olishness, believe me. they have an exemplary record, a record of success. why not take advantage of that. ? host: hitter as a what is coming up on c-span. the >> here is a look at what is coming up on c-span. martin o'malley is speaking at a gala. >> the director of the national economic council discussed the obama administration agenda at breakfast hosted by "the christian science monitor." brian deese was also very to talk entry questions. this is the very -- very to talk

and take questions. this is about an hour. dave: thank you for coming. our guests are jeff zients and brian deese. zients is in maryland native graduated with honors from duke university. he joined been consulting and worked for -- bain consulting. our guest is a father of four and has undertaken a series of challenging government roles

including serving as chief performance officer and heading the offer dubbed tech s urge. brian deese spent time at the center for american progress and worked on the obama campaign and the transition team. at the age of 31 his first assignment after joining the white house staff was to help restructure general motors. and went on to serve as deputy director of the national economic council and management and budget. so what for biography, on to the mechanics. no live blogging or tweeting or filing while the breakfast is underway to give us time to listen to what the guests are saying. to help you resist the sulfate urge we will e-mail pictures to the reporters -- selfie

urge we will e-mail pictures to the reporters when the breakfast ends. we will start off by offering guests the opportunity to make starting comments and then we will move to questions from around the table. thank you for doing this, the floor is yours. jeff: thank you very much, it is a pleasure to be here at this event. i will be brief at the top so that we can spend most of the time on questions. i wanted to give you all a sense of how we are thinking about the state of affairs and how we find ourselves today. as we think about our position economically we are in a moment where we are seeing durable momentum in the economic recovery. and so one of our key questions

is how the executive branch can position itself to be nationally effective encouraging increased economic growth but also growth were benefits are broadly shared -- where benefits are broadly shared. since the election the president has had an explicit strategy around how to achieve that broad objective and it has consisted of trying to stay on offense trying to where you can -- push where he can do move through executive action. you saw that with immigration and cuba but also making mortgages more affordable through the fha taking on conflicts of interests that played retirement accounts to

help typical americans save more money for retirement -- plaug e retirement accounts to help typical americans save more for retirement. the other component of the strategies used to lay out a broad vision of what middle class economics means and how we as a country move in that direction. that was the true move that direction -- should move in that direction. i think the results of these two components is what you have seen over the past 10 weeks during this introductory. by the republican congress --. -- threeperiod by the republican

congress. you see them responding to things of the president is doing . we are looking for opportunities for we can work with congress to move the agenda but one of the things the president will do is be clear about what his vision is and where his priorities are and it is a question about whether the republican leadership can effectively govern and effectively move to places where they are working with democrats to get things done pragmatically speaking. so that is where we find ourselves in the current moment. let me just turn it over to jeff. jeff: i will fill in more detail on the economic front with the frame that brian just offered. the president said in the state of the union that 2014 was a milestone year for the economy and we are all for a good start

in 2050 last month -- off to a good start in 2015 last month. 20,000 new jobs, 12 straight months of more than 200,000 jobs the first time that has happened in almost 40 years. stepping back and thinking about our position in the global economy, it is quite strong. we continue to be the leader in innovation with research universities and a large percentage of world that and come out of the u.s. and the workforce is the most productive -- world patents come up with u.s. and the workforce is the most productive. a decade ago we would have talked about vulnerability with energy and now that is a new strength with manufacturers in the u.s. versus global competitors. as brian said there is more work to be done.

middle class economics is a big focus on wages, a decades-old problem of stagnant wages. you will continue to see executive action like the conflict of interest role that ryan talked about good -- brian talked about. we have 5 million job openings in the u.s. right now, 500,000 of those architect jobs -- those are tech jobs. they are important for innovation and they very well so we are working with private sector companies and mayors to take advantage of trading models like coding camps that can get people in jobs and 10 or 12 weeks instead of years. we will continue to execute on executive actions and do new executive actions. likely across the next couple of months there will be an update of the overtime rule which has not been updated in quite some time.

right now workers have to earn less than $23,000 to qualify for automatic overtime. that is obviously too low in this economy. the legislative front we will look at the intersection of middle-class economic and where we can get things done in bipartisan ways. the president is very committed to trade, trade agreements that are good for american workers. on business tax reform i believe there is a growing consensus that business tax reform is needed and that some of the revenue from business tax reform should be used to fund infrastructure. we have a significant deficit in infrastructure and this combination of reforming business tax code and funding infrastructure is a train that has growing bipartisan interest

and we want to capitalize on that if at all possible. the economy is solid, we have a strong global position. at the same time does more work to be done on executive actions and working together in a bipartisan way was -- there is more work to be done on executive actions and working together in a bipartisan way with congressho. st: -- congress. host: let me ask you about the biggest economic challenge you see the country facing. janet yellen said it really of that economic growth had "moderated somewhat," and the strong dollar was hurting export and keeping inflation too low. what keeps you up at night? jeff: i think that making sure that we are doing all we can on

the middle-class wage front is most important. as i said that is a decades-old problem and there are several levels -- levers we should. infrastructure -- should pull. infrastructure is good for the middle-class/ we have seen positive effort with states increasing minimum wage and we should do that across the board and congress should back a minimum wage. we should continue to, as i talked about earlier, invest in job training methods and programs that work and have well-paying jobs on the other end of the program. so that we are working with the private sector in partnership with local employers and local businesses and community colleges to ensure we are taking advantage of new training

methods and filling well-paying jobs on the other end. so we need to continue to address wages and make sure we have good middle-class opportunities. ho last thing for mest -- host: last thing for me. you said we would see more with that posture on executive actions and we have fracking roles today. what is left -- fracking rules today today. what is left on climate? jeff: -- brian: this is a place where we have a very aggressive agenda. most of the actions that we are pushing for our actions that we can move forward on through the executive space. so the short answer to your

question is yes. yesterday we announced a goal in the president executive action to reduce greenhouse emissions from the federal government by 70% and there are a whole host of actions associated with that. today we are releasing new standards for fracking on federal lands but if you look forward, court to the agenda is -- core to the agenda is reducing emissions from the private sector and that has been proposed and then we will implement that. we have an opportunity in the international space to leverage what we are doing domestically into a viable global agreement. the on to that, in the area of methane or energy -- beyond., in the area of methane or energy efficiency, we have a lot more to do to tighten down on energy

waste and pollution but also provide long-term incentives to investment in that space. host: will you be doing that by burning the constitution? jeff: this follows legal precepts not only of the clean air act but other environmental laws ar.if you look at the clean power plan which is what you are obliquely referencing, this is a role that at its core is based on providing flexibility to states. the structure of the law, the clean air act and the structure of the rule, is about setting targets and giving states broad flexibility to achieve that. what you have seen outside of washington is broad interest in red states and blue states

around how to the pragmatic about creating plans that will work for those state. -- how to be pragmatic about creating plans that will work for those states. host: ron by the power outlet. ron: some questions for you guys. there has been a lot of attention on capitol hill on that new probably, -- that the quality -- that the policy, arguing that the white -- net neutrality arguing that the white house interfered. can you comment, did you interfere with the fcc process? brian: the president made his is known through the appropriate channels including a video that

was publicly released. fcc independent and the president's views known through legal channels. ron: over the course of the last year congress as owner e-mails that point out a fact that you have met with the chairman repeatedly some files from the beginning of november. in which the white house expressed concerns . we are saying that for months the fcc was pressured. brian: i was referring to legal channels for the president to express his views. in terms of meeting with wheeler, i do that periodically on a wide range of issues, net neutrality being one of them. ron: can you sketch out for us over the next several months you guys will be doing on tech and telecom? brian: we will continue to implement initiatives like that

higher -- tech hire. we started out with partnerships with cities and rural areas with lawyers to fill the half-million jobs and take advantage of the models. we will continue to execute existing executive actions like private and public partnerships in hiring and rollout new executive actions and i will not get ahead of those. mike: on the trade agenda, you said that the president is very committed to the trade promotion authority. and you talked about that. can you give me some sense of specifically what the president is going to be doing and when he is going to be doing it and what portion of his time he is going to be spending on this one that

comes up? -- when that comes up? what commitments have you made to do tangible things? will he be too worried around the -- be topuring= [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] -- touring around the country and making that the focus of remarks or is this something he will lead to cabinet members and make the occasional remark in speeches focused on other things? visit washington focused versus public focused? -- is this washington focused versus public focused? and briefly, r.i.m you talked about is there will be room for rules on energy efficiency and methane. can you give me a better sense of what that is? pipeline rules are more than that? -- or more than that? brian: as i said before, the

president is committed to trade and that is his top legislative priority. you see that in the state of the union, a full throated argument in favor of trade agreements good for american workers. the actually did a weekly of -- he actually did a weekly address on trade agreements. he is spending time with members from the house and senate. it is also an all caps of effort. -- all cabinet effort. secretary lou was in miami yesterday on trade. the cabinet is spending time in washington and out talking about the benefits of trade. most importantly are the

frontlines of negotiations so this is a priority of the presidents and therefore a priority of all of us who work for the president including his cabinet. there is an all out effort to make sure there is a full understanding of the benefits to the american worker of strong free-trade agreements. jeff: on your second question, with respect to methane, we have announced a goal of reducing methane emissions by 40% to 45%. the way we will do that is still a combination of regulatory action and voluntary action. on the regulatory side this includes measures like the epa proposing rules for new sources on methane which is something that we anticipate will come forward your in the next several

-- here in the next several months. on the voluntary side of this includes work through for example the usda was working with the agricultural industry to get a voluntary agreement to reduce emissions from the sector . in the efficiency context, part of what the president did in the action plan was set bold overall goals to reduce energy waste and increase energy efficiency. the department of energy has a cadence of rulemakings to increase standards in buildings appliances, and otherwise. you can expect that cadence to continue over the next two years. this is a place we are looking to partner with the private sector because the truth is that by providing the right incentives this is a place where there is huge opportunity. i was with the president in a huge who -- and a who's who of

the fortune 500 yesterday when the white house made the announcement and you have everywhere from ge to hewlett-packard that only committing to work as contractors for the federal government but also setting greenhouse gas reduction plans and a lot of that is driven on the fact that it is low hanging fruit, short payoffs, two or three or four year returns. this is a place where by being smart was how we partner we can leverage impact substantially. reporter: you talked about offense through executive actions i was hoping you could give us some insight on how the executive actions come together. do you get the playbook on the offense? some of these like the greenhouse gas omissions are big executive order's, other things

may be smaller bore regulations package together by the white house to give it more impact. in the fourth quarter of the clinton administration, there modesta. was project -- there was project modesta. is there a project dese, or project zients? jeff: there is a project zients, but i told you about it, i would have to kill you all. so it is a good question. and part of this comes from leadership and direction from the top, and part of the tone of that the president said. -- set. many of you have heard this directly from him, but coming off the election and over the last couple of months was, you know, we are in the fourth

quarter. a lot of games get set in the fourth quarter. that has resonated with me as a patriots fan. we need to be creative and stay at the effort to look for every reasonable and creative way to leverage the assets that we have to help make progress on these broad middle-class economic themes. so in practice the way that gets manifested is you have the white house policy council, one of which jeff leads, and the domestic policy council. it is a collaborative effort working with agencies trying to identify if there places where we have not thought as creatively as we could. some of that is on rulemaking. the regulatory space. but some of it is on partnership. finding new ways to partner. and finding ways to -- the word bully pulpit is often thrown around, but this is also a

thinking very concretely and hardheaded on how to use of platforms that the president and also the first lady have to drive progress. also this is a wide-ranging effort, and one that frankly the energy and enthusiasm around it is largely coming from the president himself. jeff: let me add a little to that. i agree with everything brian said. there is a clear message from the president to his old team -- whole team and his cabinet. in the fourth quarter, get as much done as we can. getting stuff done falls into two broad categories when it comes to executive action. one is what we have already announced and executing against those initiatives. on monday and tuesday, we are holding sweat usa over at the national harbor. the president will be addressing a crowd of about 2500 including

over 1200 overseas investors. this is about having companies pick the u.s. for their investments. this effort happen several years ago at commerce, and has now grown to the scale and has real results in facilitating investments in the u.s. so constant execution against executive actions that have already been announced is as important, if not more important, as new executive action. so we will continue to roll out new executive action, but the president is holding us to account on strong execution of executive actions that have been announced over the past several years. kevin: [indiscernible] a couple of questions for each of you. one or two for each. fast-moving questions. for jeff, the labor department

overtime standard. there has been some grumbling that the number you are looking at is not as big a number as the labor advocates would like. let's talk about what you are waiting against. i know you don't want to get out of it but what the trade-off you're looking at. i will save the tougher one for brian. one on autos. you were deeply involved in that, a great front page story in "the wall street journal" this week on mexico and the trade pacts. i would is winning new plants. -- how it is winning new plants. what can be done short of tba, what other practical steps could help to bring these auto plants that are going to mexico, or elsewhere, back. and then on energy, of what potential in exports. do you think exports would create artificial shortages, or do you think oil export i need -- are needed. jeff: i'm not getting in the specifics of the world.

at -- specifics of the rule. as i said it will come out in , the next few months. it is $23,000 for and salary workers. we think there is an opportunity to make a significant change there that will help many workers earn what they deserve. reporter: there's a trade-off in everything you do. . -- what are some of the things that you are waiting? -- weighing? jeff: i want to make sure workers are earning what they deserve. at the same time, that we continue to have a competitive economy, in what is increasingly a global economy. the level is so outdated at this point, there is an opportunity to move significantly. brian: just briefly, on your two . i think reflecting on the american auto industry, it is really striking to me where the industry is today, given where we were in the winter and spring

of 2009. even the optimist at that even back optimist -- optimists at that time weren't projecting either the pace at which job growth would return to the domestic auto industry or the pace at which the overall industry would recover. the second thing that people were not projecting, which probably goes to the competitive question you raised, is that in the last couple of years, we've seen something striking which is that the detroit three have actually gained market share. against their foreign competitors in the united states. so, the up swing is not simply that we're back selling, you know, a little north of 16 million cars a year, when we were, when we bottomed out at just over nine million.

it's also that these companies are finding ways to actually out-compete and take market share from their foreign competitors, which was something that was absolutely not -- which was something that was absolutely not conventional wisdom or prevailing wisdom and instead was a sort of slow march of losing market share for the american companies. i think the question going forward about how to keep the united states a competitive location for domestic manufacturing investment is broader than the auto industry alone. and it's an issue that we spend a lot of time on. we are seeing trends both in health care and energy and otherwise that have really helped change the game in terms of the competitive posture for manufacturing domestically. i think that there's more that we can do. jeff mentioned select u.s.a. on monday. it's an incredible event and initiative where we are bringing foreign investment to choose the united states.

there's also more that we can do, and usgr has been aggressive in enforcing trade agreements, which is an issue that's important in the auto space. i think that continued vigilance on the enforcement side is important as well. just very briefly on the energy side, we have not changed the longstanding policy with respect to crude oil exports. the changes we've seen in the industry over the past several years, increase in production, changes within the industry itself, raise a number of questions about where the industry is overall. and we are looking at that and monitoring the industry constantly. but we don't have a change of policy with respect to that. and don't have anything else on that. jeff: to add a little data to the position we have in the global economy, due to these strategic innovations we have.

productivity in our work force and now energy. we're the number one place to invest, when you poll global c.e.o.'s. and more than half of c.e.o.'s of manufacturing companies are looking to bring facilities or locate facilities here in the u.s. so that's part of why you have such strong interests in select u.s.a. next week. questioner: could you talk a little bit about the fiscal issues? it was clear this week from congress is that there are deep divisions in the republican party and there's a lot of chafing beneath the budget control act caps on the defensive side but also on the domestic side. when people talk about a ryan-murray type deal, there's no patty murray, anymore. it's the white house. the white house is the democratic side. what are you doing to try to drive the republicans to the table before there's a crisis at

the end of the year? and what are the prospects of some kind of settlement that would get the president his higher caps and satisfy the republicans on their deficit reduction? brian: there still is a patty murray. she's still a force to be reckoned with. i think overall on the fiscal side, and then to the specifics of the, you know, of the discretionary issues that you're raising, our hope, as we were moving into this budget season was that the changes that we've seen in the economy and in our fiscal position would actually help move us beyond the fiscal -- the old fiscal debates of the last several years. part of what we were trying to do in our budget was acknowledge

that our fiscal situation and our economic situation have changed in important ways. both in the near term, in terms of the rapid fiscal consolidation and deficit reduction we've seen, but also in the medium term, largely around the reduction in the rate of growth of health care costs continuing to step down, baseline estimates of deficits in the future. that's not to say that long-term fiscal challenges have been solved. but we are in a different position. unfortunately what we saw with the republican budget, what we saw was largely the same approach, prioritizing deficit reduction over shared growth starting principally with tax cuts aimed at wealthier americans and then forcing very deep cuts in order to pay for those and hit the fiscal objectives. one of the things that's interesting in that context is this debate that's occurred around discretionary levels in

particular. i think that the thing that we can do to most helpfully encourage the kind of deal that would be good for the economy and good for our national security is be very clear, both about where the president stands, and about how you could get from here to there. and so one of the reasons why, if you go back and look when the president announced his budget he was very clear when he went out and he said two things. he said, i will not accept a budget that locks in sequester going forward. and i will not accept breaking the linkage that was enshrined in the bipartisan murray-ryan agreement between our national security and our economic security. he laid that as predicate and then put forward a budget that shows very concretely both how you could raise those caps and how you could pay for them. quite explicitly. it's all in there. we do not ascribe to the

check -- chuck grassley theory that the right way to do budgets is to have very little wording there. i think that's the thing we can do to be most constructive. as you say, the republicans have a choice. we have done this now several times. they know where this play ends. and there is bipartisan support for coming together, recognizing that we can absolutely afford to invest in our economic security, invest in our national security, pay for it over the long-term, and we would be better off both economically and politically if we could get an agreement on that sooner rather than engage in a whole bunch of brinksmanship where we know where that ends up. so i think what we can do is be clear, be specific. and have the president drawing those lines, not as a way of fomenting partisanship but as a way of trying to clearly

indicate a path that, just to be clear, there are lots of republicans who support that path, just as there are lots of democrats. jeff: let me say one word about economy. if you look back across the last year or so, where we've had strong growth, it's been helped by the absence of brinksmanship, self-inflicted wounds, fiscal drama. in fact, if you plot consumer confidence or business confidence, the dips have generally been around things like government shutdown, so we hope, for the sake of the economy and the american businesses and american workers, that congress has learned that lesson. and that under no situation do we head toward another self-inflicted wound on the economy. questioner: who do you think are your negotiating partners and are you reaching out already to

them? brian: i think that republicans introduced their budget this week. the committee process yesterday, they're going to go through next week. and we have to see how that all plays itself out. there is still an open question, as you said, this debate within the republican party about whether they are actually going to fund defense at levels that are uniform military service would be devastating to our national security priorities. and so i think we need to see how that plays out over the course of the next week. we are and have been, over the course of the last several weeks, engaged with members of congress, republicans and democrats, largely in that context around our budget and our budget proposal. but part of that was associated with what i was talking about before, which is wanting to make sure that people fully understand the approach that we're taking, and how we think

we could find areas of compromise. questioner: i have a two-part question. the s.g.r. agreement that the house leaders are about to release. is this the framework you can live with or do you have any major concerns with? second question is, i'm curious what you make of the social security aspect in the house republican budget, it prohibits the reallocation of the disability fund to the retirement fund. is that something could you support on any level? if not, how do you believe this should be fixed, when it dips into the red next year? brian: on the first, as you say, it's about to be released and we haven't seen the details. so we're -- we'll be better positioned to make an assessment once we've had a chance to do that. i think that as some of you know, but in our budget we laid

out a proposal for a permanent s.g.r. fix. and have a number of proposals in that space in our budget. that's something that the president has been supportive of for several years. including doing it in a fiscally responsible way. but with respect to the details of this particular agreement, i think we really need to see what they are before we have a better sense of where we land. your second question, social security. so, the house provision was unconstructive and at odds with how this issue has been addressed time and time again in a bipartisan manner. and we continue to believe that the right way to address this issue is consistent with what we

proposed. and that we have always said, as many of you around this table know and have been reporting on for years, we have always said that we're open to having a conversation about social security reform more broadly. we have laid out a set of principles that would be important in the context of that conversation. but it is just not tenable to walk away from what has been a very clear, bipartisan approach to addressing the issue. so in terms of answering your question concretely, that's how we think this is going to need to get done. questioner: \[inaudible] it's an internal debate among republicans. do you actually expect to play a role in the crafting of a

republican budget? it seems at moment your fingerprints appear on it, it loses republican support. i'm curious whether the strategy that you're employing in this aggressive way that the president is talking about the economy and you're talking about your side of the budget, is more designed to set the predicate for vetoes that will come if and when legislation that's crafted out of the republican budget comes your way. brian: i think we're going to need to let this process play out a bit to know exactly -- it's impossible to project forward on exactly how the mechanics will go. from our perspective, our goal is absolutely to get to an agreement that reflects the principles we've laid out. we've laid out a menu of

policies that would enable you to get there. and there is bipartisan support to lift the defense caps, lift the nondefense caps and pay for it over 10 years. that's a blueprint where there's bipartisan support. so our hope, and our objective is for congress to come together around an agreement of that basic form and put it in place before we have to get into a situation where we're into brinksmanship, as jeff noted. and again, hard for me to say exactly how that process might unfold, let's get through and see where the republican budget resolutions actually land. but i think that there's -- our posture is one of trying to encourage good faith conversations, good faith

efforts to the there. -- to get there. and that's part of why we're trying to be clear, is to facilitate that sort of thing. the one thing that i would add is that the murray-ryan structure, this basic structure of lifting the caps on both sides, paying for it over a decade, is one that was both good economically, took off the table this constant set of brinksmanship, but was also -- worked politically. and there's a question out there that i think the republican leadership has to grapple with around do they look to find areas where there are areas of bipartisan agreement and move to those in the first instance rather than getting backed into them? and, you know, on the d.h.s. funding side, you saw the instance of them getting backed into an outcome where sort of knew where that story was also

going to end. i think there's a question in the budget context of whether we can get to that outcome on the front end, which would be, i think, better politically, but also most importantly it would be better economically. questioner: if the domestic caps are lifted, do you still have a problem with using -- kind of boosting the overseas contingencies operations funding to cover defense spending? brian: what i find interesting about the overseas contingency operation is that it's traditionally republicans who have had a problem with this and have, i think, rightly referred to the inappropriate use of it as a slush fund. i think that one of the things that's important to understand with respect to funding for defense, is that providing some certainty, forward certainty, is

vital to them being able to prepare to execute missions. so part of why when you hear the chairman of the joint chiefs or secretary of defense describe why it's not a viable solution is because it creates constant annual uncertainty around funding levels. so we don't think that that is an appropriate approach or that it solves the problem. and i frankly think that, as you've seen from the war, as lindsey graham called it between republicans, there is a lot of discomfort on the republican side around using it as a mechanism as well. questioner: you used the phrase cadence of rulemaking.

i wanted to ask about that in regard to the overtime rules. it's been a year since the president called for those. every time i check with the labor department, they push off the target date. some month into the future. why is it taking so long and in the fourth quarter do you need to pick up the cadence a little bit? jeff: we're a few months away from getting that out the door and that will leave plenty of time to fully implement the rule. questioner: why is it taking so long? jeff: you need the appropriate analysis to set the level and once the proposed rule is ready, it will be announced and that will be within the next few months. questioner: i wanted to ask you about the rulemaking on existing coal fire plants. can you describe what the practical implications might be from the administration's

vantage point to his efforts to enlist the help of governors to do that? to tie things up legally? and can you also describe your political analysis of it, is it smart politics for republicans to take a stand? brian: i think this is another example of the president leading, the president setting clear objectives and pushing the policy agenda and republicans being in a responsive, defensive posture. the truth of this rule is that as i mentioned before, this rule is grounded in providing states flexibility to craft their own plans. and the environmental protection agency is working in a bipartisan, pragmatic way at the state level to help states understand the options and the opportunities. and this rule is not even a final rule.

this rule is in the proposed stage. and they are working through that process. and you're seeing, across the country, very constructive and pragmatic efforts in states across the country. in fact, just yesterday the national governors association announced a convening of their authority, a convening of their tools to try to work with states and do workshops to help states understand how they can work within this rule, how they can comply with this rule. if you look at the states that are leading that effort, again they are red states an blue -- and blue states and a part of this is a because there is incredible economic opportunity that states understand in driving the clean energy economy in these states. i think that, you know, from -- you know, so what you have is

you have a republican leader in mitch mcconnell who is going way outside the bounds of his -- the position that he was elected to. and i think that we all would be better served if he and others spent less time trying to lecture states about what they should be doing, when they themselves are focused on looking at how they can operate in their own best interest and more time trying to actually get some constructive things done in congress. like, for example, we could confirm a highly qualified attorney general nominee who has been sitting out there for more than 130 days. we're going to keep working on this exactly as we have. and i think that that's going to be the path forward on this one. questioner: your assessment is

for the republican party, it is smart politics or not? brian: i think that addressing climate change and putting the united states on the forefront of a clean energy economy is good substance, first and foremost, because it's taking on one of the most important issues of our generation. and i think increasingly it is good politics as well. because, you know, states should be given the flexibility to decide how they want to craft plans to have cleaner air and cleaner water for their kids. and address the fact that, you know, that climate change affects how exposed kids are to asthma and has other important effects. i think as the president said last week, when he was doing an interview with vice, eventually

the republican party is going to have to change their position on this issue because the public opinion is moving on it. the posture of climate denial is one that is increasingly not acceptable because it is so at odds with the science. i think that most importantly this is a very important issue for our economy and for the health of our country and we're going to keep pushing forward because of that. >> we've got only about 2 1/2 minutes left. there are seven people waiting. not everyone's going to get a question because i want to keep my deal with jen and end on time. michael warren, last question. questioner: how do more restrictive rules on hydraulic fracturing help economic growth? brian: we believe that in order to have a durable industry in

the future, you need to strike an appropriate balance between protecting public health and safety. and allowing for responsible production. i think if you look at the rules that we will -- that the department of interior will put out later today, they appropriately strike that balance. and they are focused on pragmatic but very important steps like disclosing the fluids that are being used in the fracking process. that is a step that is very important for from a transparency perspective, from a public safety perspective, but it also is important in terms of having a template that this industry can work from, given the degree of public concern and

localized concern about the potential health and safety impacts. the last thing i would say about this is that these are rules for fracking on public lands. about 11% of the fracking that goes on in this country happens on public lands. this is the portion of this issue that we the federal government have an obligation to set rules of the road for. but ultimately this is an issue that is going to be decided in state capitols and localities, as well as with the industry. we feel comfortable that what we put out today reflects an approach to our obligation, to balance those issues. but one of the things we're going it see going forward is a conversation that will play out across the country about where to strike that balance.

>> i want to thank both of you for doing this. i want to apologize to my colleagues for not getting everyone in. hope you come back. thanks for doing it. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> taking a live to davenport iowa. we will you remarks from martin o'malley at the data-driven -- scott county democratic meeting.

we will hear those remarks right now. >> former scott county attorney bill davis, former representatives frank woods, and former alderman, sheila burmeister and former alderman and -- anne clark and it reads reynolds are here [applause] tonight. [applause] and tom eagleman. a lot of electives -- electeds here tonight. thank you. as i said earlier, my name is tom hart i am the new chair of

the scott county democratic party and i have been doing this for two weeks. [applause] i am proof of what is old is new again. [laughter] [applause] so i gave this a lot of thought before committing to this, i have been active in the democratic party for over 50 years. i am 61 years old. my neighbor sandy --, home -- whom i am sure many of you know, recruited me and my siblings to come to democratic headquarters to help. i think my mother was glad, even though she was a republican, she was glad to have us get out of

the house and do something productive. sandy told me i needed to work on my handwriting because the envelopes i was addressing were not clear. but i was intrigued by the democratic headquarters and really never stopped going back. that was in the 1960's. many years later as i am reflecting, what does the democratic party mean to me and why what i do something like take on the position of chair? i thought about that and going back over 50 years, and you look at the current time and what it means to be a democrat.

just look at 2015. we had lower turnout in this county of democrats plan we have had -- than we have had historically. that is a problem. all throughout iowa, but especially in this county, we want to change that. we want to build the coalitions. but to see the difference that it made -- makes, i was requesting on my life -- reflecting on my life. i saw a number of students here earlier, if you can stand up in the corner. [applause]

so there are many of us where our education has been such an important part of our life. the children of this community it is so important. about two weeks ago, there was a report that came out that talked about the poverty in this community. in this county, one out of every five children is in poverty and our neighboring county, rock island county, it is one in four children. the only way to break that cycle is through education. [applause] so, on reflecting why am i a democrat, what does this mean to

me? that issue alone is why i am a democrat and what this party means to me. it is the democrats in des moines, we have the senate barely, by one seat, but they are making the difference. the republicans are saying education is 1.25% growth this year, that doesn't even come close to covering the cost of living and it is our democratic legislators that are here tonight that are leading the fight to up the funding for education. it is our values that they are standing up for, they understand to break that cycle, to help the most vulnerable of this society here in this county, throughout

iowa, we need to have education funded. so that is why we are democrats, that is why we are proud our legislators are sticking up for the most vulnerable, and that is why a number of us that are saying we are going to rebuild this coalition, we are going to carry this fight. it is unacceptable to us that 20% in this county, 25% in the neighboring county, are in poverty. we are going to change that. [applause] so, in part of that coalition building, our first speaker tonight is the no -- dino

neoley. he is president of the -- of labor. his -- he has a dedicated his life to changing to the democratic principles. on -- come on up, data. the most flattering thing i know about dino is that he had the smarts to marry a polish girl from chicago. [applause] dino: thank you. good evening. first of all, i want to say congratulations to the new scott county chair tom hart. [applause]

dino: also congrats to the new vice chairs. [applause] and one another round of congratulations, to all the precinct committee people who have reinvented and reinvigorated the party. [applause] we look forward to a renewed relationship with democrats. we were all -- filled by activists, workers and their families are given a real opportunities to prosper, not like false gimmicks promoted by the republicans, such as it right to work. we demand right to prosper. we all work, we all have to work , we are the working class, but we should demand the right to profit from our efforts.

not just enrich the banks or wall street. we look for to working together for the concerns of the people -- or the concerns of the people trump the power of money that has been drowning our voices. organized labor is seeking policy makers whose first thought, whether they serve on local boards or in congress, is what can i do today that will make my community a place where work is respected and where raising a family is prioritized with all necessary immunity support, like good schools and parks. where retirees can live out: years with dignity. -- can live out golden years with dignity. [applause] i want to recognize special

guests in the audience, i know tom has done so, but this month in davenport school superintendent made it national news, when he decided to defy i waste outlaw -- iowa state law and use the reserve fund to reverse devastating cuts. [applause] [applause] you know, it doesn't come easy. after several years of cuts and concessions, and order to make a shrieking budget work, he had to make a tough choice between students and community and right-wing ideology.

this was a bold move by a brave man. but superintendent tate could not have acted without the support from his board of education and from active parents who said, enough. my child is not worthless [applause] . -- my child is not worthless. [applause] again, please stand up board members, parents students please stand. your work is our pride and we stand beside you. [applause] together together, organized labor and scott county democrats will build power for change. thank you.

tom: thank you, dino. before i get to our next guest i want to thank those -- especially thank those that put this together tonight. in quick order i am interrupting john, but john i would like you to -- [applause] bev stray hall -- bev strayhall who has taken care of all of the national press that is here. and audrey who has put countless hours into this. thank you for all of your help on this.

it is my pleasure to introduce dr. andy mcguire who is the new chair of the iowa democratic party. [applause] and he is a native of waterloo iowa. she is a medical doctor, a health care executive for more than 20 years. i got to know her in the department of economic development, years ago when she served on an innovation counsel and also when she was a candidate for lieutenant governor in 2006. she is the mother of seven children, impressive. 18 years old-28 years old. she has a little more seniority and man i do. she was elected january 17

chair. in the two months that she has been chair, she has already been to over 20 events and is traveling this state and going to be -- going to lead us to a new invigorated iowa democratic party. andy please. [applause] andy: thank you. what a great group. and a great chair. can we give him another round? [applause] i tell you, when i come to a group like this, can you feel the energy? are you proud, are you proud to be democrats? [applause] that is exactly what i see all over the state. tom told you about me i am from

waterloo. i have been here a lot of times, i have a lot of friends that i have seen and a lot of new friends i made tonight. i will tell you about democrats i love what you said. when i talk to democrats and when i went all over the state democrats never said i need this. or i need that. you know what they said? my community needs this. the person who is less fortunate than i am, needs this. my neighbor needs something. that is what democrats are about. that is what i learned all over iowa. that is a reason why i jumped into this office with both feet. it means all of us care about our communities and are proud democrats. [applause] so, we had an election, in november and it was not our best election. i only bring it up because it had an effect on me.

i saw that math and it was -- a versus bruce bailey and it was a sea of red, with little patches of blue. i have been in iowa my whole life and that is not iowa. iowa is a progressive place that cares about neighbors. it is a blue state. so my charge is to turn it blue in 2016, with your help. that is why i am so excited to have democrats in here all this excitement. you are the people that do it. you are the people that make this happen. i can stand up here all i want, but you are the ones who do it. i want to talk about a couple things and i will let you on to the next person. messaging. it is so important. we are about working people, about equality, about education

and the priority of education and making sure we are funding education. that is what we are about. and our neighbors. we are about working people, a living wage, and also about telling a story. it is one thing to say minimum wage, but it is another to tell a story about someone who does everything right, they are working two jobs working their tail off following rules, and they can't pay rent and pay for food. that is not right in this country. we have to tell those stories and tell about neighbors and why we need a living wage. that is what we need to talk about. that messaging did not happen in 2014. they didn't hear our message. happened, we don't have to change our message. it is a great message. part of my job is to make sure that everybody, with your help, here's that message -- hears

that message. we care about each other. and we are going to make this state blue and 2016. [applause] tom alluded to it, i am trying to go everywhere in iowa. it is a bigger state then i realized. i am in sheldon tomorrow, that is seven hours from here. it wasn't not the best planning, but that is what i need to do. i will not have one account the in iowa where we are not talking about democrats. we are not going to do just certain places. we are going to do sioux city, waterloo everywhere in iowa, because if we want to win, we have to be in all 99 counties. we have to pull with our partners. we need to make sure that everyone who shares our values are pulling together. the last thing, we have to be not top-down. i have heard that clearly across

iowa. we have to be bottom-up. we have be grassroots, get people our school board people aldermen, all of -- all the way up to the top. that is how we build it back. that is why i am here tonight. that got for all of the people who make the cookies for the volunteers, do the calling, you were the people that make it happen. thank you for being proud democrats. [applause] tom: next, i want to introduce our congressman. he really does not need an introduction. this is his -- is this his fifth term? it doesn't seem that long. when it comes to congress, and

are academic, he is extremely impressive. my mother told my wife years ago, tom is an a-f student. if he is interested in it, he gets an a. if he is not interested in it, he could care less. i never had congressman -- the converse men as a professor, but if i had i know i would have gotten an "a." i give to you this evening, the only them at craddick member of congress -- democratic member of congress from iowa. our congressman dave lobzak. [applause]

congressman: thank you. what a crowd. thank you, i really appreciate it. i will spend a lot of my time thinking people. i think that is really important for me to do. as everyone said, it was an incredible tough -- and credibly tough election last time. i thought that it really couldn't be worse than 2010. i thought that, we all like to be right, in this case it was really unfortunate that i was wrong. it was tougher than 2010. things are going to be better in a presidential year, there is no question. but that is going to be -- a lot of it is going to be in our own hands. it will be about the things that

we decide to do, from grassroots on up. doing all the work that we need to do for the great candidate next time around. and i have to tell you, the first person i need to thank and you all know what i will say here, because he has been with me for many years, this year in june on that special day, it will be 20 years. i don't want to see any of you, i want to see my wife terri. no offense folks. [applause] i get around a lot, you know that. i have 24 counties and i spent a lot of time on the road. andy mcguire is putting me to shame. she did tell me she had an acronym, she thought she would stop me on a those counties. i know what they are, because i grew up in sioux city. she is going to sue county,

o'brien county, and that is way up there in the north part of the state. and it sue county is not particularly friendly, we are lucky if we get 10-15% of the vote up there. that is a great credit to her that she will go to all those places. in the end, when we run this statewide race for president and for senate, this time around, it doesn't matter whether we win a particular county or not, the total vote is what counts when this is all over. we need to maximize each precinct that we can. that is what it is about. thank you, andy. i need to thank, of course are -- our new county chair, tom. i am really happy that i will get to know him better. thanks to so many people in this

room, i won scott county last time. thank you. [applause] the bad news is, only won by about 200 votes. i would like to win it by a little more this time. if that is possible, i know it is. it is possible. but tom is going to be a great chair, no question about that. he has a lot of a great support. people are fired up, this is a huge crowd. this is absolutely amazing. i didn't know what to expect. i said something to henry earlier, oh, we might get 75. but he said we would get a lot more. this is amazing. it says something about the injury. this -- inergy. by the way, this is not just scott county. we have muscatine county. a lot of places that are not scott county.

it is amazing we have so many folks tonight, not just from scott county, but from neighboring counties. it is early in the process, only march 20, but as far as i am concerned it is never too early to start organizing, getting the message out getting folks fired up to make sure that we went the presidency -- win the presidency. i want to thank the labor folks who are here. there is a special place in my heart for labor folks. i am in my heart a member of the teachers --, all the great work that you do, thank you for being here. it is about partnerships, about a lot of groups coming together, so i thank you for being here in a thank all of the folks who are here. i want to shout out to the superintendent. it takes a lot of guts to do what he is doing. terry was a teacher for a while

it is not easy to do what he is doing. education is near and dear to our hearts. i know for a fact, given how i grew up, and i was up in sioux city just a week ago, and i showed my wife and couple places where lived that are not there any longer. i know how important education is. i would not be here today, truly, if it worked for my own hard work -- if it were not for my own hard work and the education i received. i would like to say that i took a tour of the educational system in fourth grade, i went to three different elementary schools in the fourth grade, not because i wanted to, but because my mother was a single parent and we got moved around a lot. but i got a great education and in those public schools, sorry hawkeye fans, i went to iowa

state. too bad they did not do better yesterday. the hawks are winning, i believe. but i got a great education at iowa state. you all know you and i that it is a great teaching school. we have great education in this state. so, what we have to do the e -- what do we have to do? we have to keep focusing on the issues that andy talked about the middle class, about making sure that those who fell out of the middle class in this most recent economic downturn -- yeah, we are doing better, but we can do even better. there is no question about that. we need to do better. we can improve the lot of the middle class, get those folks who fell out of the middle class back in. and we can do that -- into the

kinds of things for folks, like me growing up, to make sure that they are willing to take responsibility for themselves and that they can pull themselves up and get into the middle class with a those financial aid programs that i took advantage of when i went to iowa state university. so, we can do it. we can also make sure that our seniors who were in the middle class because of social security and medicare, the two greatest anti-poverty programs, can you agree with me about that? [applause] we have to make sure. we can never privatized social security, we can never voucherize medicare. we can't do that. now, the last couple of points. we have a lot of choices for us in congress, but they are pretty

stark choices. they are choices between the values, the policies, the things we stand for as democrats. and what republicans stand for they have a budget in the house of representatives. and we know what they stand for. it is just the opposite. they are talking about taking money out of the pockets of those who can't afford it, who are just trying to get by, and giving those breaks to those who don't need it. they are talking about privatizing social security and giving vouchers to social security, those are things that none of us in this room want and americans don't want. it is a struggle. it will be a struggle the next year and a half. i don't like the fact that i am the only democrat from iowa in the u.s. congress. i need help. i need more people from iowa. all right?

we can do it. [applause] there is no question. it is lonely. after the election, terry and i we saw this bald eagle in a tree and she took a picture of it and said, that is going to be in congress. you will be up there all by yourself. and i am. but that is all right. we can get things done, we just have to do what the american people want us to do, not followed what the radical right wing of their public and party in the house of representatives are trying to do. we can do it. [applause] it is not that hard, it is not that complicated. so we have someone here tonight that will speak to you now. he has done this in maryland. he also saw how important the iowa caucuses are. he has been here many times.

that is why he didn't come and sit at the head table until he spoke to as many of you as possible. i told him about that before he came. this is how it works in iowa. of course, i have only met him a few times. so he hasn't talked to me the obligatory 7-10 times. but that is what you have to do if you are in iowa. we will have a lot of great candidates, i think. we have a number already. i don't know who is actually committed to the process yet but anyway. but martin o'malley he takes it seriously. i have seen him a number of times and he was a great governor of maryland. he is a social progressive. and he also managed to fix their fiscal house and put it in order, but without taking it out of the hide of those who cannot afford it. ok? we don't have to make those

kinds of choices. [applause] we can do what we need to do to move this country forward, the best way to do it is to make sure we make investments in our people, whether it is folks from iowa, maryland, or other folks around the country. that is what we will need as our next nominee, no matter who it in that being. all i know is that governor o'malley has done the right things for maryland. please give him a big round of applause and a big iowa welcome. thank you all. [applause] ♪ martin o'malley: thank you. let's give it up for dave. [applause] my goodness, thank you very much

congressman. think you for your kindness and generosity and your leadership. i want to thank everyone for being here. and thank you for propelling scott county to the future. i understand there is a big game tonight. go hawks. [applause] so, i ask you to please refrain from shouting out scores, but feel free to do it in another 18 minutes. again, congressman thank you for your introduction and your perseverance and your leadership. congratulations on your victory in a really tough year. we are lucky to have your leadership in washington and we are blessed by it. you will, i have no doubt, sit in some more company from the

great state of iowa in congress. [applause] i want to congratulate >> i want to congratulate you on your selection of tom hart. he said it is not an affliction, it is our steel. we look forward to your leadership. thank you to the democrats for the invitation to be with all of you tonight. dr. maguire, thank you for your leadership of the state party. sometimes, there is a truth, it is not how low you go, it is how high you balance. [applause] how high you bounce. so, tonight, i want to talk with all of you about a story of us

about all of us, the story of baltimore, and the story of iowa , the story of maryland, and the story of america. the story of us. and 200 years ago in the war of 1812, the british had just taken washington and had burned our public buildings to the ground. the capitol building and the white house. the people of my home city could see the glow from the flames in the skies to our south. now we knew that they were coming for us. amidst the ashes of washington the commanding british general at the time declared i am going to march on baltimore, and dine there.

even then, we had great restaurants. [laughter] then he said, i am going to burn baltimore to the ground. our nation was not yet 40 years old. think about it. the american dream was facing extinction. imagine what we felt at that moment. anger, fear, disbelief confidence shattered, trust gone. there are moments in the life of our country, and these are the defining moments, when it seems the american dream is hanging by a thread. for america, there is always a yet. the final thread that holds us could just be the strongest.

50% of us in the city were immigrants. one out of five african-americans of a very imperfect country. only a third of those defenders were free. somehow together we transformed our loss. we transformed our despair. instead of digging graves, we dug trenches, and we built ramparts by the sea. over the shock and all of its day, the people of baltimore stood firm. all of us as we did tonight now singing the star-spangled banner. the flag wasted in defiance over for mchenry when the british gave up. as we sing that song, let us remember the colors of the

actual star-spangled banner were stitched together by black and white hands. men's hands, hands of freedom hands of bondage. the hands of a nation that is always growing and always evolving. the threat i submit to you that held together the stars & stripes is the same that holds us together now. it is the thread of human dignity. [applause] the dignity of every person, the dignity of home. the dignity of work. the dignity of neighbor helping neighbor so all of us can succeed. with our countries future

hanging in the balance we stood as one and the american dream lived on. fast forward. 1999, there was a different battle unfolding on the streets of baltimore. this time, honestly we were losing. when i decided to run for mayor that year my city had allowed ourselves to become the most violent, most addicted, most abandoned city in america. our biggest enemy wasn't the drug dealers or crack cocaine. it was a lack of belief, a coulter of failures, countless excuses about how nothing would work and why none of us should bother to try. we set out to make our city work again. to make the dream real again. and our fight to survive we brought for word a new way of

governing, a new way of getting things done. i started setting goals with deadlines. what is the difference between a dream and a goal? a deadline. [laughter] instead of counting budget inputs, we started measuring the outputs of the actions we were taking. we started managing for results. we saw trash so we picked it up every day. we began to relentlessly close them down. guess what? when the people of baltimore solve their government was working, they rallied. [applause] together, we put into action that most important belief that unites us, the belief that we

are all in this together. that in our community there is no such thing as a spare american. baltimore went on to achieve the biggest reduction in crime of any major city in america. [applause] in this battle, between our violent pasts and are safer future, the future won. that future lives on. seven years ago it seemed like our entire economy was hanging by a thread. didn't? you watched the tv. he wondered how it can get worse. millions of people lost

their jobs. we refused to give up. we elected a new president and barack obama to make the tough decisions, and that is what we are doing. [applause] the president provided leadership, and the states had to make choices of their own. unlike some other states, and maryland we did more, not less to make our children winners. we tossed aside the failed policies of the past, the trickle down economics, and we embraced the economics of inclusion.

we returned to the truth our grandparents understood so well. the more a person learns, the more a person earns. a stronger middle class is not the consequence of economic growth. a stronger middle class is the cause of economic growth. [applause] in other words, we returned to the middle class economics that made america great. the commonsense economics that understands the more workers earn, the better customers businesses have, and the more our entire economy grows. we passed a living wage, the first to pass a living wage, and we raised the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. [applause]

we make college more affordable for more people. we froze college tuition increases, zero increases for four years in a row. by investing more rather than less, by partnering with teachers, we make our public schools the best in america five years in a row. [applause] economic participation means political participation. while other states were putting up barriers to keep people from voting, we made it easier for all people to cast their vote. we harnessed the power, as iowa has, of renewable energy. to create new jobs in this new economy, while answering the

moral challenge of climate change, to create stronger communities. we took action to restore the health of the waters of our chesapeake bay, and we made maryland one of the top states for upward economic mobility. we maintain the highest median income in the nation. maryland has created jobs at one of the fastest rate in our region. better choices, better results. we are americans. we make these choices for the future of the dream we share and the dream that we have the privilege, if we so choose to pass on to our kids. when a family can send their children to a good school, and get a good education, the dream is alive. when every family through hard work, they are hard work, and claim a seat at the table of

american prosperity, that dream is alive. none of these things happen by accident. they happened by choice. our economy is the product of the choices that we make together. it doesn't blow in here off a polar vortex or across from the gulf stream. the choice to believe in one another, the power of the american dream and our ability together to make it come true our economy is the product of the choices we make. here is the good news. as a nation, we have achieved 60 months in a row of positive job growth. [applause] there is no progress without a job.

60 months of consecutive month over month job growth. that is the good news. as a party we haven't done the job we need to do at talking about the good things we have done. but, the vast majority of us are working harder, only to watch our families fall for further -- fall further behind. we have to acknowledge the work that remains undone. most are more worried than ever that our children will not enjoy the quality of life that we have enjoyed. or a better quality of life and we have enjoyed. there is a pessimism that has penetrated into our consciousness as americans. we need to recognize that. you have seen the look in your neighbor's eyes. i have too. for too many of us, the dream of things that could be and that

once were seems to be slipping from our grasp. get this. 50 years ago, the nations largest employer was gm. the average gm employee could pay for a year's tuition at a state university with two weeks of wages. americans are worried. for good reason. for the last 12 years, wages have been going down, and not yet up. last year, wall street bonuses alone were double the combined earnings of every single american working for minimum wage to take care of their family. until we solve this problem, we cannot rest, not as a party and not as a people. our nations future is at stake.

not long ago, the washington times ran a story with this headline. the headline said, "american dream is dead." let me say to the pundits writing these premature obituaries of the american dream, the american dream will never die on our watch because we choose to fight, and we intend to win. [applause] do you mean to tell me we can concentrate wealth in the hands of the few like we never have before but we cannot eradicate childhood hunger? i don't buy it. are you telling me we can invest the driverless car but we can create a job that feeds a family or sends a kid to college?

this is not the american dream. this is not how our country is supposed to work. this is not how our economy is supposed to work. we still have work to do's county, don't we? [applause] dr. mcguire it is going to be up to the democratic party to finish the work. it is up to us to restore the american dream. it is up to us to finish the work that we have begun to make our economy work for all of us again. you see, the tea party republican party is no longer the republican party of years past. would that they were. there was a time when the republican party had leaders, a

vision, foresight. compassion. lincoln asserted our unity. and our common humanity. eisenhower liberated europe and and build the nations highway system. now republicans dismiss science. now they fight against equality in any of its various forms, and education. they of poor health care. and any increase in the minimum wage. think about that. an entire party dedicated to keeping wages low for american workers. what have we come to? they question vaccines and climate change. give them a few more weeks and they will be shunning copernicus. [laughter] here in iowa, house republicans are saying your state can't afford to invest in schools but they are willing to spend twice

as much on a tax cut that would benefit the wealthy the most. this is exactly what the field of 2016 republican candidates are offering. to double down, on this failed economics of the past, where you concentrate wealth at the top and keep wages as low as you can for everybody else. what kind of economy are they creating? their choices would give our children a future of last. they can offer that path if they like. we have better choices to make. making do with less is not an aspiration worthy of a great people or a great nation. we will not be, and we cannot be the first generation to leave our children with a future of less. not for my kids, not for yours. [applause]

we are americans. turn to your neighbor and tell them we are americans. go ahead. we are americans. [applause] we are americans, and we make our own destiny, not anybody else. the future we choose is a future of liberty, justice, and opportunity for all. [applause] do me a favor. [applause] think for a second close your eyes if that helps. think about your parents and grandparents.

picture their faces. they understood the essential truth to the american dream that we share. the stronger we make our country, the more she can get back to us. and to our children. and to our grandchildren. the poet laureate of the american dream bruce springsteen, -- [laughter] bruce springsteen asked once, is a dream a lie if it don't come true, or is it something worse? when the american dream is denied, our hopes fade, and our days unfold not in the light of possibility, but in the darkness of fear.

to make the dream true again, we must fight for better wages for all workers so americans can support their families on what they earn. [applause] what does this mean? you know what it means. your parents and grandparents know what it means. raising the minimum wage. raising the threshold for overtime pay. and respecting the rights of all workers to organize and bargain collectively. [applause] to make the dream come true, we must not allow another wall street meltdown to bring down the hard-working families of our country.

we have a responsibility to put that repeat performance beyond the realm of the possible. by reinstating glass-steagall, and holding people accountable when they break the law. [applause] to make the dream come true, we have to embrace our clean energy future and recognize renewable inexhaustible sources of energy represents the biggest business opportunity for our country in a century. [applause] clean water, clean air. human rights. clean water, clean air. these things are human rights. no generation has the ability or the right to deny these rights to future generations. to make the dream come true we must expand social security benefits, and not caught social

security -- not cut social security. [applause] and to make the dream come true we must invest more in education, not less. which means universal pre-k to help our children reach their god-given potential. [applause] closing achievement gaps, making cal which -- making college more affordable, these are the choices we make in every generation. to make the dream true again we must recognize policies of economic inclusion, economic participation are policies that are good for women, and good for families, like equal pay, equal work. paid leave, expanded childcare. it is good for our economy. [applause]

sing it with me people. when women succeed, america succeeds. [applause] the most fundamental power, the most fundamental power our country has is the power of our moral principles. triangulation is not a strategy that will move america forward. history celebrates profiles in courage, not profiles inconvenience -- in convenience. we must be unashamed and defenders of the american dream that we share and the better choices necessary to pass it on to our kids. the dignity of every person tells us the right to marry is not a state right, it is a human

right. [applause] when refugee children arrive on our doorstep, fleeing starvation and death gangs, we do not turn them away, we asked like the generous, compassionate people we have always been. [applause] the enduring symbol of our nation is not the barbed wire fence, it is the statue of liberty. [applause] this is what we believe. this is who we are. we are americans, and in god we trust. [applause]

yes, you and i are proud to be members of the democratic party. let the tea party measure their success by how many times they can shut down our government. we measure success in jobs and opportunity for all. let them speak for the sad yesterdays that were. we speak for the better tomorrows that can be. [applause] make no mistake about it. the american dream is what makes america exceptional. fear and anger never built a great nation. our country is built by the commission at -- compassionate choices that we make together. to live lives guided by

better angels. we love what our country can become. take pride, take pride. [applause] take pride in your work as democrats. take pride in what you believe. the next time somebody asks you after an election who you voted for, don't be shy. tell them. i mean it. if a child asked you who you voted for i want you to tell that child i voted for you. when you see someone sweating through another long shift and they ask you who you voted for i want you to tell them, i voted for you. when you see someone with health insurance who did not have it before, and they ask you who you voted for, i want you to tell them, i voted for you. when you see someone who wants

nothing more than to have their family treated with dignity and respect under the law i want you to tell them i voted for you. when you see someone who hungers for opportunity, and a good job, i want you to tell them i voted for you. we are democrats for our a good reason. ours is the party of optimism. ours is the party of the people. ours is the party of the better future. ours is the party of the american dream. together, we will make that dream true again. thank you, scott county. [applause] >> martin o'malley considering a run for president in 2016. he is been to numerous campaign events. 24 in the past two years.

pouring resources into iowa. he hopes years of political investment in iowa pay off, but so far the presidential race as it launches in earnest, very few candidates and party leaders martin o'malley has helped in iowa with contributions and assistance from staff have committed to him or any other possible potential candidates. you can read more at washington post.com. the former governor will be in tipton, iowa and on to council bluffs. we are going to have tomorrow a look at securities at u.s. embassies after a recent attack on the u.s. ambassador in south korea, we will talk with fred burton with the state department bureau of diplomatic security and the u.s. tax code with daniel mitchell. and corey mccrae talk about

efforts in his state to restore voting rights. we will take your phone calls and tweets tomorrow morning on washington journal starting at 7:00 eastern. >> this sunday, dr. adrian berman of farmed out on how pharmaceutical companies work. >> the promotion of a drug starts 7-10 years before a drug comes on the market. while it is illegal for a company to market a drug before it has been approved, it is not illegal to market a disease. drug companies have sometimes invented diseases, or exaggerated the importance of certain conditions, or exaggerated the importance of a particular mechanism of a drug and then blanketed medical journals and medical