and the only way we can change this is to pay attention to our state legislatures. i believe that president clinton just said this last week. if we don't want a divided washington, then we have to vote as much in off year elections and for our state legislatures as we do in presidential as long as state legislatures are in control of insurance companies and people who build prisons and the people in there that don't deserve to be in prison and then they redistrict in order to keep that control permanent. that is why the house representatives is what it is and the senate is not. you cannot redistrict whole state. so, our response has to be organizing and knowing the state

legislators. most americans don't know who their state legislators are. there is an anti- choice, right-wing majority that is able to do this state a state. about the much backlash against the changes in this country. that whitery clear women are not having enough children. why the issue -- the issues go together. the anti-immigration, anti-birth control, anti-abortion, and so on. we have to take back our state legislature. >> citing the example of working moms versus stay-at-home moms, a questioner asked what are your thoughts on the way women treat each other?

>> if we were ever asked a question that included men, we might give a better answer. [laughter] do we ever ask a man, do you have it all? we need work patterns that allow everyone to work and also have a life and have kids if they want to. men, to double oh. -- men, too. the idea of stay-at-home moms -- the language is bananas. women who work at home work harder than any other class of worker in the united states. longer hours and no pay. [applause] let's never again say women who do not work or women who work at home are who also -- always ask all of those questions is men, too. it is divisive -- can you have it all? not everyone wants it all. if you have to do it all, you

cannot do it all whether you are a man or a woman. you commented on miley cyrus's hypersexual outlook appearance. can you talk about women using sexuality to get ahead? which ou have a gain in upi believe if you count each of the contest and the national contests of beauty contest, it is a single biggest source of scholarship or women in the united states. it is crazy. if they did this for guys, you can bet they would be there. [laughter] game by the rules that exist. we need to change the rules obviously. that we are not

responsible for our actions. we are. if we are to stand for anything, it is that we are responsible for our actions. we also need to look at the context. context is everything and what choices there are. is that -- if that is a game that exist, that is again that people will play. >> what is your message for today's young women? big message is, don't listen to me. [laughter] listen to yourself. that is the whole idea. the best thing i can do for young men and is to listen to them. you do not know you have something to say until someone listens to you. each of us has authority and unique talents inside us. people often ask me at this age,

who am i passing the torch to? i only say that i am not giving up my torch. [laughter] [applause] but also, i'm using my torch to light other people's tortures will stop the idea that there is one torch forever is part of the torch, if we each have a there is a lot more light. lighting a young woman's torch often means listening to her and supporting what it is that she wants to do and encouraging her. kids today know enough about the feminist movement? let's include boys in those kids. should they know more? or does it occur to them that things may not be equal for girls? >> it would be nice if they learned history, don't you think? the do not learn history of

women's movement or the civil rights movement. you can seek it out. that is a step award. you can find those areas of study, but the textbooks of texas are a pretty good example of eliminating the history of social justice movements because heaven forbid they learn how it was done before and they might learn it again. -- do it again. it is the context that we need to look at rather than blaming individuals. however, having said that, if you gave me a choice between knowing history and getting mad about the president, i would say to get mad about the present even if you do not know history. just heat going. i didn't walk around saying thank you for the vote will stop i do not know about you.

i got mad because of what was happening to me. evernot think gratitude radicalized anybody. i hope i do not have to choose between knowing history and looking at unfairness in the present. if i had to choose, i would choose getting mad about the present. effort in the groups you are involved with to include more about women's rights history in school curriculum? aboutort to include more women's rights history in school curriculums? x yes. absolutely. pioneernist press was a in integrating women's history into textbooks and creating those textbooks. there are a lot of schools and devoted teachers and school systems. a lot of educators in this audience probably, right? they're trying to do this. the average textbook is still

pretty slender. it is the politics of studying history. you still learn more about europe than africa. profoundly political the way we study history. we have pioneers and reformers and at least we know there is such a thing as women's history. the most tearful thing that happens to me is on campus when i'm complaining about my thing that- cheerful happens to me is on campus when i'm complaining about my upcation and some incense and say, why did you not take women's studies? [laughter] it is getting better. it is still not the norm. on caregivers a couple of times. women who are raising and supporting families often get

the least spoiled in terms of political capital in the u.s. women andhappen so children are able to make gains politically? >> it has to be said that the voting booth is the one place on mom andere that single the corporate executive are equal, where the very richest and the poorest are equal. it just had to do with knowing what the issues are on our school boards and in our state legislatures and getting ourselves out there however difficult that might be. it usually come in m spans, comes back to groups. group with shared experience with whom you can talk and discover that it is not fair and if you do at -- do x and y in your campaign and

campaign for your school board, you need, i think, to have that shared experience. traveling around the country as i do, i see mainly women's groups and sometimes men are a part of it as well. they have been together for 10, 20, 30 years. through seen each other an equal education of their kids through single motherhood and divorce. alternateese kinds of families. women now make up 60% of college goers. should this be celebrated or her problem? -- or a problem? >> as i was saying that it is not necessarily a problem, but i think we ought to be able to look at the alternatives. frustratede

programmers and if we learned to code, we would not have to go to college. i think we are still a bit prisoner of the idea that a woman should be able to go to work in nice clothing and clean and so on and shouldn't be under the sink fixing the plumbing that would make them three times more money. it is not that it is wrong, it is just that college has been oversold. so oversold. so oversold as a life-changing mechanism, especially when you end up in debt. i think young people should look at a wider range of alternatives. tofor those of us wishing earn a world-class feminist education without life crushing debt, would you share some resources? [laughter] >> how long do we have?

[laughter] maybe we should do this as a group exercise. i have given you sex and world peace by valerie. is "dark at the end of the street." it is a dark retelling of the civil rights movement with more women stories added. let's tell her favorite books. julie. >> "makers." >> yes. is alsohour tv special a website with about 200 interviews. it is a huge, wonderful resource. very important president -- presence. >> [inaudible] fire."ds of absolutely.

we have fiery people right here. gretaat. very important. >> [inaudible] were." way we never it really shows the degree of ofch the changes in society which men were separated from children and did not develop those parts of their humanity that come from raising children creating the kind of hierarchy we are dealing with now. and haveve the home childbearing and not enough men entered childbearing and develop the rest of themselves. "feminism is for everybody."

in themagazine classroom. >> yes. a very important resource. even in women's prisons, very important resource. a classic, especially for women who are in a traditional role. >> [inaudible] >> tell us where you live and we will find you. [laughter] there is no shortage. the junior league has also

become much more an engine of social change than it was when i was growing up. in for one more political question. wonderful book in which he interviewed about 15 women from indian country. that.you are saying int you glimpse as you do various works from women in indian country is a crucial fact are learning in women's history which is the suffrage movement at the underground railway and many other things are mainly function of native indian country. -- had equalwere power.

they're called a petticoat government because female elders had to sign the treaties. women control their own fertility. the native women referred to european women asked those who die in childbirth. they were appalled at these women who would come from the were stage of patriarchy and couldn't decide when to have children and couldn't have them under their own conditions. we're walking around on a history we do not know. women in indian country who are trying to bring it back. there is a friend whose work you should look up as well. has written a book called "everything we want once it's here." that is not only driven native cultures in this country, but -- in south africa and

show you with a digging stick of what they do for migraines. inis true of the dahlis indian. you that anyone tell it is human nature that we live this way. no. it once was different and so could be. native women are funny about it. you need to have a sense of humor given what they have gone through. what did columbus call "primitive"? equal women. [laughter] couple of housekeeping matters. on december 3, we have the honor roll, the president of colombia. we also have the chairman and

ceo of general motors. december 19, a grammy winner and bluegrass legend. generally 15, christine lagarde, head of international monetary fund. 15, christine lagarde, head of international monetary fund. i am pleased to present our guest with a traditional national press club coffee mug. [laughter] mug.pleased to give you a [applause] >> what did you do with that tie? [laughter] >> i haven't the faintest idea and i don't care. [laughter] book. one more there is a wonderful, well written, well researched book

"alled "exterminate all the -- is swedish. it is about the invention of racism. it is a brilliant book. europeans havet become overpopulated because this breast women and these women have babies -- suppress women and these women have babies -- he does not say that. in order to overtake other peoples land, they invented the idea that they were inferior. it is a brilliant, brilliant book. let's keep this going. don't you love this? keep doing it. depending around ideas. [applause]

>> thank you for coming today. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] national pressur club staff, including our broadcast center and journalism institute for helping organize the event. you can find more information about the national press club online at www.press.org. thank you. we are adjourned. >> this week on "newsmakers"

representative mac thornberry. he is leading an effort. he got the but u.s. forces in afghanistan, military benefits, and u.s. intelligence gathering practices. here is part of the interview. >> i do not think anyone can give you a date. if anyone gives you a specific day, what you are doing is telling the enemy how long we have to wait before we are gone and you are also telling the people you are trying to help that you cannot rely on us for long. specific date is always a mistake. we should be there long enough to help them stand on their own two feet. if you look back, they have made incredible progress in just the past couple of years. they are in the league of essentially all of the combat

operations right now. -- theyy can't do is are getting there. back fort them on the the tremendous progress that they have made. it is thanks to our help and so wonderful servicemen and women who have been there. they have done a lot of good work. we're on a good track. you do not want to cut it off before you have accomplished your goal. texas republican mac thornberry on "newsmakers." on wednesday, president obama awarded the presidential medal of freedom to 16 people in a white house ceremony. recipients included former president bill clinton, opera from free, and sally ride -- winfrey, and sally ride.

>> when president climate he -- kennedy was shot in 1963, within one minute, several dallas police officers ran up the grassy knoll because many people were pointing to it as the source of the gunfire. the first officer up there had his gun drawn because he suspected to find an armed gunman. and said he'd encountered a man who was asked to he was and he presented secret service credentials. he was familiar with the secret service credentials. they were all in dallas for one reason or the other. two other officers have the same thing. it was more than one with secret service credentials up on the grassy knoll. there was one problem -- the secret service and the warren

commission have identified the location of every single secret service officer at that time. laza.e was in dealey p they went to parkland hospital the president and the vice president and soon to be president johnson. who were these people with secret service credentials that no one can identify? i do not have an answer. i stuck to the facts. people can make up their own minds. the lasting legacy of jfk, part of a tv weekend on c-span 2. american history tv continues its look at the assassination jfk in the aftermath.

and nbc coverage. remembering jfk on american history tv on c-span 3. on tuesday, the chair of the fed reserve, ben bernanke con indicated that that does not plan on scaling back its bond buyback program. it keeps interest rates low. of hisths before the end tenure, you spoke to the national economists club. this is about 15 minutes. -- 50 minutes. >> thank you. fresher. nice to be back again. nearly eight years ago when i began my time as chairman, one of my priorities was to make the federal reserve more transparent and to make monetary policy as clear and transparent as

recently possible. i believed then as i do today that transparency money terror policy enhances public understanding and confidence and promotes discussion of policy options come increases accountability a monetary policy for reaching their objectives, and making policy more effective by tightening the linkage between monetary lse financial conditions and the real economy. this bonding to the financial crisis and its aftermath became the fed reserve main focus. financialing to the crisis and its aftermath became the fed reserve main focus. supporting a reconnaissance con required more transparency monetary policy than ever before. i will discuss how communications have evolved in recent years and how enhanced

transparency is increasing the effectiveness of monetary policy. challenges inherent in communicating in an unprecedented and economic and policy environment, about a feature that can only be imperfectly for seen, i will explain why i believe the policy transparency remains an essential element of the fed reserve strategy for meeting its economic objectives. rolederstand the critical in recenttary policy years, it is useful to start by discussing the role of monetary policy communication more generally, including the relationship between policy communication and the broader policy framework. making monetary policy is sometimes compared to driving a steppingpolicymakers on the accelerator other breaks depending on whether economy needs to be sped up or slowed down at that moment.

that analogy is imperfect for at least two reasons. wrist, the main effect of monetary policy on the economy are not immediately -- first, the main effect of monetary policy on the economy is not immediate. --er -- policymakers cannot must try to look well ahead. it is a difficult task. second, the effects of monetary policy on the economy today depend importantly not only on current policy actions, but also on the public's expectation of how policy really well -- will evolve. it is a current speed of the car depending on whether what the car expects the derby to do for the future. of public expectation monetary policy matters today

because expectations have important effect on current financial conditions. it affects employment and inflation over time. because investors can choose freely between holding a longer security or rolling over a sequence of short-term securities, longer-term interest rates today are mostly linked to market participant expectations of how short-term rates will revolve. if monetary policy makers are expecting to keep short-term rates low, then current interest rates are likely to be low as well or else be equal. in short, monetary policy expectations matter. indeed expectations matter so much that a central bank might be able to make policy more effective by working to shape those expect patience. experience -- shape those expectations. there are basic principles of

transparency. policymakers stay clear objectives, as well as plans for obtaining those objectives. the past twoover decades, many banks have introduced explicit targets for inflation. regularpplemented by publication of the central banks economic forecast and provisional plans for achieving its object is in the medium-term . it helps increase transparency and predictability of policy in a number of countries. in the spirit, the federal market committee as clarified the policy strategy. because of its dual mandate that specifies maximum employment and price stability is policy objectives, that that reserve cannot adopt its target as an exclusive goal. nor would it have been appropriate to say we provide a

objective for some measure of employment or unemployment in parallel with the inflation objectives. , thentrast to inflation maximum level of employment that can be sustained over the longer run is determined primarily i nonmonetary factors, such as demographics, the mix of work or skills, labor market situations, and advances in technology. as these factors involved for maximum employment levels might change over time. consequently, it is beyond the power of the central banks that is immutable or independent of the underlying structure of the economy. which theyh on agreed is described in a statement of longer run goals and strategy issued in january 2012 and reaffirmed in january of this year. the statement begins by affirming that commitment to

meeting inductance -- objectives. and the dual mandate, the sea price stability at the two percent longer-term inflation goal. they see price stability at the 2% longer-term inflation goal. they recognize that such assessment is unnecessarily certain and subject to revision. in practice, the committee expresses objectives in terms of the longer run a normal rate of unemployment. currently, participants of the longer run rate has probably reported in the quarterly survey of economic projections ranging from 5.2 026%. 6%..2% to supplementl-bank that objectives with published

forecast that implicitly or exquisitely lay out plans for achieving their goals. although the size and diversity madee policy committee has forecasting difficult, but churches report each participants view of the most likely future path of inflation, unemployment, and output growth conditional on that individual view of appropriate monetary policy. the survey has, included participants rejections of future rates that they see most likely to achieve the committee's goals. the committees to object to its of maximum employment and price debility or complement three. stability or koppel mentoring -- complimentary --

hashort, the fed reserve made significant progress in recent years in clarifying its goals and policy approach and provide regular information about the future path of policy. transparency with the framework of policy as aided the public and policy expectations and reducing uncertainty and make policy more effect is. the financial crisis and its aftermath has recently greater challenges and demands upon the fed reserve communication. we have had to contend with persistent affects of the financial system, the collapse of the housing crisis, new shops in europe and elsewhere, restrictive fiscal policy at all levels of government, and the enormous blows to output and employment associated with the worst u.s. recession since the great depression.

theyhe first time since began using the federal fund rate as its policy rate, that rate is effectively at zero it cannot be lowered further. consequently come in has provided needed support to an economic recovery and minimize the risk of inflation. the fed reserve has had to adopt new policy tools that brings her own communication challenges. and the remainder of my talk, i will discuss how the fed reserve will try to further inform the public's expectations of how the rules.l incur the it has large-scale purchases of securities. weekend over 2008, the f1c repeatedly cut it short term policy rate. in december of that year, the target was reduced to a range of nearly 20. using

the standard means of further easing and cutting the target interest rate was on number -- was no longer possible. it was not the only challenge the committee faced. there's the depth of the recession combined with ongoing concern about the function of the financial system. it raised significant he -- effectiveness of monetary policy and supporting growth. recessionsy for most have been relatively rapid with production, on a plumbing, and other variables could you beating -- unemployment, and other variables could you beating -- contributing. recentaftermath of the

crisis, the committee had to consider the possibility that a highly accommodative policy might be required for a number of years. the federal funds rate effectively at zero created an important asymmetry for policy planning. weree hand, if the economy to recover rapidly and inflation were to increase, monetary policymakers would be able to respond in a normal way by reason the federal fund rate. on the other hand, if the economy were to remain weak and recover only gradually, the case we face, they would not be able to cut the fund rate further. case, the economy could face an increased risk of deflation are falling crisis. as the case of japan illustrates, it could mean economic growth while being difficult to escape. outcomes,free up such strong case existed for monetary policy before -- then suggested

by standard policy rules calibrated in normal times. situationtee faced a in which more monetary policy accommodation is needed and possibly for quite a long time. it's basic policy tool, the federal fund rate target, has been pushed to its limit. to put the committees problem in another way, standard policy rules and a range of other analyses implied that to achieve the f1c's objective, -- achieve -- f1c's objective it depends not just on the current values of policy, but on public expectation of future settings of that rate. they could ease policy further by sharing the public and markets that it will keep the policy rate low for some time and for a longer period than the

public initially expected. at first, the committee employees language sent that message. 2008 that itted in would likely be appropriate for the federal fund rate to be near , it change totime an extended period. such language did not convey precisely the committee's intentions. dashgust 2011, the in committee introduced a specific date into its guidance -- the committee introduced a specific date into its guidance. precisedance was more in language than the committee had been using. it appears to have been effective to highly accommodative policy. following the introduction of dates into the statement, and

just rates and service measures moved in waste broadly consistent with the writings. -- guidance. not explain how future policy would be affected by changes to the economic outlook, an important limitation will step in deed, the date and the guidance is pushed out twice in and moved to 2015 and leaving the public unsure. year, ther of last address this issue by having its guidance more directly to its economic objectives. introducing so-called steak contingent guidance, the committee announced for the contingent-- state guidance, the committee announced for the first time and

inflation expectation remained stable in your target. this formulation provided greater clarity about the factors influencing their thinking and future policy and how that thinking might change as outlook changed. as my colleagues and i have recurrently explained, the condition stated in the guidance at thresholds and not triggers. pressing one of the thresholds will not automatically give rise to an increase in the federal funds rate target. instead, it will signal that it is appropriate for the committee to begin considering whether an increase in the target is warranted. this threshold helps explain my the committee was willing to express the guidance in the labor market in terms of the on . plumbing rate alone in the judgment of the committee, the unemployment rate , it is probably the best single

some indicator of the state of the labor market. it is sufficient for finding threshold given by the guidance. however, after the unappointed threshold is crossed, many become -- including such measures as payroll employment, participation rate, the rate of .iring separation in particular, even after longloyment drops come as as inflation remains will behaved, the committee can be patient in seeking assurance that the labor market is sufficiently strong before considering any increase in the target for the federal funds rate. because of the severity of the recession and because short-term interest rates were near zero, it became clear early on that more monetary accommodation would be needed and can be provided in short-term interest rates alone, even if guidance

was kept low well into the future. they began supplementing its policies in forward rate guidance with large-scale asset purchases. open market purchases of longer- term u.s. treasury securities as security issues by government- sponsored enterprises, primarily mortgage backed securities. the large-scale asset purchases and forward guidance of the federal funds rate support the economy by putting downward pressure on longer-term interest rates. the affect rates through different channels. broken downce is into two components. one reflects expected path of interest rates and the other is called the term premium. the term premium is the extra return that investors require to be willing to hold a longer-term security to maturity affair with

the expected yield from rolling over short-term security for the same period. , forward noted guidance affects long-term interest rates primarily by imposing investors expectations of future short-term interest rates. the other in contrast most directly affects term premiums. as the fed buys a larger share ofthe stock, the quantity the securities available for private sector portfolio declines. as the security is are just, they should become more valuable . consequently, their yield should follow as investors demand a premium for holding them. this argument depends importantly on the assumption that the longer-term treasury that they buy but not perfectly suitable than other types of assets, an assumption that seems will support it in this.

the use of these tools allows monetary policy to be effective even when short-term interest rates are close to zero. the committee does not view these tools is entirely equivalent. one reason is that we have much less experience -- believe thatthey the four rate guidance is helping to support -- forward rate guidance is helping to support -- economists do not have as good an understanding for determining term premiums. there are hard to predict shifts in premiums. they can be a source of volatility and financial

conditions. there are complexities for the feel of operating a much larger balance sheet. i see both of these issues as manageable will stop in deciding to apply this, they have remained attentive to the possible costs and risk of this less familiar cooler. it is a point the committee has regular -- less familiar tool. it is a point that the committee has regularly -- effectsmful of that-- ef has -- the f1c and now star extended a series of asset purchase programs.

in each case, they specified assets to be acquired under that program. guidance, it has advantages and disadvantages. on one hand, ethics program size is straightforward to communicate. on the other hand, they cannot so easily adapt to changes to the economic outlook and the consequent changes you need for policy accommodation. in announcing its program, the f1c stated a general willingness to do more and has followed through on that promise. such statements less -- let less certainty -- left less certainty. to the ship for date-based guidance to the the fetat guidance, from a target, september 2012, the f1c announced a purchase

program that would not be fixed in advance, but would be linked to economic objectives. -- at a rate of 40 billion dollars per month as stated its intentions to continue purchases did outlook of the labor market improved in a context to price stability. 2012, there was a performer of security second to in end. in longer-term security to the program, bringing the month repurchase rate to $85 billion per month, where it remains today. as noted, the committee said a anderia for improvement outlook of the labor market as a condition for ending the purchase program. committee signaled its expectation that would end the purchases and return to an

emphasis on rate policy and forward guidance before it has fully attained its dual mandate object to. "the committee expects they have a stance of policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after that the person -- purchase program ends." the reason for the sequencing choice was the greater uncertainty about the costs related to them more familiar of interest rate and forward guidance expectation. extent ofto the additional costs and risk, one might expect a trade-off of this tool to become less favorable as the fed reserve balance sheet expands. having seen progress in the labor markets at the beginning of the asset purchase program in december 2012, the committee agreed of june of this year to

provide more comfort hands of guidance of criteria that would inform future decisions about the program. adequately, i presented a framework making the program more explicit the evolution of economic outlook. i noticed the committee's expectation at the time that the improvement and the ordered by a moderate pickup in growth that would to work it. the committee expects that inflation would move back toward the 2% objective over time. if incoming data were broadly consistent with the outlook, the committee would like measuring reductions in the pace of riches is later in 2013. of riches is later in 2013. purchaseshasized that dependent incoming data and could be slower or faster than envisioned in a scenario. the pace of purchases could be increased over time if oriented.

-- if warranted. market yields move sharply higher. the meetings of june and september, the 10 year treasury yield rose and rates increased by similar amount. financial market movements are often difficult to account for, even after the fact. their proven as an economic outlook was a healthy development. some of the rising rates reflected an unwinding of positions, positions that appear to have been premised on an indefinite

purchases. although it brought with it some tightening of financial conditions, this unwinding and hadassociated rise may have the benefit of reducing future risk of financial stability and lowering the probability of an even sharper market correction at some later time. participants that have taken indication as indicating a commitment to maintain a pursuit of its objectives. theforward guidance for federal fund rate has become less effective after june. market participants were pulling forward at the time at which they expected the committee to raise rates in a manner inconsistent with the guidance. to the extent of this third factor, and you bit

into the yields come it was neither welcome or wanted in the in thet of the -- yields, it was neither welcome or wanted in the judgment of -- committee participants emphasized communications. at its september 2013 meeting, they apply the framework communicated in june. their decision to maintain the pace of actress percentages was appropriate and fully consistent with earlier guidance. they were looking for evidence that job market gains would continue in support of i pick up in growth.

the decision came as a surprise to market participants. it persistent in the forward rate guidance -- it appears to have promoted the forward rate guidance. show a pattern more consistent with the guidance. incoming meetings and evaluating the outlook or the labor market, we will consider the progress of 2012. we have seen meaningful improvement in the labor market since the latest asset purchase program was announced. at the time, the latest rating on the limit rate was -- icahn is were projecting slow reductions in unemployment in the coming quarters -- economists were projecting slow reductions in unemployment in the coming quarters. the unemployment rate has fallen several percentage points and

2.6 million payroll jobs have been added. looking forward, we will monitor the incoming data. the f1c expect labor market conditions will improve and inflation will move toward the 2% objective. incomings supported by information, the f1c will likely increase the pace of purchases. the committee's decisions about the pace will remain contingent on the committees economic outlook. account thato its can see and costs of the program. personages do slow come it will likely be because the will rely more heavily on forward guidance and a

substantial holdings of securities and making progress toward maximum employment and price stability. the charter for the federal funds rate is likely to remain near zero for a committal time after the acid purse just end, -- after the asset purchase end. i began my time as chairman with the goal of increasing transparency at the fed reserve, monetary policy in particular. policy canonetary indications have proved to be far more an important tool that has evolved in different ways that i would have envisioned eight years ago. economists have made progress during the recession. we are still far from where we might bee to be and it

sometime before monetary policy returns to more normal settings. i agree with the sentiment expressed by my colleague, janet yellen at her testimony last week. the surest path to normal monetary policy is to do all we can to date to promote a more robust recovery. committed tois have a policy for as long as needed. q indication about policy is likely to remain an essential -- vindication about policy is likely to remain an essential element. thank you. [applause]

>> it is just a stop watch. not texting. >> [inaudible] >> absolutely. i want to see with the chairman said. it occurs to me that most of you are sitting there and thinking there is chairman ben bernanke up there with some guy because i forgot to introduce myself earlier. i will do that. i'm the senior research fellow at george mason university. i'm fortunate to be chairman of the board of national economists

club this year. gratefully relinquished that very shortly, but it has been a great honor to work with all of these folks. let me bang together some parts of my past. i'm a care policy specialist, but also spent 12 years as a fed reserve economist and i worked with small banking and small business. combining all of those things it could deprive me of sleep at night. i worry about the sustainability of medicare, medicaid, other health-care programs, and now including the affordable care act. also, social security. i'm wondering if you could comment on the country's long legged issue and fiscal sustainability. >> sure, it is important for the

country. you are certainly aware of what happened to costs over the past few decades. gdp.her share of we do not really get the return on that one would expect. given we are also -- put those two does things together, we will have some real pressures in the fiscal capacity going well into the future. i say though that the last few years, health-care costs have risen more slowly. it will be interesting to find out whether that will be temporary or everlasting. we will begin to figure out how to address not just fiscal sustainability in the long run, tied to aging and health care costs, but how to address the efficiency of the health care

quality and the system and the access to the system and so on in our current economy as well. these are important issues you are working on and i know you are having a good time with the current debates happening. i would say in terms of fiscal policy, it is important to point is that what is happening most of the tightening we are seeing is near-term. 2013, we saw increase in taxes, elimination of the payroll tax holiday, reduced unemployment insurance, a cuts inr, other spending, all the things taking offense in 2000 13, which, put notther, probably not -- off the growth rate in 2013 and hundreds of thousands of jobs. the federal reserve is in a position of trying to preserve the recovery and fiscal policy is not looking the same direction, which is a problem.

my recommendation is to focus more on the longer-term fiscal issues which need to be addressed and which will be more easily addressed when we begin more advanced and to be less restricted in the near term in order to give the economy's recovery a better chance to bring us back to a healthy state. >> thank you. mustquestion, and i recognize peak davis was really in charge of putting together and sorting through all the questions that came to us. question came from them. the fed has strived to communicate a distinction between the criteria for adjusting the pace of quantitative easing and the criteria for determining the federal funds target. given the recent volatility behavior, how much has the fed

adjusted in communicating its policy attention in -- with regard to both qe and fed funds? i hope that was comprehensible. how do they keep these things separate? -- you improve my speech. [laughter] >> i did. >> the basic point i was trying to make is that two tools work in if in ways, have different cost and benefits, so we are using them in not a completely parallel way. , we have a set of criteria for the asset purchases, which relate to a substantial improvement relative to september 2012. you could think of that as a first stage of the booster rocket to move our economy forward.

even when asset purchases eventually end, when the criteria are met, and as purchases and, we expect rates past thein low unemployment thresholds and as theretil such time is good evidence the economy could sustain higher interest rates. until that time, we want to maintain a highly accommodative policy in order to make sure we --t both our employment and objectives, both of which are calling for more accommodative policy. as i said in my remarks, over the summer, markets tended to conflate the two tools. i think better differentiation is happen now and the market is beginning to andeciate they are separate that the mix of those tools will change somewhat over time but

the fundamental commission -- commitment for meeting its objectives, which will require sustained accommodation and policy remains. it is the most fundamental point i wanted to make. >> wonderful. andto give them the glory the reader's digest condensed version. this is great. , how has declining labor participation rate affected said hollis e e should we adjust our definition of what constitutes full employment? >> the labor participation rate has been declining for a number of years. in fact, some fed staffers wrote a very nice paper about the trend in participation before the crisis. the fact that, coming into the

force at the same pace early on, ,rend decline in participation more people going to school for longer. a whole variety of factors are causing process patient to decline over time. this is a trend that existed before the crisis, before the recession. is probablytime, it also the case that there are some people who are outside of the officially measured labor their view,e perhaps correctly, is that the labor market is too weak and they are unlikely to find work and if they thought they could find work, they might come back into the labor force. these people who are temporarily outside the labor force because they think the conditions are too weak, you could think of that as being the cyclical component of the decline in

labor force participation. for the purposes of trying to make monetary policy, the trend is beyond our control but what we would like to do is try to make use of our labor resources laboriminate the slack in markets. we will make a judgment going forward as to how much the -- it is trend and how much reflects track. we will see it improve when the labor market strengthens enough that we weekend to see someone coming back into the labor force. aboutill give us evidence how much the labor force participation is cyclical and how much is secular. judgeentioned, trying to a healthy labor market, we will not look at just the unemployment rate but we will look at other factors, too. of decline innent participation is one of the more difficult things to measure but it will be one of the things we

will consider as we evaluate the labor market. >> the next one, how concerned are you about the growing wealth and income disparities and what should be done about them? >> this is a long-term phenomenon. wealth disparities have been increasing in the united states at least since the late 70's or perhaps even longer. the degree of inequality in the higher thans is most other industrial countries. there are a lot of factors. it is confiscated. certainly, trade and globalization is part of the explanation. on the one hand, if you have low globalizedan open world, you are effectively competing with many other

workers with low skills around obviously, we do not have many jobs in the united states anymore that are manufacturing jobs. if you are a highly skilled person, then you have a global market. you can earn in -- a higher return for your skills. we have seen a technical change, executing -- exhibiting skill bias, which returns from the technical change a crew mostly to people with higher skills. they can use computers and robots and the like. in that respect, even for a given district -- distribution of occasional outcomes, income distribution will widen as the entire returns accrue to people who have the appropriate skills. hard to say entirely how to solve it. it is not a problem you solved quickly. clearly trying to break down barriers to social mobility, increase opportunities for

trading acquisition of skills, education, from a very young age all the way through post-high school, junior college, and the like, is the basic approach. .t is a difficult problem to bring the federal reserve into it for a moment, there is not much the federal reserve can do about long-term trend like this. over the shorter-term, our efforts to put people back to we are making extraordinary efforts to try to increase the number of jobs in our economy, that will be an important factor, reducing inequality. willusly, the unemployed be much better off if they have work. will in sequence have the most loaded and least loaded two questions. how would you respond to criticism that quantitative easing has provided trivial

and anfor main street isolute coup for wall street? hate to shock you but i do not agree with that. [laughter] >> innocently not true. tot is the fed trying accomplish? we're using the tool we have to meet our dual mandate. jobs and low inflation, i cannot think of anything more mainstream than that. we're using the tools we have to try to achieve those objectives. if you look at what we have achieved, first, since the recession, there have been about 8 million jobs created, not as many as we would like, but certainly the economy has been growing and jobs have been coming back and the fed has been an important factor maintaining that momentum in job creation. in addition, to the us -- extent morefect asset prices,

than 60% of the population owns the rome home. the number of people under water their mortgage have gone down considerably as house prices have gone up here that has increased household wealth. low interest rates have allowed people to buy cars and other durable goods. is that auto industry pre-recession levels at this point. broadly speaking, our financial -- the effects of our policies and financially -- financial markets have held american households improve balance sheets and get themselves in better financial position. broadly, i think our objectives are aimed squarely at main , while it i think would be better to have a broader base effort in

washington to attack these problems, the fed is making important contribution to middle-class and lower income folks welfare. >> thanks. now for the non-loaded question we will conclude this with from elliott and robert. will we see you at more washington nationals baseball games next year? [applause] and, what research topics and books are in your future? >> i would like to say it is well known i'm a washington nationals fan. i am no johnny-come-lately to this. i have been there since 2005 and they lost the games every year. thank you. we are cautiously optimistic.

i would describe my views that way. became a policy maker, i was -- i worked on a lot of issues related to things i have been doing for the last 11 or so years. such as the role of the financial markets and financial stability in the economy, national stability and monetary policy. growth, so there are a lot of interesting things to work on. i look forward to writing and speaking and having a little more time to contemplate some interesting issues. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] just, -- the chairman was

here at the beginning of his tenure at the fed or the end of his tenure, and now toward the end of his tenure at the fed. youill hopefully we'll see at some future life event in your career. you will always he welcome. thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] lex c-span. we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences, and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a public service of private industry. by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded

by your local cable or satellite provider. now, you can watch us in hd. >> next, new jersey governor chris christie and general martin dempsey. they spoke at a conference hosted by the wall street journal. then, a discussion on women and voting with the founder of ms. magazine. >> during the president posses china, joeip to noticed how mrs. nixon was looking at the package of cigarettes. package, he was admiring that and he said, i understand the pandas ated the zoo. he said, we will make sure you have pandas sit -- pandas to go home with. just her being there would bring

so much goodwill. it was always families at the end of the trips, where news reports would come out. they would talk about the president this way but they would say what a wonderful job had next and did. >> monday night not -- live at 9:00 eastern. also on c-span radio and c- span.org. >> republican governor chris christie of new jersey has criticized both parties in washington for failing to lead. he talked about the failure at an event for -- hosted by the wall street journal monday. he avoided answering questions about his possible presidential run. this is about 40 minutes. >> governor, thank you very much for being with us. you squeaked home. a bit of a close election. you were not quite at the 60%

threshold for a wailing. >> i am a republican in new jersey. i am just worried right getting over the finish line. it was gratifying. >> what was striking was to look at the detail of the exit polls. you won 50% of the latino vote, over 25% of the black vote, running against a woman democratic candidate. all in a state where president obama won 50% of the vote a year ago. a lot of questions about the future of the future of the republican party.

how did you do it? >> you do your jobs. i often think people make political leadership to consultative. what people expect you to do is do your job. first and foremost. the folks in new jersey, republican, democrat, independent, felt as if we had done our job. second thing, if you want to reach out to constituencies that

have not normally voted for your party, you can't go six months before your election. we made a concerted effort from the time i got into office, we only got 30% of the latino vote in 2009. 7% of the african-american vote in 2009. my view was that was nowhere near good enough. so we started working with those groups, giving them a serious seat at the table, knowing that they were not always going to agree with my policies but that

they would be listened to. i think that was a very important part of the victory as well. campaigns still do matter. so i was fortunate to have a really great campaign team that worked with me so the last five years, so they knew me. these are not folks who parachuted in from washington or someplace else with their own ideas.

they knew me, my voice, what i would and would not be willing to do. >> you have become a national figure in the last four years. tell us what you think you did that was most effective? not just in terms of being reelected, but in terms of changing the political or economic trajectory new jersey was on. you did a number of things on taxes and public-sector unions. what is the most important thing you have achieved so far? >> i couldn't point to any one

particular achievement that was most important. yes, we cut business taxes by $2.3 billion. we reformed the pension and benefit system to save $120 billion over the next 30 years. all in the face of stiff public- sector union opposition.

the most important thing we did was change the conversation. so many of these things were considered givens in new jersey, that could not be changed. our position was, i'm a republican in new jersey, playing with house money. i am not supposed to be there, not supposed to be alive. the fact is, if you get elected in that context then you have two choices. you can try to figure out how to play everything perfectly from the conventional wisdom perspective, or you just say, the hell with that, i'm doing it my way. either it will work or it will not. if it does, i have a chance to win. if it doesn't, i lose.

we changed the conversation. at the beginning, we took on the teachers union. the teachers union is the most powerful union in our state, private or public. they have 200,000 members in new jersey, and they get annual dues of $140 million. from those, they do not pay teacher salaries, pension, or health. essentially a slush fund to reward friends and punish enemies. so we took them on early. i think they never expected us to do that. and the public reacted extraordinarily well. i think that was really the moment that changed the conversation in new jersey and made a lot of the things we did possible. we showed we were willing to take on the biggest bully in the schoolyard. >> is there a national lesson from that? who are the national equivalents of the new jersey teachers union? >> the national teachers union. [laughter] it is not hard. really, -- >> that is hard for a president, isn't it? i'm jumping ahead of myself.

because teachers are organized on a local basis and paid by local authorities. >> that you are talking about setting a tone. you have to point out to people, as rupert mentioned in his remarks, the education system in our country, while there are successes, is in the main failing many, many millions of families. anyone of these ceo's out here knows that the only way american companies or international companies working in america are going to continue to thrive is with an educated workforce. that doesn't start when you get to college. so, i think it is the defining

issue of our time. what we are going to do with the education system in america. it used to define us as the best. it is now defining us is mediocre. >> is it producing better results already? >> in certain places, we are. other places, it is too soon to tell. for instance, look at the city of newark, our largest city. we paid $24,000 per pupil per year for public education. two years ago, the graduation rate was 23%. now, i don't know how you define failure. in asbury park, where i held my election night celebrations, we pay $33,000 per pupil per year. two years ago, less than 50% of the young people who graduated from asbury park high school could read at the eighth-grade level. so, somehow with the teachers union -- this is a debate about whether that is failure or not. my opponent, who was endorsed by

the teachers union, said that when it was pointed out to her we have 200 failing schools in new jersey, her response was, that is not a bad percentage. they asked me for my response. my response, that sounds like someone who never sent their children to one of those schools. if you send your children to one of those schools, it is an obscenity. that is my difference between the republican view of what needs to be done with education in america and the democrat slash teachers union view, that the status quo is fine and we will get to fixing those places. if your child is in the classroom, eventually isn't good enough.

>> you didn't change the economic performance much. the unemployment rate is still one of the highest in the nation. you haven't had a particularly strong recovery. other states have done better. why hasn't new jersey produced more jobs in the last four years? >> tell those critics to come to jersey and attempt to turn around the queen mary in the delaware river. the fact was, we were the highest-taxed state in america when i took over as governor. we were rated e state with the least business friendliness in america. we raised taxes and fees 115 times in eight years at the state level. you are not going to turn that around in four years completely. what we have done is cut business taxes by 2.3 billion dollars, cut regulations by 1/numeral re-over where they were in the corzine yurok, and create private sector jobs. in the last year, from august 12 august 13, new jersey ranked in the top 15 in the country. it will take us longer, because we were in the deepest of deep holes in a state that had followed a liberal democrat doctrine for a decade of there is no tax you can't raise or create and you can't raise it high enough to drive people out

of your state. boston college did a study that between 2004 and 2008, in the heart of democratic governance, $70 billion in wealth left our state. you don't recover from that like that. it is going to take a while. look at your numbers, i think they will continue in the trajectory they're going in now. >> you expect a real economic dividends in the next couple years? >> i do. you can't -- everything is relative, but i do expect us to continue to be more competitive. for instance, a state like new york is moving in the wrong direction. you see taxes being increased, a new mayor in new york who is

aggressively talking about increasing taxes in new york city. i feel badly for new yorkers. come to new jersey. [laughter] you know it is moving in the other direction. >> but not to the tunnel you decided not to build. >> that tunnel would have never been built, whether i decided to build it or not. this is what new jerseyans hate the most. want to be popular in new jersey? cancel the tunnel between new jersey and new york. one, because it is the smart thing to do. secondly, the deal negotiated by jon corzine, a wizard of business, apparently, was that well, it is true. you may not like it, but it is

true. his subsequent performance has shown that as well. after he left the governorship. the fact is -- hard truths need to be told. the fact is, the negotiation he made with the federal government was that new jersey would contribute about $3 billion to

this project and would be responsible for every nickel of the cost overruns. new york city, zero. new york state, zero. for a tunnel that will take people predominantly to new york. and was not going to go to penn station, where people could get on subsequent mass transit to go to other places in the city. this was going to the basement

of macy's. six stories below macy's, a $1 billion terminal. >> miracle on 34th street. >> the miracle would have been if it happened. folks say to me, why did you cancel it? my answer is, why the hell would i ever build it? we would be responsible for every nickel of cost overruns in a federal transportation project. nothing to worry about, right? talk to our friends in boston who went through the big dig.

this was the single largest federal transportation budget that would ever be built. i canceled it because it was a bad deal for the people of new jersey. there is nothing they are more suspicious of them getting stuck with it by new york. >> that is a good opportunity to talk about national issues. on your election night, in your victory speech he talked about what you achieved in trenton. working across the aisle, achieving political consensus. there were lessons there for washington. what are the lessons for washington? what is wrong right now in washington? that is a long list, so don't go through all of it, but tell me

what you would change in washington right now. >> the people. predominantly. >> in both parties? >> sure. both parties have equal blame in what is going on here. listen, i have a completely democratic legislature in new jersey. it is not like it is close, everybody. strongly democrat. how do we get pension reform,

how do we cap property taxes, cut business taxes? how do you do all the things that don't appear to be traditional democratic things with a democratic legislature? it is about human relationships. the fact of the matter is, nobody in the city talk to each other anymore. if they do, they don't speak to each other civilly. they don't develop relationships, don't develop any sense of trust between each other. then they expect from the kinds

of problems you talked about,, big, difficult, contentious problems, that they will be able to get into a room and fix it. >> who do you blame for that? >> first and foremost, the president. if you are the executive, you're in charge of making that happen. if i waited for the state legislature to come to me, i would be waiting forever. they are legislators. they are elected not to lead. [laughter] that is it.

members of congress, members of the state legislature, they don't have a responsibility to lead. they always have an excuse. if you let them. the executive is the person held responsible. first and foremost, the president -- this is no newsflash to anybody -- he has not developed relationships necessary on a personal level with both sides of the aisle, both sides of the aisle, to be able to bring people to the white house and be a consensus- builder to drive the course.

i was watching one of the numerous specials on the assassination of president kennedy. there was one particular piece on the warren commission. they played a tape of president johnson on the phone with richard russell, who said, i don't want to be on the commission because i can't stand earl warren. johnson said, you know, i don't take no for an answer. too bad, it has already been announced.

what did russell do? he served. that is because he knew johnson. johnson knew him. in the end, when i develop these relationships over time, you compromise at times, you don't walk away with everything you want. but if i walk away with 70% of my agenda, new jersey is 70% better than it would have been otherwise. what we have in washington, on both sides of the aisle, absolutists. >> a month or so ago we went through the government shutdown. you have criticized the

president, but you have been critical of your own party, too. who was to blame, and what are the lessons you think should be learned? >> both sides were to blame. it was a train wreck everybody saw coming for months. where was the president? he knew this, everybody knew the dates. it wasn't like, i forgot my calendar, i didn't know this was coming. everybody knew this was happening. and i think there were a number of people in congress on the republican side of the aisle who just did not have an endgame. >> talking about ted cruz?

>> i get myself in enough trouble without your help. [laughter] >> the strategy of defunding obamacare as a condition for keeping the government open. >> and's obamacare is still currently being funded and the government is reopened. maybe i am too simple, but it appears to me the strategy of

defunding it by closing the government failed. some people believe it was the right thing to do. that's fine. they can believe it was the right thing to do. you can rail against obamacare. you can refuse to run a state- based exchange because you know the whole process is a train wreck, as i have done in new jersey. but not subscribed to the notion that your job in running the government is to close it. your job in running the government is to run it and run it efficiently. all the people down here, from the president to the leadership in congress who engaged in this, failed by definition. why are people more appreciative of what is going on in states? we are actually doing our jobs. >> do you think obamacare can survive this mess it is in right now? does it have to be scrapped? >> obamacare is a failure, it has always been a failure, and it will not succeed. it just won't. >> how would you replace it? >> i am not going to go through an issue like that with 16:26 to go. >> you can have 14:00 to do that. >> that is the problem. as all due respect, that is part of the problem with the culture here. somebody things i can solve obamacare in 14 minutes. solve the health care crisis in 14 minutes. and i have 30 seconds on iran

and 22 seconds on syria. we will solve the whole thing. carve it up. either conflicts conflict problems, and people are tired of these focus group-tested, below-dried answers people give that all sound the same. somebody asked me during the campaign, why is it you get so much attention? i said, unlike most politicians i don't sound like charlie brown's teacher. it all sounds the same. it is the most extraordinary overreached of government power in the history of our country. it is being run by people who never ran anything. so why are we surprised it is failing? it is failing because the people in charge have never run anything in their lives, and even if they knew how to run things this would be hard to run because it is an extraordinary overreached, taking over 1/7 of the entire economy. we need to replace it. we need a robust debate on both sides. unlike last time when the president jammed this down everybody's throat and got one republican vote because he was unable to compromise. we need copper mines were everybody brings skin to the table and everybody compromises. if we do that, we can craft a solution. if we don't, we will continue to have this failure. >> it seems objectively obvious that to defund obamacare and shut down the government strategy failed abjectly. how did the gop get itself in a position where it was associated with that for such a long time? how did that happen? >> bad decision-making. a lack of courage. that is really at. we all saw it on display. the fact the democrats were as guilty. harry reid played the same kind of games. we are not going to fund this, funds that, even though they believe in funding those things. he was going to do it because it was good public policy to close all the monuments in town? good public policy not to fund the military in the places it should be funded? of course not. if you ask what was good public policy, he would not answer. he would pivot to the are publicans are the cause of the problem. come on. he did not do that because he saw political advantage not doing that. i am fine with the republican party taking their share of the blame. i am not fine with the republican party taking all the blame. harry reid and nancy pelosi played as many games as the folks on the republican side. so we need to drop down some of the partisan cloak here and say, both sides fail here. we have an enormous failure of

executive leadership by a president that seemed unwilling or unable or uninterested in being engaged. >> you are just about to take over the chairmanship of the republican governors association. 30 republican governors across the country. how are you going to use your platform? >> elect republican governors. >> how do you do that? >> my job is to make sure they have the resources they need to tell that story, and also to hopefully give them strategic advice on the best way to reach out and broaden the reach of their base of voters in this state. in the 14 other states where there are democratic incumbents or open seats, it will be my job to identify talented challengers to come in and challenge in those states to make sure they are funded and help them with strategy as well. but my job is to be supportive of those 36 races. to make the strategic choices about where we should invest the most money to yield the greatest success. it is not a whole lot more consultative than that. >> you will be spending time in iowa. >> there is a republican incumbent governor who is the longest-serving governor in american history. in new hampshire, we have a incumbent democrat governor. i will also be in places like texas, where governor perry is retiring and we have a really dynamic candidate in the attorney general there. i will also be in states like south carolina and pennsylvania and ohio and florida, michigan, arkansas. all over the country raising money and trying to help folks raise their identity level with the voters. if we have a chance to tell a story, we will do quite well. we have 30 republican governors now out of 50. >> a lot of people were keen on you to run for president in 2012. you turned down the opportunity. how do you make your mind about 2016? >> don't know. depends on what the politics of the world are like them. >> is there any other republican candidate you could get behind? >> there's a number of people who would make good presidents. whether i would support them depends on the politics of the time and how they continue to develop. this is a long way away. we are three years away from the presidential elections. in this sense, i feel badly for president obama. he just won a year ago, and everybody is like, "who's next?" as we shoved him out the door we minimize his ability to be an effective executive. we shouldn't do that. i am not rushing. i have work to do. i just got reelected governor. i have an agenda i want to

pursue in the next two years. i will make that decision when i have to. i was direct with the people of my state. people confronted me, my opponent frequently in debates, are you going to serve a full term? i don't know. if i decide to run for president and win, i won't. if i don't, i won't. i don't have to make that decision now. people who run companies know this. when you make decisions before it is the right time to make them, you increase geometrically the chance to screw that decision up. not something i want to screw up. >> you speak very directly, unusually for a politician. >> thank you. >> you have spoken very directly about some republicans. you hinted at it tonight. there are people in the republican party who think you have been to direct and two critical of republicans, and it does not play well. they also don't like the fact you seem to have a warm relationship with president obama. i year ago, hurricane sandy, the work you did there. have you some work to do with the republican base to reassure them you are a good, solid, reliable republican? >> how outrageous. your state has been hit by the worst storm in its history and the head of the federal government comes to help. and when he does a couple things right, you say he did a couple things right.

it is the most outrageous bit of heresy. it is ridiculous. i speak candidly about everyone. when the president does something worth praising, i will praise him. when he does something worth damning, i will damn him. i will not make that decision based upon my party. i think most republicans, except for a few who like to see themselves on television, understand that what you expect of a elected official first and foremost -- the second thing you expect is performance. the people of new jersey judge me on honesty and performance, and we got 61% of the vote. some republicans think i must not be conservative. how could a conservative win there? this is completely crazy to me. among these elements, the better you do, the more voters you attract, the more diverse voters you attract, the more suspect you are. there is a winning formula. let me tell you. [laughter] there is a winning formula. so no, i don't feel like i have any fence-mending to do. if i ever decide to run for anything again, it being me isn't good enough, fine, i will go home. this is in my whole life. my mother used to say to me all the time, to me and my younger siblings, my brother and sister, be yourself, because then tomorrow you don't have to worry about trying to remember who you were trying to be yesterday. you never have to worry about that with me. i will never have to worry about remembering what i said during the debate. if that is good enough for me, that is great. it was good enough for new jersey two weeks ago. if it is not good enough in any other election i might someday pursue, i will find some work. >> we have some minutes for questions from the floor. you have a very outspoken and directly speaking governor speaking to you. anybody wants to ask any questions? there will be some microphones around. >> nobody raising their hands, brings to mind to me, i have a monthly radio call-in show called "ask the governor." in the first year it was pretty

contentious. one of my friends said i should rename the program "ask the governor, call if you dare." >> how is that for an invitation? let me ask you a bit about the campaign last year, the presidential campaign, mitt romney. according to some published reports recently, they considered you very carefully for the vice presidential slot. i am not sure how carefully you considered being the running mate. they raise some questions about your background, about some ethical questions about your time as u.s. attorney, related to your brother. you are going to get a lot of scrutiny over the next few years, whether you run or not. the press is going to be examining you carefully. the romney campaign, according to accounts published in this book that was published recently, did not get satisfactory answers. >> it is simply not true. all you have to do is listen to mitt romney. he is the only guy who got to make the decision. what governor romney has said publicly since the book came out let's face it about this book, this book is a book where these two authors trawl at the lower levels of campaigns to get gossip which they then put between two hardcovers, and all of a sudden because they put it between two hardcovers it becomes authoritative. the authoritative source for my betting is the guy who did it, mitt romney. he said there was nothing in the vetting that gave him any pause at all, nothing that had not been in the public realm, and it was not the reason he did not ask me to be vice president. i am pretty much content with that. as far as scrutiny goes, i am not worried about scrutiny. some will be fair, some will be unfair. if you are worried about that in this business, you don't belong in this business. >> the press, they like your directness.

>> you have to ask them. if they ask good questions, i give good answers, and it usually makes good copy for them. if they ask stupid questions, i tell them they are stupid. that is the relationship every candidate should try to have with the media. >> over there, please? >> i think what we all want to know, what does it take for a republican candidate to beat hillary, and can you do that? >> i have no idea if i can do it, but listen -- i think the question should be broader. what does it take for a republican candidate to win? we have to do better than over the last two cycles. we have to reach out to other constituencies that have not voted for us in the past, and we better be doing it now. the fact is, our country is changing, like it always does. as a country changes demographically and economically, people who want to lead first have to understand who they are asking to lead. they need to listen to those people. i think leadership is just as much about listening as it is about talking. for republicans, we can't give the percentage of the hispanic vote and african-american vote that we have nationally and think we can be a successful national party. we have to be better. it is not just about policy. auntie of my policies are pursued in new jersey, folks in those communities disagreed with. yet they voted for me anyway. triple the number of african- american voters we got in 2000 nine. a majority, 51%, of hispanic voters. i think it is because they felt like they were included, that their opinions mattered. when i made decisions, they didn't need to hear about it some place else. they heard about it for me. good news or bad news, they heard it from me. we had to stop, as a party, going back to the old tried and

true ways of running these campaigns. they are not working. we need someone who is going to be clear, direct, authentic, and say what they think. if that is good enough, it is good enough. if it's not, it's not. changing things around, changing positions, trying to look at something -- what does he want to hear? trying to figure it out, then say it, and pray to god he never remembers that you actually promised to do that because you have no intention of doing it, that is not the way to win. in the long-term. >> one more question? >> when you were talking about the affordable health care act, you mentioned we had a government that had people who do not know how to do things. have you given thought to, as president -- i know it is premature -- but how would you put together a federal government of people who know how to do things? >> i don't know. it is i am not president. but i would tell you, as governor, i have people in my cabinet of both parties. i have people in my cabinet who i took out of private-sector business and lured to come out. my commissioner of transportation rent private business. he runs the transportation department like a business. i have folks who have experienced, who are not business people but have been career social workers. they understand things a lot better than i do. my general rule is i want most

people in the room with me to be smarter than me. legitimately smarter than me. that is not my job, to be the smartest guy in the room. my job is to make decisions. the way i make decisions, the way i trust many of you do, you listen to the folks around you, the cabinet you build. whether you are running a corporation or a government. you listen to those people and you reach out, then you think about it, and you are the one in the room with the will to decide. that is the hardest thing to find, in my experience. it is harder to find that than to find a whole bunch of people who know a lot more than me, are a lot more than me. that is not what i am hired for. the way you put together a group, you say, i want people who are experts in areas, who have practical experience. he goes were honest, who speak truth to power.

he told who are willing to quit because they don't need this job. it is not their whole life. you put that group of people together, you will have a lot of heartburn over time, but you will also, i think, have the best chance to have the kind of information you need to make really good decisions. you have to be unafraid to decide. i think that is the format for any successful enterprise. i don't think government is any different. there are some competitions about folks who don't want to be in public life because of scrutiny and exposure. you will have to deal with that and try to be persuasive to bring them around. but in the end is identifying talent. i police tell people, you can't teach smart and you can't teach loyal. you can teach everything else. when i became governor, i brought 27 assistant united states attorneys with me to government. 25 of them had no experience in government. zero.

i had a bunch of people in trenton tell me, this is going to be a disaster. these people don't know how this town works. i said to all of them, you can't teach smart and you can't teach loyal. these are going to be smarter than anybody in the room and loyal to me. they know how i want things done. when there is no confusion about that, you got smarts of the people around you, they have loyalty to you and the mission you are attempting to accomplish, you can a company think. they didn't understand that we didn't care. we intended to change the way things worked. we did. because of those people. their loyalty, their intellect, and their willingness to stand with me to get the mission completed.

no matter what enterprise you are running, a fortune 500 company, the state government, the federal government, those are the elements to put together a successful operation. if you can hit those elements, you have a much better chance of being successful. if you can't, i believe you are doomed to failure. another thing that sounds relatively simple, because it is. it is relatively simple. when we try to aggrandize ourselves we make it more, located. >> ladies and gentlemen, you have heard some characteristically direct talk from governor christie tonight. please join me in thanking him very much for dipping of his time. [applause] >> on the next "washington

rnick lookseorge zo at present obama his approval numbers, his relationship with democrats, and senate rule change. then michael brohm talks about his book, "shaping our nation" and the immigration debate. and, the former executive director of the commonwealth health insurance director authority compares the affordable care act's health insurance with those he created in massachusetts in 2006. live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c- span. >> i thought it was fun to have a little view of history of a time in america that was not instructional. first and foremost, that was a and a bit more anecdotal

little bit more archaeological, meaning random. you take a look at them and see bunches of weird photos and then the pet -- the captions explain them. i had a vision of high school students flipping through them and loving history if they flipped through them. headc network ahead -- with the big picture sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's to a quote -- a."nd the room atin congressional hearings, white house events, and offering complete gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. now, you can watch us in hd. >> also speaking at the event, general martin dempsey.

a wide-ranging interview covering afghanistan, iraq, and the threat of cyber attacks. this is 40 minutes. [applause] >> well, general dempsey, thanks very much for joining us. you heard a lot about leadership in our last session. it seems to be the topic here in washington. everybody seems to be searching for it. we have a room full of ceos. they manage 5 million employees. you alone have 2 million in uniform. so i figured you do more performance reviews than they do. [laughter] we thought we'd come to you. so did chris christie get it right? it's smarts, loyalty and the people that you hire, and then the courage to make a decision? is that what leadership is? >> i think those attributes -- first of all, by the way, thanks

for being here. congratulations for being here. it's an indicator that you actually want to think about something that ought to be all of our kind of our core if we're in those positions where we migrate to the top of our organizations. just the term "leadership" is actually quite exhilarating in some way, isn't it, and intimidating. but, yeah, sure, i think those attributes are right. there's others, and i -- he made mention, i think, of being true to yourself. there are other attributes i would add to the list. for example, how many of you know the name of the young man or woman who served your table tonight? anybody know? anybody know who served your meal or poured you a glass of wine? it happened to be eunice at my table. from morocco, 29 years old. he pointed out to me morocco is the first nation in the world to recognize the united eights of america. --

so i think there's something for me in trying to get to know people and touch them at every level. it gets harder where you are, by the way. it gets harder where i am, but not impossible, and particularly in this age of social media and other things. so, you know, maybe a little humility doesn't hurt on occasion for a very senior leader. trust. i didn't hear the -- i think the governor alluded to trust, but for our profession trust is really the -- it's really the gold standard. you don't walk out of a forward operating base in afghanistan unless you have a certain level of trust for the men or women to your left or right, your leadership, your guidance, your medics, your chaplain. and by the way, you mentioned 2 million men and women in uniform. it's probably 2.4 active, guard and reserve, but you add to that about 3 million family members who we also feel a responsibility for. >> so where does responsibility fit into this equation?