-- the girls at her school a bus and the driver so they would be less vulnerable to attack. months after surviving a disfiguring and devastating attack, she was back at school, and the reporter found her in the front row in geography class. it is hard to comprehend how someone could do that at any age, especially with continuing threats to her security. here is what he wrote and said it so well. he said, "build a school for girls, and they will come. they will face down death to come. their illiterate parents will support them." her headmaster said "i told them" -- meaning the girls'

parents -- "i told them that if you do not send your daughters to school, then the enemy wins. i told them not to give into darkness." in so many ways, in so many ways, the afghan people, and especially afghan women and girls have fought back against that darkness. we mentioned earlier that 8.3 million young people are in school today and nearly 40% are girls. women and girls who have gained access to health care do not want to see a return to high mortality rates. the young women who fought for their education and health now want jobs that utilize their skills and will allow them to contribute to afghan society. one example of that is a woman i met a couple of years ago, an entrepreneurial woman from western afghanistan. i came to know her over the past

several years just because she traveled to the united states, but because she came to northeastern pennsylvania where i live. she met with folks in a lot of different places, including northeastern pennsylvania. to say that people have been inspired and moved by her story and by her activism is another understatement. she spearheaded an effort to build shelters for women, especially victims of domestic abuse, and she did this in a province. she aspires to start a restaurant owned and run by women in which female customers can gather and socialize in safety. we know security is still a very real challenge for afghans, particularly women and girls. solidifying the gains made over the last 12 years will require support from afghanistan security forces.

for the past two years i have led an effort in the senate to ensure that the department of state and defense are working to bolster the role of women in the security force. in the defense authorization bills, i have work to put resources behind the recruitment and retention of women in the afghan national security forces. about 1800 brave women are now serving in these forces. some have broken the glass ceiling to become pilots in the air force, and one has risen the ranks to lead the police district in kabul. these women are role models for younger afghans who would like to pursue these careers. according to the special inspector general for afghan reconstruction, more women are now showing an interest in

joining the security forces. the department of defense has acknowledged much more work remains to be done. according to the department's most recent report, female recruitment and retention rates or the afghan national security forces fell far short of the afghan government's goals. the international community, especially any military trainers, must continue to stress that women have a key role to play in afghanistan's security going forward. for afghan women and girls, the stakes for the transition are particularly high. for afghanistan to work through its political, security, and economic transition in 2014 and beyond, afghan women need to keep their place at the negotiation table, in the police stations, in university classrooms, and at the helms of companies. afghan women can help foster

stability, promote economic growth and prosperity, and keep fighting for inclusiveness, human rights, and democracy. last week the state department honored a woman of courage for her work and an ob/gyn and her commitment to getting medical care to afghan women in the face of telepath and oppression. -- taliban oppression. in her speech she said it is vital to come to the realization that women are half of the population. empowering a woman means empowering a society and a generation. supporting afghan women should continue to be a top priority in our post-2014 engagement strategy.

total disengagement from afghanistan after 2014 could precipitate a backsliding, not only in women's rights, but on progress across all sectors of afghan society. to be sure, the u.s. presence will be smaller. we can still accomplish our goals and protect our national security with a smaller footprint. this will require us to review our priorities -- physical inclusivity, transparency around elections, support for afghan women and girls, promotion of human rights and economic growth, and building a professional security force that can protect the afghan people. it will require a clear strategy and better communication with the afghan people, the american people, and with our international partners. i will keep working to push this message forward, and over the course of my remarks i have mentioned a few inspiring women, women parliamentarians i met

with in 2011 and others. all of these women demonstrate and exemplify uncommon courage and resolve. their stories should continue to remind us how transformative the past 12 years have been for afghanistan, despite the fact that it is a long, long way to go. we have a clear and enduring national security interest in afghanistan's stability and security. we owe it to u.s. service members and the american people who have sacrificed so much to ensure that these gains we have fought for are not rolled back. i appreciate this opportunity. i thank you for this time, and i would love to take your questions. [applause]

>> thank you so much, senator casey. i am caroline wadhams, a senior fellow here at the center for american progress. we are very happy that you all are joining us today. i think once again with that speech you showed what a leader you are on issues, especially for the people of afghanistan. and you made a very compelling case for why afghanistan still matters despite the fact that the american people are exhausted with this war. there is still a security interest. we have made a commitment to the afghan people, and we should have a long-term partnership. i think you made a very compelling case for why we should. you have, i think, shown

leadership in foreign policy for many years, and we are so delighted that you are here. you have demonstrated both a pragmatism and a value in foreign policy that at the center for american progress we embrace. thank you so much for your leadership on this. on afghanistan you have shown both -- you have made the case for why it is in our national interest, but you have elevated important issues that we are trying to attack, which is elevating the women and girls, but also how important a political transition is. there has been such a focus on troop numbers, but there has been much less focus on the how important this transition is. if we do not have a successful transition, there is a risk of what could happen. thank you for your leadership on afghanistan we have been for many years trying to elevate this position, trying to make -- this political transition, trying to make the case for why it matters. today we also are releasing a report called afghans find their way, which is about the political, economic, and security transitions underway,

and it speaks largely on a trip that john podesta and i -- tom perry l oh, and i undertook to afghanistan and met with hundreds of afghans, mostly from civil society. and they spoke about all the work that they want to do, and they are ready to do, and that building their economy, improving their security forces, and making their government work better. they just want our long-term support. obviously, it cannot be unconditional support, but they made the case for why a long-term partnership is so important, and that paper reflects some of those meetings. before i go over to the questions, i want to ask as the moderator a couple of questions to start the discussion. i would like to pull the lens back a little bit and start off with a larger question.

there has been a lot of criticism of the obama administration in terms of having a feckless foreign policy or not having a strategy for afghanistan. i would welcome your thoughts on whether you feel confident that the administration has a plan forward for afghanistan and you have general thoughts about their foreign policy and we would welcome that, thank you. >> number one, i would say they have a strategy going forward, but i think they should articulate it more and make it more apparent. that is one of the reasons why i sent that letter both to secretary kerry and secretary hagel. i have to say on the broader question of the criticism which has been withering of the administration's foreign policy on a whole range of areas, i would suggest that it is at an

intensity level and at the degree of partisanship or really destructiveness that i do not think helps anybody. let me suggest a way that members of congress can be critical, because i am allowed to do that. look, i do not hesitate to the critical of the administration if there is a particular aspect of foreign policy. i do not think they're getting right or they need to look at, but if you are a member of congress, i think you have a higher duty in terms of how you weigh in with criticism. let me say just the following -- it is one thing to say i do not agree with what the administration is doing in this particular part of foreign policy. it is another thing to make it very personal to the president and to make a categorical.

you have heard the papers -- the papers are full with them every day, folks in washington, it usually starts out with barack obama is or something like that, and they level a charge. that does not help anybody. it does not help advance the ball. it is not constructive criticism. if members of congress want to be critical, it helps to say the administration should do the following, the administration is wrong about this, and they should consider that, but this idea that you have to be as sweeping in your condemnation and to be as personal i think is in violation of that basic rule that a lot of our differences should end at the waters' edge. the recent back-and-forth on ukraine is the best example of that. even in circumstances that involve other aspects of foreign

policy, i think you can be constructively aggressively critical without making it personal or without using political language, without being categorical, and i think that would help us have better debates. we probably do not debate foreign policy enough. sometimes all people see is the invective that is covered every day instead of the kind of discussions we should have. >> thank you. we have made moving to afghanistan, a number of commitments to afghanistan affairs conferences, on the security side and implement assistance. -- in development assistance. given the polling numbers in the american public, just how exhausted the americans are with providing financial assistance to afghanistan, what do you think that the political appetite is in the senate, but

generally, in the congress for maintaining a commitment post-2014? how do you think that is going to play out, and how do you think the case can be made that the commitments are met? >> i hope we can make the case in similar ways i did today and in other ways as well which is to articulate what our interests are, why it is important that women have a measure of security than they have before and have opportunities. that if we do that, you substantially reduce the likelihood that not only will afghanistan be a place of tremendous instability or insecurity, but you are reducing the likelihood of violence and terrorism even beyond afghanistan. it will not be as fertile a ground for terrorists and for entities that would cause us

harm. i do not think we do that enough, making the case as to why it is in our interests. we also have to be very clear that the drawdown is happening and will continue and will be completed, but there are lots of other ways we can be helpful in a manner that is not simply about security, but in a manner that is consistent with our basic american values we have had for generations, which is to help countries that need the help and to help them build their own future. and that has been a subject of great support among us, but i think lately because of what people have lived through -- can you just imagine this might be a different conversation about levels of support even for matters that are not military if we did not have the tragedy of a huge commitment in iraq? the frustration and frankly the

anger that a lot of people feel about iraq has impacted our afghan policy whether we like to admit that or not. it has. we have to articulate the interest more and make the case as to why we have to do what everything we can to maintain those gains, not in the lead, but with the afghans in the lead militarily, but also in terms of their own democracy, there are no elections, their own institution building. that is a whole other -- i could give a whole speech just on the mechanics of governing, delivery services, having strong ministries, and what would you would call here departments. >> let me open it up. i want to give people an opportunity to speak. yes, sir. >> my question is for the upcoming elections, the united

states has made it clear that they would not pick the winner or there would not be any interference. yet many people expect the elections to be unfair, and some -- to go free and fair and accomplish some of the goals that you just stated. how will the united states fit that balance of not being seen as influencing things, but yet securing some of the principles that the u.s. has always stood by? >> a good part of it is by making sure that the efforts that have been undertaken by the state department and you could go down the list, other departments of our government as well, the efforts that's they and others have taken, ngo's

included, to make sure that the infrastructure, the mechanisms are therefore free and fair elections. that is why the security numbers that i mentioned about how many poll security people, the effort to make sure that there is a measure of security there, led by the afghans, but supported by the work we have done over time, that is why the training we have done will be in a sense tested during the selection. i do not think we have to get in the middle of who wins if we are doing the job that i know people have worked very hard to do which is to set up, work with the afghans to set up the mechanisms of the election date apparatus.

and the fact that you have polling places that are public far in advance of the election itself is a much better indicator than we had a couple years ago. there are lots of ways to be helpful and constructive without getting in the middle of it. >> a bunch of questions. i will clump two together. the man in the back, and then we will go over here. >> doug brooks. even if elections are successful on the security side there is still a big enough issue that nobody wants to invest in afghanistan at this time. the appf, the afghan public protection force, the main force for the private sector, has just been disbanded. is there something the u.s. can do to product afghanistan to provide or allow security, whether it is appf or private security to be there so that investment can go on with confidence? >> let me get one more question. yes, sir. if you want to stand, that would

be great. >> johann jones. i spent the better part of four years in helmand. my question is i have seen provincial elections, district elections, and now presidential elections and the free and fairness. i feel one of the more important things we may be missing is helping the losers to identify that they are actually losing, that they lost, and making sure they are included in the process post election transition. what role did you see the international community and specifically the u.s. in helping the losers identify their loss? >> i will go on that. part of the answer to that question is doing what i was trying to do with president karzai, which is to say to him you have got to lead an effort

in that transition, and that simply is not having the mechanics of an election go well, it is also the intangible leadership of communicating what it means, communicating how important it is it and being part of it. president karzai was a former president at that time, but in an interim period of transition, making the case as to why the new president and those who have just been elected have to embrace the folks who did not win. some of that is an intangible, and part of that is us -- keep making the case to the afghan leadership that they have got to reach out and do more than just build a political coalition, to build a coalition be on that so

they can govern. i do not think there is necessarily a policy that we could implement that would do that. it is more of a question of international community as well as individual countries like united states pushing them to accept the results and do the messaging around that. i think that is the best suggestion i have on that. on the business community question, i do not have a ready made program that we should implement. i do think that part of the narrative that we have not been as faithful to is this question of the gains that have been made. you are a lot less likely to make a business investment in afghanistan if you do not see measurable progress, progress that you can attach a metric to. that is why the life expectancy numbers should be emphasized, health care access, education gains for children overall, but especially for young girls, the

participation by women in both politics and in the economy, which is still very much limited, but is growing. one of the best ways for us to ensure that folks will at least consider investment is by articulating those gains on a more regular basis. it has been my experience going places in the region and beyond, whether going to india or egypt, turkey, you could pick a lot of different countries in the middle east or south and central asia where we have a lot of great american business with the business leaders in a particular country coming together, and they have established working

partnerships to try to kind of -- chambers of commerce that are overlapping. to the extent that we can continue to foster that as well as to articulate the progress i think is a part of the answer. if you have any suggestions, i would be happy to hear them, because this is an aspect of it that we have not talked about nearly enough. >> on this, articulating the gains that have been made, i want to shout out a number of people in the audience who have been members of coalition supporting the afghan people, which i urge people in the audience to look at. a group has been making gains. i remember anthony and chuck and david, and they have been making the case that the gains need to be articulated, that them messaging has all been negative, and there are some positive messages, and their coalition is pushing the importance of the

political transition process in a long-term partnership with the afghan people. we as part of that coalition would agree with that. let me open it up again. yes, sir. >> news network of kurdistan. can you compare homage karzai to prime minister maliki in that he has not been willing to sign a security pact to extend support of afghanistan past 2014? maliki refused to grant immunity to american soldiers. the question is, what is hamid karzai counting on? thank you.

>> you would have to ask him that. i do not want to make comparisons. they are different circumstances, different leaders, different countries with different challenges, but i think it is vital we have an agreement. there is no way that we can make the kind of commitment i hope we can make in the absence of an agreement. i would be surprised if in the end we do not have one, even though it has been difficult. there has been difficulty with president karzai. i am more optimistic than some might be, but i think we will get there. he is a very difficult person to read sometimes. and i have had the occasion to meet with him four times now. and often came away frustrated. that frustration that i have

felt i think is shared by a lot of people, and it is another reason why we got to make sure this transition goes well, because what we do not have to happen is not the process go well, the electoral process, but you also do not want someone who is elected that starts out with a stumble or starts out with a problem that would be kind of a carryover from some of the frustrations that we have felt with president karzai. we need to have the election go well. we also need to have a strong leader to begin to effectuate the change, which will be very challenging for anyone coming in. >> thanks, senator. i would like to thank you for your support and for

highlighting the gains and achievements of the afghan people. i was born and raised in the country, and afghanistan, where it was in 2001, and where it is now, not even comparable. that is how much has changed. when you wake up in the morning you see a sea of girls going toward the schools, and the cops clearing traffic. in 2001 in afghanistan i could not have imagined that, even. you see the change happening. also in terms of militarily, afghanistan is much stronger, even though the army was re-created in 2003. for a lot of afghans, they are confident that the ansf is able to stand. what the country lacks is political stability. part of it is domestic politics and also part of it is the perceptions, and perception is such that if you see an extremist taking over a

building, killing a bunch of people, it has no military significance. in the media it often comes out that they are able to take anywhere. that trend -- that has given a lot of confidence to the of given a lott of confidence to the intrusion groups within the region. if it gets late for some reason, what do you see in terms of being gauge and it beyond 2013. and also to make sure some of the gains will solidify so

afghanistan stays on the democratic path. >> that will depend on the level of training and results achieved so far. they're still a set of questions regarding might have the quality and readiness of the security forces. police that are trained and the army. they've achieve those numbers. those were not far off the goals. of the officer corps

and the folks trained to be soldiers and police officers will be the test. there are limits to what we can do. we invested a lot in the training. be led in terms of further training. we have to keep making the text -- case here home about how to stay united on making sure that these gains stand play. you reach a point where there isn't a question about whether

it is a free and fair election. it is not necessarily the kind of commitment summer concern about. >> one more question, then we will wrap it up. even -- david. of the state and dissent -- the defense department. what chances do see of there being a bipartisan approach. is there support across the aisle on both sides that could make this into this kind of issue. thank you.

>> there is a degree of bipartisanship. one of the biggest problems we had in both the senate and house, i will just be from the center point of view. we do not have a nothing gauge meant on the body itself. the committee has measures it deals with. we need to think of more and better ways to come together just to talk about these issues in a more constructive way. this is one area, the post 2014 part of the policy where there is not as much partisan rancor, tothere was when there came levels and the schedule of the

drawdown and all that. once you get away from that there tends to be more unanimity. we were able to get together on that. this can be a place where people in both parties come together. , but sometimes people have and it is agreement not as interesting for some people to engage in. of acan be an area partisan agreement, unlike the earlier debates about security issues. upwe will have to wrap it three thank you to everyone for coming.

[applause] >> if you asked the american people they would hat's out. yeah. in january, the u.s. embassy issued warnings to china citizens that the air quality in beijing was so bad it exceeded the upper limits of its measurements and the exposure to fine soot was many times above what the world health organization considered hazardous. they call it an air-pocolyps. it forced the china authorities for to have close highways because the visibility was so

bad. and this goes on in cities across china. in harbin, a woman said, "i couldn't see e window. i thought it was snowing." then she realized it wasn't snow, it was dangerous toxic smog. that's what the people are living with. they're beside themselves. they walk around with masks. they can't go out. they're suffering and dying. and this is the country that about carney was asked the session. we will hear what he has to say. >> there was an all nighter to talk up the issue. does the white house support this and think it is a good idea to get folks starting to talk about this? is there a nice rotation that there will be some sort of a vote? we support the action taken

to focus attention on the challenges posed by climate change and the impact that climate change is having on our our abilityand on to respond to emergencies. we commend those who are participating. if it is an important subject to the president. has a climate action plan dedicated to. he will continue to take steps to make sure we are more prepared for the effects and impacts of severe weather, which is a byproduct of climate change that we have seen. >> mr. speaker, the house of

representatives opens for the first time to televise coverage. >> television will change this institution. the good will far outweigh the bad. >> we saw the spirit of american heroism at its finest. we sell one grip on the helicopter line. he they dragged her to safety. [applause] this personal opinion is you challenge these people and their americanism. it is the lowest thing i have ever seen.

>> we are on the brink of an acting a bill for the disabled of america. they will henceforth look to and the day that the president signed this bill as the independence day for those who have been disabled. >> the chair would like to ask my republican colleagues to take the chair. will the gentleman take the chair? [applause] >> mr. speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to sit

in the chair. [applause] >> george w. bush has received 271 votes. al gore of the state of tennessee has received 266 votes. may god bless our new president and a vice president. may god bless the united states of america. >> you supported us with your resources, leadership to the world community, and most importantly, with the lives of your soldiers.

toit is number and privilege present the gavel to the first woman speaker in our history. nancy pelosi. [applause] >> it was dr. martin luther king jr. who said that all forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and in you main. ane.nhum >> racial profiling has to stop. just because someone wears a 30, does not make them a criminal.

>> in just a few moments, senator marco rubio outlines his plans for economic growth. in a little more than an hour, the first meeting of the panel created to help young people make that are financial decisions. after that, we will re-air senator bob casey on u.s. afghan relations. >> several live events atari but tomorrow. the senate committee holds confirmation hearings to head the nsa and transportation command good that is here on c-span at 10:00 a.m. eastern. 10:15, they hear from whistleblowers from the hanford nuclear waste site in washington state. jeh johnsonpan3

testifies about his agency's budget request before a house appropriations subcommittee. that as of 4:00 p.m. eastern. >> senator marco rubio says the international community needs to respond strongly to russian actions in ukraine in order to discourage china from active more aggressively. the comments came after the florida republican outlined his plans for the economy, including auctioning the wireless spectrum. this is a will more than one hour. >> thank you for coming today.

we are here at google, obviously. it is the social media world. we want everybody to know, who is here with us, but also over the internet, you can follow the foundation onmp facebook and twitter. my name is jimmy kemp. on behalf of the kemp foundation, and our partner in google, we really appreciate you hosting us today. we are grateful for the special form.g on the camp

true growth is a designation that recognizes that growth comes from a dynamic source. it comes from humans. it does not come from government. personal dynamic that has been best realized throughout history in these united states of america. we need a strong, balanced economic growth that results in many kinds of investments that we make in people and property. that is in order to provide for ourselves and our children, each other, whether as individuals, members of a family, business, or government. true growth is a critical designation. we just do not want growth at last for little while. we grope with words like lower

tax rates, supply-side economics, the gold standard. these are the first words that pop into my head when i think about my childhood. a strange childhood, i know. there were some for thrown around as well. but i learned about entrepreneurial capitalism. i also learned that there are no limits to our future, if we do not put limits to our people. a reale the limits of plan to get our economy going. the goal is to explore the thatntic wrote principles can be clearly communicated to all americans convinced that our nation can and must better. nobody represents that better than senator marco rubio, the son of cuban immigrants. he was a standout wide receiver and defensive back in high school and college.

accolades, he received the camp leadership award for exceptional leadership in championing the american idea. i will not ever forget how he brought the crowd to its feet that day, that night. said some people believe our problem is that the american people is changed, but too many people want things from government, but i'm convinced that the overwhelming majority will my parents had, a chance. it is not about the new normal of limited growth. fewer jobs and restricted opportunity. if that is not americans future. the true normal as creativity and entrepreneurship and the willingness to take risks on what the future may bring. educated the to be businesses not yet open.

helworld is now we have done, bt what we have yet to do. please welcome senator marco rubio. thank you. thank you to google. when it was a young boy i would sit for hours on the porch of my home listening to my grandfather stories but history life. he was born in cuba in the last year of the 19th century. later, he watched on television that an american want him in. lifespan extraordinary

progress and change. opportunities of the world. i sense that he wondered what he could've achieved if he had been born in a different time and different place. my grandfather love this country. he never took it for granted. he knew what life was like outside of it. he knew that america was different. thats founded, believes every human being has a god-given right to pursue a , and based on that belief this is a country that rewards merit and worth rather than social status and privilege.

equal opportunity defined this as a nation and a people. achieving a better life has been come to know as an american dream. it is about raising a family and a safe environment, to do meaningful work and to give your children a chance for a better life . years later i came to understand why he spent so much time talking about his own life, growing up. what he wanted me to know was

i was born in the one place on earth where the son of a bartender could achieve the same as a child born into privilege. this remains a country where you can get ahead through hard work and determination. we cannot deny that achieving this has become increasingly difficult for millions of americans. a growing number of people are gripped by economic insecurity, haunted by the realization that they are one that break away from financial ruin. they fear that they will not be a will to leave. people areumber of losing confidence in the american dream. left with the sense that

what is defined our nation for so long has eroded. this feeling is not without cause. children born into poor families in france or canada have a better chance of emerging from it than poor children born in america. this erosion of mobility and opportunity would be a problem for any nation. for us it is a crisis. it is an urgent crisis. there cannot be an america without an american dream. before.had depressions our current recovery stanza 54 months and counting. our feeble and you'll growth waits do not offer much hope.

the economy was projected to 3.2%.t but even that paltry number has been shown to be wishful thinking. it is been resized down. here's what is troubling, the projected long-term trends. the measure of the maximum amount of gd you can achieve using all the resources. officeks ago the budget revised the estimates. 7.3% lower than the original forecast they made in 2007. this means a loss of 1.5 trillion dollars in economic growth.

unless we address the trends creating this erosion, they threatened to become permanent. it is primary the results of trends that began before then, in particular a rapid, fundamental, economic transformation that washington is not begun to seriously address. while the 84 years of my grandfather lived abroad historic progress, the 21st rapid and seeing more dramatic change.

this new economy comes of exciting opportunity and challenges. the goal middle-class has emerged. it is willing to buy the isvices we provide, but it easier to compete with us for jobs and business. haveances in technology made communication and learning and work faster and more productive. the wages are not keeping pass with childcare and education. the problem is that while we are facing full brunt of what is

--ated by the economic opportunities are not reaching enough americans. is tondamental problem help more people overcome these problems and assess the problem of our time. the good news. there is no nation on earth that are prepared to do this than ours. achieving this is going to require us to replace antiquated policies and institutions of the last century with one bill for this new era. in the middle of the last century we began a war on poverty. this effort later remains incomplete. the anti-poverty programs help alleviate the pain of poverty,

they do not help enough people emerge from it. earlier this year i proposed a wage enhancement credit. i proposed streamlining our antipoverty programs into a fund that would allow designing your own creative initiatives to deal with the underlying causes. another example is in the 20th century, higher education became an option for more people than ever. higherrent system of education is too expensive and too and flexible. it offers limited options for and want aeed traditional degree. it is leaving far too many people with debt instead of jobs. in the 21st century, higher education will no longer be an option. it will be a necessity. that is for all. i proposed creating additional

pathways to earning a degree or vocational certification and new ways to open a economic opportunities. google is a leader in this practice. seven googleery hires does not have a traditional bachelors degree. performing our educational system is important. bras to harness the promise of a we are going to need millions of new jobs. there will be global competition for the jobs. it is a competition we can win but not unless we reform our current policies in washington. i'm grateful for this

opportunity to share the reforms that will position us to compete and win in the new global economy. this is built on two principles. one there is no better model than free enterprise. the bigger the government and the more involved the government the more your ability to influence the government determines your chance of success. only free enterprise system that rewards merit can produce upward mobility that our nation six. 43% of the new jobs being created pay less than $16 per hour. our economy is growing at three

percent a year. washington is arguing how to divide describes. look at the fervor over the minimum-wage debate. hour is not the american dream. ann he does the pay $30 hour, $40 mark, $50 an hour much more. i want to outline three avenues for achievement. thatirst is new policies encourage innovation.

from the personal commuter to the internet, to biomedicine, think of all the jobs that exist as a result of american ingenuity. the innovations do not just come out of a desire to earn more money. they come from something deeper good it is in the hearts and minds of our people. a profound desire to create, innovate and build. to take resources and carve something out of them that is beautiful and lasting. opportunities that change the world for the better. the power of innovation is present in this room or he now

you have technology in your pocket that could not fit in an entire room 30 years ago. 30 years ago -- from now it might fit on your finger third this is going to happen whether we like it or not. we going to stand at the , or of those discoveries are we going to fall behind in what others take the lead? we remain the leading innovative nation on earth. think of all the examples of american ingenuity. look at spacex. it revolutionize the ones industry. dominated and it helped revitalize my home state of florida. every year americans are launching startups, and the this and thet with

strength of our nation, 20% of the value of the world's goods are made in america. in other 15% are made by american companies and other .ountries and we produce the right products. china produces more toys, shoes, and to russia's crude where global leader. create.le as much as we innovate now, we can be doing so much more. washington put up a blockade of

things that keep us from doing well in the new enterprise system. but we can collapse these barriers and open new pathways. much of our groundbreaking innovation is going to do take place in the unexplored realm of digital media, particularly with the devices and services related to the internet. in 20 years the web has changed .very industry in the world this is not going to slow down. web traffic is expected to be 13 2017,as high by the year so ensuring that access to the

remains free and open is essential. it is not surprising that internet freedom has many enemies. since it has proven an effective catalyst, it is about a ground. 42 nations restrict online access. they want to exert control over the way the internet is govern and regulated internationally. consists ofmodel independent boards, governments, businesses, and the model may be a topic for debate, but no one can question that it has been

effective at promoting a free and open internet. we find governments lobbying for .egulatory control preserving internet freedom must be a top priority. introducey will legislation to change the policy of the united states. we must recognize that here at home much of the digital realm is blocked. the more spectrum and bandwidth we open up, the more jobs we create. his spectrum is the highly of the digital age, that highway is getting crowded. traffic will only get worse.

innovations will go unrealized. it is about one of personal inconvenience. it is about economic mobility. $87 billion is added to the gross to mystic product. this i wille on introduce bipartisan legislation to increase wireless access and affordability. spectrum forocate commercial wireless services. it is going to create thousands of jobs.

our efforts to expand innovation should not be limited to technology. we must remain global pioneers. government has a limited but important role to play. nasa, the national institute of health, department of defense have been incubators of research. they will serve as private sector innovation. our network of labs has been a leading resource. they lack the ability to work with the private sector to translate this into american jobs. that is why myself and chris americaled the innovates act that will make it easier to work together with business and bring groundbreaking research to

fruition in the you the marketplace. innovation will be critical. innovation can only lead to more jobs if innovators have access to the customers. the emergence of a global the class have create a more potential customers than ever for products and services. keep too manyiers american businesses out of emerging markets. .lobalization is a fact form must beal for to expand the markets for american products and services i

actively engaging in the global economy. we need trade policies. it easier for our products to reach a global network of consumers. take a family owned trucking business that transports products. there are billions of people to andthe world who want can afford to buy these american products. if we can make it easier to ship these products to those work tos, the volume of the trucking company would have would grow dramatically. this would mean it would make more money and hire more drivers and by more american-made trucks , and this could be a boon. that is why support trade promotional authorities. that is why support regional

trade agreements with asia minor america, and with europe. as we open up new avenues for trade, we will see growing opportunities to export american energy hundreds of millions of people become drivers. if selling some of our energy resources will lead to explosive growth. despite energy production, we produced more energy in 2012 in 2005. nonetheless, we after member we're in constant competition with other global energy partners.

we must promote access to abundant resources. crude oil has come under regulatory attack. we need a more efficient, modernize structure to ease the transition. for example, the highway system of the last century fostered an explosion of economic opportunity. this included the pipeline system. that had a similar impact on our economy. unlike the interstate highways of the 1950's, the private sector will pay for the new system. we need a reduction of the things that are presenting the private sector from doing this out.

this is resulted in a sluggish process that leads to years of litigation or a seemingly endless wait while bureaucrats argue about details. they were trendy figure a way to build a gas pipeline and for do. the businesses involved had to under the review of six different federal agencies. we should review the processes for natural gas piping. we remove barriers that prevent doing business abroad. fully benefiting from the opportunities of the 21st reformingll require policy that will put a sudden international advantage.

from our tax code to regulatory system, to the federal debt that hangs over the economy, america is less and less appealing to job creators. there are only a handful of economies to compete against. investment creates high-paying jobs. my father had a job in hotels a bartender. my mom had a job as a cashier, not because the government open these up, but because someone who had access to money decided to invest that money in opening up those hotels, but in the year

since, the growth in government has made this sort of investment harder in america, not easier. we now have the highest corporate tax rate of any advanced economy in the world. andou combined federal state taxes, our corporate rate is nearly 40%, while the global average is under 25%. just on taxes alone it's more expensive to create jobs in america than in most other countries and most other developed economies in the world. that is why the senator and i have dedicated ourselves to the development of a new modernize , one that is broad, promising, and program. replacing thetize

tax system with one that is globally competitive. it would allow businesses to take a full reduction for all of their investments. treatmenty equal would and the crony capitalist loopholes that benefit politically connected and it will result in a lower tax burden. that will lead to job growth. take a business that brings and $50,000 a month. what they 20,000 goes to basic operating costs. that would be about $30,000 in profits. you do not have to decide what to do with the 30,000. to a withdrawn spend it, or do they use it for investments to grow their business.

or to hire more people? under the current system, the same thing to do is leave it in the bank. we see evidence from the fact that american businesses are sitting on $5 trillion of cash that is uninterested. that is more than the size of economy. it is sitting in on investing cash. they place major obstacles in to path of companies wishing participate in our global economy.

as i mentioned earlier, 15-20% of the value of products in the world are made by american companies operating overseas. laws if anurrent tax american business makes money in japan, they have to pay taxes in japan but if they want to take that money and bring it back to factoryk to invest in a floor to hire more people, they have to pay u.s. taxes on the same money. we can fix this. by implementing what 28 countries already have, a territorial kind of taxation. ,ost economies have this including all of the other g8 .ations, maybe soon to be g7

that is put american companies at a major disadvantage. wilson need to remove the impediments to investment. is our healthese care law. it has led to uncertainty in crude andrising cost the national debt continues to rise. there is a regulatory code that is burdensome. it is an attempt on the part of some to rig the game and pick winners and losers. obamacare is the single largest impediment to job

creation. is a perfect storm of federal mandates, relations, and aggressive marketplace intrusion that threatens jobs and economic growth on a truly historic scale. it ising and replacing our only option. to bring the debt under control, we need to reform entitlement programs driving the fiscal imbalance threatening to bankrupt our country. the budget the president introduced was a missed opportunity. washing cannot wait for a debt crisis -- crisis. and let me talk about the last impediment. that is the regulatory system. any the test of its own medicine. it needs to be restrained in

restricted. here's how we can do it. the budget would be set by an independent board. amount. set an if it is over the amount, agencies will have to reduce regulations to get under the .udgeted amount it would put in place the cost benefit analysis and framework we are lacking right now. obamacare, the federal debt, the regulatory system, all these things would go along way toward restoring the certainty that we desperately need.

jobs and higher-paying claim the american century. all the policies are important in our own way. each is like a single brush stroke. only when their combined together, do we begin to see with a great. a illustration of american potential. already able to say that 20% of products are made in america. imagine we combine this with a trained workforce, plus access to wireless spectrum, plus abundant energy, plus billions of new customers, the american

economy would take off. it would create thousands upon thousands of higher-paying jobs. this is the exciting opportunity. we don't have the luxury of wasting time. the world is changing quickly. we have waited far too long to change with it. we still have time to build the new american century. we do not have forever. we inherited from those before us the most exceptional nation a unique place where dreams that were impossible everywhere else became possible here. american to say that

exceptionalism is a myth that we perpetuate to make ourselves feel better. i notice on that. i see it with my own eyes. i've been touched by it in my own life. into four were born families in another land. by the grace of god they found their way here. they were beyond the retirement age. they never became rich or famous good they do not leave us any money or help pay for college, but i would say that they live the american dream. he lived a fully. why? because here they were given the opportunity to live a happy and for filling life. they own a home. they raised a family and a safe and stable environment. they found dignified work the patent have to provide for the children. they give us a chance to achieve.

and to achieve a life better than their own. this was their version of the american dream to give purpose to their work and make them feel that their own lives mattered. they never made it big. but through us, they made their mark in the world. this is the meaning of the american dream to have the freedom to decide the kind of life you want and the opportunity to achieve it. this cream is neither dead nor doomed, but it is also not self-perpetuating. each generation had to step up to expand it. the time is come for us to do the same. we live in an insecure time. the world is changing. relied on to we

take us to our dreams no longer take us there. but there are new paths waiting to be opened. paths can bring more people to our dream than ever before. opportunityexciting , to usher in a new era of opportunity and prosperity one better than anything the world aboutr seen, to bring another american century greater than the one left behind. if we do this we will write the latest chapter in the story of the greatest nation in the world has ever known. thank you for this opportunity. [applause] >> spoke to a very much. you heard my phone buzzing

that was my wife calling to talk about the repair of my american-made refrigerator. >> i don't the quicker it. this is a debate and platform for competition and ideas. ideas are the life what of the country. grateful that you are engaging in a competition. in that spirit we gathered a bunch of people who enjoy competition of ideas. with a couple of microphones. senator ruby likes to speak. we will have a good amount time. if you don't raise her hand and ask for microphone, i will start the questioning. please give us your name, where

you're from, and ask your question. >> thank you for your remarks, senator. what is going on with the time warner merger? >> that is still working through the justice department process, and is that correct? >> yes. theot knowing enough of details about the novel issues they would be concerned about, but we want to see a work through the justice department. it is an interesting challenge in that sector and numerous sectors. we've seen ever stick area of thein the mobilephone side. argue withng i would regard to time warner and comcast is the multiple outlets. access not cable

you also have the over the air satellite an increasing number of people who are watching on platforms like netflix. it will be interesting to see in multiple different industries ask these consolidation efforts roll out, how the 21st century changes for the global economy and the plethora of new ways to gain the same services will influence the justice department's decision-making. wait for the microphone. >> nice to see you again. up in washington, d.c. come and in the 1970's, i saw my -- saw people in my community thriving with small businesses.

understand how regulations affect people in my community. however, we do not hear people talk about it who can speak to the masses about it. people used to drive taxicabs and we sent our children to college. people used to be vendors in ndc and they regulated that out. and they regulated that out. the regulations have made us dependent on the government and they are pushing us out of urban america. empowered to do for self. that is something that needs to be addressed. do you see this in florida? course at florida international university on mondays and fridays. a lot of young students are there, i say young because they are half my age. we had a recent debate in

miami-dade county about uber. concept,ard about this the miami-dade county commission did not allow them to comment because the regulations. i see young people that might be friendly to government involvement arguing against impediment. a number of different fundamental challenges 2.2. a lot of those jobs allow my parents to make it to the working middle class, those jobs do not pay as much as they once did. if my parents had the same jobs today they had 25 years ago, their standard of living would be different because those jobs to not pay what they once did. require ahat do pay

higher level of education or training than the same jobs did in the past. our system of providing people that learning is inaccessible to many people. i will give you one perfect example. my son's football team had a mother on the team who was a receptionist at a medical office. she was the first person laid off every time things went wrong. she was laid off because her boss needed someone who could stay until 7:30 p.m. and she had earlier earlier that -- than that because day care closed at 7:00. the only way she will get a job to's provide more security is if she gets the skills she needs to become an ultrasound technician or a lab technician or something else. she has to get up in the morning, make breakfast, take her kids to school, work nine hours, to come up, make dinner.

one of the barriers we have to figure out, how can we help people acquire employable skills that allow them to double, triple, and quadruple their pay, but in a way that people like them can access? she cannot drop everything and go to college for four years. we overlook some of the regulatory barriers that exist in higher education. that is a real impediment as well. one that we have to focus on. the other example i always use, imagine if you worked somewhere and decided, i can do this job better than my boss. because of wireless and internet access, i do not need a big office to do this. i need access to high-speed internet and i can open up this business out of my spare bedroom of my home. but you are now hit with a --

with regulations at the federal, state, and local level. your former boss can because they may not like it, but they have an army of lawyers that can help navigated. in some industries, they hired a handful of lobbyists. with all thatl stuff. you end up being an employee your whole life. that is the point i made when i talk about big government. a government hurts people who were trying to make it. unless you have the power to influence the government, your ability to succeed becomes limited. do you believe that putting illegal aliens on a path to inhibitor tos an economic growth? >> we have a broken legal immigration system.

the legal system that is something that could help our economy grow. our current system is based primarily on family reunification. if you have a family member living in the united states, you get to bring a family member as well. that is how my parents came. in the 21st century, our immigration system has to be built more on merit and economic ability to contribute to the economic -- economy. the second issue is like every sovereign country on the planet, we have a right to enforce our immigration laws. we do not have mechanisms that do that effectively. owned a hotel where you only checked people and, but never check people out. we do not have an effective way of determining when people leave or if they leave at all. there are sectors of the

southern border that remain insecure. our employers do not have a reliable way to determine who they are hiring and whether that person is legally here and capable of employment. you have 12 million human beings living in the united states that are here illegally and that is the part that is most complicated. on the one hand, there is no serious effort that you will round up and deport 12 million people. if you reward the breaking of the law by granting people something that they could not otherwise have gotten had they done it the right way, not only are you rewarding bad behavior, you are encouraging others to do that in the future. the challenge we face as a country, how do we face this reality? you have 12 million people and not everybody can stay. how do you figure out who those 12 million people are? which ones get to stay and which ones get to leave?

what sort of consequences will there be for having violated the law? no one has the right to come here illegally. argument i hear, it you will go ahead and legalize all of those people, but you are never going to put the enforcement mechanisms in place. the same argument you hear about tax increases versus spending cuts. get reduced cuts over the years. the taxes stay in place. they will suspend the enforcement or they will only enforce the parts they want, but the legalization becomes permanent. that has been a real challenge. a 12 millionl with people here in a way that is realistic and responsible? that has proven to be a real challenge. if we can reform our legal immigration system and can put

in place a better enforcement mechanism, it will become a lot easier. not easy, but easier. your last question was about citizenship. that is a fundamental question the country will have to make. are you prepared to eight or 9 million people living among you that can live here permanently for the rest of their lives but never become citizens? that is an issue that i do not think there is a consensus on. for not think it is good the country to have people who are forever barred from becoming citizens. i think the broader point, is immigration good for america? it is generally good if it is done appropriately. if it is the kind of immigration that will bring to the country -- there will always be an element of people coming for

family unification and always an element of a silent and people seeking freedom -- asylum and people seeking freedom. but it has to be merit-based. that is the most fundamental reform that we need to make. >> yes, sir. >> my name is michael coleman. you mentioned the bill you have dropped dealing with the national technology transfer. i wondering if you could, and why you think -- [inaudible] has been so ineffective that technology transfer? >> it would take down the barriers that make it hard for

the national -- where the government can play an effective role in basic research. what any of the apps in your pocket or the platforms we now use ever have existed if the government had sold and retained the internet? the answer is not. the government has a role to play in basic research. we have seen the commercialization of products that were innovative to the space program. how can we limit -- how can we get that basic research into the hands of the private sector? the bill would streamline that process. about astion was federal bureaucracy. federal bureaucracies do not have much of an incentive to build the economy. instances, they seem to have no interest whatsoever. one of the largest complaints i

get from potential business owners and job creators is they feel like it is an adversarial process. feel welcomed and the government agencies use -- view themselves as a resource to get .heir investments to succeed in the u.s., they feel as though it is an impediment. that is in attitude that is pervasive throughout government. one of the ways we can reduce that is through our regulatory budget idea. these guys can cook up all of the creative regulations they want, but they will have to come under a regulatory cost budget every single year. that will force them to justify these regulations. >> i am with industrial bank.

my question relates to education. the escalating cost of college education, we have a number of young people who are having to loans.t after taking on that kind of debt you cannot declare. people are unemployed, cannot pay back their debt, and they have their credit wrecked which makes it difficult for them to find employment. the escalating cost makes it impossible for people to get an education. to controlyou do escalating costs and how people can work their way out of a difficult situation? issues that lead to the escalating costs of higher education. every time we increase the aid packages, it gets eaten by tuition increases. one higher education provider, they say the maximum amount you get per student or semester is

$1000, there is no incentive for them to charge $700. that leads to tuition inflation. universitiesber of are increasing more expenditures on nonacademic endeavors. more support staff, administrative staff, more things that are not directly related to teaching skills. many students graduating with degrees that do not lead to jobs in the 21st century. that creates all sorts of firestorms, but that is a fact. we cannot continue to allow people to borrow $15,000 to graduate with a degree that they will regret for the rest of their lives. when you go into the school and you take out a loan, you will have to be told, this is how much graduates from our universities with that degree are making. you will know whether it is worth taking out the loan for that job.

at least you have been informed by it. what drives quality and affordability in any industry? competition and transparency. we need more of that in higher education. no reason why students should not be able to acquire the equivalent of a bachelor's degree i being able to package -- by being able to package learning.eas of i have 10 years of work experience and i have gained proficiency in these matters that i can test into the equivalent of an ap exam. i filed a bill last week that creates a pilot program for the federal government to do what google does. hire people with alternative experience and education, which is cheaper and more accessible to people.

away from vocational education. do not walk away from what kids can learn in high school today. no reason why we cannot be training more airplanes mechanics, welders, these are growth industries. why we cannotason hire more people from high school, not just with a diploma, but with a job ready certification that allows them to go to work the day after graduation. i would also argue that community colleges can play a role in all of this. many of the higher-paying middle-class jobs are going to require more than high school, but less than a four year degree. when he to steer more people in that direction without stigmatizing -- we need to steer more people in that direction without stigmatizing. >> i reserve the right to ask the last question. we will finish on this.

our mission at the foundation is to develop, engage, and recognize exceptional leaders who champion the american idea. you have talked about the american idea, the american dream. one of the quotes from my dad , at he put in his book collection of his speeches, the most revolutionary idea in history is human progress and prosperity are the result of individual freedom and faith. this is not only the most revolutionary idea in history, it is the only one that has really worked. you have writing a little bit about ukraine recently. with everything happening, would youmind sharing with us how are encouraging our government and the president to approach ukraine, to address the issues that are there, with that premise that it is freedom and faith that is the undergirding --

>> lets her mind ourselves of why this matters -- let's remind ourselves of why this matter. these are principles that give our nation purpose. .ll men are created equal not all men born in the united states. this is a foundational belief of our country that we should express in every pronouncement that we make. whenever that is being challenged or oppressed in any part of the world, we need to speak out on behalf of those who are fighting for the freedom. the second point i would make, it if you look after world war ii, this explosion in the growth of a prosperous economy, look at south korea. they had an economy smaller than the north in the 1970's. today, it is a global donor. look at how japan recovered after world war ii. look at the history of some of the eastern european countries. look at latin america.

the point is, the expansion of individual liberties, combined with free enterprise, has created human prosperity on a global scale, which has allowed us to sell things to millions of people that, a generation ago, were living in poverty or oppression. if you look around the globe, what are the challenges that we face? middle east question mark eastern europe -- middle east, eastern europe, and in asia. every one of these points of conflict are being created by a totalitarian government. in the pacific region, it is north korea and china. in europe, it is russia. in the middle east, it it is iran and al qaeda. the point of the matter is oppressive governments view individuals as things they own,

statistics that have no value outside to what they contribute to the state. that is how they treat their neighbors and other countries around the world. that has to be confronted. if you do not confront tyranny, or it spreads. on earth capable of galvanizing international community to confront tyranny is the united states. we cannot do it by ourselves. we will not go to war in 15 different countries, but there are things we can do beyond that. ronald reagan never invaded the soviet union, and yet it came crumbling down. we should never accept a government that restricts access to the internet, jails political opponents, refuses to hold free and fair elections, does not allow the media to operate, and guns down people on the streets, we should never accept that as just another way of governing. we should always condemn it for what it is. the u.s. has to be a leader on that.

ukraine gives us an opportunity to do that, to say very clearly to say we're on the side of those who seek freedom and there will be consequences for a tyrannical government that invade its neighbors. those consequences do not have to be military consequences in order to be felt. we can eject them from the g-8 summit. in the long term to make europe more energy independent. these are real measures we can take that show the world that there is a real consequence. russia is not the only country on earth with territorial claims that are illegitimate. the chinese claim that a bunch of islands in the pacific belong to them. the filipinos and the japanese disagree. they're watching very closely what is happening in ukraine. what are the consequences and what is the price in the 21st

century of executing on illegitimate territorial claims? if the price is not too high, we may find ourselves with a similar territorial conflict in the pacific. there are, we actually have defense agreement with these countries. that sort of territorial crisis will make ukraine look like child's play. [applause] i want to thank google for facilitating this competition of ideas. thank you for coming, for your questions. please stay tuned to the foundation and senator, thank you for your leadership. god bless you and god bless your family, thank you for your service. have a great day. [applause]

>> wind is the fastest-growing source of electricity in the world. c-span, live from the floor of the u.s. senate, members are several hours into an online discussion on climate change. speaking now, senator tim kaine. nighter speaking on this come from states that have coal and that produce coal and virginia does. i want to talk about coal for a second. e.p.a. is expected to issue standards later this year about reducing pollution from coal-fired power plants, and in fact there is already talk on the other side of introducing a bill to reduce that -- repeal the regulations before the regulations even come out. i'm not exactly sure that's kosher, but i suspect we'll be having that debate later.

there is a natural anxiety in a coal-producing region like southwest virginia. that's where my wife's family is --and entered tim kaine senator tim kaine, several hours into an online discussion on climate change. this is the 35th all-night session in senate history and you can see it all live on c-span 2. pressay's white house briefing, secretary jay carney was asked about the session. climate change, senate democrats are having an all nighter to talk about the issue. does the white house support this? folks talking about an important issue you want on the radar. is there some expectation by the president that end of the talk

hot there will be some sort of a vote? -- talk, it will be some sort of a vote? >> we support the action taken to focus attention on the change andby climate the impacts of climate change is having on our environment and our emergency -- ability to respond to emergencies. we can and that we commend those who are participating because it is a very important subject. the president is concerned about it and has a climate action plan dedicating to addressing it. he has taken steps in his first term and his second term and will continue to take steps to both reduce our carbon emissions and to make sure we are more prepared for the effects and impacts of severe weather, which is a byproduct of climate

change. >> the original plan when they built the new capital in the 1970's was to tear down the historic capital. a fight ensued between politicians and the people of florida and there was a save the old capital campaign. when the call came out the architects planned to demolish the historic structure, but the citizen campaign to save the old capitol had prevailed and the two buildings are going to coexist in one complex. how exactly the historic capitol would be restored to was the debate. it was not whether we save it or not or what time period should .e restore it to all three branches of government were in this one building. the goal of the department of

state was to turn them into a museum and use it as a teaching tool. to come to this one site and see the supreme court, the governor's office, the house and senate chambers and understand the three branches of government really was the benefit. >> this weekend, we take a look at the history and literary life of tallahassee. saturday at noon eastern on c-span 2. the first meaning of a presidential panel created to help young people make better financial decisions. e on u.s.-afghan relations. we will re-air marco rubio's comments on economic growth. on the next washington journal, the aclu to discuss edward

snowden's appearance in austin, tesxas. take your calls about the budget proposal for the next fiscal year. is live on journal" c-span every day at 7:00 eastern. a presidential panel created to help young people become better money managers and better equipped to make financial decisions met for the first time on monday at the treasury department. speakers included education duncan, white house adviser valerie garrett. this is two hours. >> it is great to have you here with us for the first meeting of the new advisory council on national capability.

a warm welcome to the members of the council. we are grateful you have agreed to serve. the subject is a priority for the administration and we look forward to the work of this council with great interest. in a few minutes, we will your remarks from secretary lou, secretary duncan -- secretary lew, secretary duncan. let me make a couple of points about the work this council. the mission of this council follows from the work of the previous presidents advisory council. that counsel submitted a report to the president in which it is noted the importance of financial education for our resources, arrive at an public, state, local, and federal, to advance this agenda.

second, while the previous council worked on conceptualizing a path forward, this council will discuss and share experiences on the actual implementation of ideas. the members of this council are leaders in achieving results in this area, and we look forward to hearing from them on how to move the dial on youth financial capability. third, members of this council come from public and private actors and also have representation from the federal government and from local government. work on financial capability is a collective endeavor. bestdingly, we must do our to figure out how the public and private sectors and the federal, state, and local government can complement each other to achieve the results we would all like to see. and now, i'm honored to present to you,he