the then minister of justice from 1968-some 1972. i saw a transformation rocked by the charter. it was the responsibility of the ministry of justice and attorney general to ensure that every prospective law or regulation coming forth in any department or agency comports with the charter. it is the good housekeeping seal of constitutional approval. in any extradition case and the minister of justice focused on this, as to ensure that issue comports with the charter. a wrongful conviction -- the minister of justice has sole jurisdiction in miscarriages of

justice and wrongful convictions. the charter has brought a dramatic transformation on that whole case. in the matter of criminal prosecutions, we have to ensure that each criminal prosecution, the prosecution comports with the charter and that means making full disclosure to the accused, etc. at the time i was with the minister of justice, he had three possessions. he was also attorney-general and he was the solicitor general. and the chief prosecutor. i felt this was overreaching. happily, we were able to outsource the role of chief prosecutor by the time the term ended. this can cause a certain conflict.

it is bound by cabinet solidarity on any issue. in the role of attorney general, he or she has to give independent constitutional advice to the government which make up not always follow the constitutional advice. he may have a situation where the cabinet announces its decision which could be embarrassing to the minister of justice if he is giving, -- contrary constitutional advise. >> thank you very much the last word? >> i think we have not too much time left. i will cede whatever time i have left to the audience. >> stay away from politics but we can have a question or two. there is a microphone over there. if anyone is interested in posing a question.

i think cspan would like you to use the microphone. >> i am from beirut, lebanon. i have two questions. you mentioned about the state of the maronite people presenting an appeal in lebanon to the maronite cause. this case was not executed in israel. there is no relationship. in my view, we have a bishop

appointed by the maronite patriots to be the bishop in israel. he can give -- he has authority to approve this case, the appeal. or the people in israel, the , can make anle appeal to the vatican. is there an effort to make an appeal to the court in lebanon? >> maybe i misunderstood. the rules it -- the ruling of the religious sections and the

execution of the office of israel, one of the parties claimed it is not to be done like that. the ruling of the maronites was respected in israel and enforced by the minister of justice which is responsible for the enforcement of the state of israel. >> my second question -- >> i know personally of the bishop who was there. we have a new one now. he is going to-tomorrow -- haifa tomorrow. >> you mentioned you have around

100,000 files -- >> 10,000 files. >> what is the number of your tribunal? >> we're doing well. we are working very hard in the morning until 9:00 every day all week. >> you are card. >> thank you. >> the difference is you sit in panels. >> sometimes in important cases, there is an appeal to the president to enlarge up to the 11 panels. >> if all 15 of use that is not every case, you could not handle it all. >> we've reached our time. would you like to add anything? >> i'm picking up on a comment

that was made on something i was -- i said when i was in egypt. i reviewed the u.s. constitution and it was way ahead of its time. the founding fathers were natural right thinkers and they did not put into the constitution itself what came four years later in the bill of rights. they thought people have rights by virtue of existing and there was a fear about writing down those rights. we have come to think about rights differently nowadays. i gave the south african constitution as a model in its respect. article number one is human rights. it is in the very first article and you conceive the structure of government exists to uphold

and implement those rights. it was certainly not intended to detract in any way from the u.s. constitution which i carry around in my pocket wherever i am in the world. >> thank you very much and thank you all for being here. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> we will have more white house coverage coming up this afternoon. the president is speaking in laos vegas now. it is on line at c-span.org. vice-president is in detroit at renaissance high school and we will have that event at 3:00 p.m. eastern. in mexico tomorrow, -- in new

mexico tomorrow, mitt romney will have a campaign stop there and we will have live coverage about 1:00 p.m. eastern tomorrow. >> i'm not in the habit of making -- of breaking a promise to my country and either is governor palin and when we tell you we will change washington and stop leaving to our country's problems for someone -- some on lucky generation to fix, you can count on it. [applause] we've got a record of doing just

that. the strength, experience, a judgment, and backbone to keep our word to you. [applause] >> you have stood up one by one and said he not to the politics of the day. you understand that in this election, the greatest risk we can face is to do the same old politics with the simple pleasures and expected different result. you have shown what history teaches us that at defining moments like this one, the change we need is not come from washington, change comes to washington. [applause] c-span has aired every minute of every conventions in 1984 and we continue with less than one week to go with live coverage of the republican and democratic conventions live on c-span and cspan radio and online at c-span.org starting next monday with the gop

convention with new jersey governor chris christie as the keynote address. 2008 presidential nominee john mccain and former governor of florida jeff bush, the democratic convention speakers include the mayor of san antonio, michelle obama, and bill clinton. >> what is the biggest news to come out of the congressional budget office. ?

>> republicans are refusing to do tax increases and have passed a measure that would avoid the fiscal cliff avoid the spending cuts by cutting social programs. >> the cbo director discussed alternatives. >> they do current law were they look at lot that will happen on the second is current policy which looks at what is done in the past. typically, congress has extended the bush-era tax cuts. they have avoided a severe drop in medicare payments.

they have always patched the alternative minimum tax. the tax was supposed to affect wealthier taxpayers. we will not see a recession next year. if all this happens. the deficit will continue on a sustainable path. we will have a $1 trillion deficit next year for the fourth year in a row. some years, it will be $10 trillion in debt as it added compared to the current law. >> their economic conditions in 2013 that would be considered a recession. is that out of the norm for this press conference? >> the cbo does not declare recessions. that is more of an executive

branch decision. sometimes it has to be two quarters of consecutive negative growth. basically, he is saying in the press conference that this will be a recession theme his protection -- his projection of unemployed was not too rosy, either. >> he said unemployment would rise from 8.2%- 9.1% next year. even without that happening, he is looking at 8% unemployment next year. republicans are all over the president today saying he is to blame for this. democrats are firing back saying the president produce the jobs package. >> you can read his reporting on thehill.com. thanks for the update next in discussion on women's

rights and women engaged in peacemaking. participants include a 2011 nobel peace prize winner and a former adviser to president george w. bush and condoleezza rice. it was posted last month by the roosevelt institute. it is part of the hampton institute summer symposium. this is one hour, 15 minutes.

>> this is our third summer of programming. i want to thank our underwriters -- [applause] our lead sponsors, and the many of you and others who are not here on this gorgeous day who have been faithful underwriters and sponsors and fellows of the program for three years. i want to thank donald mullen of goldman sachs to help us secure our wonderful speaker dina p [owell and the maker of the movie "pray the devil back to el." hell." you'll hear about the situation in liberia.

the roosevelt institute is the longtime partner of the roosevelt committee in hyde park. we have a new extraordinary park opening up on roosevelt island. the president and a member of our borders here today. come out there and see this exquisite monument to the roosevelts which will open october 18 and is the only work in new york ever of the great architect, lee conn. it has been in development since the early 1970's. it is the very southern tip of roosevelt island. in recent years, the roosevelt institute has decided to create a living legacy of which i am

fortunate to be the senior fellow. it is creating a robust conversation across the country about the roosevelt legacy particularly in economics, creating a new deal for the 20th century and we have an extraordinary campus network on 200 campuses around the country. we are now expanding our reach to talk about the global legacy of the cool -- roosevelt united nations and begin. today, our program helped launch the program called women rising at the roosevelt institute which is about the very conversation you will be fortunate to cheer, the ways in which investments in women as agents of democracy and the formalizing of women's work is bringing and securing prosperity and peace in so many

countries in the world. it is my pleasure to have the opportunity to introduce my dear friend, katia martin, a distinguished and best-selling author and longtime human-rights activists who will introduce the panel. as many of you know, her most recent book is an extraordinary memoir of growing up in hungary after world war two after her parents were declared enemies of the people. does it but you cannot put down. her new book is the story of her marriage and loss of ambassador richard holbrooke. i just read one of the preview reviews and it looks like a in another must read. i hope you will all go out and buy it. i don't think it is in the lobby because the publication

date is two weeks hence but i know you will enjoy reading it. to is really a special account -- occasion to have this conversation here because eleanor roosevelt is the founder of the human rights movement globally. she went to the united nations as america's representative to the human rights initiative. in that conversation, she made specific reference to the rights of women and the need to secure the rights of women long before there was the robust conversation even in the united states that we now have. it was eleanor roosevelt who understood that human rights must begin in small places close to home. without meaning there, they have no meeting anywhere and she encouraged people around the world to engage in a conversation about advancing the rights of women long before it was fashionable.

we will hear about how that conversation is going and how to i believe it is changing the world in this program this morning. kati and lima and dina, please come to this stage. thanks so much. [applause] >> good morning, good morning friends and neighbors and thank you all for coming out and choosing us over the tennis courts. i'm not sure i would have made the same choice but it is wonderful to see so many of you. we promised lina and dina that we will make it worth your while. as ellen said, we have two extraordinary women who are walking the walk. , not just talking the talk of

women rising. our subject today is women rising in peacemaking and and prosperity. i would like us to have more than kind of vague back - patting conversation. are women rising in a meaningful way? these two women are but when the average american female worker is still making 18% less than her male counterpart, we still have a ways to go. the fact that a recent cover story in "atlantic monthly," asking if women can have it all written by one of the highest powered women in the obama administration concludes that no, women cannot have it all. she returned to attend the home fires, leaving an extremely important position.

i would like to engage in that. withuld like to start to lema who was a transformative figure. it is no exaggeration to say that without firing a shot, she brought about dramatic change in her work toward a country of liberia which was under the rule of one of the most ruthless war lords in africa and that is saying something, charles taylor. he was recently contended to long prison sentence in the hague and much of that was you're doing. [applause] of course we are here to find out how exactly you did that and how it is that as a result of your organizing, grass-roots organizing of the women of liberia, you have now brought

the first woman head of state in africa, ellen surly johnson, with whom you share the nobel peace prize this year. we are extraordinarily pleased for you. [applause] i am in awe of you. i sat up reading this all night. i recommend this. you're on a trajectory really runs parallel to liberia. that is to say you did not have a great start in life. >> no. >> and get you pretty much bottomed out and hit a wall and then you found the strength not only to transform yourself but to bring the women of liberia

with you. where did you find the strength? where did you find the courage to face of these men armed than absolutely dangerous? where did you find that strength and courage? >> thank you. thank you to everyone here for making this day possible, my being here. this is a small group compared to -- on this coming back from new orleans and they're worth 3000 young people in the superdome. this is a good conversation compared to 18-years old. [laughter] >> we hope. >> when the war started, we were comfortable and the sense that we were protected.

the community i grew up in was urban with a rural flavor mixture of ethnic groups and different things. being sheltered all my life and all of a sudden one day, everything collapsed. i carried a lot of anger. i was very angry for many years, angry at god, angry at who started the war and angry for many different reasons. what started having my children, the pain was not going away. one of the things i say to young people when i am working with them -- what can you see that nelson mandela and dr. king had in common? they say nothing because you cannot compare. i say they have one trait in

common and that trade is anchor. they were angry at a particular situation. the difference between the groups of people is the way they decided to deal with their anger. if i decided to be a fighter, i may die. i thought we should try something else. there's nothing like having a bunch of angry african women to say let's do something for peace and that's exactly what we did. we shared similar patent. we came together and there was not a single one of us that had not seen a child of theirs go hungry. some of us have been beaten. we all have our lives turned upside down. we decided to use our pain and broken bodies and put it out

there to confront these cowards that are unleashing this terror. this is basically what we did. that was an act of being fed up and survival. >> what is the most appalling to think that charles taylor did decide to ripping your children from you and turn them into small soldiers? you spend a great deal of time talking about how important it is not to shun these child soldiers. i spent a year at the united nations working on this issue. it is one of the trickiest of all issues. these children are robbed of their childhood and turned into a cold-blooded killers. how do you bring them back? but such an important part of your mission. these are your children. >> it is a catch-22 situation.

these are young people who have killed and on the difficult things. when i started working with them, the first day i met with them, they abused me for one hour. the next day they abused me for 59 minutes on the following day, 58 minutes. when you realize i was not going away, the abuse stopped. i realize that in 30 minutes, there will be a switch. you will see the 18-year-old boy turned into an 8-year-old that he was when he was recruited. he is that child. he is in the body of that 80- year-old even though he has become a man and a killing machine. when i started working with them, i told myself that i cannot deal with these children.

we have to go back to being 8 years old. that's how i dealt with them. what you do with your 18-year- old child is to reassure them and be there with them. the transformation form became one of them looked for me for a week and he could not find me. he was frantically looking for me because he had something to say. when he finally found me, he said i looked for you and i could not find you. for over a week. he was high on drugs. we sat down to talk. it was like reassuring my 8- year-old and he was 16 years old. you had to reach out at that compassionate level. people think you are crazy. how can you be compassionate to

people who kill? you ask yourself -- and about your 8-year-old getting drugs and guns. into the bring dina conversation. she is doing astonishing things as head of the goldman sachs foundation to nurture and foster women and bring them into leadership roles through her 10,000 women project. how are you doing that? there is an intersection between with the two of you do. it is a truism that societies do not empower their women but they cannot suppress or limit feelings. you two are really comrades in arms. >> for sure. thank you, first of all.

it is an honor to be with such extraordinary female leaders. when leyma spoke at goldman sachs last year, there were literally people hanging outside the auditorium trying to get in. the work she has done this so humbling. that is the reason i wanted my daughters to come today. children are here as well. i cannot think of a greater role model for my daughters. you tend not review not only changed the country but changed the world. i want to thank my colleague at goldman sachs who is here today. one of the greatest things about this program is now invested everyone at goldman sachs is. from our ceo, lloyd blank fine, too many colleagues around the world. we started this effort almost four years ago to literally

reach 10,000 women are around the world in business and management education, mentors and networking and linking them to capital. at goldman sachs, we have pieces of research that actually showed that if you empower women economically, you achieve growth in developing economies. was interesting about the work is that if you really want more peaceful and prosperous solutions, the very best investment is investing in women especially female entrepreneurs who grow their businesses, create jobs, who are now working in 22 countries, 6000 women have graduated including in monrovia will leyma knows the author of the north. when we started, there was no economic program for women at all and now they are literally growing.

we measure everything at goldman sachs which will not surprise you. the international center for research on women did the first independent analysis of the program and found that 80% of the graduates are creating revenues and 60% are creating jobs. nine out of 10 are mentoring at least one other woman. kati said to me not to repeat too many numbers. i think it is important that we focus on results. the real power for the stories of the women themselves. one of the women we work with in liberia has a very difficult time throughout the war. it was remarkable that she could barely read and write but she got into the program. she now has a company where she is providing for an oil and has hired 25 women. the stories are so powerful.

i know you want to share a couple of stories. >> one of the things i love about your narrative is that you turn these stories, women's stories, into a sort of strength at the highest reaches of policy-making. i love your crown and thorn therapy, group therapy. explain how that works. we could use some of that, all of us. how does that happen to women's strength? >> one of the things we do when we bring women together to do the work we do, i was talking to my daughter last night, trying to get them to help me. sometimes they think my work is easy. i get to travel

-- >> that's their job as your children. >> well, sometimes i have to put lot of thinking into what i said. we were having a chat. when we start working with women is to bring them in and recognize that african women just exist. no one has ever taught you or help you affirm what woman with this. you know? when we go into the room, we do something called being a woman. the first time you work with these women, you ask what is being a woman. there is nothing about themselves. it is a mother, a wife -- everything is outside of themselves. you ask them as a woman what are

your crown stacks they will say children, nothing about themselves. you ask what are your thorns. the idea of this session is to get them to come to realize that around all of these things, yourself as important. we realize that as women talk about their crowns, the crowds are often associated with the external things. we ask them to sit down and what they value as the crowds in their life. when you think about the things that are the points in your life, you realize the negatives. this helped them to become to understand themselves. one of the other things we do which is fun is draw yourself. really just tell us what is that feature of your body that you like. the first thing you get what?

we dress up and get in the streets and people admire our things but at home, you never get your kids because it is not part of the culture to say you look good or your husband says you are pretty. spend some time looking in the mirror and say you did -- and say, god, you did a good job with me. these women walk down the catwalk. they pride themselves positively3. in about one day, the ones that were very quiet, they are always chatty. the come to that place where they find themselves. going back less by talking to these young people about women rising, the theme for today and the implication for security,

the one thing that struck me was it is not that we are rising now or is it that there is an awareness being created that we're contributing to? in liberia, all my life, i saw my grandfather, my auntie, my own mother work but like her womanhood, no one thought that work was giving a real contribution. it was not like you did anything. yes, this is what you do when your husband's art sitting and thinking -- sitting and drinking. at the end of high school, it is the father to get to speak. the role of these women are minimized. what is happening globally is this new awareness where you are contributing.

projects like the 10,000 women give a perspective for a lot of these women who say they never really counted themselves. i need to shut up. [laughter] >> i wish we had all day. this notion of women's work being respected and whether it is in the home or outside the home -- this week we had the news of yahoo! hiring a 37-year- old women hiring a ceo. the big news was that she announced she was pregnant the same dead. day . there is this same kind of built-in friction between those two pieces of our cells -- the mother and the provider. we want to be both but we are still torn, right?

one part is generally getting short shrift. you write about this very powerfully that you had to give up being a mother for quite awhile in order to find a leader in new and how painful that was. what i love about your book is how human you are. in our country, we tend to like our icons to be perfect. you embrace >> my flaws. [laughter] >> does the 10,000 women attempt to deal with the built-in conflict for most of us? >> maybe i can describe it by telling his story.

i have the privilege of working with ambassador holbrooke on this initiative where we work with the american university in afghanistan. he was so dedicated to making sure that women were central to the peace process. he understood strategically that they were, and we would have a much better shot than otherwise. >> he learned that from may. >> there is always a woman behind men like that. what we learned afghanistan, if you can imagine one of the most challenging places to empower women for many years, the taliban restricted girls from going to school. there were no universities that accepted women. the american university now works with 300 entrepreneurs. there is a woman that we worked with who owns a company called kendo are treasures. k --andahar treasures.

many of the women cannot leave their homes and they give her beautiful and the press likes cars and jewelry that they have made. she sells them and returns the proceeds to these women. the couple of years ago, when she for started working with us, she told us the story of a woman in the most difficult problems and afghanistan. she returned some money one day to a woman living there who literally never left her home. the woman grabbed her hand and told her story. my husband never respected may. my husband barely ever looked me in the eye. ever since i started working with you and making a little bit of income, he suddenly talks to me. he even asks my opinion on things. just the other day, in a submissive way, he said i think these girls tools -- girls' schools cropping up are terrible

but i think i should ask your opinion whether we should send them to school. she told us the story and did she say yes? she said she was much smarter she said to him, i will -- i never bore you a son so because of that, you have to care for these three girls and provide the may dowry. if they go to school, they will learn a skill. like me, they will make money and take care of you in your whole day [laughter] age. the husband looked at her for a moment and said you are right. we will force them to go to school. [laughter] sure enough, those three little girls are still in school. this woman who never read or write or never leave her home, used her moment of power so wisely and she got that moment of power by being economically independent that is where this inner sanctum of investing in women who care about global peace and natural security

policies or if you care about economic growth -- women are the single best investment. >> you emphasize throughout your book that women are the experts in peace building. explain that. >> two brothers live in a compound and they start a fight. their wives and daughters are in the compound. before the fight, these women have observed the buildup to the fight and attention. they know everything. this big fight with destroy everything in that compound. some men outside the compound come to make peace and decide that the women and daughters should sit outside. think about it for a moment.

who knows the beginning of that crisis? who knows those men better than anyone to say if you tackle peace from this perspective this way, you'll get to peace. it to tackle this issue from this perspective this way, you'll get to that. no one but those women because they have been there. tickets to the national level. there is an example -- when we started this movement in the community, the disarmament was like the other side of east hampton. you had mother is coming to us from this side of the block and know when news these boys fought because the left from their communities. and went across the river.

we have guns here and we want you to help us keep the guns from them. we want to do this disarmament with these boys. we're standing there and in many of our communities, there are mothers who are the ones these boys respect. the fathers are off and have no care for these boys. these women understand the frustration of their sons and understand why they want to get involved you also say i am building peace and making peace and taking out the key information. there is a person who has all the information. that is part of it. when we start building peace as women, it is not about our selfish interests. i will give you another story >> -- it is about our families. >> one of the women was in

charge of feeding combatants who could not move. she is using her hands to feed them. he looks up and saw her face and said, mother come sit me up. she sat him up. he said he killed her daughter. did she stopped beating him? fee --ding him? she said is that what peace is about? i had a community of women that i would come back to. she came into my office and wailed.

when it comes to peacemaking and peace building, we are the greatest, we're the ones who suffer the brunt, the ones who feel the pinch, because when your husband is a fighter, and he goes out there, you have to bring a. children you are the mother who loses a son or daughter or you have to raise those children without saying a single world. -- ord. when it comes to peace building, you have to support those things behind you and say i am moving ahead. peace in your community means peace in your life. >> human values. [applause] don't have a particularly high opinion of the un. >> my mother told me that the old people will say of the

meaning of madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. that is the. un [laughter] >> the example of liberia and your transformative role there, can that work elsewhere? you are now working gha fromna from ghana but you have moved back to monrovia. can you transfer the examples of liberia? >> they have this one size fits all for peace building. every conflict is unique. every conflict as a different perspective. when it comes to building peace in different countries, people have to decide for themselves that this is the way it will go. what we can offer -- what i do in communities is sit with women

and try to listen to them. two years ago, we were sitting with those women and that left that room -- >> abby disney produced this documentary, "pray the devil back to hell." >> and she is right there. >> thank you for great work. i recommended for all of you. >> i was saying to her that it will be difficult for us to see the women come together for now. go iswe see in the con that the conflict does not come to the place -- we are the ones -- it is still about which political group wins.

in liberia, we can to that place where it was to hell with our religion, to help with our economic -- economy. we're banding and so in different areas until people can come to that place where they understand that walls are not fought because of the political ideologies and peace can never be main because of the ideologies. if they put aside the ideologies and come together, then they will find peace. >> i think it's also institutions coming together in countries. and i think this could be a tipping point moment for this whole issue when you have a government saying this is a national security priority. you know, corporations like goldman-sachs, it was the single largest investment in empowering women and now other corporations are saying we need to be a part

of this and i think institutions like the atlanta, you were saying earlier, have women have been rising but nobody was noticing and a thing moment is lima say can go either way and that's why it's been so critical to have leaders in the private sector in the government saying we all have to come together now. but because in communities where girls have never really taught

about doing something, there is now this real movement of young women thinking i want to do this and i want to do that. a lot of person would just become head of state in africa that will fight. joyce had just taken over as president since the vice president died, and not that we are part of the same family in africa and leaders and reproductive right, but what joyce is out right. she's an activist during president. so you get those kinds of things from her. i don't think i'm going to be coming to the e.u. summit if i have to sit at the likes of brashear. i don't like him. she was not at the summit. ma la we had a thing an -- malawi had a thing about -- even though she was up for election in two years, to hell with him. >> yeah.

>> i'm living and standing by my conviction. and if it's going to cost me the presidency, so be it. >> yeah. >> and those are the kinds of -- >> hear, hear. [applause] >> i'm just curious. how did you personally feel watching charles taylor sitting in the dock and be sentenced by the highest court in the world? >> you know, there's something like people about taylor, they tend to hold -- the day of taylor's sentencing, i couldn't get dressed. so i came from taking my bath and i put on the first piece of clothing and i'm holding this piece and sitting in front of the television and i continue to read and read and read. the only part that kept going through my mind, oh, see how hard the mighty have fallen. because he's just sitting there and sitting there. >> they don't look so big when they're in the dock.

>> no. and then we step outside, and this is something many people haven't heard, but when the sentencing was going on, when the verdict -- the final four verdict was coming down, the sun had a rainbow around it. and everyone had a live crew and the reporter was screaming this is the first time in my life i've seening in like this and people were calling and saying it means traditionally a big chief is falling. and i say no, god is just telling us it's all right. his conviction is not going to bring us to war anymore. but it was a mixed feeling for me because again, as an activist, i'm never satisfied until justice is balanced. taylor is going to prison. what's going to happen to those amputees? that was my question.

i'm glad because what taylor's conviction has done for africa is to show brashear, all of those who mess around with their people that your day in court is due. so it's either you die now or when you live, you will fear justice. that's what taylor's conviction has done to the world, but the other thing we need to do is to start think while we put millions of dollars into prosecuting the people, in people will never know true justice until there is some kind reparation to make their lives better. [applause] >> i know that our friends in the audience have questions for us so we'll go to that, but first, i'd like to return to where i started, which is that it is not yet a perfect descend

si for women. and, you know, the great conversation that was sparked by the atlantic cover story about women having it all, i think brought back a subject which i frankly thought we already had. do you feel like that, that we can't have it all? >> i'll answer it a couple of ways. first from my perspective of working with so many women around the world. one of the most interesting things about this whole issue is how in our country, for instance, bipartisan it is, secretary clinton's leadership has been extraordinary. secretary rice's leadership was

similar -- >> you worked for secretary rice? >> i had the privilege of working with her and traveling throughout the middle east and many countries throughout 911 and it was clear -- 9/11 and it was clear that she sat at that table saying i won't discuss the national issues until you tell me what you are doing for women and girls in our country. and that is so power and to use that power in our role is extraordinary. and in many ways, this whole dialogue began when secretary clinton so many years ago, now more than 17 years ago went to china and made that declarative statement saying women's rights are human rights and human rights are women rights and it set off such a firestorm as you remember and not only did that statement resonate and create change, but last year when she went to the apex summit when all the asian countries gathered again, she said i know what i've said so many years ago and now i

have something new to say. and that is that women are central. if we want to have an impact in this global recession, they have to be central to the economy. so that is a very -- i think the ball is moving and i think that is so different now. this is not the right thing to do. this is the smart thing to do. >> yes. >> it's smart economics to invest in women. >> and i know more humans, personal level, can anybody have it all? >> i'm not a sure how to define have it all. you know what women do a little better? i'll say one other thing. you know what's interesting about the debate? it's so many men are saying this is the right thing to do. >> how do you feel on this issue? you certainly didn't have it all at once. >> i think we can have it all, and that's my optimistic mind. i definitely think we can have it all. and i think we are having it

all. the problems we have now is just another side -- some other part of the world recognizing that having it all doesn't ask for women, doesn't mean that we want to halt it. it means that everyone's life is going to be better. >> it isn't about personal agenda. >> no. like these women leaders in country like hilary clinton and all of these people, when people start to say we're giving it to them, what else do they want? you want to say to them as you've given it to us. this is just us that are benefiting it from it? don't you see changes in more meaningful ways in the lives of girls in the lives of boys in the lives of people in general, things that are important. it's just not just about quality. >> i want to ask you that because you're saying our personal view.

what i think is different is i don't think it's for one woman to define. i think what women do is give each other breaks to define it for themselves. it's hard to have that conversation and say one path is correct or one isn't. >> yeah. but i don't think men have it all either. those men who spend their lives in the office are missing out a great deal too. >> well, kathy, you want to also ask yourself when you are talking about having it all, what are you talking about it? if you ask me, i will say i have it all. and you say you're living in africa and you have all the problems and i say i have a place where i'm able to stand up and address some of those problems but also have the space to carry some of the women along. having it all is defining what is all. >> yeah. >> all to one person could mean a company, a group of people. having it all to me, having economic security. and some countries peace and security.

but what is having it all? and i'm saying everyone, including men can have it all. it's just an understanding that we're all unique. we all have unique skills. and just allow us to contribute those skills because my theory is the world is operating 50% on its brains. until women come here, it is lacking. >> they're here. [applause] >> let's make some real questions, not speeches. so please, i think we have 20 minutes. so we have mics there and please, whoever's closest to the mic. ellen. >> can you speak a little more about scaling obstacles and models? it has been such an effective one, as you mentioned, the international center for women

has done quite an analysis of women that 10,000 women cannot change the world. so many of the problems of women are embedded in larger issues of class and race and economics, division in the world, north, south, particularly. >> we reached 10,000 over fie years four years ago and at the end of next year, we will have reached 10,000. and you say 10,000 women won't change the world, i wouldn't be so sure. each of those women literally support 100, 200, 300 people, not just the employees that they are hiring, but their families, their communities. i mean, the ripple effect which is why we believe this is the best investment at goldman-sachs was the mult plir of those women. so we have been thinking and talking to our partners.

and we're think how we can get to many more thousands of women with very innovative model. the reason it's been a success is because it's not just education but it's bringing education, mentors from goldman-sachs and local partners and capital together to help these businesswomen. the reason we are in liberia is an interesting story, and one of the things that we'll look at to scale. the overseas private investment corporation approached us. they have made a big announcement with president johnson to create a $30 million lending facility and president johnson surly insisted every one of those dollars go to women's business but this is right after her election. there were barely women entrepreneurs. so many women were not at the level that they could be building a business so they called us and say if you will bring 10,000 women to liberia, we will give first in line status to every one of the graduates to give capital from this fund. to date, 50,000 have accessed

that capital. and we've just started a dialogue with the new president of opec to replicate that model in many other countries. i think it will be a combination of public private partnership. the people at the firm are so committed to this and we would love the ideas on how to reach even more women and we're starting that process now. >> any other questions? yes, the lady back there. >> i'd like to ask about communications. if you're in the united states and you want to communicate with the world, it's rather easy. you've got television, facebook, etc. in liberia, when you're starting, what is the -- >> how do you reach out? such a good question. thank you. >> word of mouth. when we started, we set up committees. we had a committee of 25 women that we call the organizing

committee. and in that committee, we have two chair and a co-chair for the committee, different things, fundraising. so our committee would now go into different communes -- communities with fliers and we would put some announcement on the radio when we have money. but we have flyers go into the markets and going the churches. we targeted areas that have more women. someone came down to monrovia say to buy goods and saw us sitting and they'll come and ask us questions and say to the committee something good is happening the women are protesting for peace. and someone in those committees without even consulting with us would decide let's do the same thing. when they started, they would

sit there and would not speak to the press or do anything formal until we came from monrovia and kind of bless it before they start any action so by the time we started where one group when we end there, two and a half years later, we were 15 groups operating from nine counties. so over 10,000 women. >> and a brilliant stroke, i thought, was the white t-shirt that all your women wore white t-shirts. >> and white scarves. >> so it was like this blaze of white that even charles taylor couldn't miss and -- in his motorcade passing by. so the power of sbosm -- symbolism. good marketing. yes?

>> i have a daughter who's a journalist with rioters and she just went two weeks in pakistan to cover the problems of the country. because she's young, she was instantly invited to two weddings and she started talking to two women there and the women were traditionally kidnapped by husbands and now they're getting turned into multiple wives because of the muslim problem there and she said, you know, mother, i've talked to all of these women and i don't think any solution will come unless some international organization comes in and organize it. so i want to know how you get in touch to go into a country like that to do that kind of thing? >> let me just say one thing. i want to really debunk the myth of the superwoman thing. there is no superwoman in the field of organizing. if you even try to think that

you're a superwoman, you've missed the mark. the thing about organizing is an internal thing and i made mention about my experience. in liberia, since the end of the war, you go to different communities and the challenges are normal. i spend last two weeks with 30 women activists from 30 different communities with some of the worst challenges, rape, teenage pregnancy, and these women, when i got into the room, the first question was how did you put us together? and i told them it's so sad that you all did not learn anything. and they're laughing, but it was really serious. the one question i ask them when you invite a woman to a

gathering, what are you inviting them for? and i said let me tell you something. you have to find something that every woman sees as a problem in the community to mobilize them around that issue. maybe your daughter saw the kidnapping of those women in that part of the world as a problem. until those women for themselves can see it as a problem, even if you have 10 conferences in the u.s. and carried 2,000 more conferences to them, they will look at you like you're mad. >> so it has to come -- >> it has to be internally generated. if i come into this community and start talking about oh, we need to do this, we need to do that, until the community by itself see that particular issue as a problem, i will be wasting my time. so the only way i would go into

any place is if i'm invited by those women to say we need you. come, let's sit together and talk about issues of peace or talk about issues of mobilizing like the women are doing now. we need you to come because we see the elections are going this way. we want to see how we can all hang heads and i keep saying to them we, liberian women will come to a place to work if you are leading the way. we are not going to come with that mentality that we know it all. what kills me and every time i get so upset when a group of people leave from either the u.s. or london fletcher or somewhere and say we've come to this country to teach them. are you kidding me? what you can do is come into the space and share experiences and i can pick from you and you can pick from me and again, together, with all ideas which can make the world a better

place. [applause] >> can i say one thing on that? >> yes. >> i could not agree more with you that that is the most important thing. the fact that so many well-intentioned institutions, government to private sector go in and think they're going to teach something or to help, it's totally -- i think our guiding principle in 10,000 women is how we can go and learn from these extraordinary women and use local partners, local institutions to do something together in partnership. it's the reason we're working in pakistan now because there's so few female entrepreneurs there and so many women came forward and requested that the program go there. and we have a different model there. we have to bring the women to the united states that we worked with, but it is amazing as i know your husband used to say we can do it the wrong way so easily without having that level of respect. >> the nobel peace prize, has it

empowered you? has it made you more of an international mediator, organizer? are your services more greatly in demand and are you willing to engage in -- >> kathy has asked her children that question. they've given a more honest answer. >> well, these children don't see me as a noble winner. -- nobel winner. i wish they could give me a little respect. [laughter] i went to france to visit my daughter and my sister and my niece said you have to come to my school. and so we're arguing about the way we were dressed and i said it's a 10th grader and there's nothing about going to her classroom so let's just put on jeans and t-shirts. because i'm still a local girl. and she says i think we should

try and put on something -- i say you worry too much. anyway, she won because she can nag. so dress up well. >> you look great today. >> beautiful. >> thank you. we got to the school and there was camera and then i said to her why is the press here? and then as i was saying the story and my daughter said so why were they there? and my sister said your mother is a noble peace winner. -- nobel winner. [laughter] so when it comes to the prize, i was just saying to cora and her colleagues when we were at breakfast, there's one thing about this prize that i've come to learn very early on. people, when you have the prize, you are like an ornament. so people want you to come to their events to brighten it. so you know we were able to -- you know like there's a very lovely ornament on the christmas

tree? bam. and you're doing nothing but to brighten it. >> that's not why we asked you. >> i resisted that. i will not go to any space where i know that i'm not going to make any impact and people are not interested in what i have to say. that's clear-cut. immediately after the prize, we identified issues that i've worked on, that are dear to my heart and that i will continue to work on and those are the issues that you get me to continue working on. so there's this. now i work on peace and security for women reproductive health and rights. this is an issue we need to continue to talk about and girls leadership. those three things, you will get me to anywhere to talk about. so you get all kinds of demands to go to different places, but i'm very selective about the places that i go to that's one.

two, you have all of these big platforms globally that will invite you to be a member of. can you come and be on the board of this? can you be on the -- we said no many times. but i just along with the president of tanzania got on the high level panel on reproductive health and right between now and 2015. that's a long time to be talking about family planning. but i think it's something that is have important. one of the things, kathy, that i say and i say it to this group and you can take it and use it as a quote. what the nobel has done for me as a person is given me a local girl a global platform to advance the issues of rights of women and girls. [applause] >> it's so inspiring. >> oh, somebody's screaming down

there? >> yes. >> ok. now we have the mic there. then we'll come to you. >> hi. this is a question for lema and i don't know if it's a silly question but i so admire the courage and the tenacity and the obvious wisdom that you've brought to your experiences in your own country. and you've overcome such dramatic injustice and violence. i wonder if you have any thoughts for us women in the u.s. who have been raised with less of the dramatic challenges and sort of have the illusion of equal opportunity. do you have anything, you know, character traits or practices that you found successful, that you would maybe in your wisdom advise us to embrace or carry forward so that we're not like secretary clinton, just cracking the ceiling but maybe shattering

it like you have been in liberia? >> first, i used to be afraid to speak about u.s. issues because when you go to get a visa, it's a tough thing. . [laughter] but now that the government of america decided to give me something, they call o one. people with extraordinary abilities. >> you certainly deserve that. and you speed right through that passport line. >> no. this last trip, my son, arthur, got lost in the airport in chicago. and because i kept going back and forth, i think they thought our planes had something somewhere. so they took me to the holding room. i was so mad. [laughter] but anyway, when it comes to the u.s. and women and what they can do, one of the things that i've seen over the many years i've been coming back and forth, the

first time i came here was in early 2000 and no one -- the people are engaged with could not distinguish between liberia and libya. [laughter] honestly. or when you say i'm from liberia, they say nigeria? liberia? libya? you know, those kinds of things. >> even politicians. >> yeah, over time, what i've seen is -- and i think 9/11 in a bad -- which was bad, but in a very good way open up that face for the kind of hunger for people who are curious who want to know what is happening on the underprivileged world. that is that kind of thing. that's one. one of the things that i would wish to see, because like you said, there is an illusion that there's the equality existing in this country. you are -- when you have women

issues, and you should be angry, i see people angry in their living rooms. and they never take it outside. you have resources. there is -- if she calls a tv crew and invited 10 of her friends to make a statement about something that was going wrongly on the issues of women's rights, the media will pay attention. and sometimes i still -- i feel, this is my personal opinion and i think i'm on tv, right? [laughter] please don't hate me, those of you watching. sometimes i feel that, with all of the resources at your disposal, you're a little bit too laid-back when it comes to women's rights issue. and i think some of the things that we read in 2008, glory came to began da to come to -- ghana and those african women wanted

to eat her up. because for them, she represented one of those people who open up this page. >> yes. >> -- for some very difficult conversations on women's rights issues to stop. >> for all of us. >> what we see now is like you all have put it in the fridge. it's on ice. so a lot of things will be happening not just for women happening in is in country but globally. sometimes i say to myself maybe you know it. or maybe you don't know it. but you can change the world for women out there if you were just a little bit more assertive. [applause] >> good answer. >> ok. we will hear from this lady. the fact that there's a 18%

income disparity tells you that it is true. >> i want to ask you on a personal level in terms of having it all, how you each came to terms are motherhood and activism and what choices were involved with that. >> ok. starting with you. >> you know, i was asked a very difficult question a few days ago when i did an interview. someone said to me would you have done it any differently as a mother? growing up, my kids sitting there -- lemu, stand up. [applause] she's actually my niece. her mother is -- if you read my book, my sister died in 2006. she was lemu's mother. and geneva had to take care of all of my kids.

so geneva is the one who died. we used to make fun that when i ever stop running around, we will both write a book on the growing up years of my kids because she knows when this person lost their tooth, she's taught them very well. and then someone asked me, if you could do your life differently, would you do it differently? and i said no. and the audience went -- you know, like you're a cruel mother. but for me, motherhood is making this world a peaceful place so that these girls and deena's girls don't have to worry.

>> those are the values that i espouse. will is never any questions on my list of priors that my children were on top, and yes, i admit i may compromise it professionally to maintain that, i found that life as a roving foreign correspondent was not suitable to mother hood and so i tried my hand at writing books. now i'm just about to public my eighth and i have two very good kids. my name perhaps is not in like the way i dreamed when i was in my 20's that i would be the next barbara walters, but i do -- >> pretty darn close. >> hardly. i think we all make bargains with ourselves. so i don't -- i really don't buy

into the superwoman thing because i think we all make compromises along the way. deena? >> well, i'm so lucky, as i said to kate and ava and as kathy said, there's nothing more precious to me than those two little girls and along the way, there were tough days of needing to be two places at one time, and somehow they would know that. because when kate met one of the graduates at goldman, this is from nigeria, really, nigeria, one of the 10,000 women graduates and it was a day after she had been in school and she met her and she said to me afterwards, wow, i can't believe that something you did could help her. and i remember thinking on my tough days, i have to remember that we are all our daughter's first role model in life. >> yeah. >> after a while, they -- amber

told me, my daughter, amber there, is very quiet in an evil way. [laughter] >> yeah, she looks very evil. >> abbey says she'll be looking at you and she's laughing at you in her head because she has done her whole analysis of you as an individual. she told me when she was growing up, mom, i would never want to be a peace builder. my interpretation of that is i want to stay home for my children. i read somewhere and my fate is very important to me and what i do, i see as something that i'm doing for god. it says do what you can and god will help you do what you can't. i held on to that. >> wonderful. [applause] >> well, thank you so much, deena. you're wonderful. lema, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you so much for joining us, ladies and gentlemen. [applause]

>> and in under half-hour, we will take you live to detroit, vice president joe biden holding a campaign rally there. live coverage coming up at 3:00 p.m. on c-span. and mitt romney is in newman. and a campaign event there during which he's scheduled to announce a new energy plan. that be live just before 4:00 eastern tomorrow. and also here on c-span. the tampa bay times forum in tampa. it costs $2.5 million to build the stage, according to the "new york times." on the weather situation, rick scott released a statement about tropical storm isaac saying " florida state managing teams have been working closely with convention officials. have been planning this for a year. " bob buck horn spoke about the

convention. here's a portion of what he had to say. >> this is the biggest thing this city has ever undertaken by a long stretch. all of you know that we've hosted four super bowls. we host an unusual invasion every winter. this is a big deal. bigger than anything we have ever done by a long stretch. if you multiplied all those super bowls together, the magnitude of this and the number of moving parts involved in this process would far surpass that by probably six, seven, eight, 10-followed. the security issues are very unique. that's why this is a national special security event.

we could not have done this without in the help of david and the hgso. they have been absolutely wonderful to work with. you see chief caster in blue but in real the, those uniforms are purple. because they truly work that well together. it is two interchangeable agencies and we could not have had better partners in this than the sheriffs office and i tell everybody that. so colonel duncan, thank you on behalf of the blue team for all the work that the green team is doing to help us. there will be challenges. we all understand that. there will be traffic issues. there will be congestion. there will be security concerns. there potentially will be confrontations. it is the nature of these kinds of events in a post-9/11

environment. there will be significant security issues that are involved in this as we make sure that we protect the nominee and that we protect the people that want to come as delegates to the events and those who want to come to for the an alternative opinion. we are choosing between the two. we don't care what folks are protesting about. that's not our job. we're not here to pass judgment. we're not here to care about the politics of this. this is an economic development opportunity for this community likes of which we will never ever see again. and let me tell you about the scope of this event. other than the olympics this year, this will be the second most viewed television event in the entire world. this is tampa's opportunity to shine on the world stage like we will never get again and we have never had before. it's our time to tell our story, and to tell the world what a great place this is to grow your business to invest, to buy real

estate to move your family to visit to travel to enjoy. the tampa experience that all of us know because we live here. folks, we're never going to get this chance again. ever. and i think when we look back on this 10 years from now, they will say about this moment that this was a time when tampa played on the international stage like it has never done before. this is our coming-out party. and i think this will transform this city in the eyes of the world in more ways that we can ever imagine. we're not here to discuss how we got here. we're not here to discuss politics. we're not here to discuss the ordinance. we're not here to discuss romney or romneyville. we are here to help prepare you for the four days that is this event will be in our city. and we want to have a healthy discussion and we want to have a respectful discussion and i want you to know and hear from all of these people each of whom have pieces of this, whether it's tampa police department or solid waste.

there are so many moving parts that i want you when you leave here today have a better understanding of what has taken place and the amount of study and the amount of preparation has gone into this by the folks that you see here, but more importantly, what to expect during the week of the convention and how you can plan your lives accordingly. we want to minimalize the impact on you but we all recognize that there would be an impact on this community but the benefits will far outweigh in the long run, the short-term impact that we will have all and the minor inconveniences that we will have. >> and again, live coverage every speech, every minute of the republican convention beginning monday. the democrats get underway the day after labor day in charlotte, north carolina. live on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. the schedule for next week in tampa looks like this. they'll get underway monday, 2:00 p.m. eastern, a long day. and the rest of the week, they get underway 7:30 p.m., live on

c-span as we just mentioned. a reminder, coming up about, we'll take you live to detroit. vice president biden campaigning there. we will take you to detroit once it gets underway. a kind of debate to give states more flexibility in dealing with federal welfare rules from obama. >> >> here we're to talk about changes that were announced when it comes to the welfare programs. could you give us a sense of what was done in 1996 when this program was enacted and what has been changed?

in the 1996 law, one of the reasons people were against it on the left was these people were not ready for employment, and that was demonstrated not to be the case. we require people to go to work, and we found the overwhelming majority of the caseload could move into jobs, and that was the best way to increase earnings, rather than sending them off to prolong the education, and things like that, though a state could do that under the law if it wants to. i would also disagree that we do not have enough money in the welfare system. we have increased spending on the poor, which is called means-tested aid, by 30% over the last year. it's not an option. it's a national requirement, the case loads dropped about 50%. they had not ever dropped after world war ii. they have never gone down. they immediately dropped about 50%. half of the democrats in congress voted against us very adamantly and in fact, they have sought to repeal that program

and especially to eliminate the work standards periodically in the last 15 years and they've not been successful until about a month ago. host: what happened a month ago? guest: the obama administration illegally said that these poor work standards in the program and we can talk more about what they are, they would eliminate them. they would say that they would be waived, no state would have to comply with them. these are the work standards right here. i helped to write these. obama said they're gone. and he said we will devise our own standards to replace them. it's completely illegal. it's basically waiting through a bureaucratic trick, what they could not achieve in legislation which was to get rid of the work requirement. host: they put out an ad talking about this act, the criticisms that it has received from the romney campaign. i want to show you the ad and

get your response to it. >> i approve this message. >> mitt romney claiming the president would end welfare's work requirements. the "new york times" calls is blatantly false. the washington redskins says the obama administration is not removing the bill's work requirement at all. in fact, obama's getting states to remove 20% more people from welfare to work and president clinton's reaction to the romney ad? it's just not true. get the facts. host: can we start with the part that said the 20% more than previous year as far as moving people to work if guest: did they eliminate the work requirements? and the answer is yes. they basically said this is section 407 of the law which contains the work requirements. the law says you cannot waive these work requirements. they said we waive them. no state would have to abide by them. so that's a pretty substantial change in the law from these are

the standards passed by congress to these are some unknown standards that h.h.s. is going to issue with no possible input from congress. so did they eliminate the work standards? yes, they did. what they might claim is oh, we illegally removed these standards but we're going to put in real tough standards in their place which is what they're trying to say here but anyone who knows this subject knows that's simply not the case. for example, what they will do is replace these standards with bogus standards. the current standards require about 30% of the able-bodied adults in the program to engage in some work activity or job search activity in a given month. half the case load does nothing. but we have this minimal standard. they have waived that and say we're going to replace that with various different things. one of them is called universal

engagement. well, universal engagement means everybody does one hour of activity per week. it's a completely meaningless standard. they also said we want to count exits off the case load. well, this case load has a certain automatic turnover rate. and it has always occurred. at what periods do you have the most exits off the case load? when the case load is going up, not going down. in fact, we had more employment exits off the case loads before welfare reform than after because as the case load goes down, there are fewer people to go off the road. it's a complete shams statistics and it's been known. that's why congress never adopted that statistic because people who were serious about work would say this doesn't measure anything. it is a reverse indicator. the worst you're doing, the worst the case load goes up. it was used prior to welfare reform but it's deceptive. it says we're getting rid of

welfare dependence and we say we're not going to have those sham statistics anymore. we're going to bamboozle the public into thinking we're all about work, we're all about reducing case loads and reducing dependence when in fact the statistics are meaningless. host: you can ask him with your questions. send us e-mail or a tweet as well. in the past, if i understand it correctly, the federal government has given states a chance to do things or at least make changes that would apply better for their state than the federal mandate. why not apply to this case? guest: the current law is very flexible. but what it says is the court of the law, you have to do something about work. all the current law basically

says is to a state, you have to have roughly 30-40% of what you call work eligible adults engaged in some kind of activity. it has to be about 20 or 30 hours a week to count and then we give a range of 14 different activities ranging from a g.e.d. class to on-the-job training to supervise job search to subsidized employment to employment. very wide range of activities that count under that. and it's very difficult to come up with something that doesn't count under this system. but the obama administration has said we want to change that. and they explicitly said we want to lower those participation rates. when you read what they said, we want to exempt people out. well, it only applies to a third of the case load. why would you need to exempt things? why do you need to make these standards lenient when as we speak, half of the case loads are sitting at home doing absolutely nothing? why do you need to make this

more lenient? and then they would reduce the number of hours and moreover, they've said we'll get rid of those whole participation rates entirely and replace it with these vague things like universal engagement, which literally means you do -- maybe you assist your child with homework one hour a week. it's a complete sham and it's due to the fact that the left wing of the democratic party opposes work fair and has really since the nixon administration has really hasn't changed. we used to say work fair is slave fair. they used to say that. they don't say that anymore because 85-95% of the american public beelum that welfare recipients should be required to work or prepare to work or at least look for a job as a can be for receiving aid. if you disagree with that, which is what the left wing appointees and the h.h.s. disagree with that passionately, they have spent their careers fighting against it, you can't say we're

against this. you have to say oh, yes, we're for work. by the way, we're getting rid of the existing work standards that worked well. we're replacing them but trust us, what we're replacing them is going to be very tough. host: first call is from sun city, california. rudy from the democrats line. caller: i agree with you about the welfare. everybody needs to get out and work. the only thing i would like for somebody like you to say is that this is not against any demographic group because, of course, when everybody looks at welfare is either black, hispanic, you know, of minority nature it and really needs to be put out there that this is everybody. guest: absolutely. caller: and i would like for your comment on that. guest: it's absolutely true. the majority of this precip gent in welfare programs in general are not black and they're not hispanics. they're white non-hispanic.

what we have to understand is that this program is only one of 80 different programs that the federal government runs to assist poor people. 80 different programs and those -- on those programs, we're currently spending nearly $1 trillion a year. this does not include social security or medicare and of those programs, we have roughly one third of the population which receives at least one benefit from one of those programs each month. it's a huge, huge system. and out of those 80 programs, only two -- three of them had work requirements. it's amazing, ok, but now it's down to two because the obama administration is essentially removed the work requirement from the program. >> this is florida. phil, republican line. caller: i had a question. why is it more done to keep the illegal immigrants, you know, from getting welfare? why is it so easy for them to

get it and why is nothing done to stop that? guest: well, illegal immigrants per se probably are not allowed to get -- to get welfare. it's unclear to what extent the states actually enforce that. but what they do is that if illegal immigrants tend to have children born in the united states, they're in fact about four to five million children like that under the law, those children are treated as-american citizens and they are eligible for welfare. so there are a lot of illegal immigrant families that get welfare on behalf of their children. incidentally, those families are exempt from the work requirements because the benefits are only going to the child and the parent isn't getting anything. so the system is pretty bizarre in that they get more lenient treatment than u.s. citizens. host: when someone's under 10, what requirements are there as far as who do they report to as far as what their job activity

serge -- search has been? guest: it's up to the state. the system is very flexible. we allow the state to determine what activities within a pretty broad range how they're going to report it, they do have to keep track of what the individual is doing, which is important, but sometimes people say that tracking is a little excessive. maybe it is, but the obama administration could have changed that in the regulation, which is legal. they didn't have to throw away the law in order to change those things. it's basically just a very broad law. and when i explain to people that in this program, half of the case load has no work requirements because the child is with their grandmother or with than aunt or with an immigrant parent who's not subject to the work requirement and then the remaining half of the case load, only about a third of those are participating fully in work. so it's about 15% of the total case load that are participating

in work. most people say wow, that is ridiculous. it's far, far, too low but what we have here is a change that will in fact even eliminate that standard and make it much more lenient on the state so that people really don't have do anything. host: here's a quick one from george schultz at the health and human services. he wrote a blog explaining some of the process saying many states report that their case workers are spending more time complying with federal documentation requirement and helping parents find jobs. guest: i heard that. i don't necessarily agree with that but that is again, in my law, just to explain, there's the law itself and then the department issues these regulations that implement thank you law. all of those reports requirements are in the regulation. the obama administration has complete legal authority to change those regulations. so if he's claiming other reporting requirements are too tough, he could change it. he didn't have to go back and

strike down the law itself in order to do that. so the fact that they chose not to change the regulations concerning reporting but to wipe out the law itself really is a demonstration that they have much border objectives in mind that they want to change these core requirements which say for example, a third of the able-body work eligible people have to do some type of activity. that's too onerous for them. they want it more lenient. host: is it too early as far as what these climates could look like under these changes? guest: one of them is this thing called universal engagement which sounds tough. it sounds very ronald reagan like but what that meant is that everybody on the case load, all the work eligible adults has to do one hour of activity a week. it's a joke. it's designed to sound tough, to appeal to the 95% of the

americans to believe that welfare recipients should be required to work while in fact, doing nothing. and the bureaucracy can go back to the business of writing checks. they've always been most comfortable with that. welfare bureaucracies are not the most dynamic institutions in society. and they don't really like being required to do much of anything. the reason the act was initially successful when it was in its most vigorous form was it forced the bureaucracies to push people and the resep yips responded very positively. when you say you can't sit at home and get your check anymore over the long term, most of the response -- most of them response very well. people who want to come into the welfare program goes down dramatically because well, they have other options and we shouldn't be encouraging people to unnecessarily enter welfare if they do in fact have other options. host: robert rector with

heritage foundation l.a. independent line, hi. caller: good morning. in terms of who is eligible, it seems like everybody. but i feel like we are overpopulated and i wrote my senator about 15 years ago and said we cannot continue to bring in immigrants that are able to take lower paying jobs and we do nothing about the illegals. you know the illegals cost california $10 billion a year. they get free health care. they're very lean yen with the welfare, most everybody is on welfare. and they have no respect for --. so my question is how do we go about illegal immigration? everybody said oh, this country

is built on immigration. that's true, but they weren't greeted -- graded by the welfare system and we didn't have it at that time, i don't think. host: right. caller: and they had to learn english. they had to get a job. and they melted into the -- guest: you're right in the sense of illegal immigrants do get free medical care. they also get free education for their children. they also if they have children born in the u.s., those children will be very heavy users of welfare so illegal immigrants receive far more in government services than they could ever pay in taxes. the same thing applies to legal immigrants if they have a low education level. for example, about a third of all the legal immigrants in the u.s. do not have a high school degree. those families on average receive over $10,000 a year in

means tested welfare benefits, cash, food, housing, care. they receive about $2 of government benefits or $3, actually, and they're very costly to the u.s. taxpayer. you can't import welfare dependence. the point that the caller made in history when we had high immigration say around the time of world war i or before that, there is no welfare state. we have a welfare state that costs close to $1 trillion a year.and if they are legal in particular, they are natural recipients of that system. host: atlanta, georgia. good morning. caller: i understand what you're saying, but when i am competing to find a job, and people who are trying to get work, if they do not have the

education, how do they get a job? i work with this socio-economic group and the biggest roadblock is the lack of good mental health. with so many things cut, particularly in the mental health, just pushing them out there and say work, work, work -- these people are mentally not able to. it is not they want to sit around and not do anything. i agree that we should not be giving our money to illegal immigrants, but what about a 62-year-old grandmother, or a 73-year-old grandmother, what should she be required to do? i work with women out of jail in california. so many have mental health issues that are not addressed.

there is no money out there to help them. we are giving tax cuts to the wealthiest americans who are supposedly job creators creating jobs overseas where people work for pennies, but not in this country. host: we will let the guest respond. guest: with respect to the grandmothers, they are not subject to a work requirement at all. in half of these cases, the child has been placed with a grandmother. we do not know whether the mother is in the home and not reporting that fact or not. will not be subject to the work requirement. that is half of the caseload. where there is a parent in the home, the work requirement applies to only one-third of those. the state can send them to therapy or anything like that. in the 1996 law, one of the reasons people were against it on the left was these people

were not ready for employment, and that was demonstrated not to be the case. we require people to go to work, and we found the overwhelming move into jobs, and that was the best way to increase earnings, rather than sending them off to prolong the education, and things like that, though a state could do that under the law if it wants to. i would also disagree that we do not have enough money in the welfare system. we have increased spending on the poor, which is called means-tested aid, by 30% over the last year. it has risen from 4.5% to 6% of gdp. the total spending this year was $927 billion. one-third of the u.s. population gets paid, and that comes to around $9,000 per person, and these figures do not include social security and medicare. it is an enormous system and

under obama's plan it will get larger in the future. host: how did president clinton come to pass this legislation? guest: he vetoed it twice, and going into the election against bob dole, the republicans passed it again, and he was advised that if he were to do it again, he might lose the election. he signed it. most of his cabinet urged him not to sign it. within his administration, he was probably the only one that was philosophically attuned with the idea of work, but most of his party was not. half of the democrats on the hill in 1996 voted against every version of this bill that was passed, and they have never

changed their mind. the democratic party has shifted substantially to the left since 1996. because the public likes it, the democratic politicians will never say it is a bad thing, but if you go on the hill, liberal democrats trash this bill. they dislike it. they attempted to repeal the entire act in 2002 and replace it with something completely different, and it would have had no federal work standards. again, because their position, which has not changed very much since the 1970's, that position is very much at odds with the public. we have to have a flimflam of trying to do away with the work requirements quietly, as obama

has done, and at the same time beating your chest, saying how tough you are. host: what was your role in crafting the legislation? guest: i was an advisor, and i crafted these work standards for them. i think they were pretty good. i am biased, but they worked pretty well, particularly after the passage, before they were watered down. they are not perfect, but again, they are fairly flexible. all the standards say is roughly one-third of work- eligible adults have to do some type of activity, 20-to-30 hours a week. we do not allow people to go to college and count that as a work activity. " but if the state wants to send somebody to college, they are

perfectly free to do that. host: what was the economy like back then? guest: it was much stronger, and that is an important point. the work requirements combined with a strong economy that brought these caseloads down between 1996 and 2001, they have continued to go down, but not as fast in part because of a weakening of the work standards, and in part because of the weak economy. when obama came into office he suspended the work requirements because of the recession. that was not an unreasonable thing. i did not perfectly agree with that, but that was not utterly unreasonable. this change that they are proposing is a permanent one. it is not temporarily because the economy is bad and there are no jobs. this is a permanent change that does away with the law and replaces it with something new. it is completely illegal. they have never even made a

pretense to demonstrate that this is the intent of the law. everyone involved in writing the law said you cannot do that. we clearly said you could not do that in the law, and there is nothing in the historical record that would ever indicate that they have this right. the law has been there for 15 years. nothing has ever suggested they had the right to get rid of these work standards, and all the sudden they came up with this shifty loophole. and they said they have this huge authority to basically get rid of the core of this very popular legislation. when they were caught, they said we are not really changing anything. if they did not want to change anything, why did they decide to override a law? caller: thank you for educating us on this issue. there is not enough education

out there to begin with. i am a small business owner. i have eight employees. please bear with me. i am a republican. i voted for obama last time. i would like to make that clear. it is not about democrats or republican, but about change that never happened, in my opinion. that said, my business is down since obama took office, which is not all his fault, 50%. my employees, not one of them make less than $14 an hour. with welfare reform, larger chains like wal-mart can hire employees for minimum wage, which they are entitled to do, and people still collect welfare. i never knew that.

i thought if everybody worked, they did not collect welfare. my question is about large corporations. if i can pay a livable wage to an employee and still make ends meet, how is it that we can not change the minimum wage for everyone to move them off of this system? guest: well, you have a very productive business, apparently, they you are able to pay that high level of wage, and you must have fairly skilled workers there. not everyone is capable of contributing that much to a business. if you artificially raise the minimum wage, although many people gain from that, one of the clear consequences is the lowest skilled people in society are put on the shelf because they cannot earn that wage. we do have a welfare system that supplements those wages.

we have the income tax credit that basically says if you have a low wage and you are a parent supporting kids, we give you up to $6,000 a year. we have a very generous system, but what we are trying to do is say that within the system those programs should encourage work and encourage marriage. in the food stamp program,there are no work requirements now. there is no work requirement in housing. these programs would work much better for the taxpayer and the recipients if we simply stood by the principle that if you are an able-bodied adult and you need assistance, we will give you that assistance, but in return, you should look for a job.

why could we not apply that in food stamps? not throw anyone off of the rolls, but just apply the principle? the reason is the left is opposed to that. they regard welfare recipients as victims of social injustice and requiring them to work as a type of punishment, which it is not. ultimately, it is in the best interest of the recipient as well as the taxpayer. host: here is annapolis, maryland. independent line. matt. caller: i appreciate the talk on the subject. i have three points i want to make. when you take away the work requirement for any type of aid, food stamps or whatever, the problem you run into is the lack of motivation to get out there and do anything. when you put your hand out there and people give you

something, there is no motivation. my wife is a school teacher in anne arundel county. she teaches at five different middle schools. she is amazed at the difference in the attitudes of these kids. some are less fortunate. some are not. she asks the kids what they want to do for a living, and their response is i'm going to collect a check from the state. it is taking away the motivation and that has been going on for years now. it will take a huge effort to recover from. host: make the other two points, please. caller: i am just trying to say there has to be a work requirement, and it is beneficial. guest: i think that is exactly right. you do not want people growing up with the idea that life is about a handout. they are not all that generous,

but their larger than people ordinarily think. you basically are cutting off multiple generations from productive participation in our society or real success. in combat is handed to you without you really doing anything for it is not that psychologically rewarding. one thing that we have found over and over in the work programs,by the time they get into it, they feel a reward, because now they are taking steps to at the least give more to their own well-being. they have pride in that. their kids learn something. i am not saying it is a panacea by any stretch of the imagination, but it is a much better system. again, we should apply to every single one of these welfare programs. if you have an able-bodied

adult, he should be required to do something. in the food stamp program, for example, there are more than 4 million able-bodied adults that do not have kids, usually young men, that get checks, and they get about $2,000 a year, and they're not required to do anything. that is simply not a good message. you should require them to come in and look for a job. if you require them to come in to the welfare office and look for a job under supervision, most of them will get off the rolls because they have alternatives. host: earlier this month we had a discussion about this with an anti-poverty advocate who supports the obama administration on this, and he asserted that welfare basically does not exist anymore. i'll show you what he had to say and then get your response. [video clip] >> there is an unspoken

assumption that there are millions on welfare that want their check and are dependent. the fact is welfare barely exists anymore. it is ironic that poverty has gotten into the campaign, with an attack from the right. as i said before, in half of the states, less than 20% of the children in poor families are getting help. in this recession, there are 6 million people in this country who only have food stamps because cash assistance is not available. their entire income, 6% of our population.

food stamps, which gives held at one-third of the poverty line. guest: he is playing a trick there. andwhen he defines as welfare is the temporary assistance to needy families program, but the income tax credit, public housing, so forth, they do not count toward the welfare system is best the larger than it was in 1996 reaching the do not account. you have to look at all 80 programs. i'm talking cash, food, housing, medical care. the welfare system is vastly larger than it was in 1996. 100 million people get this aid. they get a least one benefit of this program. it is an enormous system. if you took all of this system and converted into cash, it is five times the amount of money needed to eliminate all poverty in the united states. it is simply false to say the welfare state has shrunk in any way.

>> all of this is available at c-span.org in our video library. and vice president joe biden is about to speak. live coverage here on c-span. ♪

[cheers] [crowd chanting "usa!"] >> thank you. i do not know who you are more excited to see, me or toure -- joe biden. [laughter] i am proud to represent my hometown of flint, michigan. [cheers] for me, the olympics were a time to represent my country, even possibly bring home the gold.

and the amazing about the olympics, you learn about the world. but as much as you learn about them, you love your own country. new field of fire when people from other countries show you what it's like to represent your country in the world. and it good when you have a president and vice president representing you. we have at times, but what we have not, we just get up and keep going. [applause] when things are looking bad for the auto industry here in michigan, they bet on us. for young people like me and my friends, they are betting on us

by putting an education for all of us, helping our schools get better, and helping us in education. it is tough. you make sacrifices. but it is worth it because you know you are part of something bigger than yourself. that is what this election is about. and something vice president joe biden understands. he knows the working town like scranton, pennsylvania. he knows the price you feel in never giving up, always getting up, and fighting for what is right. ladies and gentlemen, it is my honor to introduce the vice president of the united states, joe biden.

[cheers and applause] >> hey, folks, hasn't she amazing? [cheers] i want to introduce you to another athlete, not a gold medalist, but a heck of a lacrosse player. this is my granddaughter. [cheers and applause] and i think she came because kirsch was going to be here. [laughter] i am so happy to see you all. that is pretty impressive. i have to tell you something. a watching you, clarissa, it

reminded me -- some of you have heard me say this from afar. my dad had just one saying. i have played sports, but it was nothing like this child. i played sports and i thought it was the essence of what was most important in my life in high school and college. my dad would have only one thing to say when he would watch me play football or baseball from the time as replying in fourth grade. he would say, joey, just get up. you get knocked down, just get out. the child, you know how to get up. [applause] my dad used to say, the measure of a man or woman was not hot -- t whether they got knocked down, but how quickly they get back up. and guess what, detroit is getting back up. [cheers and applause] and i tell you, -- where is john

conyers? thank you for the passport into the district. i know this is your district. and john is one of my great friend and my whole career. great to see you, buddy. and congratulations. i understand represented clark is here. where are you? hey, how are you doing, man? the only thing i don't like about him is that he is always better looking than i am. but i like him alive. and a guy who has -- and someone who has been my friend for a long time sandy conners. for any congressman to come in here to hear the vice presidency, it is like a bus driver going on a bus driver holiday. you have done that before.

i also want to thank anita williams, the principle of the school. she said to me earlier, welcome to the best high school in detroit. [cheers] and coach rice, where are you? a coach, how are you doing? i understand some of your ballplayers are here. hey, guys. it i understand you got a big gain coming out. go get them, guys. and you guys only big. you know why? if i was not here, you would be out there on the grass. [laughter] i used to love anybody getting me out of preseason football practice. if any have you ever played football, if they tell you they like preseason, they are nuts. look, folks, i will try to get right to it.

i'm impressed by the crown. thank you all for coming out. [applause] i am not ready to go a couple of rounds with clarissa, but it is hot in here, folks. the country in november will face one of the starkest choices it has had in my memory. because there will be no wondering who stands where, no wondering what direction this country is going to go depending on who gets elected or reelected. and governor romney is a decent man, a good family man. [boos] no, no, no. i disagree with him on an almost everything politically, but he is a good man. when he selected his running

mate, those stark differences even became more stark. [cheers] congressman ryan, who is again a good family man, a good man, he has given definition to the vague commitments that governor romney has made. now we know congressman ryan and the republicans in the congress, as one person said, they have already passed in the republican house what governor romney is promising to pass to the whole nation. i say to my friends in congress, it is a little bit like two governments running against one another. there is no mystery here. and they are straightforward about it. how to use an old football metaphor, they are not hiding the ball. they are telling us exactly what

they're going to do, and they have done it. they have done it in the house. and ladies and gentlemen, they call their new economic plan, what they are talking about, they call their plan . they call a ball. and they call it gets a. -- they call it new and they call it gutsy. but i say there is nothing new about giving a millionaire a tax break. and there's nothing bold about cutting medicaid and medicare and education and research and development in order to pay for that tax cut. [applause] not only is it not new, folks. it is not fair. it is not right. and the people who will pay the price are the working class folks and middle-class folks in this country. [applause] they are the ones who will pay the price. and there is overwhelming evidence.

if this policy will not grow the economy again. it will not grow it. it did not before. and, we have seen this before. and it will not grow the economy now. folks, we have seen this movie before. we know how it ends. it ends with a great recession of 2008. throwing millions of people out of work. it was a catastrophe for the middle-class and working-class. falls, we cannot go back to those days. we have to move forward. ladies and gentlemen, the president and i have a very different way forward and our republican friends. -- then our republican friends. we know the history of this country, and from our experience we know you do not grow the great economy of this nation from millionaires down. you grow it from the middle out. [applause]

that is how you grow it because by the way, folks -- [applause] by the way, folks, when the middle class is growing, the poor have a way up, and the very wealthy do very, very well. everybody benefits. what this is all about when you cut it down to its core, it is about american having an opportunity to have a decent standard of living, a decent job, to be able to own their home and not grant it. it is a place where hard work is rewarded and taking responsibility is expected. look, folks, my dad had an expression i heard my whole life from the time we had to move from scranton, pa. when he had to find a better job to take care of his family. that is how i got to wilmington,

delaware. here is what he would say -- no joke. he would stick to my job is about how lot more than a paycheck. it is about -- he would say, a job is about a lot more than a paycheck. it is about your dignity. it is about your place in the community. it is about being able to turn to your child and say, honey, it is going to be ok. that is all, it is going to be ok. and believing it. too many people where i come from, here in detroit, around the country, too many people are not confident about being able to turn to their kids and say, honey, is going to be ok, because they have been battered. americans, through no fault of their own, have been stripped of their dignity. and millions more who have jobs have had to live for the past

five, six, seven years with stagnant wages, no increases, making it increasingly difficult to care for their families. i talk about the longest walk a parent can make. the longest walk a parent can make is up a short flight of stairs to a child's bedroom -- and i mean this sincerely -- to say, honey, i'm sorry, but daddy lost his job, mommy lost her job, or the bank says we cannot live here anymore. honey, you cannot play on the little league team next year, you cannot sing in the choir. we have got to move, honey. my dad made that walk. when i was going from third grade to fourth grade. when he made the walk, he said, but it is going to be ok.

157 miles awaye to wilmington, delaware, because that is where uncle frank was. when he got enough say, he would bring us all down. a lot of you know people who have made that walk. a lot of you know people who are going to bed tonight and will be staring at the ceiling wondering whether or not there will be able to live in their house five months from now. am i going to be here? am i going to be ok? are my kids going to be ok? i wonder how many of you knows somebody where mom and dad sat at the kitchen table in the last couple of months and said, who is going to tell saundra that she cannot go back to school at the college or community college next semester? we just do not have the money. how are we going to tell her? folks, and i mean this sincerely, when the president and i ran the first time, we

knew how tough it was going to be. we knew the devastation that had been visited on this country by the great recession. even we did not know how extensive it would be. no one did at the time. but we were determined to to restore dignity and pride to hard-working american people, to provide them with the ability to care for their family. if there are over 4.5 million people today i am proud to say that are making a different walk. not of the stairs to their kid'' bedroom, but a walk to the manufacturing plant where they are allowed once again to make the best automobiles in the world. [cheers and applause] the walk from the assembly line to the car and they go home and say, honey, i am proud of what

i'm doing. it walk from the graduation stage at the community college to a four-year college to a high-tech company that just closed down its operations in china and came to detroit or michigan. [applause] -- detroit, michigan. [applause] and walked back home to the dinner table to say to the kids, my does not have to work two jobs anymore. dad is ok. i have a job again. that is what is going on in the neighborhoods i come from. that is what people are looking for. we've got a long way to go. there are still on awful lot of people out there still hurting. but things are starting to come back. we have been fighting to help people keep their palms, help them keep their health care, keep their child care, so they

can work and know someone is going to take care of their child, protect them from predatory lending and wall street abuses, and encourage american companies to in source instead of outsource. [applause] they have a vote in the congress -- but we had a vote in the congress. all we said was, look, instead of doing like we have been during the last 30 years, instead of giving a company a tax credit in the millions of dollars for going into a factory in michigan or delaware, unbolting the machinery, putting it in the belly of a ship or in the belly of a plane and taking it to china, instead of getting a tax credit for doing that --

we reward people for moving. we cannot keep them from going, but we can stop giving them a break if they do go. [applause] we came along and for john said to these guys, look, -- and john said to these guys, look, let's give a tax break to the guy who unbolt the machine in singapore and brings it back to michigan. [applause] it is kind of simple, right? i mean, not complicated. they all voted no. they said no. [boos] we should be discouraging outsourcing, not encouraging it. clive governor romney has done, but "washington post" said romney and that companies he owned at bain capital pioneered

outsourcing. [boos] as elected officials would say, when i saw her party on that about a month and a half ago, the romney campaign with sai, vice-president biden does not understand. he does not understand the difference between outsourcing and offshore in. [laughter] can you picture id now? two people in the unemployment line. one turns to the other and says, were you outsourced or offshore d? what difference does it make? you do not have a job. [applause] i guess that means they are bad guys. they just do not get it. they do not get what happens in the street, in the neighborhoods. they do not get what happens when people do not have these jobs.

[applause] republican obstructionism has slowed our progress, but it has not stopped it. [cheers] in spite of governors romney -- governor romney's insistence " led detroit go bankrupt" we rescued the automobile industry. [cheers and applause] saving 1 million jobs -- [crowd chanting "four more years"] with your help, we will. look at what has happened since we came out of bankruptcy, 200,000 jobs created.

a commitment -- and you are seeing it here in michigan -- a commitment of almost $30 billion to be reinvested in the united states in equipment in plants, which will create another 10,000 jobs. we passed the toughest wall street regulation in history, turning wall street back into what is supposed to be, and allocator of capital, not a casino. [applause] folks, we improved education, raising standards and demanding more of teachers, students, all of us. my mom had an expression. she used to say, children tend to become that of which you expect of them. we expect a lot of you because you are capable of a lot. [applause]

we did common sense things that you would have thought of before. we took the $60 billion that we would be paying banks over the next 10 years to put through in loans for students to go to college, federal laws, and we said, look, you guys are ok. we are not going to pay any more. we're going to take that $60 billion and put them into pell grants to help people go back to school. [applause] the banks were not doing anything wrong, but it was a waste of money. in this neighborhood, in every neighborhood across america, instead of 6 million kids in school because of pell grants, there are 9 million. [applause] and by the way, i have been in and out of iraq and afghanistan over 20 times.

my son spent a year in iraq as a captain. i am seeing firsthand as my congressional friends have seen the sacrifices this 9/11 generation has made. faults, may be the most important thing we have done is that we believe the only truly sacred obligation our nation has is to care for those who we send to war who, on injured and in need. [applause] -- who come home injured and in need. [applause] by guaranteeing them health care as long as they live and giving them the opportunity for education that they are entitled to. [cheers and applause] we even had to fight with these other guys over whether or not they would support giving businesses tax breaks if they hired a veteran stock and an

$8,000 tax break if they hired a wounded warrior. it was a fight. we should not even be talking about that. [applause] anymore than we should be talking about why we should pass a violence against women bill. why are we talking about? [cheers and applause] we have cut middle-class taxes every year we have been in office. federal taxes for middle-class families are at their lowest level since the eisenhower administration. we cut small business taxes to help them grow. we helped millions of families modify their mortgages so they could stay in their homes. and we help more than 1 million refinance their mortgages, saving $3,000 per year. we could do it for another 12 million if the republicans could just get out of the way. [applause] and it will not cost the

government a penny. [applause] i hope some of you guys graduating from this grade school next year -- great school next year are born to go to a 4 year college or a community college. my wife teaches at a community college and she says the best kept secret in america is a community college. [applause] here is what we did with our congressional delegation. we went out there and said, do you realize there are 600,000 high-tech manufacturing jobs going unfilled in local communities? -- communities. why? because over the years we lost the tool and dye makers, the generation of specialists. these are new technologies. all people need our certification. what did we do? we partnered with colleges and

companies and we said to the company, what training do you need it? and we set that up in the community college, so you can graduate and go directly to a manufacturing job averaging $50,000 a year. [applause] the kind of jobs, i might add, that even mitt romney cannot export. [laughter] look, the result. 29 straight months of private sector job growth. 4.5 million private-sector jobs. i have a million new manufacturing jobs. the fastest growth since the 1980's. and by the way, it would have been another 1 millionth or 2 million jobs created if they had who supported our jobs bill. that is what the experts say. [applause] i know over the years of lot of democrats have said to sandra and two hanson and to john and i -- to hanson and to john and

i, why is it that republicans are able to reduce what they are saying to a bumper sticker? they are against taxes and for the military and so on. why can't we do that for you -- what can we do that? i've got a bumper sticker for you. osama bin laden is dead osama bin laden is dead and general motors is alive. [cheers and applause] you want a bumper sticker, that sums it up. it tells you what the great president of ours has already done. he has guaranteed it measurable progress not enough, but it is important progress. governor romney and congressman ryan are running on a theme as well. their theme is how "restore the

dreams and greatness of this country. but what they are not telling you is that the very plan that the congressman voted for in the last 14 years, the very economic policy that the governor supported as a governor and as a businessman is the very same policy that is what america's greatness is in jeopardy. [applause] i-5 if fascinating -- i find it fascinating. make time to see one of your republican friends that says we can do better. ask them the following question. the congressman and a governor acknowledged that president obama and vice president biden inherited a really difficult economic situation. that is what they say, right? what else could they say? ask your republican friends how

they think we got into this difficult situation. [cheers] what happens? how did this calamity land on america? it was just going on a great one day and then all of a sudden, bam, the great recession. [laughter] my granddaughter has a little cousin, my fourth granddaughter. her name is natalie. if she were here she would say, did casper the friendly ghost do it? [laughter] how these things happen? what they did not tell you was when congressman ryan was elected to the congress in 1998 during the democratic administration, we have a balanced budget and the middle class was driving. [applause]

what they did not say that the day we were sworn in in january 2009, we were -- we inherited a deficit, a bill of $1 trillion when the president sat behind his desk. and in a class that was devastated. -- and a middle class that was devastated. and now it is amazing. they have discovered the middle class and they care about it. there are running to save the middle class. -- they are running to save the middle class. john, you have met my dad before. my dad was a high-school educated, graceful, decent man. he is to have an expression. his name was joe. when someone would say, joe, let me tell you what i value, my dad would go like this. he would say, don't tell me what

you value. show me your budget and i will tell you what you value. [applause] that is fair, right? i value women in the work force. i do not employ any, but i value them in the work force. [laughter] let's take a look. let's be objective. stand back and take a look at what these guys value. let's look at what they are proposing. let's look at their budget. and governor romney says in the first 100 days if he is elected, he will repeal the wall street reform legislation that we have passed and let the big banks once again write their own rules. [boos] he then says he wants to continue the same policies that have encouraged the outsourcing over the past two decades. he wants to make massive cuts ha -- i mean, massive cuts in education.

ask john and the other congressmen. they tried to pass and they voted against it in the house. barack, michelle, and joe and i were literally waiting to go into a an event together and i think it was michelle that said, you know, not a one of us -- and this is serious -- not a one of us -- my wife, jill, who is a community college professor, me, michelle, barack, none of us would be standing where were if it were not for college assistance [applause] and these guys want to wipe it out. they make massive cuts in medicaid, forgetting that a significant number of the people on medicaid were thrown onto medicaid because they lost their jobs through no fault of their own.

if the budget that they support, which passed the house and got defeated in the senate, the one that romney is pushing, if that were to become law, 19 million people on medicaid today, including 1 million seniors, would be thrown off. 75% of all the people in our home getting care -- in a home getting care, 75% are women. where are they going to go? do they think about the consequences? what will happen if that happens? 19 million. massive cuts proposed for future generations of social security. romney put forward a detailed plan of social security. if you are in your 20s by the time you are old enough for social security, you get $4,000

less than someone gets now. if you are in your 40's, you'll get $2,000 less than someone gets now. massive changes in health care. allowing insurance companies to once again make the world. not a joke -- literally. repeal obamacare, and guess what, no longer does an insurance company have to keep you on a policy. they can tell you, guess what, you have hit your limit. we have -- you have gone through chemotherapy for eight months and we will not pay for it anymore. that was before we passed obamacare. massive changes in health care. they say, it will not affect anybody, which is not quite true. i will not go into the detail, but under 55. they say, you will get a voucher. the government will give you a set amount of money to go out

and find your own insurance policy. right now, it is guaranteed. if you have medicare, you go to the doctor and pay, pay and the government pays the rest. -- you go to the doctor and pay a copay and the government pays the rest. the experts have looked at it. totally non-partisan. they said it would cost seniors an average of $4,600 a month more for their health care. when my dad was dying, i had the great advantage of having him live with me. and my mom, the last four years of her life, living with me. toward the end -- and you pay a lot of money as vice president and you paid me a good salary when i was a senator.

i have four kids and they are successful. it was still a troubled -- still a struggle to take care of my mom's bills. no complaints. it was an honor. but we had to lie to my mom and tell her, no, this is all covered by your medicare and this is all covered by the sale of your home, which is not. -- it was not. do you know any parent who wants to be a burden to their children? i do not know anybody who wants to do that. folks, they changed the whole deal, and they do all of this stuff i have not mentioned. and they kick 200,000 kids out of head start. [boos] i could go down the list, but you are standing and i will not take more of your time. here is the deal. why are they doing all of this? they are doing this in the

service of being able to provide these massive tax cuts for the wealthy. i go into a lot of detail of what you already know in your gut. but let me give you two examples. when romney and the republican friends say they want to extend the bush tax cuts for the wealthy, let's just take tone group of people. that poll tax cut will cost $1 trillion over the next 10 years. do you know where $500 billion of that goes? you'll think i'm making this up. it goes to 120,000 families in america. that is not a joke. half a trillion dollars, which means they've got to cut half a trillion dollars somewhere else or balloon the deficit. a half a trillion dollars goes to 120,000 families.

and on top of that, governor romney has been straightforward and not hiding the ball. he said to my watch a $1.60 trillion tax cut for people making $1 million, and on top of that, another tax cut for those making over $250,000 a year. five times the median and come -- the median income. ladies and gentlemen, this is not only a giant price tag, but it increases the deficit. i'm going to sound like a policy guy, and i'm sorry. i sound like a senator, which i was proud to be. the non-partisan tax policy center -- this is one of those thinktank groups that go and objectively look at all of the proposals that we always come off with. they said, if these tax cuts go through, it will mean the average middle-class family with a child, one or more children,

will have their income taxes go up -- their taxes go up 200 -- $2,000 a year. this is real. in order to give $500 billion to 120,000 families. this is not class warfare. i come from the wealthy little state of delaware. rich folks are just as patriotic as poor folks. the difference here is that nobody has asked anything of them. and they are not even asking for this. romney calls the president out of touch. [laughter] out of touch. swiss bank account, untold millions in the cayman islands, refusal to release your tax

return. [laughter] they call my president out of touch? come on, get real here. [cheers and applause] folks, this is not your father's republican party. and this is not even mitt romney's father's republican party. [applause] this is a different group of people. they have a very fundamentally different vision for america, one that is totally different than ours. our vision rest upon a prosperous, a growing middle class. and we see a future where my granddaughter that you just met has every piece of what opportunity my grandson has. [applause] we see an america where women get equal pay for equal work. [cheers] for real.

we're getting hill does not risk bankruptcy, where nowhere no m'l or raid that a middle-class where we provide access to college at every qualified kid regardless of what labour but they come from -- neighborhood they come from. [applause] have not only do we bring back the auto industry, but we become the leader hot manufacturing country and the world. where is it written that we cannot do that? in america, where once again, instead of ranking 16, we rank one in the world for the percentage of population that graduates from college. where science is valued, innovation is encouraged.

a middle class that get their taxes cut and not raised. where medicaid is expanded, medicare fulfills its original mission. we see a future where we maintain our obligation to take care of our veterans. the president said, this is a make or break moment for the middle class. it really is. so much is at stake. i haven't even talked about foreign policy i haven't talked about what the supreme court would look like after four years of the romney administration. i believe we are going to win. [applause] let me tell you why. i believe we are going to win because in the and, throughout our history, every presidential

election has come down to one fundamental look as it relates to the candidates. who has the most character, the character of their convictions, and you have the vision -- who has the vision. on that score, i don't even think it is close. it's not close. i am absolutely convinced that the american people are seeing that. they are seeing my guy, our guy. a backbone like a ramrod. he does exactly what he says he is going to do. as the congressional delegation can tell you, i spent four-six hours a day with him every day with the exception of the last five weeks were we were both campaigning. he's on the road and i am. i have known eight presidents.

once, and all the time i have been with this president, including our private meetings, in the difficult decisions he has made heard him ask me or anyone else, what are the politics in this for me? not one single time. [applause] folks. i am absolutely certain we will rebuild this country stronger than it was before. i am absolutely certain that we are going there rebuild the middle class stronger than i was before. i know as you know that given half a chance, the american people never ever let their country down. not waonce.

and it is never a good bet to bet against america. never ever. let's meet this moment together. with your help, we will win michigan and we will win this country. thank you and god bless you. it may god protect our troops. thank you. this is what it's all about. getinting up. god love you. thank you all. ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> we will have this video shortly at c-span.org. vice president biden traveling to tampa, the tampa area. on monday, august 27, the same day as the start of the republican convention. the president obama has been in vegas making his way to new york city for several campaign stops later today including a basketball event with michael jordan. mitt romney has been in iowa, a manufacturing company and heading to little rock this evening for a fund-raiser with

supporters. tomorrow, he is in new mexico. he is expected to announce his energy policy just before 1:00 eastern on thursday. and tampa bay, the side of the 2012 convention inside the tampa forum.imes the first nominating convention in florida. about 50,000 people expected to attend. there is concern about a possible tropical storm or hurricane. tropical storm isaac is getting stronger as it moves closer to florida on monday. the police chief of tampa has talked about the -- preparations. >> i want to go over what the

police department has done to prepare for this event. i want everyone to know that the first element of any special event deployment is that we cover the neighborhoods. if we want to make sure that there is no reduction in services. the same number of officers as you have any other day of the year. we use all of the officers and in addition to function in the rnc. this takes about 3500-4000 police officers to secure an event of this magnitude. if we don't have that number in the tampa bay area. we have partnered with other law enforcement agencies throughout the state to come here and assist us with this event. there are two events that are going you have the political

event in side of the secure zone. -- two events that are going on. you have the political event inside of the secure zone to procure a candidate for presidency. and you have where people will be able to come and express their viewpoints and exercise their first amendment rights. both of those processes are equally as important. it is our job to make sure everybody has a safe platform to express their views. community oriented policing is not a philosophy or a division or bureau within the tampa police department. it is our way of life that defines the police department. that is how we have been able to reduce crime over the last few years.

you have done that through the community policing approach. all of you have seen a map of the event zone. within that, it will be broken down into smaller geographic areas. each one will be overseen by a commander from the campbell police department or the hillsborough county sheriff's office. in those areas, there will be smaller geographic areas of several blocks that officers will be assigned to. everybody will get to know them. business owners, residents, they will get to know the officers in that area. we believe it will be very successful. we obviously have the ability to expand and contract on that if we have crowd management issues

and a particular area. we have the ability to send officers there. i will show you a photograph of the uniforms you will see. everybody loves this beautiful polyester uniform that we use. we will be a a tan colored uniform octton. -- that is cotton. it's cooler for the officers and it is more approachable. people won't hesitate to come forward to the officers. the crowd management gear, th you will see a photograph of that as well whenever there is an issue of public safety or a large crowd that we have to deal with. it is our hope that no one will see that, but it is probably unrealistic. our job is to identify

individuals that are bent on destruction or destruction and remove them from the crowd as quickly as possible so that we can restore that peaceful environment. the individuals that are coming to tampa to express their point of view and demonstrate will do so peacefully. there will be a very small group that will be, as i said, bent on destruction and destruction. we will be dealing with those individuals. we have done a great deal to communicate with all levels of the individuals that are involved. the town hall meetings. but we have had meetings with the business managers, the building managers. we have met with davis island and a lot of individuals to try to communicate exactly what to expect and what they will be seeing during this event.

we have also communicated with the individuals coming to canada to demonstrate. we have participated in panels with the aclu and a webinar dealing with the rnc hosted by aclu. they were singing our song at telling everyone that they do not support any criminal activity and their expectation is that everyone will follow or abide by the lawful orders of any police officer. they also said that there of the individuals in the crowd whose job is to incite everyone that taking actions that they normally would not take. they cautioned individuals. it is our job to insure that everybody has saved time and everybody gets to express their

viewpoint. we know that there will be spontaneous events for communicating with those individuals as well so that we can develop a process that will be advantageous to everyone. we certainly expect that as well. these are the uniforms that i talked about. this is what you will see on a day-to-day basis. on the bottom is what we refer to as the turtle gear. we have done a great deal of training. officers get 10 days of training with an attentive crowd management training that is put on by the department of, and security that involves three days of training that every officer is involved in crowd management and goes through. we have done a great deal of amendment.on first

the golden rule is that everyone is treated with dignity and respect. there is no exception to that rule. obviously, that as a cornerstone of law enforcement and all officers would be expected to treat everyone with dignity and respect. we are reinforcing this with all the officers that are coming to assist us. we have gotten five sessions of commander training. this is not your everyday policing where an officer deals with a witness, a victim, a suspect. this is group policing. the officers will be expected to act as a group on the commanders instruction and not acting individually. we have trained all of the

supervisors and commanders and let them know that we have set the bar very high and our expectations of leadership, they are to insure that the officers are showing restraint, they bring in an extra supply of patients and them, and they only act on the commanders orders. and the message that reinforces the talent and the philosophy of our enforcement, every officer coming here. if that wasn't enough, we want to make sure that there is an e- learning test that the officers have been obligated to take and pass. we believe everyone will be prepared for this event to ensure that it is positively

reflecting on the city of tampa. >> i am not in the habit of breaking promises to my country. and when we tell you we will change washington and stop leaving our country's problems for someone else to fix, you can count on it. [applause] we have a record of doing just that and the strength, experience, judgment, and backbone to keep our word to you. >> you have stood up one by one and said, andenough. the greatest risk not we can take is to try the same politics with the same players and expecting different results. you have shown what history teaches us.

defining moments like this one, the change we need doesn't come from washington, it comes to washington. >> c-span has aired every minute of every major party conventions since 1984. it continues with less than a week ago with live gavel-to- gavel coverage of the democratic and republican national conventions. o starting next monday with the gop convention with new jersey gov. chris christie. and the 2008 presidential nominee senator john mccain and former gov. jeb bush. julian castro will deliver the keynote address and michelle obama with bill clinton. earlier today, hispanic leaders met to present their public policy priorities for the next congress.

hector sanchez declared the latino vote critical to winning in the upcoming elections and planned to attend the convention still let the candidates know the latino community will hold the candidates accountable. it is an hour. >> buenos dias. my name is hector sanchez, i am the chair of the national hispanic leadership agenda and for the council of latin american advancement. the most important latino organizations in the nation. we have members across whole business, health care, labor, education, and the civil rights

sector. it is a unique position to give the agenda on behalf of the latino community as a whole. i like to introduce some of the leaders that are here today. will be able to respond to some of the questions. with the mexican-american legal defense and educational fund, the league of united latin american citizens, speaking with the coalition with the hispanic federation. the national hispanic coalition on aging. the hispanic colleges and universities. the national hispanic media coalition. the national hispanic bar association and a national

conference on per uerto rican women. i will ask the representatives to come and answer some of the questions when we are done with the presentation, please. and the importance of timing is unique. the latino community has been under constant attack that has been making lives unbearable. in unity and solidarity to say enough. and of to the constant violations of human rights and civil rights of the latino community. enough to all the pieces of legislation in the nation. enough to borders oppression and that is excluding latinos from the democratic process. enough to an educational system

that excludes latino children. enough to the crimes. hate crimes. [speaking spanish]

it is more important than ever. it will leave us accountable for their actions and the impact that they may have in the community. it is very clear that the latino vote has become decisive for national elections and we only keep growing. both parties need to earn the latino vote. both parties need to earn the latino vote. the policy platform, the committees of both the rncc and dncc. we will be traveling to tampa to dn tovc conventional thec -- and then to the dnc. we want to be prioritized for

the next congress and state legislatures. we intend to hold them accountable. we will issue a progress report outlining what issues have been advanced and which have not. it is through this report that we will inform the latino voters. they plan to meet with republicans and democrat leaders on capitol hill. , the white house, and governor mitt romney. we have an opportunity to gain the interborough support from the community and key organizations around the country. we have a number of committees and working groups with experts in each one of the areas that we

are going to present today. and recommendations for the entire body. these committees are education, civil rights, immigration, economic empowerment, government accountability and health. we will hear from those commendations today. in case you want to take a closer look, and the case of economic security and empowerment, it was clear that the latino community was hit the must. there were households with latinos the lowest at about 5000 in comparison to more than 100,000. we recommend access to capital for entrepreneurs, preserving growth for federal contracting opportunities.

provide pathways to sustainable homeownership and combat predatory lending practices. defend the right for collective bargaining for workers. and support the agenda in the workplace among others. i would like to introduce representative from the policy recommendations for emigration. [applause] >> my task here is to go through the education priorities that we have selected as a consensus- based body. those can be found on line in the report or in the reports that you have in the audience. the main items that both parties should have arcade-12 education. there are three separate conversations around k-12

education going around. whether it is the flexibility that the department of education has approved for many states around the country that will last for two-four years, or the supported state consortium to discuss how important education topics. these are critical outcomes and the measures of success. we have to ensure that student progress is measured through multiple measures. and must not abandon a rigorous accountability system. we cannot mask the data that shows disparities for migrant students and students of color. data and sub-group data is extremely important. we must not drop to a percentage planned approach. we must have accountability for all students, all schools.

federal accountability that attaches to the lowest accounting schools is critical. the last have every drop out factor in the country. we must hold them accountable by federal actors. in a school that has a persistent achievement out must account for purposes of accountability. any deviation from 100% accountability is untenable. we must invest and invigorate the college career ready curriculum debate that is going on around the country. that is critically important ha. last, we have failed and we must solve the issue of diagnostic assessments for english-language workers. and also as their progress. we must have reliable indicators for them to listen, speak, read

and write english. they are heavily invested in flexibility application that has been approved and any conversation that is going on around the country. for the federal programs for education, it is essential that the government fund and extend programs that meet the needs of latino students. even if it is headstart or even start. whether the k-toe program for four migrant students. there are tremendous amount of programs that make a difference in the in the lives. these are college assistant programs and increased investments. these other colleges where our students are attending disproportionately.

and finally, vocational trading skills are important. we look forward to the authorization and work force investment act helps people learn new skills and basic civics and the modern economy. these included the entire ones for latinos. [applause] i have also been asked to cover immigration. let me go over the recommendations we are making for both parties. a measure of success includes the following topics. we must maintain a fair and orderly path from action to halt removal. this program that was just unveiled will only exist for two

years and it is up to the next administration to continue this end of path and in order that is fair to all potential applicants. temporary solutions are not enough. in part to give all these undocumented students a path. immigration does not just affect young people and youth, it impacts the entire latino community. there must be reformed for legalization and citizenship. it unites families and allows workers to enter with rights and protections that safeguards the entire workforce. it is essential and can't be deviated from. the measure of success is comprehensive in the next congress. the next white house and congress must get this done.

in states like arizona, the supreme court has spoken with clarity. the supreme court upheld state immigration laws and struck down most of eras of's lock. we must find new ways to curtail enforcement of so-called states immigration laws. he's inevitably lead their racial profiling end of unnecessarily strained relations between police at a local latino communities. from our perspective, those are non-starters. we will hold those parties and branches of government accountable. >> i am the vice chair of the national hispanic leadership agenda. as well as the lead of latin- american citizens. i will talk about accountability

this morning. we believe that this portion of the agenda is critical to ensuring that the rest of the recommendations are actually available to our community. without civil rights, we don't have a level playing field and we can take advantage of the opportunities of education, the economy, health care, business opportunities and parts of the agenda because the playing field is not fair right now. there is too much discrimination and a lot of it is intentional. congress and the administration are the primary recourse for fairness. we end up being discriminated against across the country at local, state, and national level. we have to do something to make sure our community has fairness. that is what the principal role is about starting with voter

identification requirements, we have seen an incredible effort by states in this election cycle to suppress the latino vote. it is probably the worst we have seen in a long time. we started out fighting against the jamb crow laws. it is hard to see states trying to react laws better trying to do the same thing. like the national hispanic leadership organizations to keep them from engaging in the process to throwing latinos off because it is possible that the voters that our citizens and using the data bases are so outdated that have turned out to be 100% accurate. we need to make sure that voter suppression is stopped. to rein in the corporate money, influencing our government. the more money influences our

elections, the less that the people, the latino community and others have a right to say who gets elected. we think it is important to change citizens united and make sure that the real power lies with the people that vote. we need to safeguard the efforts that are indispensable. we'd been out that if we don't have good data, we are out of sight and out of line. right now, there are efforts to try to prevent the center's zero -- census bureau. to the effects of hate speech in media, we support the policies to expand and promote media ownership and diversity. this is one of the ways that they are keeping latinos from realizing the american dream. toey're riling up others

prevent opportunity and we are continually dismayed at how badly these laws are enforced. only the extreme cases get the police and most of the other folks to say anything and get away with it. just by putting political pressure against these shows are we able to get some of them off. i think we need to do a better job of enforcing that. unfortunately, we have gone backwards in this area. we need to change that, considering this country will become a minority population. we have to support efforts to ensure that the department of justice and the equal opportunity employment commission aggressively pursue workplace safety and enforcement

laws. we have seen that this discrimination will run rampant throughout the united states. it has made a huge difference, and we need that to continue not to increase. this is something that we are extremely concerned about, especially with efforts to police immigration. it becomes an excuse to target people of color and we have got to prevent racial profiling. this is really critical for seniors. this is a bill that is before congress right now and there is no reason not to extend and enhance. for victims of domestic

violence, we can't back off. across the federal government to ensure they are carried out, like the u.s. department of homeland's security, we need to make sure that it is accessible to communities. we are disheartened by the english only legislation trying to close the doors of opportunity by denying them access to our governments. we need to dominate and confirmed and judges for expanding civil rights that will reflect the growing diversity of the country. it is really the court of last resort for our communities to sustain our rights. for many examples we have to go to the court and the only way we can do that is if we have judges that appreciate that role in this regard and i will talk a

little bit about the government accountability. one thing that is really important about the government accountability, we also have to make sure that we realize the fact that the government can only serve our communities if it reflects the diversity of the communities. 8% of the federal government is latino. that 50% is the highest gap in the country. it is something we have to work on and change. it is under 4%, they are so have and they don't representation. some of the recommendations included increasing the number of hispanics in the work force,

including senior positions, creating a pipeline. this is where organizations will help out because that will be getting the word out. will hold these leaders accountable. this is something that we can't help out with and it is something to hold them accountable. go away they can't just long and continuous same thing without facing repercussions. we need to focus on increasing federal contracting rules for small businesses, and in " excess -- and equal access. key areas where we can improve government accountability. let me introduce the national council --

[applause] >> buenos dias. i am here to speak with you a little bit about health, a critical element across our society. it is an area that affects each and everyone of us every day. if we are healthy -- unhealthy, we are unproductive and it affects important aspects of our lives. if we are a family member or caregiver that takes care of sick loved ones, we must work to drive down health care costs. we also need to reverse those disparities among latinos. we see the issues of held at the heart and the root of everything we do. we know, i diseases don't occur overnight. several stages take place homo

for a person's health goes down the road of no return. promoting and creating access for preventive care and services is key to promoting health equity. a health care system with healthy people isn't as costly as one with individuals with chronic diseases. the policy recommendation is a focus on access to care. particularly access to preventive care. that is why we believe a solid first step insurers and prompt deployment of the affordable care act. it is not a silver bullet but it is moving us in the right direction. the it addresses factors that lead to health disparities. children, pregnant women, and latino seniors. it does a wonderful job of

offering affordable care by eliminating pre-existing conditions and protecting them from health insurance abuses. we applaud the affordable care act for strengthening medicare by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. increasing relief for seniors in the double is also important in this matter. providing preventive benefits like free screening and annual checkups, there are other parts that we would like to see strengthened. one example would be finding the way to implement the class act to provide patients with affordable and accessible long- term health care insurance plans. while there is a long way to go to find that perfect the law, the affordable care act has proven that the country could not delay any longer on

improving via quality -- the quality of health care. another aspect of the policy is the need for more culturally competent -- in the health care industry. when it comes to health-related interactions with a health-care provider. we know the cultural and linguistic competence he is not just about language. it is acquiring specific knowledge and understanding about the communities that we serve. creating a bond, establishing that relationship and securing a level of trust. this way, patients have the tools and information they need to make informed health decisions. tied to this is the diversification, creating

opportunities for young health care professionals to serve their communities is not only gratifying but another important factor in addressing inequities in our society. as a matter of public health and common sense, we must take action to ensure that hispanic communities have the tools and resources it needs to be healthier. they can focus on other important issues to make the country stronger. it is within that spirit that we can set forth these policy recommendations. we believe they can help move the needle significantly if implemented. we urged policy-makers to consider them and work with us to make this a reality. our next speaker will give us some closing remarks. >> thank you, anita, brent,

hector, him. -- jim. i want to thank all of you for being here and taking time from your schedules to be here with us to present this really incredible agenda that is representative of an incredible effort by the leading latino organizations that have come together to make sure that the community has a voice and that policy makers across this nation are listening to what the agenda is. ultimately, what we want is that policy makers and public officials, there is no america without latinos. across cities, across towns, across the nation, our success is intertwined with the latino community.

we must have a thriving latino community. we have the fastest growing number of small business owners across the nation. it is also very strong and it is helping to expand and rebuild our cities. we also have an increasing number of latinos going through colleges and universities, graduating with high-quality degrees. those of the stories we need to communicate to the public at large. if we want to get our country back on the road of recovery, we must invest in the latino community. this is outlined in the 2012 policy agenda.

this campaign to make sure it is implemented and carried out by policymakers begins today. we have met and secured commitments from republican and democratic leaders. i am here to share with you, as hector mentioned, we will be at the rncc and the democratic national convention. we will be at the center for the present to this agenda to republican leaders. we will be at the democratic national convention on tuesday, september 4, from 10:30 to 11:30 at the museum of modern art in

charlotte, north carolina. the information will be on the web site shortly. i encourage you to join us and make sure that we speak with one voice as one community to make sure that the leaders here us loud and clear. this campaign begins today. we look forward to your questions and answers. and thank you. [applause] >> i would like to ask all the leaders that i mentioned at the beginning to stand with us and the frost to answer some of the questions. some of you are experts on a number of different issues and i want to have everyone here up front, please. as i mentioned in the opening remarks, we have expertise in a number of fields and we come

together to debate, to strategize, and this is our public policy agenda. we will open it up for questions. in english and in spanish. >> yesterday, the gop and incorporated in their platform the support for immigration laws like in arizona. a middle ground to talk with the republicans at this point? is there any middle ground if we have this kind of signal? [speaking spanish] >> i will attempt to answer some

of those. as an opening statement, we are non-partisan. a but the report within party -- but the republican party has made a number of statements, and we say enough. as i also say in opening remarks, we are here to say enough is enough. we will move the agenda forward. [speaking spanish]

>> i think the platform you mentioned is just the tip of the iceberg. there are extra tests in both parties across the political spectrum. that doesn't necessarily foreclose the conversation. not every party has experiments. but there are moderates that are willing to have a reasonable dialogue. this debate cannot be had based on what is politically expedient but based on what the supreme court has handed down. those platforms must be refreshed, reviewed, and matched. again, the federal government has significant power over

states that choose to go there. there are future cases to be had and future nuances. just because someone has an extremist platform does not prevent us from engaging those people that are willing to make reasonable to find common sense solution. >> returning congressional correspondent. i will be going to both conventions, so i will be interested on your approach with the different parties. will you emphasize different things? and what kind of commitment are you looking for? by the way, i think you have to supremeesp spin on the court stuff. there were 14. in 2010 and the supreme court denied three of them.