center for asia-pacific policy. you can read the report online at rand.org. that is our show for june the 10th. we will see you back here tomorrow on "washington journal ." [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] correct 50 years ago today president kennedy signed the equal pay act requiring employers to give women and men equal pay for equal work. this morning, president obama will talk about that legislation and its impact on

equity. the administration has pushed congress to pass the paycheck fairness act, designed to make wage differences more transparent and guard against retaliation from employers. you can see live coverage of the president on c-span at 11:30 eastern. coming up this afternoon, president obama is expected to whitete the veteran house official as president of the council of economic advisers. to thewas an adviser world bank. that is at 2:10 eastern. the antrim forum on u.s. cybersecurity efforts here and abroad, live coverage, as we see the number of attacks increasing. that will be live at 12:30 eastern. health, first lady i

the mckinley also suffered from epilepsy. because of that, her husband, william mckinley would sit next to her at state dinners. if she had a seizure, he would shield her face from guests with a large tanker tif until the episode past. despite her health problems, she traveled as first lady, even extending the 1901 pan-american exposition where her husband was assassinated. we will look at the life of i at mckinley live tonight 9:00 eastern on c-span and c- span3 and also on c-span radio and c-span.org. ida mckinley. >> looking at the legislative agenda in congress this week, the house will gavel in tomorrow at noon eastern, 2:00 for legislative work. lawmakers will focus of an era of the week on the 2014 defense authorization act. that includes $552 billion in spending for national defense. an additional $86 billion for overseas contingency operations. senate will be back at 2:00

eastern today and will continue debating on the bipartisan immigration proposal, creating a congressional -- a conditional path to citizenship. it also would approve or security and it puts caps on visas for high skilled workers. at 5:30, lawmakers vote on final passage of the farm bill, setting policies over five years. you can see the house live on c- span when they gavel interests and is always on c-span2. >> house lawmakers this week will pay tribute to their colleague, michigan democrat john dingell, became the longest serving member of congress in u.s. history, serving 20,997 days. he represents michigan's 12th congressional district, spoke about his 57-year-long career at an event hosted by the atlantic in washington. this is just under an hour.

>> good morning. >> good morning. >> is this working? >> no. [laughter] >> we are about to have one of the most extraordinary moments that anyone could possibly have listening to john dingell. everybody in this room knows about him. i will not give you a long introduction. i will say a couple of words. for anybody who loves and is passionate about politics, loves the game of politics and making policy you cannot help but admire, respect, and indeed even love, not all the time i am sure.

the chairman. he has been center stage since 1955. his father was here starting in 1932. the word "dingell" is synonymous with getting things done in washington. it was a time when we got things done in washington. there's hardly a piece of legislation in the area of health or energy or environment or security or telecommunications and others that john dingell did not have his fingerprints on. -- securities. he has been center stage for a long time. just to give a quick perspective, he's the only member here in the 1950's. is that right? he is one of two members that was in the house in the 1960's. he was in the house before president obama was born.

[laughter] we have some perspective here. what we are doing today is steve, the editor of "the atlantic," is going to have a conversation with john. we are indebted the foundation for helping us do this. we want to welcome and give a tribute to debbie dingell. [applause] it me quote from john, and will turn it over to steve. having a very tough race in 2004, one of the few tough races john ever had said, "i had the curious view that i have to be judged on what i stand for, what i have done, my

ability and effectiveness -- excuse me for being in your way. >> don't you worry. "my record and my personal integrity." he also said, "i keep on going." john, thank you very much. [applause] >> i wanted to say a special hello to those watching live on c-span. we have live coverage. i love the c-span guys. there are many established people in this room. -- distinguished people. a special shout-out to john. i am happy to say hello to all of you. i want to highlight elizabeth

who is president of atlantic live. i do not see her. she is working hard. it is such a pleasure to have you here. when i talk to your staff and your wife, we talked about various states. -- dates. maybe not to do this on friday when it is scheduled to rain. i said, no. june 7 is the day, 57 years ago he surpasses the late robert byrd's record. i wondered if he was here, i wonder what he would say about you surpassing him. my first question, are you ready to put another 10 years on this? [applause] >> i am going to stay as long as i can do a good job. i do not want to stay here when

people are sorry for me and when i cannot do the job or when somebody else i think can do a better job. who will listen to what my closest friend feels we ought to do. we talked about this earlier in january. we had a discussion. that discussion early next year. >> give our audience a quick snapshot of the legislation you have drafted and authored to remind people of what the world looked like when congress did things. john dingell wrote the endangered species act, clean air act, affordable care act, the patients' bill of rights, children's insurance program, food safety modernization act, it goes on drug,

and on. it is an unbelievable record when you look at legislation attached to somebody's name. i worked in the senate and knew quite a number of senators in that chamber. would you look across history, -- would you look across history, this is like -- when you look across history, this is like ted kennedy. do you think it is possible in today's political climate to have the kind of successful passage of legislation? are we deluding ourselves? is today's temperature and congress just like any other time? >> no. each congress is unique. it depends on the challenges and the concerns of the people are. and what's been going on in the world. the congress has a leadership responsibility. is reactive. this is perhaps the most -- it is a privilege to serve even in this congress.

--ing said these inks things, we have had difficulty coming to an agreement on budget. you cannot bring up the 10 commandments for fear you will get voted down. [laughter] there is a real fault here are the -- here. it is in good part that congress thought. congress' fault. they tolerate this. they sent us down here to fight. it is divided. you see the result in washington. you see it on the hill. you see a tremendous amount of ill will that should not be here. good will and respect and integrity should be the hallmark of the congress. we should be proud that we can

and do work together. proud that we are a few of the people that have had the privilege of serving in congress. we are the highest elected officials of people. the senate is not directly elected, or was not in the beginning. we have a unique responsibility. i have to tell people. these are the words -- as we work together. ofare the most fortunate human beings. being born in this country or live in this country, we hit the jackpot.

this is a wonderful place. it is the happiest, richest. not just in terms of opportunity. we are the oldest democracy. we insist that our government works. because we refuse to do that, we are in danger in this country are endangering this country. we are diminishing our ability to survive the challenges. >> when you were elected in 1955, sam rayburn was speaker of the house. lyndon johnson was the majority leader in the senate. "the washington post" reminded us that rosa parks had just not given up her seat. over that period of time, what would you say legislatively your proudest moment was? the top moment or top two or

three that mattered for you and the country in that period? >> in my view, and my wife, the single most important vote i cast was on the civil rights act of 1964. for the first time we addressed the problem that each american should have full citizenship. african americans could vote just like anybody else. i was focused on this because i almost lost my job over this. [indiscernible] don remember is this. there were riots and trouble. .nd all kinds of difficulty the african american people were patient and nonviolent.

that was a vote that really solve a tremendous problem. that problem was eating away at the foundation's about democracy and. i have had others. medicare was very important. the affordable care act was something that my dad started out with roosevelt in 1935. [indiscernible] harry truman. but of course there was a lot of environmental legislation -- a lot of other conservation. i am really a lucky guy to be blessed with a superb staff. i've had the good fortune to have members of the house in my

times to mentor me. people like rayburn. mccormack. and gary. and of course, people like my dear friend, john. i have had great people teach me the trade. [indiscernible] >> were there times when you were disappointed in the house? what would be the memory that you found that congress did not live up to? -- live up to what it was supposed to be? >> there were good and a bad and sometimes at the same time. i was always very frustrated

about when people would not do things. of the mccarthy era. or when the president -- i do not mean this president, he is doing a good job. i was troubled about the fact it is an important responsibility. thes always troubled when government was not working. so i was a great practitioner of oversight, to see that the law is a fully carried out. -- was faithfully carried out. >> who taught john dingell to send a dingell letter? members feared getting a dingell letter. did someone help you draft the first one or develop it into an art? >> i have had great friends. john moss was my greatest friend.

he was great on this. i had a wonderful staff. [inaudible] and they had promised not only honest sense of social justice but things that were not right. writing letters -- [laughter] those three and four words that asked questions, who, what, when, why. you can get a lot more when you ask questions rather than starting a nasty argument.

it did not make a difference whether it was some guy in government or a citizen. they would receive these things and say this is something i need to take a look at. we could get more done by asking questions than trying to hit someone over the head. that was our chosen tool. we got the information that we wanted. when i became chairman of the committee, i was scared because i thought this was a big job and i thought dingell you better do it right. we went to see a parliamentarian. i said how am i going to do this job? he said, john, two things.

first, you got to be fair. second, you have to appear fair. so we always used our powers with restraint. that does not mean we were weak we just know how to get these things done. i have a picture of joe mccarthy on the wall. i look at that and the reason he was there, i thought he was one of the biggest scoundrels in society and he was the prime example of what not to do. we were fair in the things we did. the staff knew and understood this. they were superb investigators. they had this wonderful sense of social outrage and a chance to correct something that is bad or make something better we were very successful and we never had a failure in investigating. >> as a representive you've been dealing with presidents

since eisenhower and nixon was his vice president. you knew all these guys back and given the fact that your father held the seat, for what 23 years or sore before you, you had encounters with them. can you tell us the presidents that you appreciated and had good relationships with and the presidents that you felt did not cut it. >> i had good relationships with every president. presidency is something very important. it is an office that we have to view as people love before me and wiser used to say it is an office that should be treated with great reverence. it is a huge responsibility. president,y each whether i liked them or not or the same party, did some great things. nixon was the guy that tested it because of the nasty things

he used to do. but if you look at nixon's presidency he was said he was a great, bad man. winston churchill said. it is a very interesting way to define it. i'm not winston churchill but eisenhower was a got president before him. kennedy, just an exciting administration. they didn't stay around long enough to really be appreciated it a to reach the greatness i thought he could have gotten. johnson was saving -- the same awful, crazy guy from vietnam. he should be recognized as a

great president. he went out to create the new deal. or to complete the new deal but he did something else. he is the guy that began the leadership and brings to the end of the terrible civil rights we had. nixon did some wonderful things and he did some bad. they carter was one of finest people but regrettably he did not have the successes that we would have liked to see him have because he was so concentrated on detail he did not have time to concentrate on the bigger questions. he is probably the most underrated presidents. [inaudible] >> what a point of distinction.

we are equally important and this is very important. clinton was a great guy who cared about people, he worked hard and he was smart as all get out. he had empathy. you would watch when he would enter the room. folks liked to be around him, even phones who said nasty things about him because he had this warmth and he cared. the two bushes were quite fine. very fond of both of them. one,he's a great guy, never forgot his service in the house. it is just terrible mistakes.

george w. bush, that is. i like him, though. i think they have not done enough of what i would like to see him do. i've had the privilege of serving with some great presidents. they carter was probably probably could have been elected if he had not been sabotaged, the first time he ran. but that was regrettably not to be. you become a free have the same problem. they sent out to destroy him and they succeeded. >> i am pleased to report those

watching on c-span can follow congress and john dingell on twitter. the longest serving congressman in history is at twitter. if you went to look at the twitter account, which i did this morning. you saw the vice president biden stopped by yesterday and he gave you a gift. yet, you did not say in your tweet what he gave you and i've been wondering ever since. >> he gave me a wonderful wall clock. something that i will cherish. i'm a great admirer of joe biden. he has something of that my good friend has has -- mccormack [indiscernible]. >> let me go to charlie cook. am i handing out the microphones or is someone running mics around? no, i guess i am.

>> in honoring chairman dingell's longevity because that is easier to measure. but he's had a greater impact on war legislation than any member in congress in history. important legislation. the story that may kids love hearing and more people can relate to, tell us about december 1941. your role. >> i had a little bit to do with the history. -- the preservation of history. remember on the 7, the japanese bombed pearl harbor and sank every battleship we had or damaged every battleship we had. in the pacific fleet. we thought the united states could lose that war. givena senior so i was

the responsibility of taking care of the media and he was a conservative newscaster. he was up in the gallery with an old-fashioned magnetic recorder. he was supposed to record. i was told see to it that he does not record more than the. president's speech. -- record more than the president's speech. i thought, you know, there's enough history that is important. so i let him go on into the discussion. the country was badly divided. it was badly divided over different matters but the interesting thing was when roosevelt finished his speech, which by the way, was a fabulous speech he left the podium.

the house -- the senate left and the house proceeded to deal with his call for the declaration of war. the country being divided at all the america firsters and there were a lot of fellow travelers, and quite frankly, the germans. you had huge rallies in new york. nazi rallies. everybody was trying to get on the right side of history. there was one woman who voted against world war i and world war two. her name was lincoln and she was from montana. she served one term twice. her votes on this cost her job, as you might major.

they would not let her speak and it was interesting period that went on at this time about she would be heard. they finely let her speak on wednesday. war was not declared on the united states until that day. it was an interesting time. you can still hear some of that debate and you will hear this hiss that goes with the steel wiring recordings. i was sitting up there and looking down. roosevelt was interesting. he didn't want you to know that he was crippled by polio. so he actually walked -- he had the floor to himself and he was supported by -- we had 10 pounds of iron. rames that held him.

he would come on the arm of one of his sons, franklin or jimmy or a couple of secret service guys. he would actually walk in the door there by where the podium is and in front of the reading clerk and stand in front of the vice president and give his speech. it was a terrible, terrible stress to him. the people who walked in with him always said he had the most powerful grip they have ever seen. you can imagine the difficulty he had been doing this. there's a lot of interesting stories we can tell about how he responded to this and how he did his job and how he try to conceal it. healways let everyone knew was in charge.

>> interesting. >> i am jeff trammel. i had the pleasure of working with howard and paul. close friends of yours. >> i love them both. >> as i was sitting here thinking about your many great contributions to congress. i thought about the epic fight over the clean air act in the 1970's and the film that was made about that. hr 261 act of congress. for those who haven't seen it i recommend it. but it explains the art of governance and i thought you might take a moment to help us understand -- think of today when we're not governing very well. the process, as you touched on, a compromise and how legislation should come together

despite competing interest in the house. andery wise observation question. congress is a human body. there was an observation like sausage or government -- [unintelligible] when we finished the clean air they handled it and we passed the bill in 13 hours on the floor. they said mr. dingell what a wonderful thing you did, you did it in 13 hours. it passed 420-10 or close to that. that was a rough number. 13y said you did it in hours.

i said yeah, it only took me 13 years to do it. [laughter] what was interesting was you saw the rifts of government and those who understand the fundamentals of government, but they don't understand that the events of human activities that make laws come to be. aey tell us 6161 is actually story of psychology and relevant thinking and attitudes way people interact with friends. and with enemies inside the congress. le it shows actually how

outside forces come into play. it is interesting. it shows government working as it should. it shows that the process of government can be and is an honorable thing. that compromise is honorable. and coordination and conciliation, they are honorable activities that should be cherished and not criticized. when we send someone down to washington, people don't seem to understand this, we talk a how they are going down there to work together to solve the great national problems that we confront. thate message or lesson you take from that voting, i -- i urge you to

think about how it is that compromise and working together is important. lyndon johnson understood this. they were able to work together and accomplish the public needs. >> how much interest do you find in your colleagues in the house today in trying to reachieve that common spirit even your political foes? i've been reading about how you have remained close friends with some of the people you were fighting battles with. do you find those members coming in seeking out to learn about that time? -- those new members? >> every force in our society fights the way congress should work.

members hit town somewhere around 3:00, 4:00 in the afternoon on monday or tuesday, the first act is to tell the staff of what is the first plane i can get out of here on thursday or friday? [laughter] so we give the folks a three- day work week. aty say we don't see you home but i'm supposed to be working down there on the nation's business. one of for important things is we ought to be friends. we don't have the time to achieve that friendship. we don't have the time to begin to work together. short terms, of course, work against that. the fact that we're always expecting to be home, not down here working on the nation's business. this plus the media, which encourages the nastiest behavior.

calling the president a liar or something like that. that is destructive as hell. it really is counter protective. we're just -- the guys who hit this town and before they know where the restrooms are they are meeting to get some kind of big thing where they denounce the president or raise hell about this or the other thing. the result is this is most counterproductive in having this system work. i think i talk too much about

the wrong questions but i feel strongly about these matters. >> yesterday, senator mccain gave a speech and he kept saying the president this and the president that. he said that he had small disdain about the chief of staff -- the joint chiefs of staff. what i said back to him was from the people i know and the people in the diplomatic around me, they look and say you guys have a great country but you can't work together. how are you going to get anything done if sequester doesn't get over? >> you're asking about the sequester. ok great. >> we put the sequester in because we thought it was so difficult and the result would be that we wouldn't let it happen. some guy figured out right or

wrongly this was going to cut the budget. we wouldn't know what the consequences were. the thing about sequester is we need to stop a problem that we created for us because it slows us down from getting home by getting the air traffic controllers not being able to move aircrafts action quickly. this is an example of failure. we can't put together a budget. i've got something to say, everyone is going to say this is partisan, it may be or may not be. i have enormous respect for speaker boehner but potentially he is a good speaker, he can't get his republicans to follow

him. the problem in the house is there is a huge battle between the republicans and they don't have time to fight against the democrats. [laughter] so they come back and tell them what he has done and his freshman and sore mores smack -- him on thees smack side of the head and say no way. then it goes out the window then we have to have some process where the senate minority leader works to solve the budget problem last year. the intention and wisdom of the founding fathers is gone. that is not the way we should have done it. when i was a chairman, i got in

trouble by my own party. i became a good friend of the senior republican with whom i work with, if i was doing investigations or handling legislation. neither he nor she or i would ever reveal this because if we did we would be whacked on the side of the head. but it worked. ofintelligible] i was proud it and so was he. it was questioning him. was costing him real difficulties back home. he was a great friend of mine. i was sit in the meetings and i said make this motion and he said why should i do that i said don't be a smart ass just

do it. we would wind up with the legislation completed and we were able to work together to see to it that we started in the middle and we worked out. the end result was good legislation, clean air, clean water. [indiscernible] when he got to be the senior republican on an environmental sub committee, i said this is awful. he said no, this is not awful it is good. if i can sell him on this and he was a fair and decent guy, remember. it turned out that way. so, by the way, there is a funny story about him.

john mccormick, he had the heart of an irish man. i have the highest regard for all the members and he popped up and he said does that include the gentleman from iowa and he said of course. i have the highest regard for all members and the gentleman of iowa i have the -- \[unintelligible] it should be you. regard.e the minimum [laughter] it should have a kindness to it. it should not have the hatred. that is there because the people tolerate it and unfortunately, we're a divided nation right now and unfortunately, that division goes and drives the ill will,

which we find so corrosive. >> can you talk about the inside republican caucus. can you give us a quick snapshot how the democratic caucus. i remember the blue dogs and the rival with nancy pelosi, you had your battle with henry waxman. how is the camaraderie in the democratic caucus? >> it's there. [indiscernible] the great uniting force in the democratic party is now caucus is through thes republican caucus. right now we're opposing what they are doing and trying to

have a meaningful impact on things and to protect the great fundamental legislation means so much to us. social security, medicare, means so much. the affordable care act, the environmental law acts, the clean water act and other things and to make progress on things like global warming and the other concerns we have. that is holding us together. after the election we have about a half dozen left and that is a great shame. arell my colleagues, they the majority makers of this party but you cherish them and protect them. if you're going to run this

place and you want to have a democratic speaker on the first day of congress, you protect him. without him, you're not going to do it. i keep telling my colleagues that and some of them follow it, some of them don't. one of the big problems in this society is we're too much focused on the events of today or tomorrow. we aren't looking at a year, two years or six months ahead. that is the real concern of the future. that is one of the reason why the asian nations are cleaning our clock. they are thinking in terms of scores or hundreds of years out. was in the china one time and people were madder than about things that happened 3000 years ago. [laughter]

>> first of all, congratulations, mr. chairman. secondly, very glad you mentioned superfund it is a legacy of yours. little louder, my friend. >> superfund is an incredible legacy of yours and i had the privilege to work with francis of that. >> francis is a wonderful guy. >> the fact that you took a consensus approach made it possible for you to get so much done, more than any other single individual. him,u didn't work for right? [laughter] >> no. >> i wish i hired you. [laughter] >> the other part of it is you taught so many people how to investigate.

the other part, how to investigate administrations, even our own administration, as a democrat. so your legacy is just incredible. so i wanted to ask you about the current time. you've given us some great insights. tell us about the grassroots pressures on the republicans, the tea party pressures, how do you see that? how do you see that abating hopefully? and the role that that group is playing in this country as opposed to other movements if you will, nativist movements in our history? >> i don't have the mic here. i appreciate bill's question. but because i'm always fair- minded, i always presume that we've got a good number of tea party patriots watching this show right now. and i want to make sure that we like them watching. and participating in these discussions. but john, how -- can you talk a bit about the time and about the grassroots currents in the g.o.p. and i assume those

grassroots currents just as alive in michigan 12 as anywhere else. and i would just -- to on bill's question about the tea party, the occupy wall street movement and others that ginned up a lot of concerns on the left were born out after lot of economic anxiety and your thoughts on these current political streams. >> frustration, fear, are terrible, terrible motivators. but powerful. and they often lead to some serious and unfortunate results. anythingant to say against the tea partiers. i strongly disagree with them. and quite frankly they have no use for me. this is an ancient fight that

goes on inside the republican party and been going on since at least the time of goldwater. and that election in 1964, they gave us by the way a democratic landslide. but it was -- it was over control of the party. and they wanted to control the party. and they have a very adroit plan for perpetuating republican control of the country and the congress. and by golly, they're as smart as all get out. it's working. but having said this, they are -- they're afraid. they're concerned. there's a lot of honest concern. the problem that you have there is the -- really don't understand how the system can and should work. this nation was founded by some of the smartest, best educated people who had read thoughts of the great philosophers at the

time. these folks have not learned those lessons and the result is that they will -- they will rush forward to re-create the mistakes that we've made over centuries. there's not much new going on in politics. dumb ass mistakes are made today and dumb ass mistakes were made in an earlier time. having said -- having said these things, they tend to believe that the end justifies the means. that's not so. and they also have the belief that we have to move strongly and not to pay attention to the great system of which we're a part. we have the best system of

government in the world. the problem is we're not making it work. and we're not permitting it to work. and we're not encouraging the people who are in government to make it work. and this is terrible. the institution of our government, the institution of our congress, are really more important than any single person or any single issue. and we don't appreciate the precious character of this government. which is designed to protect our liberties, our freedoms, and also to see to it that each and every one of us is heard and has an opportunity to participate in our country. and this is -- this is a terrible thing. and i don't know whether i've answered the question. >> done a great job. former senator regal. >> if i may, i just want to make a personal observation about john. >> did he ever run against you in a primary? >> are you kidding?

>> think about it? >> no one in their right mind would run against john. >> i supported jim o'hara against don. and it was one of the biggest mistakes i made. because he cleaned our clock. [laughter] a great politician. a great senator and a great friend. and i learned my lesson. and i haven't made that mistake since. >> john was a great mentor to many people. and i include myself on that list. very gratefully. but i spent my first six years in the house as a republican and as a republican you sit on one side of the house chamber and as a democrat the other side. from the republican side you look over and see the democrats, and the democrats look over and see the republicans. i decided to change parties. and it's an awkward thing to do. and it was an awkward thing for me to do. so one day after i had done that, i crossed the center aisle. and i started to sit after six years on the other side of the

aisle. and i felt very strange. and i didn't feel particularly welcome. there were a lot of democrats at that time. had a big majority and didn't need another renegade republican necessarily coming over. but the first person to reach out to me was john dingell. and of course there wasn't anybody that was more respected at the time than john. or today. and one day he just motioned me to come over and sit beside him in the chair next to him on the house side. and i think he put his arm around me. i felt like he did. that was the gesture he was making. and it was a wonderfully kind thing. it was a leadership thing. and a mentoring step. and john spoke about mentors who were important to him. like john moss and others. and john mccormick.

but he's been a mentor to an enormous number of people. i have to be one of the lucky ones who went on to be a chairman and used a lot of his methods. but i see it now even in some of the republican chairmen in the house. i think the two republican chairmen from michigan that we have in the house today follow certain number of john's practices because his leadership has been bipartisan. it's been bigger than party differences. and that's a wonderful gift to the country. and he's given it to a lot of people. and made a big difference. he served our people well.

it was not a problem. it was his presence in the congress [indiscernible] i was very glad to have him join the democrats. the republicans i used to always go that if the republicans were as bad, [indiscernible]. [laughter] day thats a historic you are the longest serving member of congress in either chamber to serve this government. it's such an honor that you joined us here at the atlantic. sullivan and others wanted to have you today to have a real conversation. we very much appreciate all of you being here and the viewers at c-span for joining us. i just want to give you a round of applause. >> can i say one thing before

you do? i'm a lucky guy. i've had great mentors, wonderful brothers, precious wife. precious my dad was one of my principal mentors. people were talking about when he served 23 years. it ain't how long , it is how well. there are people deserved relatively briefly who served with great distinction. put in just means i collected a check. the question is what have i done within that time? served? have i that's more important. >> i think we have covered that quite adequately today.

i commend you on the things you have done so well. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

this event comes to a close, further tributes to congressman dingell are expected in the house as a gavel in for business tomorrow at 2:00 eastern. theuple of days ago, "guardian" newspaper reported that president obama has asked rose to drop pamphlets. we'll have a form on u.s. cyber security efforts here and abroad as the number of cyber attacks increase every year. former ambassador and national intelligence director john negroponte as well former ibm cbs -- former ibm ceo. also this afternoon, president obama is expected to nominate

jason furman as chair of the president's council of economic advisers. we will have that announcement live here on c-span, set for 2:10 eastern. it was about 50 years ago today that president kennedy signed the equal pay act, requiring employers to give women and men equal pay for equal work. president obama will talk about that. you can watch that life here on c-span at 11:30 eastern. right now, on yesterday's " washington journal" the report discovering mothers are the primary or sole provider in four out of 10 households with children. tests talked about the socioeconomic reasons for the trend and what it means for american families in the workplace. as muchshow you this as we can until the president's statement at statement at about 11:30. host: a recent pew research report looked at "breadwinner moms." here to dig into it our maria

teresa kumar, the executive director of voto latino, and syndicated columnist mona charen, you can read her work in places like the "chicago sun- times," also the "washington examiner." thank you for being here. the pew research poll garnered a lot of attention. but first, what are "breadwinner moms"? guest: they're the ones that are the primary earners, they are earning more than their husbands, and their sustaining their families. host: we saw this difference between those who out-earn their husbands and those who are single mothers. mona charen, you wrote about that in a recent column. why is that an important dissension? guest: it is interesting,

changing sex roles, women are now the right winners, and it tended to focus on husband-wife couples. as you look into the data, we find is that actually the percentage of women who out-earn their husbands in a two parent couples is actually -- it is bigger than it used to be, but it is not much. whereas most of the "breadwinner moms" are single moms, either because they were never married or because they are divorced or widowed, so on. among those who never married, and the statistics are very sad. grim. they live in poverty, they have a real struggle. it is really important to know that a big chunk, 60% of these "breadwinner moms," are actually single mothers, who are not only right winners but the only sole

support for their kids. host: maria, do you see the gestation between women out warning their husbands and single moms relying on themselves to support their children? guest: mona has a great point. out-earning your husband is one thing to celebrate, but the other thing, the women who are heads of household and they do not have other options. their property level is huge with the average income of $17,000. i cannot imagine a family being on that. at the country, you have to set back and say kind of policies can we revive these individuals make sure that these cycles are not continue, what kind of support? one of the things most folks do not realize is the united is the only industrialized country without paid leave to take care of the babies. what that says is that we are behind papua new guinea. that is atrocious in this day and age. guest: another way to look at it

is that we might need a research and our expectations of what is good for kids. and one of the things that the pew study found was that among people age 50 and above, a huge majority say it is really a problem or single women to raise kids alone. it is a huge societal problem. where is people under the age of 30, majorities do not think it is a problem. and we see the percentage who said that if they problem comes down the younger you get. it suggest that people are not aware of the link between a single parenting and poverty, the link between single parenting and all kinds of social pathologies. if we know anything in social science these days it is that two parents are best for kids. host: let's take a look at some of the polling that pew did. republican somewhat less concerned about the rising share of single mothers.

even the here in 2007, 71% said they thought it was a big problem, now 64% see it as a big problem. when you look at the views of unmarried mothers broken down by age, you see that in that 54%, unmarried mothers of a big problem, only 17% in that young age bracket feet of a big problem. what is good about not seeing single moms is a bad thing? guest: for some, it might actually be a choice to be a single mom. and we make sure we are not victimizing these individuals.

we need to provide the policy and support we need to make sure they are successful. the same time, and i know that mayor bloomberg tried to address the issue specifically of teen mothers because that is a growing problem. if we don't have those conversations that we don't eviscerate them and shed light on the issue of teen motherhood and, again, if they choose to, but say how do we help you with those resources that you need in order so that the family can be successful, and more importantly, the impact on community is less severe? host: mother in sole provider, the pew research provider looks at how it has gone up. 1960 as the start all the way up to 40% today. we are talking about right when her moms with maria teresa kumar and mona charen. here are the numbers of youth like to join. republicans -- (202) 585-3881. democrats -- (202) 585-3880. independent callers -- (202) 585-3882. 40% of mothers are the sole

earner in her home. about a third of them earn more than their husbands, but 63% are single mothers. guest: could i throw in something? among that 63% who are single moms, almost one third are receiving public assistance. so this is not necessarily when you talk about breadwinning, it may not actually be breadwinning, it may be being on public assistance. host: why that significant to you? guest: the more the family breakdown, the more people rely on government to support them, the less self-sustaining, productive citizens we are supporting. we are creating many handicaps. we want people to come into the world with the best shot that they possibly can for success. and that means nothing with the government. it means having a really strong family that supports you and sees you through to the age of

18 or even beyond. that is what we need to get back to. unfortunately, there is a lot of makes things going on. there is a celebration of women charging roles, but we have to keep our eye on the ball. if the family falls apart, it is not serve the interest of women, men, and certainly not children. guest: i think we are in a different age, a different dynamic of what constitutes a family. we need to be respectful of those choices. how we do that is to have open and frank conversations. but there are different kinds of families. the fact that they may be in public assistance, had we graduate them so that they are in power? had we empower them with entering the workforce? guest: how do you get somebody off public assistance if they have a child, say at the age of 20, no husband, not even a high school degree, it is tough.

they have a little baby at home, the baby needs mom. you're going to say, you're going to provide her a job, it is tough. guest: it is incredibly challenging, but we have to understand what we are prioritizing. the fact that even as we are talking about a to couple home, in the event that the mother has a baby, we'll even provide her with paid family leave. physically we are signaling as a country what our priorities are in the family. the fact that we don't even provide that as a basic, what other policies are we writing for a single mom? what are we providing for single mothers? host: the ability of women to present in the workforce, and the "washington post" outlook section has this --

host: she went on to become a restaurant critic and food editor. the letter says basically -- host: mona charen, have you seen the change over time and what women are capable of doing? guest: there has been a change. in some ways it has been for the better. many women do decide to drop out of the labor force when they have kids. and that is their choice, and that is great, but no employer should assume that that should be the case because women who don't have children, they work long hours, women who have children, don't have children.

so that has been a change, but we don't make my get assumptions about everybody based on their sex. but there is too much of a tendency in our society to neglect the fact that kids need parents. and the choices have to be made and trade-offs have to be made. you cannot do everything. as a woman, you can't have a fantastic full-time career, joyce bernick was the metro editor for the "new york times," she gave a controversial address where she said -- if i'd had kids, i would not have become metro editor of the "new york times." i would have left early, i would've taken longer occasions, i would not have been willing to spend the 12, 14 hour job at the office, which is what this job requires. it was very versatile virtual. people got very angry at her. we're not saying anybody is less than anybody else. we're saying life presents

choices and trade-offs. she made hers. other people make different ones. but when you make a choice, you should understand and live with it and not say that it represents a cosmic injustice. guest: i would disagree. i do not think all that have choices. when you have the luxury of being highly educated, you have the choice of is a home. for those are in households, even women who are out earning their men, oftentimes they may not have a choice because of the economic downturn where a lot of men have lost their jobs because it is really taking a step back and saying, if we are saying that the family is our number one social safety net, if that is what we believe, then our policy needs to demonstrate that as well so that we can make sure that we have a fighting economy. goldman sachs just recently did a study on the japanese economy.

the number one driver in the japanese get out of their economic slump was for their women to go back to work. for them to actually get into the workforce, for them to be productive members of their society outside of the home. the japanese, who are such an economic powerhouse, they have is gaping hole in making themselves more economically productive. guest: the big problem is women who have kids who are single, who are never married. that is a huge problem. whether or not we have married women, married couples making trade-offs, every married couple i know juggles how to handle childcare and all that. and that is fine. but for single mothers, it is a terrible grind, and it is a cycle of poverty. it really is. guest: it's challenging, but again, i don't want to judge,

often times very few single moms, they could've divorced, they could've lost a spouse, when you going into something, you don't know. guest: in 1970, i think it was something like 4% of single mothers were never married mothers. it is now 44%. host: we can look take a look at those stats in a few minutes. if you are a breadwinner mom, you can give us a call at (202) 585-3883. that is (202) 585-3883. mona charen mentions the stat on single mothers, so let's take a look at where they are according to the pew research center. among the single moms, 50% have children from prior marriages, 44% of never married, and 6% have an absent spouse.

guest: that is a really worrisome number, and it keeps going up every year. not only does it keep going up, and the numbers that they get is fine and acceptable and not something we need to worry about also keeps going up. host: it's not like you are empathizing and looking at what society can do for those families and what the government's responsibility is. we are some folks that tweet in about this. wild and wonderful says -- society should pay for the extended leave and moms be able to get at least some work. how is it that the employer's response ability to pay for their female employees to take leave when they have babies? guest: when google changed their maternity leave, they had an increase in retaining employees. if you provided a space for people to take time off with her

family, they're going to retain, but you do not have to worry about upfront cost and training a new employee. that is huge. guest: i think businesses will figure it out if it helps them keep great employees, they will do it. but it is not address this other question which is really what i think is the heart of our problem, which is these never married moms. they are not the ones working at google. guest: they're working as people cleaning google's offices. see you have to look at that. i think it is a moment of taking a step back and addressing there are two different questions. one is -- what are we looking at with single moms, maybe teenage moms or he young moms without an education? i think it is a matter of providing them with opportunities and saying how do we actually get out of this cycle of property. that is one. guest: you know that is a choice?

guest: no. guest: i do. i think it is really important. i think that stigma serves a useful function for people doing something that is bad for themselves and die for their kids and that for society. choosing to have a baby before you are married, before you are settled, before you can afford it, it is now the case that 53% of children who are born to women under the age of 30 have no father. guest: they have a father, they just may not know who the father is. or may not have an active father. it wasn't the moms fault. host: is there a danger in stigmatizing the women and not the men in this situation? guest: absolutely the men should be stigmatized as well. this would require a lot of rethinking about the sexual revolution am a but we cannot go there this morning. but absolutely. it should be seen as a sacred obligation when you bring a

child into the world that you will only do so when you are ready to support that child with two parents and a home that makes enough money to provide the basics of life. and to say -- let's have the states do it -- only encourages length of the state support them, let's have the state provide all kinds of financial it only encourages the behavior that we want to discourage. host: let's get your response and we will go to the phones. guest: something you have to keep in mind is, unfortunately, i have a really hard time to disparage someone for making their choices. if you have a child come as a community, you have to celebrate a child. it is not that child's fault to be born without two parents. i do think that as a community, we have to be able to provide, make sure that that child does not end up in poverty. i think that is an obligation that we have. again, if an unwed mother chooses to have a child, she has to make sure that she has the support system that she needs to

thrive. it is unfair because every single circumstance is completely different. host: we will get some of our callers involved. jody writes -- the only choice we make is crucial how many of us make the right choice when under percent of the time. it only works in a perfect world. ryan is on the phone from south dakota. hi, but ryan. caller: hi. i was just pointing out -- ms. kumar mentioned that as a teen mothers that make the choice to become mothers, it is an interesting point, however we do not even let teenagers choose to drink alcohol. alcohol is a short-term choice that children make. raising a child is a long-term choice that they make.

how do you justify that disconnect? i will take my answer off the phone. thank you. guest: i think that is a great question. not only that illegal for a person under the age of 18 to have alcohol, but i would actually argue that there aren't there is very little attention paid to teen mothers. if we have programs that would address that and advocacy and educational programs to the consequences of that, that would be one thing, but we are asking people to make these choices absent of real structure. i think that mona made a good point -- they may not be getting that structure at home, but where are they getting that then? we are very stringent as a country when it comes to alcohol prevention for 18-year-olds, under the age of 21, but we do not have that same advocacy program when it comes to teen motherhood.

guest: i think we should be trying to get the message to young people that having a baby before you are married is a bad idea, and we should be discouraging it with everything we got. but to respond to what you said earlier, there is a moral hazard problem when you say you are not going disparage their choices, and by the way, of course, there are great mothers who managed to raise great kids who are single. we're talking about the idea, the idea is a very bad thing for them, for society. but if you say we are going to if you have made this batch was, we're going to support you and provide all of these structures with money, housing, food stamps, which we do already, by the way. don't you see a problem by encouraging them? to young ladies -- one does the right thing and does not get pregnant before she gets married, she gets nothing. the woman who gets pregnant before she is married gets a huge number of federal programs.

[indiscernible] guest: a lot of it stems from clinton passing the health care act in 1993. you had to make sure the one outside of those cycles of poverty. yes, there is government assistance, but we have to provide the training that will they need to get out of that cycle of poverty that they have. host: women in the workplace make up 47% of the u.s. labor force, and 65% of married mothers with children are employed outside of the home. let's hear from mary in chicago, illinois. she calls herself a breadwinner. caller: yes, i am a single mom, my son is now 14.

i had him at 35. listening to all the different comments that i'm hearing, stereotypes, which might be based on some of the numbers, the statistics. i find that a lot of times it is not a choice. a lot of times for religious reasons, if somebody finds themselves pregnant, they're not going to abort themselves. i am a widow and was widowed for a few years and found myself accidentally pregnant decided to raise my son of my own. i do have an education. i went back to school when my son was two and i got a masters degree. i'm still finding it very difficult. with regards to single mothers

always living off the government, the government actually encourages women or individuals to stay in a cycle of poverty because once you try to better yourself, the amount of money that you can make is so extremely low to get public assistance that it keeps some people -- well, i might as well keep taking it from the government because even if i try to better myself, -- host: mary, do you know that from personal experience? have you wrestled with that question yourself, or thighs or something that -- caller: i have. i am doing ok i guess, in this economy. i live in a region where we have the highest gas prices in all of the country.

about $4.35 a gallon, and that is on the cheap side. and it is not just about a mile, well, they have to make better choices and stay married. in this climate, you need to be working just to make ends meet. host: let's get a response from our panelists, maria teresa kumar and mona charen. guest: i salute you. being a child of a single mom, i understand the difficulties that you must be facing. but i applaud that you had the opportunity to go back to school and do so, successfully found by, raising a 14-year-old. that said, i think you said a couple of things. there is a penalty for women who go out and decide to better themselves and then the government shuts down. and it is like, do i continue going to school and better myself and actually have that higher paying job, the meantime, that is so thin and marginal. what is important is the idea

that right now in tough economic times, what other kinds of support are we providing individuals to make sure that they are as successful as possible and not being penalized as they try to improve themselves? guest: as i said earlier, i think the goal should be to have the fewest people as possible in this situation. as our caller said, it is very tough. some people find themselves single parents because a spouse died, because of divorce, sometimes avoidable, sometimes not. host: religion, that was interesting. guest: i have my problems with that because first of all there is adoption. i am an adoptive parent myself. second, putting themselves in that position to become

pregnant, that did not happened by immaculate conception. but in any event, as i said, the point is to try to minimize in a situation never married because they're in a situation the most at risk and continuing the cycle of poverty. in 1996, we had a welfare reform in this country that was widely predict it was going to throw women and children into the snow and was going to be a terrible catastrophe. instead, it was excellent. it reduced childhood poverty tremendously. it had many beneficial effects. unfortunately, this administration has gotten rid of many of those areas and rather than rewarding work, reward divinity.

we find ourselves back to where we were before welfare reform was passed in some respects. host: let's look at some more about the pew research report about women who are the breadwinners. married mothers are increasingly better educated than their husbands. the last caller talked about getting more of an education herself when she had a child. it says -- host: then we see the perception among americans -- most people

think it is bad if a wife out on to her husband. mona, what you think about this notion? guest: again, i would say it is not really a problem for society. by the way, it can be a problem in the marriages. the science that is interesting. it shows that when women out on her husbands, they are much more likely to divorce, and couples are much less likely to report themselves as happy then in the reverse situation. i don't know if that is something that will change over time, but it is the case right now. guest: i think habits might be changing. i would be curious to see how the generational break up of that is, whether not individuals get divorce. i think that what is interesting is i recently saw a commercial for laundry detergent, and it was the very first time that i saw that the heaven with staying home and taking care of the kid. i think it points to that families are changing,

priorities are changing. guest: one change that is great is that husbands can do that. some husbands are cut out for that. i would have to say anything most are not. guest: some women are not cut out to do laundry, either. [laughter] guest: nobody is cut out to do laundry, let's face it. host: let's look at some stats from the pew research study. "breadwinner moms" -- 40% of mothers are sold or primary providers and their homes with children. 37% earn more than their husbands. 63% are single mothers. as we look more at the information about moms who never married, since we have been talking a little bit about what this study reveals about single mothers, we can learn more about who these women are.

we see this low median family income. let's talk about your interpretation on what that means for the future of family and women. when you hear those numbers, what do you think? we need to have conversations on how we prevent this from happening, but not do it in a way that is disparaging the choices. we have huge campaigns on drinking and driving and underage trunking. whenyou go down the list, it comes to teen pregnancy and prevention, there is very little conversation around that. the more we can provide that, that's excellent, but we need to make sure we provide these individuals with the support they need in order to get out of that cycle.

breaker wants to point out all single mothers are not destined for poverty. mona get over it. terry o'brien says you are absolutely right trade we need to discourage illegitimacy for the good of society. we are creating a society in america that is a caste system. women with graduate degrees and at are getting married almost the rates they did 30 or 40 years ago and forming intact families and their kids are going to harvard and they are doing great trade then there are the parent to have some college or a high school degree, especially those with not even a high school degree who have families that are failing to

form. murray says we would be so much better off if the people who are in the upper caste, the college-educated, married group, would preach what they practice. they are reluctant to do that because they are afraid they will sound judgment old. sometimes, being judgmental is important. randy is in wyoming on the republicans line. i agree with most of what mona has to say. maria, you mentioned programs. they have to be paid for. they come out of my pocket. the stigmatization of young boys and girls having kids out of wedlock, mona, you are right about that. we have to get back to that. but my main point is this. as far as poverty goes, young,

never married mothers, and i know a bunch of them that live down here in a housing complex not far for me, don't realize they are in poverty, as long as they have their cell phone, as long as they can text their friends, have a broken down car for transportation, their friends have all of that. they have two or three kids and everything is subsidizing their lives, so nothing nothing is going to change. the stigmatization was gone two generations ago. as long as they can be equal with their peers who are in the same boat they are, they don't recognize poverty. i will hang up and let someone else call. i think that's interesting. i think it is probably the case that some young women who have babies don't realize they are in poverty in the beginning, by then, it's too late.

they've got the child and their responsibilities to that child are unending. it is a terrible trap we have allowed them to fall into because we don't want to criticize their choices. i completely agree that increasingly we are socioeconomically sideload and as that, we don't have a responsibility to one another. whether or not -- this is where we are today. we have 40% of women who are heads of household. a lot of them are living in poverty. how do we sure that? the genie is not going to go back into the bottle. we have to identify the root causes and identify the policies and we can move forward and make sure they are economically robust and paying back into the system as much as possible. single mothere a out there who says i don't want to do good for my child. but that means we have to hear

what they're saying and provide the safety net they need. you mentioned the government. one perfect example where government is dysfunctional is the current sequester program. we are laying off head start teachers and closing down headstart, one of the number one programs that has demonstrated not only does provide food and education education for children facing poverty, but it encourages them in early childhood development so they can succeed later in life. of onlya tendency talking about the nuclear family and the choices we are making, but that spills over into the community. let's look more at the survey -- the public views on changing gender roles. that it'stage saying easier for families to earn and make a comfortable living, 28%

say it's harder, 67% say easier. 50% say more women working outside the home have made it harder for marriages to be successful. say it has made it easier. 74% say the increasing number of women working for pay outside the home has made harder for parents to raise children. "new york times" -- she saysiece tomorrow is the 50th anniversary of the equal pay act. guest: i would refer people to the independent women's forum website. there, you will find interesting data on why women make less than men. they work fewer hours and choose to devote themselves to their

families, take time off from work and so on. when you compare young people at the same education level, before children enter the picture, women are either making the same as men or out earning young man. one of those statistics that will not go away. here's the point the writer makes -- there was research on contemporary families that show more than a quarter of the convergence in wages has been the result of men's wages losing ground rather than women gaining ground with their wages. one of the reasons we do have so many women who have become the heads of household is that they may have been in the same industry as their household -- as their husband, but their husband got laid off area that was almost by default. she was actually earning less

-- earning less for the same job and it was easier for the employer to keep her on. hert: it is illegal to pay less than him if it is the same job. guest: but it happens. that's one of the reasons the president signed the lilly ledbetter law. that was basically an empowerment tool for lawyers and litigators. we do see some women and losthe workforce weight potential because of the time they took off. same thing happens to men who leave the workforce. one person writes --

let's go to rochester, new york, democrat. what mona said earlier that she thought in an ideal world, her ideal world, that 30 years old with a well- established career and a house and then you can have children -- that doesn't pass the giggle test as far as i'm concerned. when most of wage earning people in america say they're making less than $10 an hour, those are facts. i go back a long way. under ronald reagan, that is when those people had to be working, husband and wife. under him, both of us had to go out and make enough money to survive in this economy. in your household?

caller: that's right. and i had a good job. but both of us had to go to work to make ends meet. thats during that time most americans, husband and wife, had to leave the household. to make ends meet in their household. first of all, i did not say 30 years old was an arbitrary cutoff or when you can start a family. i said people should wait until they are married and stable, and i stand by that and challenge anyone to say it's not the ideal situation for families to form. , it was a reagan era tremendous economic boom. spouses went many into the labor force, the amazing thing is the american economy was able to expand and wages went up during the 80s,

even though there was a huge influx of all these new workers, mainly women. >> see the rest of this discussion at www.c-span.org. we're going live now to the white house for remarks on equal pay legislation from president obama. he will be introduced in just a moment. >> we are marking the 50th anniversary of the signing of the pay act. hooray. [applause] it is great to look around the audience and on the stage and see so many amazing women and a few very good, brave men with us this morning. president obama created white house council on women and girls just a few months after he took office. there are representatives from every agency and department in the federal government to serve on the council and it is the executive director here with us today as well.

please stand. [applause] so the council is tasked with making sure we take into account the needs of women and girls in every policy, program and piece of legislation we support. together, we worked on issues ranging from building economic security to creating stem opportunities for women and girls to helping women start , to stoppinginess violence against women and human trafficking, to make sure women have affordable and accessible health care to supporting -- [applause] and to supporting equality for women all around the globe. we have seen so many others raise their voice in agreement. warren buffett wrote recently " america has come to fully

employing all american citizens, the greater the output will be. we see what we can accomplish when we use 50% of human capacity. if you visualize what 100% can do. the unbridled optimism for america's future per quote --." women are increasingly becoming breadwinners at home. that makes it a societal issue. that is why we need to build a strong 21st-century workplace that includes equal pay for equal work, ensure that workers are not treated unfairly because of their family responsibilities, and it helps women and men balance their obligations at work and at home. obviously, these policies have a huge impact. the president's council economic advisers has reported that while more women have begun working

over the past half a century, that number has begun to fall again and one reason being that workplace >> ability policies have not yet adjusted to the growth of women in the workforce and the challenges of a dynamic between home and work and the commitment of such growth. the council also noted that if you boost adult women's wages by one we would lift over billion in debt -- one million individuals of poverty, including half a million children. us fully wheret we need to be to close the wage gap, but imagine what a huge difference it would make two families around our country. these are issues that matter to all of us here today. we are motivated by women like amanda mcmillan, guest at the first lady's state of the union. she also introduced the president during women's history month.

.hat's ok it shows that someone brought their baby to work. [applause] amanda worked at her company and she was told to not be promoted despite her years on the job. but with the help of the equal employment opportunity commission, she sued and she won and we are so grateful to have her. [applause] when amanda was asked why she pursued the case, she said i'm doing this because it was wrong. i could never look my girls in the face and tell them they live in america and could be anything they wanted to be if i didn't. isn't that what all daughters, sisters and mom's serve? that's what i want for my daughter as a mother. that government cannot

solve these challenges alone. that is why we are thrilled to have advocates in the private sector and civil society joining us here today. i want to give a special shout out to those standing on the stage with me you have worked so hard on behalf of women and girls. please give them a round of applause. [applause] the private sector recognizes competitiveness depends on creating a 20th century -- a 21st century workplace. one company that leads by example is the lloyd. .ere with us today is the ceo i would like for you to welcome joe to the podium to introduce the president. [applause] >> good morning.

if we were doing this in today we will go with joe. i have a real personal connection to this subject. i grew up in the inner cities of the south bronx, puerto rican. it was the poorest district in the united states at the time and it continues to be, my neighborhood. but i had a mom who had me working really hard. i had the help of government programming, and i became the first person in my family to go to college. that was quite an accomplishment and my mom's eyes and it would not have happened without the government support. [applause] in 1978, yes, 1978, 30 five years ago. i know you are not thinking i'm that old. [laughter] in 1978, i landed a job at deloitte and 35 years later, i'm

here as ceo. one day early in my career, the team decided we would do our own version of a salary survey. there was no internet at them. we are talking about the late 70s. we wrote it down on a piece of paper and through the number in the hat i was surprised to find out that i was the lowest paid person of someone who had the same title and responsibilities and i believe the same performance. the only difference was our background and where we came from. but that was 1978. that was a long, long time ago. a lot has changed since then great to ensure fair and equal pay for a job well done, we talk about the laws passed by congress and the fair pay act. just four years ago, we had the lilly ledbetter act passed trade laws alone will not solve the problem. companies have to do their part. the public sector and private sector working together. i'm proud of what we have done. i stand here before you -- you

mentioned the young lady sitting right here about being someone who could live the american dream. i am certainly living the american dream and my firm helped me. i am proud of what we have done at the lloyd and i'm proud to represent the 60,000 people in 3000 partners who'd define our organization. we have lots of policies to make sure there is equal pay grade people are evaluated. there is no retaliation for people who stand up or speak up. it's not good for economic justice only, but it's good for the companies and what we do. when you pay based on performance: you pay based on a job well done, that is what is good for companies and that's what's good for america. that is well we are all about. now it is my honor, and it really is an honor, to introduce a man who has let on this issue and champion the cause of fair pay and equal pay from his first day in office, ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states, barack obama.

[applause] >> thank you. thank you, everybody. thank you. thank you so much. everybody have a seat. .elcome to the white house it is wonderful to see all of you. thank you, joe, for that kind introduction. thank you, valerie, for the great leadership gets shown on this. business leaders and advocates, members of congress who are here, numbers of my administration, i'm so glad all of you could be here to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the equal pay act. we'reou think about it, not just celebrating a law, we are honoring the heroes who made that law possible.

the fierce determination of americans who saw a wrong and worked to write it. the women who were sick and tired of being sick and tired. [laughter] seeing the same jobs advertised with the firm pay scales, women who are tired of being treated like second-class workers, women like dorothy height and congresswoman edna kelley. [applause] all who pushed to make the equal pay act a reality. today, we recognize the work of those brave women. but, until equal pay truly is a reality, we are here to recommit ourselves to the work that remains to be done. , presidento today kennedy signed the equal pay act into law a right here in the white house. he said it was basic to our democracy that the idea that all

of us are created equal. as i said in my inaugural address this year, our journey to equality is not complete until our wives, mothers, our daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts. the day the bill was signed into the law, women earned $.59 for every dollar a man earns on average. today, it's about $.77. 77 -- it even less if you are an african american or latina. i guess that's progress, but does anybody here think that's good enough? i assume everybody thinks we can do better. yes we can. [laughter] [applause]

over the course of her career, a working woman with a college degree will earn on average hundreds of thousands of dollars less than a man who does the same work. that's wrong. i don't want that for malia and sasha, i don't want that for your daughters, i don't want that to be an example that any child growing up into accepting as somehow the norm. i want every child to grow up knowing a woman's hard work is valued and rewarded just as much as any man's. what's important to realize is that this is not just an issue of fairness. this is a family issue, a middle-class issue, and economic issue. just last week, report confirmed what we already know -- that women are increasingly the

breadwinners for american are the primary source of income for nearly 40% of american families. almost half. that's not something to panic about or be afraid about. that's a sign of the progress and the strides we have made. but what it does mean is that when more women are bringing they shouldn't just be getting a little bit of bacon. [laughter] if they are bringing home more of the income and that income is less than a fair share, that means families have less to get by on for child care or health care or gas or groceries. it makes it harder for middle-class families to save and retire. it leaves small businesses with customers with less money in their pockets. which is not good for the

economy. that is not a good example to set for our sons and daughters, but it's also not a good recipe for long-term, stable economic growth. $.77 on theo says dollar sounds pretty close to equal, i would say your math is bad. [laughter] you would not like it if your vote only counted in three out of four elections. [laughter] you wouldn't like it if your daughters or sons went to school but they only got caught -- bailey got taught three out of four days a week. you would not like it if you were forced to work every fourth day without pay. men would be complaining about that. [laughter] they would not think that equal or fair area -- equal or fair.

it's the 21st century. it's time to close that gap. that's why the first bill i signed into law was the lilly ledbetter fair pay act. [applause] that is why i created the first ever white house council on women and girls, which is working to close that gap. [applause] valerie's council is doing a bringing the experience of women into our federal policies as well. it's why i established the national equal pay task force to crack down on violations of equal pay laws which they are doing at a record rate. and through education and outreach, they are helping employers develop tools to comply with the nations equal pay laws on the round. that is why earlier this year, i signed a presidential memorandum directing the federal government to close that gap for

good for its employees. we have to set an example. [applause] also why we are using the latest technology to help workers get the information they need to figure out if they are underpaid. things to innovators like -- thanks to innovators, we can now say there is an app for that. [laughter] persists, this cap we will have more work to do. keep up the work all of those trailblazers 50 years ago is now. now is the time for congress to step up and pass the paycheck fairness act. [applause] now is the time for us to encourage more young women to pursue math and science education. now is the time for us to hire

so studentsachers are prepared for the high-tech jobs for tomorrow. and that businesses offer flexibility to be good employees and good parents. i really want to commend deloitte and the ceos who are with us here today. the are creating exactly the kind of innovative workplaces that help hard-working americans thrive, and they are committed to act. when you have a chance to talk to joe, say thank you. ceos who are out there, if you ,ant a first-class company tapping into the talents and resources of all of your employees, make sure you are putting in place systems so they all feel like they are being treated fairly and equally. it is a simple principle, and it is a powerful one.