some mom will reenter the workforce, kids are off to school and she reenters the workforce, no jobs available. some people come from the military, and there are no jobs. both parties have economic challenges and both parties need to have a robust debate internally about what they propose to do about it. i think mike is right. it needs to emphasize the lived experience of most americans. the idea that this has been settled by what has happened over the last five years -- don't believe me. go read about jim messina going to be president in march and april we talk about the stimulus and people bar of. we talk about economic recovery and people say what recovery? we can't win on the basis of your record. we have to take a fifth and go eradiate mitt romney and we call it the grand bet because if it doesn't work we have needser money nor time to try something else.

that's not a winning message of saying we've done all the right things and as democrats we've won this debate. it's very much up for grabs and going to be determined in the next three or four years. >> so flush that out if you're karl rove in the next election, what's the platform you want your candidate to run? give bullet points. two or three policy related things. we all understand there's negative sides, tactics and technology but every candidate wants to talk about something. that's my experience. candidates want to talk about what they're going to do. what would you tell a candidate that he or she should run on as a basic platform on economic and domestic policy? >> i think republicans have a disadvantage and i'm sure those in the audience have heard this and some will agree and some will not. i come from kentucky. i lived in new york, i've lived in california. and there are people believe it or not there's a whole swath of the country that does not agree

with california and new york. and they're actually quite vocal and increasingly so. i think it's interesting. we've got to put it in perspective. both parties if you take the long-term point of view there will be differences. and there will be ups and downs. i think the republican party is looking at itself very, very seriously, very intently, i think republicans felt very intensely the loss of 2012. so that they know that something needs to be done. but as we've just heard here, there's a lot of different opinions as to what is really going on. for me because i focused on jobs and employment i think that is still very relevant. in all the polls that is still the number one issue. it may recede here and there but it's an overwhelming issue and i think karl will address that as well. we need to speak about these issues with compassion. and sometimes we don't -- the republican doss not speak with

a voice of compassion. and i think that needs to be improved. i think there needs to be more outreach to groups of color. we're not doing that. but i think the economic message is still pretty set but that's also the advantage and the problem. because how many times can you talk about tax cuts? how many times can you talk about taxations, regulations and too much spending in the message is simple but it gets kind of boring after a while. even though it is totally true. so i think the -- i'm in no position to offer advice. you've got two much greater minds here. >> that's pretty good advice actually. >> i think just the basics. and you have to say it in a way that's appealing and there has to be much more outreach to the people that we're trying to reach. >> the same question. eric cantor is going to be here today or tomorrow doing a panel. what would you say that eric

should advise his caucus and candidates to talk about in the next election? >> well, there's a fundamental previous decision you have to make. the question right now is does the republican party need to motivate its coalition or modify its coalition? you always have to motivate your coalition when you're going to election, that's necessary. you cabinet get rid of it and start over. the question is whether you need to modify in some significant ways. i think there are good reasons you need to. demographic change, generational change, the problems with working class voters. that to me requires a governing vision that includes everyone that does outreach to even people you know are not going to vote for you because it shows you care about the whole. you're not representing a faction within your own coalition. you're representing the country and its needs. it's the reason when we were involved in the campaign in 2000 when one of the

president's first candidate bush's first speeches he gave he specifically criticized the idea that politics has no higher purpose, no greater goal than leave us alone. that was a criticism that we made to prove this point. >> that's a criticism you snuck into the speech. >> we could have been a little more artful in that one speech making our point. >> but governing vision matters but then the republican party as to overcome i think three symbolic policy, needs to communicate. we get it. we know there's a problem here. and the problem on immigration just to be blunt about it is not that republicans have not done enough outreach in the last couple of decades. it is that an element of the party has set out to alienate positively alienate the hispanic community in proposition 187, in the arizona

law in defeating the bush comprehensive immigration reform, in talking about self-deportation. the message here, that requires some kind of shock therapy. it has to say we understand that this has been on the wrong track. that's the reason that immigration reform think is an important symbol for the republican party. it's not enough. then you have to address people's real world economic needs. and that's an entirely different set of issues. i would also say there are some other issues where you can communicate that we're taking a different approach. i mean, in an essay that i did for commentary, we said why don't you take on the concentration of hiring the big banks or corporate welfare, or other things to symbolize that you're not on the side of the corporate culture, that you're on the side of individual entrepreneurship and social mobility and other things. i think the republicans -- i write for friday for tomorrow,

on the issue of like prison reform. that is an interesting issue where libertarians are concerned about 2 million people in prison. vast mass incars ration. evangelicals have a humanitarian concern with ministries with prisoners. liberals are concerned about the racial implication. why can't republicans pick some issues like that that show we're different, we're changing? perfectly within the bounds of our coalition, perfectly within our ideology but show the kind of creativity that says we're get it. we're shifting and changing. i'll conclude by saying parties n when they are -- when it comes to the point where they say we're tired of losing. democrats did that in 1992 with bill clinton where they gave their nominee the leeway to do unexpected outreach on welfare and crime and other issues in

order to reposition his party and shift their coalition. republicans did that with george w. bush in 2000. they trusted him on the essentials on tax policy and other things and then they gave m the leeway with compassion conservatism. the question here is whether republicans right now are in that place or whether they're going to have to take another loss in order to reach that place. >> i have a slightly different view than my 2000 colleague. i don't think they gave him leeway. i think they liked it. and i think that's the recognition. rib republican primary voters like -- rand paul is doing this. when he says we need to campaign, we need people with tattoos it strikes a hopeful

note among people who may not agree with his views on foreign policy for example. so i think one of the things is that in 2000 we constantly had this conversation, people said that's kind of risky by having bush emphasize compassionate conserve tism. people rallied to it. how is paul ryan, who represents a district that was carried twice by clinton, by al gore and twice by obama -- how does he get reelectd with 60% of the votes? because he had an optimistic pro growth message that is not the typical republican message and he talks about it endlessly in every community in his district. if you're an auto worker or a latino family, if you're an african american in milwaukee, he's making the pitch to you. now, he's got the message better developed than the party does at large. but i agree with a lot of what mike says. my one difference would be is

that if we had candidates with courage who stood up and said here's my message and it's an optimistic one and lit grow our party, i have yet to meet too many republicans whose attitude is i want fewer people in the republican party and fewer victories. you can't really trust a guy who thought that ronald reagan was too liberal in 1984 and supported somebody else for president. but most republicans like this and it's just finding -- it's like ben was his kind of republican. jack kemp. the kind of republicans who were broad in thinking about how do we broaden our base, how do we broaden our support. how do we get more people inside the tent and take our timeless principles and apply them to the new situations. >> i would only say though that moods and parties change. there are periods when parties are looking for converts and there are periods where people are looking for hert tax.

>> i disagree. not parties. it's leaders in parties. there's sometimes when leaders in parties -- the mob goes this way and a leader can go that way. do you think it was easy in 2020 with some of the people -- es? the people were sellouts but the base of the party was responding to it. i remember after the election we were -- clinton saw bush, george when you said that compassionate conservative thing i knew we were in deep trouble. he said that was just brilliant because i knew it would keep your people. that was just brillion ynt. just brilliant. and you know i love this thing about the base of the party. the because of the party is reflected through their choices and primaries but it's the leaders who dominate the public dialogue. and we have too many public leaders in that dialogue who

are not forward looking. >> i want to make sure we save some time for questions but i want to talk one more zone because i want to keep focused on policy. even though it doesn't dominate every election, a party without a foreign policy national security rationale is not a governing party in my view. i think that helped the republicans for most of my adult lifetime, hurt the democrats certainly since the mcgovern campaign. it seems to me we're opening up a debate in the republican party that has kind of been glossed over for the last few years. i thought about the reach of american policy and the role of americans in the world intervention. i thought we might have had that debate in the 2012 primaries had of all people hailey barbour run for president. all of our friend maybe the best chairman of the parties great governor of mississippi. but here we had a guy from the deep south, worked for ronald reagan and he was critical in his speeches before he decided

not to run, the afghanistan, the iraq involvement. i was listening to him. most people were focused is he going to run? he was saying something we have heard from the deep south establishment republican. i don't know if he would have won the nomination but that debate never took place in 2012. it looks to me it's going to take place now. our friend john bolton says he may run for president particularly to combat just that kind of thinking. do we have a split in the republican party on foreign policy? what's the foreign policy message for our party if it wants to be the governing party after the 2016 elections? >> i like the libertarian pulse on the domestic front. i don't like it on the international front. the republicans were isolationists, libertarians view before world war ii and it hurt the country and the party. we had a brief flirtation with

it with robert taft in the aftermath of world war ii but since then we've been an internationalist party that recognizes america has a great country with a role in the international stage. if we lead it is positive and if we don't lead it affects our shores particularly in the globally connected world we are. >> i'm not sure how much of a debate we're going to have on it on the surface. there may be some things but i thought it was interesting rand paul didn't do a full fronted attack on afghanistan or iraq with a war on terror, he took the image of a drone hanging over the starbucks at the corner of maine and third in aspen and getting ready to find an aspen-based terrorist and unleash a missile into the starbucks. that was as mike pointed out in his comments, that was a great sort of intuitive political sense of what the american

people would like or not like. but i didn't hear him say you know what? i'm against us taking that drone and unleashing a missile on alacki a u.s. born terrorist in yemen who is behind the fort hood massacre and encouraging violence on america. but we'll see if he does have a sort of a full-throated attack on sort of an internationalist foreign policy that believes that there is a war on terror and america has responsibilities on the international stage, then i think he is going to come up short but as yet he's not engaged in that way. >> let me ask mike and elaine to address this in a little different way and then we'll get to the questions. and i think we want people to line up behind mike to ask questions. it's not just rand paul. our friend has written a book in which he talks -- have you shown the audience? richard is right over there. >> i'm loyal. >> he's going to be very hurt

if you say anything bad about his book. and i am reading your book. richard called me. i tweeted a link to a column that he thought was critical of it so now i have to read the book and report back to him and the papeser due by the 15th jul. >> and reporters will comment and i'll get my grade about early august and i'm looking forward to the experience. >> i sent it to my daughter who interned at the council last summer and she is very pleased. anyway here's my point. richard's argument basically is that foreign policy -- we are in a period of time where america can focus more heavily on its domestic challenges because we have a little bit of a breather in our obligations of international leadership. doesn't that fit quite consistently with what you were just saying about what the republican party needs to do to appeal to voters in this very difficult time economically?

>> i do think that there has been a shift that's gone on. i think when i talk with members of the house and senate, republican members, they did not come out of the reagan cold war era many of the new members. they don't share many of the assumptions about america's moral role. they're much more skeptical of engagement in a variety of places. and i believe -- i want to disagree with karl on too many things, i get in trouble. but i think that rand paul is a conviction politician. i think that his conviction about the nature of what he views as the national security state is the central conviction of much of his views. he believes that is the source of overreaching government in our history since the cold war. and it's likely to be a real contrast between rubio who is by the way in a risky way adopt it had mantle of internationalism and engagement talking about foreign assistance, talking about other

things. there could be a real serious argument on this and i'm not sure how it would turn out. the only response that you can give is well substantively when you ignore the problems of the world they don't ignore you. you know, we have a situation where we think we can disengage from the middle east and then you get into a crisis that spills out over borders and produces terrorist threats and destabilizes key allies and produces humanitarian night marse and we wonder why weren't we more active in shaping events instead of allowing them to fester? that's always what happens in america is that we think these are optional commitments until they become crises that threaten us. >> i think it's interesting that so many of the isolationists believe that somehow foreign aide takes up like 50% of the united states' budget. in reality, it's less than 0.1 of 1%.

and i think it's really ironic that in an age of greater globalization that there is further and further talk about pulling back and ice olationism. >> so we've agreed to reject the iceleationism. >> i agree with mike about rand paul being a conviction politician and it will be interesting if he enters the 2016 race and we do have a rubio-paul discussion. but my point would be he's also a very clever practical politician. so he has -- look, he'll pick his fights. for example, my experience in 2011 rand 2001 was a speak on a lot of campuses and i run into ron paul kids. and about two minutes into the conversation it would be the plight of the palestinian people and the oppression of the jews. and there was a -- by the jews. the oppression by the jews of the behalf of the poor palestinian people. there was a rampant anti-israel, almost anti-smetic

view of a lot of these ron paul supporters. rand is smart enough to say i don't want to be associated with that view that sort of affected my dad's campaign so i'm going to go to israel and make it clear i understand israel is a strong ally. but it's going to be interesting to see this between the conviction, ok, i'm going to talk about the starbucks but not anwar alackie. i'm going to eif a size israel but not our military aid budget which could put israel and other allies at risk. >> let's go to questions. we'll go back and forth starting over here. >> thanks very much. i'm the national finance cochair for the ready for hillary pac. >> you all -- >> something tells me you'll get a lot of donations out of

that zip code. >> i sure hope so. that's why i'm here. i'm here seriously to listen to your points of view and learn from you. to that end you've spoken a lot about rand paul. would you each please address who would you like to see representing your party in 2016 and why? a very oing to give simple answer. i think there's going to be a lot of different candidates. we're going to see governors, we're going to see paul ryan certainly. i don't think paul's going to have a leg up. i think it's going to be the republican primary will be quite robust and it will have lots of different candidates. >> who would you like to see? >> i'm going to not answer that. that's why i wanted to be first. please go ahead. >> i don't want to punt, either. i think one of the advantages republicans have, we talk a lot about the disadvantages, long term. but it's a pretty strong bench for the next election.

chris christie is a tremendous natural politician. >> he's a big figure on stage. >> you know, i have a tremendous affection for jeb bush. who i think -- i understand. by the way, gets both the libertarian side and the common good side of a lot of these questions. you know, i look at -- i think somebody like bobby jindal. i think that people like paul ryan. you know, would contribute a lot to the discussion. i also think that beneath that are a number of younger policy experts within the republican party, smart, intelligent people. some libertarian, some from a more humanitarian perspective that can provide the policy for an innovative campaign. but my general concern is that we just have seen deeply unstable and disturbing primary processes where mitt romney

really suffered not -- a candidate can really benefit from a tough primary challenge. you don't benefit from being serially almost beaten by a series of joke candidates. ok? and that's the way the primary process worked in the last election and i would hope it wouldn't in this case. you get these odd enthusiasms by billionaire-supported candidates who put a lot of money on television who are not serious. and that's damaging to the parties. >> i would add to the list of names mentioned earlier rubio, walker of wisconsin, casic of ohio, and potentially snider of michigan as people who may or may not be interested in running. i'm interested in seeing them run. i want to see how they perform, if they are able to articulate a forward-looking message that speaks tot lived experience of people we need to get inside our tent. i would say one other thing. i don't think that it was the

money that was spent by outsiders or the millionaires supporting these candidates. i think it was worse than that. all you needed to do in this contest with the proliferation of debates was you needed to raise enough money to get an airplane ticket to get you to the next debate site. primary contests in the past have been contest obvious will and muscle where you have to have a message, an organization, advertising, you have to have money, all the acoutrement obvious a campaign and a good quality candidate. here you had to have an outstanding debate performance when you are one of nine people sharing 90 minutes. all you had to do was have seven or eight minutes. so i think limitting the number of debates and stopping the practice of picking liberal moderators whose interest wasn't to pick the republicans as the weirdest people on the face of the planet would be constructive. we ought to require these people mount a real campaign rather than simply raise enough

money to get a debate ticket. given that the overwhelming majority of increase in wealth and income since the bottom of the recession until today has occurred with the top one or two percent, two questions. why? is this good or bad in your view? >> i think it's bad. i think mike is very right in talking about the aspirational merit tocksy which has always characterized america. i came from taiwan as an immigrant. we had nothing. but somehow despite the bad years we just knew that this is the land of opportunity. and i think that's a very important message that somehow our party and all of america has to maintain. so i think it's very harmful. and this one percent, i think this one percent is such a bogus -- i think it's such a demagogued issue.

mike talked about the skills gap. there's a widening gap between people who earn a lot of money and people who don't putting aside wall street. that's primarily because of the skills gap. more and more we are knowledged-based economy and employers are paying higher wages to those workers that possess more knowledge. that actually works to the advantage of women because women are now graduating in larger numbers from professional schools, from colleges. so we're going to see more and more women taking leadership positions. so i think it's very bad. but i think we need to have a real honest look at what does that one percent really mean? i'm sure karl and mike would have a better discussion. >> i think there's a disturbing dynamic at work here. but it's not because of the wealthy or queltsdzy it's because a significant number of people at the bottom of our system, about a third of workers now -- which is a scary notion -- lack the education, the skills, and family

structure and background if you read robert put nan talking about these are the three major factors that determine social mobility. to compete in an increasingly merit cratic economic system and a globalized economic system. the effect of that is -- republicans shouldn't downplay this as though we're not concerned about inequality. i think the traditional republicans' view is in a highly mobile system where people can go from the bottom to the top, inequality is a natural outcome of capitalism. in a situation where you can't move from the bottom to the top, inequality is a caste system. it's essentially condemning a whole group of people to not have the ability to compete in the free market. and b that to me is exactly what republicans need to be addressing. and my concern as i've already expressed it is that the 1980

republican economic message of low taxes and high growth doesn't address that. it doesn't even speak into those concerns. now, we need economic growth. right now it's anemic and you can't get social mobility in the absence of a dynamic economy. but you have to have policies that are actually specified to build social capital in market oriented ways to help people be able to compete in a free economy. >> i think it is a problem. and look mike's hit it. the main driver of this is family and education. and i agree with mike entirely. this needs to be a robust effort. it's going to more likely happen at the state level than the state level -- federal level. we have a system in some of our big cities that says we're concerned more with the inputs than outcomes and we don't give a crap if we're educated. in the district of columbia one out of every two students who

eepter the public school system will never graduate from high school. that's a stain on our great country and we need to address it. i might have a slightly different view. i'm like elaine. i didn't come up with much. i got to go to college because i got a 1500 a year scholarship. my dorm room my apartment was a rented storage space under an eve. i hung my clothe ons a nail. my light was one of the things you get at the auto repair shop that's got the cage and i slept on a foam matt ress and i had to work three jobs to make my way through school. and i think there is another problem. our government has gotten too big and there's too much corporate welfare and there are too many breaks that benefit the big guys and the people who have already got it. you get these wind farms where we're paying gigantic almtsd of money in the name of green energy to a couple of fly by night guy whose have been able

to put together a quick buck. ethanol guy, yeah our facility will be paid off in two years. we have all of our capital investment back in two years because we had the blenders tax credit and we got through the tax system we got our entire investment back in two years in this huge facility. you talk to some of these offshore guys who are drilling, tom delay put that stupid tax credit for offshore oil development we don't need it but we have to take advantage of it because it's there but we don't need it. whay what are we doing that for? we can make plenty of money without it. so we have a tax system that benefits the big guy over the little guy and we need to reform it and we've got a government with way too much money to the people to keep the resources to the people who don't have money and has us paying too much in taxes because they're running up too much debt because most of that corporate welfare is being paid for by borrowing money that we don't have. so i think we've got to address it and i want somebody who will

stand up and say we need to take on corporate welfare at the same time we're doing these other thing that is stand for the republican right to rise. we believe in the right to rise. we believe in the ability of a daughter of immigrants to rise. we believe in the son of a geeologist in a stay at home mom who sold avon products, we believe in the right to rise. and we need to find ways to do that but we need to come up with a robust on corporate welfare and the tax system. >> i'm glad you got out of that cramped dorm room and into more spacious facilities and are able to enjoy a better standard of living until you moved into the white house. it sounded like that dorm room. >> it was great space though. >> it's been a lively conversation but so far i think your panel has failed to address the real elephant in the room, which is the right wing of the party, the tea party.

karl rove alluded to it when he said we have too many public leaders who dominate dialogue with retro gressive language and we need people like them who are moderate but your party won't let poom like them be elected and that's why the congressional leadership has an even lower popularity rating than the president. >> i love how the easy target is the tea party. that's not right. marco rubio is tea party. jeb bush appreciates the tea party. there's a difference between the tea party leadership and the tea party sentiment. this concern that grew up in 2009 and 2010 and in reaction to president obama's policies in respobs to the affordable care act and this risinging amount of debt and this theory that somehow we can spend our way to prosperity brought into politics for the first time a lot of ordinary americans who were deeply concerned. now, the tea party movement has been taken over in some respects, not all of it but

some of it by people who have all their agendas and have been around for a long time. i love the tea party sentiment. i had a book tour about 2010, i did 110 cities in 90 days. and people come through the aisle and they would be getting me to sign the boork i'm a member of the marianna florida tea party. i asked what have you done in politics before? all of these people at the local level would say nothing. i've never been involved before. but you look at the leadership and some political consultant in sacramento who has mailing list, somebody with a nice office in atlanta bank rolled by a drkt mail firm that spends 75% of the money on expenses. so i'm a defender of the tea party sentiment. i think it's been a healthy thing for american pom ticks like all new movements it gets a little rusty and ragged but it's been a healthy movement for american politics and i don't blame the problems of these people who are

intrangjent and insistent upon having our party -- look richard's been around, he opposed the nomination of abraham lincoln because he was too moderate. so i don't worry about people like that. i worry about finding the leaders who will have a positive message to draw the arty in the right direction. >> let's got to the aforementioned tom. great to see you. from washington, d.c. we have a place over here. >> mr. ambassador. >> thank you. >> by the way, we have the gallery in bass at. we give family discounts. we haven't touched on the social issues. why do we keep getting wrapped around the axel? >> i think we're out of time. >> we get wrapped around the axel on abortion and gender issues and gay rights and our

we idates come up -- how do t into -- how do we solve -- how do we solve getting -- i guess it means getting good dand dates, choosing candidates to -- do we send them to school somewhere and say don't say these things? >> electro shock therapy. >> you all thought this question was going to come from some left wing plant. didn't you? >> let's take a shot. >> i think realistically, parties don't get to start over. you know, coalitions are built over time. in the republican primary the last time, the largest single group within the republican primary electorate are really just conservatives and a lot of that depends on how they're led. george bush led them in one way

and rick santorum leads them in another. boast with trusted -- both with trusted and both had very different political outcomes. i think that matters a great deal. i'll address the elephant in the room here. i think the republican party is going to remain a principled incremental pro life party. i think that's what the base of the party believes. i think it's going to undergo a significant shift towards a more diverse view on gay rights as the next generation rises. i think that's an unavoidable reality. republicans will be united by a belief that these things should be decided through democratic means rather than the imposed by courts. i think they're going to be -- so i at these are think there are sources of unity within the republican coalition on even some of these issues but i think that you're going to have people like rob portman in the republican party who have strong social

conservative convictions and are for gay marriage. and that's not going to be uncommon because it's not an ideological issue for many people. it's often a personal issue. it's often people you know. your circle and family. and so i think republicans are going to have to find a way to accommodate the fact that it's going to have diverse views on that set of issues and communicate that to the next generation. >> we haven't talked about the far left element in the democrat party. and i'm sure this session was set up because we have four republicans here that are a similar panel on what the future of the democrat party would be very interesting as well especially as the president enters his second term. there's something about the second term that never turns out the way that you want to. you can have all these wonderful ideas and i think the president is seeing that his trajectory is not what he expected. the i.r.s. scandal has shown up. the drone issue has come up. o in terms of party, i mean,

there's all this less part of the democrat party that somehow is not talked about. i said the republicans are at a disadvantage because i think the media focuses more on the divisions within the republican party and the republican party understands what happened in 2012. they are working very hard to try to find a new path for themselves but there's nobody in charge. this is a democracy. there are all these different people who are vying for attention, for their own voice, and this is part of the beauty of this of voices that we have in america as well. >> i've been informed by the keeper of the time that we are done. i'm sorry we can't take any more questions. >> in preparation for today's event i went back and read a lot and there's a particularly insightful column written on june 17 on this very subject not by me unfortunately though my column today in the "wall street journal" is pretty good.

but on the 17th of june mike wrote this religious conservatives are the single largest constituency within the g.o.p. and comppose about a quarter of the entire electorate. such voters are not baggage thrown overboard they're planchingse in the hull we thought that was really important insight. mike later goes on to say that what's required is madge gnative leadership. a republican reformer cannot use religious conservatives as a foil. he or she will need to appeal as a motivation for reform. it's easy to go out and say a stupid thing. it's a lot tougher thing to do as michael said is necessary here which is to lead. to find a way the take the base of the republican party and lead it in a way that allows us to expand the numbers without sacrificing first principles but making ourselves accepting to current circumstances.

and this is the great challenge of both political parties. and let's not kid ourselves. both political parties succeed and fail at this over the course of decades several times. they fail and succeed. there will be an interesting debate within the democratic party. a democratic coalition that is dependent upon extraordinarily high turnout in the african american community and near universal support for their nominee is going to have a challenge in the post obama era. a democratic party that has a division between the foreign policy views of the former secretary of state and the soon to be not soon enough 3-1/2 years former president of the united states is going to have some tension there. but both political parties face it and this is one of the key ones for the republican party is how do we keep the religious conservatives as part of that coalition while allowing ourselves to be heard and seen by other people. >> we've prove than the future of the republican party is a long discussion and not a short one. thank you.

[applause]

>> sunday taboo sciences, living in space, the afterlife and the human digestive system. mary roach will take your calls, e-mails, facebook comments and tweets. >> now, a panel from the annual net roots nation convention. chris tin pelosi the daughter of nancy pelosi mod rates a discussion about the obstacles

women face. this is about an hour and 15 minutes. >> good afternoon. it is my honor to introduce to you four members of my caucus who happen to be four amazing powerful effective leaders. we have with us today the very first african american councilwoman from antioch, california. monica wilson.

next to monica is my former assembly woman and future other elected leader and the first chinese american speaker otestimony of the california assembly woman and future to be etermined. next to fiona we have a woman who has dedicated her career to helping women run for office. i met her when she was on the board of emerge america. she is now the executive director of emerge california. please welcome kimberly ellis. and a dear friend national and international leader, a member of congress from oakland but we all claim her and the congressional liaison to the united nations, a fearless

fabulous leader barbara lee. when you decide to run for office, you might put out a tweet. the next thing you know, you'll get any number of people using their real names give youg free advice on everything from your hair too short too long you should color it you should stop clorg it you use too much botox. you need to get your teeth fix. are you sure you want to be wearing that on your picture? what are you doing talking about issues like women's issues and feminism? don't you know that we're tired of hearing about women complain about wanting to be the same as men? you're talking about sexual assault?

haven't we had enough shaming and victim shame sng why do you have to bring this back to us? and by the way what makes you think you can talk about national security? you've never carried a gun. you've never protected anybody. oh, i see you want to talk politics. what makes you think that one woman can survive in a man's world of politics? there's no way that you can do that. are you really sure? wait a second. you're single. aren't you? can't you attract anybody? you're married. does your husband know you're doing this? what does he think? why isn't he running? you have children? who's taking care of your children? you're divorced? hmm. i can see why. you must have put your career over your spouse. oh, you're a widow? you must have killed him. all of these things happen. and by the way, that's just part of my own personal twitter stream. wait until it happens to you. so you say why would i want to do that? why would i want to encounter

that? i haven't even gotten to the commepts you get from your dear friends who say are you sure this is what you really want to do? this is really hard. this is really hard and i know how things get for you when things are hard. you know you start to sound a little bit like a -- are you sure you want to do that in public? are you sure you want to say that word? did you just say that word on c-span? this is the kind of thing that every single woman running for party office or public office has to deal with. now, because all of my friends and candidates over here are still politically viable i thought i would say all those words for them. but the reality is i own my feminism and as anybody who follows me knows, i'm quite aware of the double standard. because if i wasn't experiencing them for myself i certainly would be experiencing them when i watch the way people treat my mother. and i see her go from actually a very culturally conservative

catholic grand mother to being the thing that is they say about her on line. and really villified by the tea party and that made me realize a couple of things. one i thought it would be important to do this panel today so you could hear from people who are out there confronting the major issues of our time and confronting the sexism that the status quo forces you in order not to have a conversation. because why should we talk about income and equality when we can talk about whether or not someone is being upty and why should we talk about war and peace? and why should we talk about shifting the power dynamic when we could instead talk about my hair? well, the reality is we know that the issues require a full conversation of women, women of color, women from the lgbt community and we know in order to have that conversation we need to support women when they step up and run. that is what my panelist doss

every day. and there is a decision that s made by our first question recipient and that is congresswoman barbara lee. so i'm going to sit and join the panel after i ask this question. on september 11th, 2001, america was attacked in a horrific terrorist attack. thousands were killed. our country was changed. and the psyche of our country was changed. and we had never experienced anything like that in our lifetime. but when the entire country was debating what is it that we are except to do, everyone one in congress said, we are going to support a vote for a declaration of war. now, many democrats worked behind the scenes to make that authorization a lot more specific and grounded but

nevertheless they voted yes. one person voted no. so the thought exercise that i have for congresswoman barbara lee, the woman courageous enough to make that vote, was this. your family was in the military. you represented military installations in your community. and you stood up and said no. tell us a little bit about what that was like and how you think the reaction might have been different if you were a straight white male. >> thank you so much. and first thank for that great introduction. you just laid it out what we all face as women. and just thank you for your tremendous leadership. and what a difference an election makes with your mother as speaker. and i just have to say that because we have a lot of work to do for our country and for women especially. you know, first of all, i didn't recognize myself after

the media and those out there tried to describe who this person was, who this woman was that cast that vote. they, just as with speaker pelosi, demonized me, they called me a traitor, they said i was commiting an act of treason, they -- lots of death threats, they said i was crazy, didn't know what i was doing, didn't know what i was talking about, the whole nine yards. but they never said yes i was raised in the military family the daughter of a 25 year veteran who served in two wars, yes i represent many military families and militarien stalations, yes i am as tough on terrorism and protecting our country and global peace and security support real global peace and security efforts that would reduce terrorism. they never said that. but they described this person

who was someone again i did not recognize. and i don't think they would have done that had i been a male and especially a white male. they didn't believe that i knew what the constitution says. i read the constitution, i know the constitution. they gave me no credit for having cast a thoughtful vote. i explained my vote on the floor. i explained the constitutional issues. and also i said that this could spiral out of control and congress should never give authority to any president to wage war forever. under any circumstances. that congress had a right and to the constitution -- debate whether or not we commit our young men and women to harm's way to war and that we commit our tax dollars now over $1 trillion to a war. and so my reasons were logical. they made sense. and believe you me now i think everyone understands what that was about.

but they didn't even give me credit for being on the foreign affairs committee and being involved in international and foreign policy for most of my life. a once again i had i been white male i am sure those kinds of attacks wouldn't come. certainly they would have given me some credit for knowing what i was doing. but in this instance, i still say it is because a woman, an african american woman, the demonization that came was because in many ways people saw me as a target they were angry and they couldn't come up with anything but these very terrible sexist and racism depictions of who i was. and for that, i had to just stand and take it. but fight back also. and keep -- i talked to the press. and what i did was communicate hopefully to the world who i really was and why i really cast that vote. and for women i just have to

say women always have to do double duty. we have to convince others that we know what we're doing, that we're smart, that we understand what we're doing. and that we're as smart as men. and i think that was an instance where i had to really convince those who were attacking me and others -- well, those who were attacking me that's one group of people. but others began to believe it. so i had to convince those that were about to believe that th that i knew what i was doing, i knew what i was talking about and i knew exactly why i voted no on that resolution. i think history sooner or later ill show that. >> as someone just said it already has. i appreciate that very much. moving down the panel. we just asked congresswoman lee about the most public incidents

of sexism and in her career one that we all saw and knew about. but tell us a little bit about you and the work that you do and what, how do you encounter sexism and what strategy do you have to overcome it? so as the executive director of emerge california, i have the privilege and the honor of working with women all across the beautiful state of california to inspire and encourage them to really step into political power. and to take a seat at the decision-making table. and i can honestly say that it is one of the most fulfilling things i have ever done in my life. in terms of sexism, that's really i want resting. i talk about my -- with my husband about this some of the time. i feel like i personally because i have not run for office yet don't actually encounter a lot of sexism. i think that has to do with the

fact that i am very confident and very strong in who i am as a woman and in our ability as women and very vocal about that and also that comes across. and so personally i have not encounter add whole bunch of sexism. but i do know that the women who go through the emerge program and have graduated from the emerge program and especially those who have run for office and who now hold office have had to deal with it a lot. and that kind of goes back to a lot of the stuff that we teach in the emerge california program, which is that you have to be able to find the confidence and the strength to know that you are just as qualified, you are just as smart, you are just as talented as men are. and you deserve a seat at the table and you deserve an opportunity for your voice to be heard and for your perspective to be heard. and so really instilling in

women that they are just as qualified as a huge part i think of combating the sexism that they will inevitably encounter and do encounter on a daily basis. >> when you were in the assembly, you earned yourself a leadership position. they had seen men of color as speaker, but they had not seen a woman of color as a speaker protemprear. you had the same credentials but you had power over threm. what was that like for the guys and for you? >> well, i really think it depends on the leader. speaker john perez as many of you know is a very progressive individual. he is a gay man. he is the first gay speaker that we've had in california. and he believes that everyone is equal and wants to treat everyone equally.

so he does a good job of trying to diverse if i his leadership team, the committee chairs, and just balancing out all the kess. so i'm very lucky that i was serving under speaker perez and that he appointed me as his right hand number two person. i do have a sexism story. can i just share that? >> please do. >> so i was lucky because i served in the san francisco board of supervisors for four years. and for anyone who knows san francisco, there are real no republicans there and so we're all different shades of democrats. so we don't really face sexism as much. when i got elect tot assembly in 2006 i ran a bill based on an article in one of the newspapers. a young couple had been dating for seven years they wanted to get married but they wanted to change their last name. each of them had been adopted. they didn't feel a connection

to their adopted names and wanted to come up with a married name for thems. so reading the article, the woman could just go down to the city clerk's office and put whatever name she wanted after they got married. a man could not. he would have to hire an attorney, pay hundreds of dollars. they would have to go and file publicly in the newspapers that they wanted to change their name and have to wait a certain period of time before they could officially change their name. so i thought it was really unfair so i decided to propose a bill ab 102 which was a name change bill. so low and behold i got some press on it and i got a postcard in the mail from a gentleman from a small town, he had his name and address and a little i guess american flag on the postcard and he said dear is the your bill ab 102

silliest thing i've ever heard. you should go home and bake cookies. so you can imagine my shock when i got to sacramento. i was like what is going on? i really hadn't dealt with people like this. so you came into my office and i had it framed on my book people who are different than us, but they are entitled to their opinion and perhaps one day i will write him back when i have something i guess important to respond to him and send him a postcard back. >> monica wilson, when you first decided you were going to run for office others tried to dissuade you in order to protect you from yourself.

that is one of my pet peeves, that we have to stop protecting ourselves. and men, too, mentioning the concerns in the beginning. but then going into a hardened opposition when you insist on going forward. tell us about your decision to run for office, some of the things that you encountered, and what happened when you ran? >> when it came time for me to run, i knew that i wanted to run for office. i knew that i wanted to run for the city council position. i remember when i let the information out to people letting them know i was running for this office, i remember a lot of men coming up to me, saying, city council? why don't you run for school board? why are you doing that? i got that more so from men than women. every once in a while i would get a woman. usually if it was from a woman, it was mostly, you are single, you really don't -- since you're not married, you really don't get the whole picture.

she never really explained that comment, but, ok, to her, i do not get the big picture. those were the comments. once the campaign got going and we had forums, i believe it was our second, maybe the third forum, and at the time the current mayor decided he was going to run for city council. we had just finished this form, i was feeling good, but i did a good job, answer the questions, i was to the point, i did not pontificate 10 minutes. the mayor came up to me and said, you did a really good job. and he said it just like that. i was kind of like, what? did you really mean that? i would get that from people. and once i had been in office, i still get a friend comments, even from fellow councilmember saying, did you understand what the report said? yeah, i read it, i understood it.

or had a former councilmember come up to me at an event who was not too pleased with how i voted on a particular ordinance. he came up to me and said, you don't understand, i used to be on the council, i know what it is like. you don't understand. i came back and said these are my reasons why i voted the way i did. you need to back off a little bit. as he was walking away, i remember thinking, that's why you were only on the council one term. but i'm amazed that it is an ongoing battle to always prove myself. yes, i understand what is going on. i read my reports, i asked questions. i'm very meticulous in the information that is coming up on council meetings. i am also really shocked how many people on the council don't read the information that comes. but i'm amazed how many men feel and i don't say all men, but i'm amazed how many men feel they are justified to come up to me and just point their finger and, "you don't understand."

i had a man, "you don't understand. i don't like the way you voted. you did us wrong." and he was pointing his finger at me, shaking it. before he had a chance to respond, he had turned around, ran to his truck, and drove away. i'm very fascinated by how some men in particular will feel they are justified to come up to me and tell me how i should and should not have voted. >> and the way in which they do. each of you to a certain degree were talking about the importance of credentializing yourself. it is my opinion that sometimes women tend to overcompensate or over-credentialize to prove themselves. that gets into a fear question. my next question, starting with you, congresswoman, is, how do you tackle that fear of failure or success? >> first of all, in terms of

tackling fear, very few things i'm afraid of. secondly, i think when i think about just my life and what i have been through and what i want to see for this country, for the world, it it's that hope that help us meet get over that fear. it is that optimism. it is that commitment to justice and peace and the work i do each and every day that really helps fear just dissipate. again, as a person of faith, you know, i'm a person of faith. not every body are people of faith, people have values and a sense of morality and what they believe in. and for me, i have to always remember that there are people

out there who are the least of these, who look for some of us to help them over some very difficult times, who need someone to speak for them, for the voiceless, and that helps me in terms of any fear i have to really realize that fear is a selfish emotion. and if i'm going to do what i have to do on this earth, you know, i cannot be afraid. and i have to close by just saying, i always remember and think of my ancestors. you know, the slavery, the slave trade, and what happened during slavery, what happened during jim crow, segregation. when i started school -- and this dates me, really -- when i

started school, i couldn't go to public schools because i was black. so i remember those days. and if it had not been for so many people who were fearless and fought for women's rights and for civil rights, i mean, they were fearless. they paid, oftentimes, the supreme price. these are people i remember each and every day that helped me overcome whatever fear i may have. because if they were not afraid to take on the issues and the challenges and the government to make this a more perfect union, then who am i to be afraid to do any of this work. and so i just have to remember everybody who came before me and took a chance just so we could be free and have some semblance of fighting for the american dream. >> that's beautiful. [applause]

beautiful. kimberly, you train people who are afraid of both. some are afraid of losing, others are afraid of winning. so what advice can you share with us? >> yeah, i mean, i think, very similar to what the congresswoman has said, i try to communicate to the women that fear of failure is really a waste of time and energy and that we should approach the failure and the possibility of failure as an opportunity to learn and grow. and i know there is a famous quote that i love sharing with women, which is, "people who are afraid to fail are people who don't take a lot of risks." and so really embracing failure, not as a bad thing but as a good thing and opportunity to learn.

and i would say on the other end of that spectrum, the fear of success is probably the biggest fear, even bigger than the fear of failure. there's another quote that i love, from marianne williamson, that is something like, "our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure and it is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us." i think that is absolutely true. i don't think it is necessarily differ year of failing but the fear of succeeding and what that success means. when you're successful, when you take a stand, when you speak out, when you stand up for what is right and for the voiceless, that comes with consequences. it can sometimes be scary, it can be lonely. it can also be dangerous, quite honestly, being able to stand up and speak out for what is right. the fear of being successful i

think is even bigger than the fear of success in terms of emerge, getting out there and letting their light shine, standing up for what is right and what they know is right and just, and being able to stand there and speak truth and power even if your voice shakes. for us, we sort of counterbalance that. we get them past the fear of failure and then it becomes the fear of being successful and being ok with that and to stand up and stand for what is right and just. i think we are getting there. >> i guess i have been blessed to have parents who never taught me to be afraid. there we said, yeah, go for it. the matter what i did, they were there supporting me, clapping, saying how great i was coming even if i was not so great, like singing, even though i love it. and for me, my parents wanted me

to be an accountant. that's why i have an accounting background, cpa. i know that the board of equalization member betty ye is here, and we are the daughter of immigrant parents who had a lot of expectations on us to be in an honorable profession. certainly, politics is not considered honorable to the asian community. so i fought my parents for many, many years, saying, mom and dad, i don't think i was meant to be an accountant. helping people do taxes 16 hours a day behind a computer, i really feel i need to help people. it took a long time for me to decide to finally run for office. when i finally did, i guess because i took so long and because i was so passionate about it, i worked harder than all the candidates that were running. i still continue to believe that if you don't want to face

failure, work harder. when you're a candidate, and as a woman, we do need to work harder than everybody else. but in the end, it is worth it. i don't see things as success or failure. legislation that i work on. it is about milestones. it is about pushing the envelope further. it is about trying to help people, like right now i'm trying to help battered women get out of jail. it is just about having a purpose in life. in the end, i think we need to sleep well at night. i feel like i am doing the right thing for the right reasons. until i feel i am times or i am not sleeping, i am and earned out, i need to go back and do accounting -- i am burned out, i need to go back and do accounting.until then, here i

am. >> i had supportive parents. the first thing i ever ran for was for the committee. my dad said, just go for it. do it. and i did it and i was able to win and was successful. when i came to run for council, i ran into some nervousness. i came back to my mom and she said the same thing, go for it. i remember a friend sitting down and saying, you have to believe you are the best person for this job. nobody else can do the job the way you can do it in you are going to be successful. the minute i heard that, the fear washed away and i was able to take that leap of faith and run and speak out on issues i felt passionate about. also, congresswoman lee touched on this. looking at things in my past.

i worked at mills college. i tell students this as well. being able to look at your past. times when things are the best were difficult for you to do and you were able to do it. -- when things were difficult and you were able to do it. there were so many events in your life back prepare you for the next events. i was able to take a couple of things to really overcome that fear. do i get nervous from time to time? yes. i try to use that positive energy to focus on what i am making my point about our my argument about. that is how i have used my nervousness to help me achieve this office. >> i will drill down a little bit. you started to enter the next question.-- answer the next question. i will ask one more question --

you started to answer the next question. i will ask one more question of the panel. i was a prosecutor in the san francisco district attorney's office prosecuting sexual assault cases. for the longest time afterwards, my biggest fear and my touchstone for success were some the same cases. i remember working with victors, -- working with victims, working with survivors who were overcoming their sexual assault to make it into the courtroom and confront their accusers. -- abusers. through all of the challenges i had professionally after which i would think, i was able to achieve justice, i had some really, really tough cases, successful to where the perpetrators decided to start stocking me. i had -- start stalking me.

there is still a case i remember losing where i wake up in the middle of the night and think of a way i could have won that case. not for the competition of winning the case, but getting justice for the children. particularly when you are in public life going to challenges and you look back at something that was a challenge to you, something that was difficult, in some ways when you are afraid, it is the face of failure to you. when a new challenge comes along, you think it will be just like that. when you are going through trying times, having succeeded in something difficult allows you to put a current situation in perspective. for me, my touchstone revolves around some of the work i did years ago in the trenches and continue to do. a woman here is working on the document remove the about

"the invisible- " documentary about military pe. that is why i was so proud when your colleague was the public face of a rape survivor in the violence against women act. i really love gwem moore, african-american rape survivor for standing on the -- gwen moore, the african american red survivor, or standing on the floor of the congress. [applause] what is that touchstone and victory or trauma or success that is your touch-tone as you ground yourself in public life? -- touchstone. >> i wrote my memoir and it was a difficult book to write.

i wrote my memoir and you have to be authentic. it was a leap i had to take for a lot of reasons, especially after i cast my vote. people said, how were you able to do that? i said, that was the right thing to do. in a democracy, dissent is central to a democracy. that was not really an act of courage. that was the right thing to do. writing a memoir was difficult. i am a private person as a public official. our lives are totally public. there is that zone of privacy, ,- maybe two percent --hat you want to -- zone of that you want to keep. at

we beat that firm bank bill. we made it. for me to talk about being -- farm bill, we made it. for me to talk about being on public assistance was difficult. it is helping other women in terms of understanding what is taking place in their lives and there should not be a stigma if you need a helping hand when you are going through difficult times. i had to write about being an unmarried teenagers, a pregnant teenager. -- unmarried teenage, a pregnant teenager, being a battered woman. i wrote to the violence against women act in california and

trying to get women who had actually killed in their baterrer -- batterer, but they had never received justice and they had been incarcerated for life. they had histories in the emergency room of almost being killed over and over again. i remember going to a hearing at the prison. all of a sudden -- the sudden, i saw myself in there. i could have been one of those young ladies. that is where i was. that took a heck of a lot as a public official, to be able to share some of these stories. what i learned was that it gave other women encouragement and the ability to say, if you can overcome all of this stuff and get here, maybe i can, too. how do i do expect -- do it? it is hard for me to sit up here and talk about it right now.

as a public official, that has been the hardest thing in the world, to reveal some of my past as a way to help women along the way not have to go through what i went through. >> thank you. [applause] >> for me, i am crystal clear about what that is. i am a graduate of emerge california. that reignited a fire that had been burning in side -- inside of me for a long time. in 2009, a position became available as a national affiliate. i was at a professional crossroads in my life and wanted the lot -- the job at emerge america. i had no political experience

whatsoever. i went ahead and interviewed for the job and interviewed for another job for director of hr, something i had a background in and had been doing forever, could do with my eyes closed. halfway through the interview process for both of those jobs, i had made it for the final interview around and i got a call from my mom, who told me i should probably start making my way back home to tennessee because my 28-year old brother was about to die from cancer. this was my brother who i had raised since birth. i was close to him. he was an all-american hero. he played football at the university of alabama, a dean's list, did not drink, did not

smoke. the picture of perfection. an amazing human being. and actually having to go there and watch my brother die, literally, in my arms -- i was there when he took his last breath -- i knew what i had to do, which was walking into my seat here, to confront and face the thing i was afraid of most, but wanted most. that was to stand up and use my voice and let my light shine and do what god put me on earth to do, which was to use the influence of my voice to inspire and encourage other women to step forward and take a seat at the table so that we can create the world we know is possible. for me, what i do at emerge california is not just a job. it is personal.

i have a personal interest in the success of the women who come through the program and the other women whose shoulders we stand on to pave the way and really lead as western women, as californians, to lead the way for the rest of the country and the rest of the world to show that, not only do women deserve a seat at the table, but that once they are there, the policy and the legislation that comes out on the other end is more just, more equitable, and more inclusive for everyone in the community. that is what this is all about, making sure our policy matches our values and principles as americans and humans. that is what this fight is all about. i consider myself to be a soldier in this army that is really fighting for justice and peace for california, for america and for this world.

[applause] >> kimberly said, as a legislator, our job is to pass laws. if you go through our bills, you will see bills that are personal to all of us, some that are not, some that are personal to constituents or industry groups, something we read in the newspaper. we get our bill ideas from all different places. as a legislator with six years in the state assembly, i felt a sense of urgency to get as many bills passed as i could. i think i have passed about 60 bills in my six years, which is a lot of work for my staff. my last two bills that were signed by the governor last

september were probably my most favorite bills. it has to do with some of the work congresswoman barbara lee started having to do with battered woman syndrome. some of these victims did not get there justice during their jury trials and, consequently, they are sitting in jail. there are about 11,000 women sitting in prison right now. the majority of them have gone to some kind of domestic violence in their lifetime. many are there was no opportunity of seeing their life on the outside. my last two bills, we worst hard with documentary makers as well as a woman who spent 26 years in jail and was out advocating for her sister's in jail.

the study bills are giving these women -- advocating for her sisters in jail. these two bills are giving these --men rain chance -- a chance. in placing parole board to face great weight on these cases and not write it off as lack of remorse, which is what they had been doing for many years. i started going to parole board hearings. i heard about this system of former mostly public safety retirees who were tough on crime. they did not believe they should release anybody. i wanted to see for myself. i have been to two parole board hearings. i am two for two. it makes them nervous when i said in -- sit in on their hearings. good.

i will sit in on more parole hearings. on tuesday, brenda virgil is going to get out of prison. she has been abuse all of her life. she has faced three lung cancer. -- she has stage three lung cancer. she has a small chance of living, but she will be released on tuesday. for me, it is about saving lives. it is about personal stories. it is not about pieces of paper. it is about trying to find a deeper meaning to the work i am doing. it only came after 10 years of being in elected office that i felt there is something deeper behind the pieces of paper we submit as bills.

i have had a renewed sense of purpose in what i am doing and i look forward to continuing going back into public office. [applause] >> for me, that pivotal point was in a former life. i was living in new york city. i had just graduated from college. i went to college in d.c. and went to new york city. i was working in the retail management. my supervisor said, it is time for you to manage your own store. she sent me to a store that was store699 out of -- ranked 699 out of 750 stores. sometimes manages what they are and they disappeared. it was really nerve wracking. what is going to happen? being the analytical person i am, i stepped back and evaluate

what was going on in the store. who was working and who was not working? who were the people in my neighborhood who shocked that store? i walked been able to lead to a figure of who lived -- i shopped that store. what did people in that neighborhood want the? a year later when the rankings came out again, i was ranked 51. [applause] i remember the regional office called me. ohio was calling me. what did you do? i just sat back and paid attention of what was the demographic of that particular store? i had a good staff and we were a good team that worked well together. i always refer back to that story when i come back to something that is really hard.

remember the store back in new york? i am able to go back and look dead that and really -- and look at that and see how hard i worked. that is the pivotal point for me. no matter how tough it is. the hill may be released, but you can get up the hill. that is what i used to help motivate me. [applause] >> we have some amazing women in the audience and a wonderful men here, too. if you have any questions as a group or individually, we have a volunteer who will be handing you the microphone. ok. hi. >> i am currently one of the vice presidents and i will be the first african-american --esident of andover america.

of the young democrats of america. it has definitely been a learning experience. we are learning about public speaking and everything else involved in running for office. my question is, as women of color, how did you deal with the judgment that inevitably affects all women candidates? our hair, how we dress, should we do it differently from white women who are elected? i would like to hear your comments on that. >> yes, i did experience that when i was running. more so on my dress than anything else. i was running for the assembly

at the time. every time i was running, they would come to me and saying, your shirt is too low cut. i would get that about what i was wearing. i cannot think of any place in america where this does not happen. anywhere you run, you will get the racism that comes along with that. during my campaign, might push was economic development and talking about how we need to look within our community to see what types of businesses would support us. i remember when i was reading a blog and somebody said, monica wilson is about economic development. she will bring in more fried chicken and watermelons -- racist stuff like that. it is noise. you have to not listen to it and stay focused on what you are

running for. if you are running as president of democrats of america, that is your focus. stay on that. all the other stuff, clothing, hair, is just noise. >> i agree. i got involved in politics -- i have to mention this because often we forget that the first african-american woman elected to congress, shirley chisholm, paved the way for barack obama to be elected. [applause] shirley was a dear friend and mentor and got me involved in politics when she came up as the black student union president of mills college. the bottom line is she told me one thing and i got involved in politics as a result of her running for president. she said to me, people are going to believe you based on what you do.

if you ever run for office -- this was in the early 1970's and i never thought i would run for office. people will support you come work for you because of who you are and what you do, not because of how you dress. do not change. once elected, people will not trust you if you change up. she kept repeating that over and over again. just be yourself. often times, women, especially women of color, are pulled in many directions because of the image of being, you were a welfare queen. he did not want to go through this again because women might start calling you the welfare queen again. i said, the sort tried to make sure we do not pass a $20 billion cut in benefits.

if it helps if i get out and start talking about being on food stamps, so be it. we have to be who we are and by their deeds,. shall you know them. >> there is a great book by melissa harris perry, sister if you have not read that, i would strongly suggest that you read it. at it is an amazing book that talks a lot about that. i will refer to the graduation we just have for this past saturday for the class of 2013. another reason why i feel so incredibly blessed to have the privilege to be surrounded by such amazing women who come from all across the country. that particular session was talking about answering the tough questions. in one of the exercises, the women had to ask each other the scare is question they did not

want to get. one of the women in the class, an african-american, the director of programs for an organization that trains young girls in college and high-school to build their political ambition, a beautiful african- american woman. she has this beautiful afro. the question that was asked of her was, don't you think it is inappropriate for you to have that kind of hair style running for office? don't you think that is not professional or inappropriate? the answer that she gave was so beautiful. what she said was, as a woman who works with young girls and young ladies, they cannot even dream of being what they cannot see. for them, it is important that they see other women who look like them, dress like them, have a hair like them, who are being leaders and role models.

no, my hair is not appropriate. it is not unprofessional. it is who i am and i am proud of it. i stand as a role model for other young african-american women who are coming up who are looking for other women in leadership roles to look like them to aspire to. i absolutely echo what the congresswoman said. do not be afraid to stand up and >> do youlight shine. want to answer that. from 2002,oogle me you will see a totally different picture. when you hire consultants, they feel justified in changing you

completely. i campaign photo was a red turtleneck. they asked me to dress very conservatively. that is what they made me. over the years, i have not been come to bowl that way. -- i have not been comfortable that way. i would just say to you, be comfortable with who you are. it makes a difference. if you are not comfortable with what you're wearing, the way your hair is, what ever jewelry you are wearing, it's going to show. consultants are great, but they are also kind of negatives. i am trying not to higher -- to hire political consultants in the next race. told thatg not to be anymore. i do not want people to

tell me what to do anymore. just, be yourself. it will reflect in what you do every day. >> hi. i can tell you the kids in high school -- there is a big 1990'snce between the and the 1970's. it has something to do with the tech revolution, i'm just thinking. the teachers in the schools, they felt the same way. at i was in the drama department, so we were sort of isolated with the drama kids. i'm trying to figure out what it takes to motivate kids, teenagers. what clicked? what made you feel braver? were you always that way?

i could never have stood up in a room and talk like this. but i changed. what got you to do what you had to do and what would you suggest we adults do to encourage kids to bring that out in them? >> i think you have to start with the arts. i was never from a quiet family. i do remember the day it shifted over from volunteering with my mom to volunteering on my own. and it was a cause when i grew up, we had something called vip .s -- volunteers in politics my mom was the chair. every month you had to come listen to a speaker -- cesar chavez, you name it. a leader in the movement, who would come and talk to people. the grassroots got very involved. for me, i remember the day it

shifted. what really affected me was barbara mikulski, the congresswoman, had just been to el salvador, and she was talking about the people who had been killed. at that was in 1980. everything that i had heard to that point -- who would kill millions? who does that? why is our government paying armies to go out and kill nuns? it did not make any sense to me. in at thet to a dye- fairmont hotel. my parents were mad, but not really that mad at me. it was going to take. the arts are very important. we will talk about teaching the arts, and encouraging children to study the arts and follow that, rather than conforming to the standardized testing. they will tell you what they are interested in.

people do not want to listen, or the do not get credit for, so they shut down. encouraging young people to listen, not be surprised when they do we ask them to do, which is to speak up. >> i think you are right. arts and drama, a big part of this. i was very shy and quiet as a child. i play the piano, i read books, very studious. i probably would be doing it to this day at it not been for seeing how my mother and father and grandfather were very active in the naacp and texas. i could not figure out what was going on as a child. as a move to california, and began to realize the injustices in this world, and then wanted

to be a cheerleader, i could make a mature letter i didn't meet the criteria of being blonde. i had to do some things i could be achildren.-- could cheerleader. that is what happened to me. i went to the naacp in san fernando and asked them to help me. they did. we got the rules changed where they could be elected. i was the first black chile-- first black cheerleader at san fernando high school. so, that brought me out. it was having a really wanted to do. i think it's important to find something that you people really want. i think that is probably what we haven't been doing very well. >> i think, as the mother of two

young kids, and a teenager who was often like this, i feel like technology has a big role in this. i think that, this is relatively new for me, instead of blaming technology and saying what later -- put away the iphone. go outside, get some fresh air, that we need to re-examine and re-approach it, and start trying to use technology to help inspire them. i was at a conference on wednesday. there was a woman, i forget the name of the app, but she created an app in this competition the white house had put together which basically gave a history of all of the famous and important women in women's it was fascinating.

she was just knowing through and showing all of the pictures and the bios of what they had did. and she was using this to engage the members of the young community, specifically the young girls, about all this history. need to look at how we can incorporate technology to help get the kids more involved area -- more involved. also, not feeling as though we as parents need to do everything. yes, mommy is now trying to save the world and do what she can, but you have a role in this as well. really making them feel empowered, and they a part of if we are doing our part to create the world we know is possible, a beautiful world for them to and herod,

they need to have some skin in -- finding well. ed ways to incorporate them in the fight is huge and important. >> alexis started with the brownies and the girl scouts -- >> it started with the brownies and these girl scouts. it is all about getting rewarded for doing good deeds. i think that has really permeated my whole existence. i am so motivated by that. i think that for kids, if you give them opportunities to succeed, and it is on this early grades -- and it is not necessarily grades, how do you reward them for doing good things. they are going to go out and do things other of the home to figure out there is more to life than getting straight a's.and

getting into a good college. for me, girl scouts. >> for me, it was music read i -- it was high school music. i was in band. a band teacher encouraged me, and compliment me on how i played, i came to class upset about something. he pulled me aside and he said, tell me what is going on. somebody was listening when problem i was having. it is about taking that and fast forwarding to now. in the city i live in, we are having problems in our middle schools and high schools with bullying. it we start with one of the high schools. we set a doing listening circles with small groups.

as we did this with high school students, they were saying it was the first time people have listened to us. oney put a question out there what is going on, what is motivating you, what is challenging to you -- we found that once we given them the opportunity to start speaking, creating a form where young people can talk until you what is going on on, if there is a problem at home, if they are having problems that school, or they feel like their parents are not listening to them, giving them the opportunity, giving them the chance to speak and let them hear their stories.-- and let you hear their stories. >> i just got the name of the app. the young woman from name is and the app is

called leave her forward. we have time for one more question. >> hello. i am 60 years old. when i first got involved in politics, i was 15 years old. i cared about getting woman elected. i never thought i would get this far. as much as i celebrate, i thought by the time i turned 60 years old, we would have two percent -- 50% of women. i wondered if you would comment on assuming that if it is a man -- on something that seems to happen with regressive's in particular. we tend to assume if it is a man and a woman running against each other, the man is more progressive. the mayor's race in los angeles to months ago, we had two really strong people running against each other, but many regressive's -- progressives thought the man was

more progressive. the presidential primary, when hillary clinton wasn't considered to be as progressive as the men she was running against. i just feel like we are missing some solidarity. particularly, for those of you who are out there supporting other women, and training women to run for office, how can we really own the fact that we deserve to have 50% representation at all levels of government? >> what you need is public --nance campaign reform. public campaign finance reform. until you do that, women are going to be dialing for dollars on the phone, rather than out in the community listening, talking, sharing credentials. we lost the races of 11 pro- choice democratic women in 2006 by five points or less.

11 women. i knew them well. even that big way, we lost them. when we did, we try to figure out why did women lose? it could've been 11 more votes. 11 more democratic women votes. there are two things that happened. one thing that happened was they didn't have money early enough. when attacks come against them, they do not have a strong enough base in the community to push back. they had to go through a tougher knowing cleared the field for them. they had a tougher election, competing with candidates for money.early resources are certainly one issue. the other issue is that each of them had their gender turned against them and answer my republicans that would have a woman carrying a little baby, fill in the blank.

,ammi dirt road, mary jo kilroy fill in the blank. she's going to give this woman and her baby your money. food stamps. the reality is that legally, she could not even if she wanted to because that is not the law. she wasn't running to change the theseo that she could. people thought they would be sympathetic and govern from the hearts. they would say, see, these women, she is just too sympathetic to keep us safe from the scourge of immigration. the problem was in those ads. their problem was they had not built enough coalitions within the immigrant committed to do stand up and say we are going to help this family. what if we did change the law? the reality is, we need is to have one america, and everyone working together. --ke sure they had built the

the two things that they needed to do after 2006 was to get more money and training early and number two, make sure they had built those coalitions. work thisdid not time. they did not work because the coalition building is a lot better. factnnot discount the that women have to be just as responsible for building coalitions among communities of color. particularly white women candidates need to be much more intensive about building those coalitions. because they will not be presumed by any means. the saying goes in politics, if you do not respect us, do not expect us.>> let me add to what christine was saying in terms of money. at we have to get the money out. that is absolutely essential. secondly, women -- pro-choice women -- are very progressive women on issues. my campaign manager told me when

i first ran for the assembly way back in 1989, this goes record to the money, she said maybe no one knows you now, but you have enough money, you can create whoever you want to be in seven days.[laughter] you know? we can make you whatever. i can't believe this. that is a money does. money and politics is very key to women being elected to any public office. we have to really committed to overturning citizens united. getting money out of politics, i mean -- that is key.[applause] >> we need to do two things.

we need to start supporting other women candidates. with our wallets. putting money behind them early. man given -- men give them more money than women candidates. an interesting thing, but true. we as women need to start financially supporting women candidates if we want to get more at the table. secondly, i think it is really important we keep reminding our male friends it is not the sake of getting more woman elected for the sake of getting woman elected. it is to match our values and principles pre-we need to make sure they understand that they are partners in this. we need men talking about the importance of getting more woman elected. including the men in the conversation, having them come on as surrogates, is just as in -- as our supporters is just as key in this fight as it is having woman there. >> i would also say that this is a grassroots nation. we are all about technology. is your website good?

everyone is going to go to your website first.whenever you are attacked. i learned i need to set my own image. i have a facebook, a fan page, i tweet.i post to my website. i update my wikipedia, make sure no one is posting things on it. everyone does it. we need to manage our own image. technology is the great leveler. back then, when i got elected, we depended on the papers to report what we were doing, good and normally it was bad. these days, the papers are not doing so good. they go on the internet. let us control our own image. we can do that. we can negate the attacks. money is still a big problem. we need to have mentors. make sure our own public image is what we want to project to am just going to

keep it short because i'm basically going to reiterate what everyone else has said. if you know a woman candidate that is running, encourage them and inspire them. do not say, when i got ready to run, when it came time to needing money, crickets. they would not even answer the phone. please support. if you feel very strongly, help them any way you can. say, hey, ia check. will update your facebook once a week. be there and support them. >> i want to thank our amazing panelists. i would think are amazing audience. [applause]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> next, recent campaigns that were called by candidate statements caught on tape. in a discussion of the future of the republican party. after that, the future of mental health treatment in the u.s. the monk debate rings together news leaders to debate current issues. sunday, they focus on economic equality, income disparity, and taxing the rich. arguing against the motion to ch is former house speaker newt gingrich. arguing in favor of the measure

is george papandreou. >> no man needs a strong partner, other than the american president, sheltered and cocooned in what harry truman called the great white prison. that is what i concluded after five years and hundreds of interviews, that those presidents with brave spouses willing to speak sometimes hard truths others are not willing to speak to the big guy, those presidents have a distinct advantage. we give an example. had pat nixon been able to cut through her husband's paranoia, watergate might have an avoided. but that had long since given up on her then by the time they reach the white house. a were leading virtually separate lives, as you will in my portrayal of this saddest of all presidential couples. i don't give my husband advice, pat was quoted as saying, because he does not need it.