had a friend -- it was almost from sea to shining sea because of the terrible winter we had. he blew out three tires. any idea what three tire replacements on a mercedes costs? he can handle the tax increase for another decade. just for the cost of inaction. till people a cost of doing nothing is higher than the cost of doing something. host: time for maybe two more. panelist: i think it is a good point you made, the value goes up, but that is one of the mechanisms you need to count in terms of funding these projects. the value to the average consumer is hopefully the rail,

you have access to the rail. and the congestion goes down. in places like london, where we put in congestion pricing and more transportation, they see traffic volume down by 20%. congestion down by 26% over the last three years using technology and mobility. and a better environment. that increases the quality of life for everybody in the market. that is the windfall for the average consumer. >> good morning. i am tonya saunders. i represent one of the largest rail operators in the world. the reason i am standing, to underscore what the gentleman said, in addition to the taxes we look at, what are the

alternatives for moving large numbers of people in terms of the increase of families and people in the cities and suburbs? you're looking at 14 or 12 lanes of highway if you are expecting to accommodate that in the future. four rail, whether it is high-speed or moving freight off of the rail system that we have onto a cheaper railway. if you could maybe comment on long-term investment in doing some of these additional things. panelist: you could not be more right. in the northeast corridor, it is estimated by 2030, we will have 40% more cars on the road. think about i-95 40% more cars on the road. it is a frightening, horrific thought process. the airports, thanksgiving day

travel, it is predicted by 2030 thanksgiving day travel will occur twice a week because of airport congestion. you are not spending enough money on airports. think about that. panelist: two things you mentioned -- i forget the exact numbers, but light rail travel is worth two or three lanes of highway. at some point, we are running out of lanes coming into town. we need more mobility. intercity transportation in this country is extremely weak relative to developed countries. forget high-speed. just higher speed. to your point, it fills up airports, highways. we are running out of space to go. you will have to bite the bullet and make a bigger investment. host: we have about 22nd.

-- 20 seconds. >> i'm with homeland security. one of the things we have not heard about this, we have heard investment politics, is the nature of security. whether homeland security is in cyber or transportation or rail or whatever. is that a failure of media political voices, a failure of the administration, to build a connection between what we are talking about in infrastructure and the nature of security? the interstate highway system was built because eisenhower needed to move troops east or west, north and south. i do not hear anything about security. is there a reason behind that? panelist: we have talked a lot

about how infrastructure plays an important role in resilient disasters. first responders, evacuation. there has been a lot more talk about security from the standpoint of how you can secure around the city. i have not heard a lot more outside of that. but if you look at new york, the george washington bridge is a key link. there is no other way except for the long way around. that has been a problem since world war ii. we have not fixed that yet. panelist: it was a problem at election time. [laughter] host: i get it. i think we will end on that. i do not want a fistfight of any kind.

but i want to thank our panelists. great panel. obviously, a great day in general for us. a big name coming up in a couple panels. i want to introduce one of our senior congressional reporters at bloomberg news. she will be interviewing a harvard university professor. thank you all very much. [applause]

host: not only is she a best-selling author, she is releasing her book "move: putting america's infrastructure in the lead." the book explains with compelling details many of the costs and social justice impacts of our outdated infrastructure. i want to get to some of those. first of all, can you give us a brief synopsis of where we are and how we are faring versus other countries? panelist: there is one indicator in the transportation and infrastructure area in which the u.s. is number one. that is number of available

airline seats. that is because we have made it cheap and we like to fly. americans like to fly. europeans will take the train. that is one reason we do not have a good enough rail system in america. otherwise, we are way down on the international indicators. my friend rodney slater, who was here today, former secretary went to japan recent the for the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the bullet train in japan that regularly reaches speeds of 200 miles per hour and has only been an average of 32 seconds off schedule in any year. 50th anniversary. we have some anniversaries here too. the 100th anniversary of overhead wiring on our train systems. we are celebrating ancient infrastructure. in chicago, there are water

pipes made out of hollowed out logs that date back to the 19th century. we need to modernize. not just for maintenance. maintenance is not a vision. people just want to sell it and move on, which is why we abandon many parts of cities that are incredibly appealing and attractive because millennials do not want cars. that gets me to the gas tax. the gas tax is such an important part of the debate. of course, i favor after -- having the funding to do repairs, but the gas tax is an outmoded concept. you should tax anything that moves if we want to pay for something we care about, but one of the reasons the highway trust fund is losing money is fewer people are owning cars. cars are getting higher mileage. electric cars are on the horizon.

and user fees, technology permits us to charge user fees, pay-as-you-go. we have so many new ways to think about old issues. we are falling behind in part because of how we are thinking about the issues. we have the technology and can do it. it is a question of will. host: i want to break it down a little bit, starting with cost. i was struck by the number, $70 billion per year in time wasted in traffic jams. panelist: that is the cost. productivity, this is an area of big business. moving goods are important. but the average american wastes about 38 hours per year unnecessarily in traffic congestion. that adds up to a huge amount of productivity. delays and canceled flights also

have huge consequences for the economy. will we, -- why we cannot do anything about cancellations because of the weather, we can help people get their faster. host: another big price tag in terms of health, you say about $15 billion. panelist: goes on the consequences we can measure from pollution, breathing bad air. the health consequences for people who live near highways higher risks of certain diseases. this is the harvard school of public health that puts the number on it. that it is higher. think about traffic fatalities, bicycle fatalities. the more bicycles on the road, the fewer fatalities. we do not have a culture -- we have a car-centric culture stuck

in the 1950's. we justify every national expenditure on defense grounds. going back to the transcontinental railroad, which was not a glorious day. it was highly contentious politically. national security dictated if you have the whole continent you have to put settlements there. how are they going to get back and forth without trains? everything we have done has been on defense grounds. we do not do that anymore. we need to define this as a mobility issue, economic growth issue. how do we get where we need to go in a seamless, connected way? nobody cares which mode of transportation they are taking as long as it will get them there. there are people that have to take four or five, even though their smartphone could connect them. host: something we do not always think about because it does not

have a price tag, but the social justice impact. you had an anecdote about a man from detroit who has to walk five miles to work every day. this is a man in a low income communities who wants to pull himself up, but in order to do so, he needs to go to a different part of the city to go to that job every day. but there are not bus connections, certainly not a subway system. can you speak about the social justice impact? panelist: that five miles is a little like abraham lincoln. we are going back to the 19th century. people cannot work if they do not have access to jobs. transit access is not available in poor communities in the same rate at affluent communities. even bike sharing in chicago is not as available in low income communities. even if they had credit cards and could get into those stations.

i did a little correlation of cities with the highest scores for public transportation and the cities with the greatest chance of moving one generation to the next from lowest to highest income levels. it is an amazing correlation. the top 10 out of 20 overlap. those cities have great public transportation. even the ones with great public transit, like chicago get good marks but are 57 for being able to get to a job within 45 minutes. if people cannot get to jobs, i know we are going to get great jobs if we invest in infrastructure, but if people cannot get there we will end up with inner cities ready to explode because people are hopeless. the jobs are not there. they cannot get the discounters

who do not put stores in low income communities. they cannot carry groceries on the subway or bus. we have to put those in the equation. we are lucky that -- i am from massachusetts. tip o'neill added funding for public transportation to the highway cutbacks. now, it also funds about 16% of it. it also funds mass transit. but we need more of it and every city wants it. our survey of business leaders at harvard business school, the highest item that got the most support for investment in infrastructure was public transportation. that was from people who do not necessarily use it themselves unless they commute from westchester into new york city. host: and yet, before we came in here, you said there is a need

for a grassroots movement. where is not going to come from? i want to ask you about a statement you make in your book about the difference between our philosophy about government and other countries moving ahead on infrastructure. panelist: by "grassroots," i am talking about this regional thing we kept hearing about. if you do not get regional coalitions who agree on strategic priorities, nothing will happen. for example, here is one that took 20 years. in houston, there was -- voters voted for light rail in houston. because the neighborhoods were not involved, though the business community loved it, it took 20 years before there was support for light rail in houston.

it is amazing how long these things take without a coalition or involving the public. i was motivated to write "move" to integrate things people know about but are talked about in isolation. one picture together that affects every constituency. that could make a huge difference. people are elected every two years. if they do not think they will be reelected because support from constituencies for investments they do not have the courage to make, where do politicians get courage? some of them are not born with it, but some of them get it because of the big constituencies behind it. those had to be multi-stakeholder constituencies. host: let's talk about some of the things we are doing right. you cite a number of examples. miami, chicago, can you talk

about what is going on in those cities that we should be looking at? panelist: i am in love with the board of miami tunnel. the port of miami tunnel is part of the plan to accommodate the larger shift, so it has huge implications for the port and commerce. it has huge implications for being able to get rid of traffic congestion in miami and develop miami for residential use and pedestrians and bicycles. the tunnel is a great example because it is like these long-term -- it was a 30 year dream of a young civil engineer fortunately became the secretary of transportation under governor bush. it was then killed by the next secretary of trans rotation or she tried to kill it. it had to come back.

it was a public-private partnership whose underwriter was lehman brothers. the financial crash took care of that. everything that could have gone wrong went wrong except one it was approved, it came in on time. and under budget. the community was involved, girl scouts have to name the tunnel harriett after harriet tubman. they had a job fairs in every language you could imagine. the construction jobs were temporary. the real jobs are the ones being created because of activity in the port and less than a year later, 80% of those 18 wheeler trucks have been diverted from downtown miami directly to the interstate. they can carry more cargo faster. it will be good for everybody. of course, less congestion and

pollution in downtown miami. i call it the wind temple win -- quintuple win. well done, miami. host: by talking about the emerging net of smart growth -- vehicles give us an overview of where we are going. panelist: if we are going to have a vision of our mobility jerk, it has to involve technology. tech entrepreneurs have to be at the table. which one of you started a company to make a flying car? we have one in massachusetts that has 100 orders. it is expensive, but we need tech entrepreneurs. right now, we do not have a framework for smartphone related apps to find parking, which seems simple. that is going to take cars off

the street because a lot of the congestion and pollution is from cars driving around looking for parking. once we have sensor-embedded roads, i say we should not just re-pair, we should reinvent. but you have a new road, why aren't cen -- sensors going into it? some of the investors and all of that are foreign competitors. daimler bought up the winner of an innovation contest, ridescout, that will help you connect. we have the assets in the u.s.. we have to refurbish and modernize. we do not connect them. to want to be able to use the barcode on your smart phone and check your luggage like they can

in hong kong. check them to your final destination and get on them and keep waving your barcode and have the information about schedules. we must think in a visionary way about connected mobility systems. that will help us. inequality is the word du jour for political candidates, but if we could create jobs and stop is to time -- wasted time there is a lot we could do if we thought about this in a systematic and visionary way and mobilized leaders not just in washington. when i say grassroots, i'm in chicago, kansas city, denver. denver, only 6% of the people do not commute by car's, but they put in light rail. host: thank you so much for

joining us, rosabeth kanter. [applause] >> i am peter cook with bloomberg television. i will be moderating the next panel. we heard in the last panel that some agencies cannot agree today is monday. but on this issue, they are in lockstep. we have cameron lundgridge ceo of switzer steel industries. there will be opening remarks and we will sit on stage for a q and a session.

we had a coin flip, and richard gets to go first. come on up rich. [applause] panelist: i do not know if a coin toss is a win or loss. i am rich trumpkin president of the cio. talk is cheap in washington dc. we hear a lot of noise but little action. instead, congress lurches from self-inflicted crisis to self-inflicted crisis, engaging in debates and wasting precious time with political posturing. it makes you wonder what the real priorities are. let me give you an american priority.

one shared by working people and business leaders everywhere. i am talking about public investment in america's infrastructure. roads, bridges, pipelines, waterways. ports, electrical grids, internet and phone lines and drinking water. these investments benefit everybody. those investments create jobs. those investments build america. if you want to spend money to make money, build infrastructure. build bridges. expand ports and modernize railways. safe roads and transit systems can get workers to work and home everyday. companies get manufacturing goods to market. all of our infrastructure system needs attention. the most immediate concern is

the highway and transit trust fund. once again, it is about to expire. we do not need another temporary extension. it has been extended 30 times in seven years. i have to tell you, that is no way to do business. we need a permanent funding source. states have been forced to postpone and cancel necessary construction. this is becoming another self-inflicted crisis. i am not talking about a pretend crisis. one out of nine ridges in america is structurally deficient. that is from the american society of civil engineers. a bridge collapse is a real crisis. failing to pay for infrastructure is dangerous and irresponsible and we can and must do better. america needs a reliable,

long-term funding source now. the highway and transit trust fund should be a top priority, not political jockeying, not trying to get the best soundbite. it is so basic. we have put forward funding sources, explained how the trust fund strengthens our community with good jobs and create opportunities for economic growth. the trust fund improves america's quality-of-life and makes us competitive in the global age. we all bear the cost of inaction. every year, every single person in america spends almost 38 hours and almost $1000 in wasted fuel while we idle in traffic. at that together, it is $120

billion a year wasted. it buys is nothing. raising the fuel tax would cost less and get something for it. here is another cost of congressional inaction. if we fail to invest in infrastructure in a way -- big way, by 2020, there will be a $300,000 per year drop in personal disposable income per household. think about that. taken away from each household. business and working people joined together again today for the kickoff of infrastructure week. to tell congress this simple message -- build america, create jobs, do it now, do your job. thank you.

[applause] panelist: good morning. thank you, peter, for hosting us. i would like to thank rich for partnership on an issue that unites the business and labor communities as well as lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. rich's right to call for a long-term extension of the highway trust fund and he is joined by scores of public sector leaders doing the same. there are other looming priorities to contend with as well, including reauthorization of the faa, full funding of the water and resources development legislation, and progress on the rapid act, a sweeping bill to

streamline permitting processes. these priorities are essential to maintaining, modernizing, and expanding the physical platform of our economy and must be swiftly addressed and adequately funded. each of these priorities has been perennially the set by short-term funding challenges. while this might suggest our challenges cannot be resolved in a meaningful way or a sustainable way, that is just not true. among our country's difficult challenges, this one is self-imposed. we can easily fix it if we had the will to do so. there is growing support from leaders of all sectors of the economy and both sides of the aisle. there are funding solutions to choose from, whether that is a modest user fee increase private investment, low-cost

lending through federal programs or other financing mechanisms. there is a willing and able workforce ready to rebuild the country. there are strong incentives of immediate job growth creation. the time is right to push our leaders to take action. then we must move on. we must move the conversation forward and expand our thinking. for so long, the focus has been on maintaining and expanding infrastructure. those are important goals we must continue to achieve, but they must not be the limit of our aspirations. we must begin a dialogue about how to make infrastructure part of a national strategy for durable economic growth greater global engagement, and stronger competitiveness. other leading economies are not

only having those kinds of conversations, they are making plans and implementing them. competitors like china are not thinking about how to patch the next pothole. they are thinking about how to build the next supply chain. many of us in business particularly companies like mine that operate in a global market we have been watching china's infrastructure move with great interest. beijing is looking comprehensively at how to help companies compete. they are pulling every lever to make that happen. the chinese have ambitious plans to rebuild the silk road on land and sea to create direct trade and transportation routes to europe. the initiative, dubbed one belt one road is the centerpiece of development strategy.

by building infrastructure along the proposed route, china just promised $46 billion in infrastructure aid and allows them to benefit in several ways. it allows them to meet the region's infrastructure needs. in the course of its development, chinese companies and workers have ascended the learning curve. they are in a strong position to build these pipelines and ports. it would create robust avenues for getting chinese goods and services including a huge domestic oversupply into regional markets. these activities would support china's twin goals of stimulating their slowing domestic economy and helping homegrown companies compete in the region. if you add it all up, the strategy that helped china

wields greater influence across the asian continent, including financial integration and trade liberalization. and again, infrastructure is the foundation of these expensive goals. how do you pay for it? to help pay for it, the chinese have established a $15 billion asian infrastructure investment fund, a bank with 57 members including germany, the u.k., and italy. there are plans to expand it to $100. china led efforts to create the new bank and a silk road fund to promote infrastructure investment. however one feels about these efforts, it is hard to deny the seriousness of china's plans. why am i talking about chinese infrastructure development at a summit about u.s. infrastructure

development? because competitiveness has long been a talking point in the infrastructure debate in the united states, but it cannot just be a talking point. the competition is very real and so are the implications for u.s. businesses and manufacturers as they were to operate at home and compete in global markets. we need to broaden our thinking, elevate our ambitions and figure out how to pay for critical investments over the long-term. business partners in government and labor should expand the conversation and drive it forward. let's not just ask how we are going to pay for our system for the next snow -- six months for six years. let's ask what we want our system to do to advance our country's best interests. how can it be a strategic assets that strengthens our competitiveness?

you will be confronted by major infrastructure question and trends in the coming years. everything from competitiveness to technology and all its implications. let's be ready to respond to them or better yet lead the discussion and help move transportation and infrastructure policy forward. thank you very much. i look forward to our discussion. thank you. [applause] host: go ahead and sit in the middle. richard, if you could join us on the end. he will chat a little bit. then it is time to open it up to questions from the audience. thank you for being here. a whole host of issues where the chamber and afl-cio do not see eye to eye. i just saw mr. trumka and mr.

donahue talking about trade. but on this issue, there is so much overlap. in organized labor and the largest business lobbying group are on the same page, why can't this get done? what is standing in the way? you have battled over this for years. what is in the way? panelist: it is pure politics right now. in the past, it is a bipartisan issue. never bickering. everyone knew you had to keep the country running. it is like your household. if something leaks, you have to fix it. if it needs painting, you have to fix it. the country needs to be replenished so we can stay competitive. everyone knows that. yet, they cannot figure out a way to get it done. it is just politics. no other reason for. they agree it needs to be done.

that is what frustrates the american people, frustrates business, working people. this is an issue that needs to get done now. host: from the chamber's perspective? panelist: i completely agree on this. one thing that congress fails to make a distinction on is investment of infrastructure is a capital investment, not an expense. it needs long-term funding, not month-to-month funding. it is like running a business. you cannot make investments for growth if all you can do is look forward 90 days. it is a capital investment we need to make in the country. panelist: it really does need to be five or six years so the project can be planned, get done. we have had 30 extensions in the last several years. host: looks like were about to get another one. panelist: it will either be june or december. how do you plan?

panelist: it is much more expensive when you do it that way. so different from building your house and doing change orders instead of scoping it out creating a budget, and utilizing it over the long-term. some reports have shown expenses have increased -- extensions have increased the cost by 30% to do the little that has been done to date. host: would you agree that we are looking at most likely the end of the year or another two-month patch? do you have a preference? panelist: the length of the patch from our perspective should be long enough to allow congress to create and pass a long-term bill. host: what is your take? panelist: i agree. the more we keep kicking the can down the road, the more it hurts

the country. we are looking out over $3 trillion that needs to be invested to make the country healthy again, make it competitive again. the longer we kick the can down the road, the bigger the bill gets. and the more individual pay. also losing salary down the line. business becomes less competitive. when they become less competitive, workers get laid off or do not get raises they would otherwise get. we are paying the price for their inaction. every businesses paying the price for their inaction. host: do you get any sense there has been any change in the conversation, the tone in washington, about where this is headed? you hear senator hatch, the ways and means committee, talking about progress. secretary foxx talked about it

again, the funding stream that gets this off the block. do you see something different today than a year ago? panelist: there has been conversation about repatriation as the solution. does not really make sense. they are talking about a holiday, a short-term gap. we need comprehensive tax reform, not corporate tax reform. we need comprehensive tax reform. but we should be looking for, as rich pointed out funding through public-private partnerships, funding from federal and state programs. you should be looking at transportation-related revenues that are sustainable and have growth potential. panelist: i do not disagree. there is a number of things that can and should be done. we need to use the user tax look at the vehicle miles

traveled, a program being tried out in the west. you're coming up with electrical cars. host: some people do not like the idea of a little gps watching where your car goes. panelist: they already do, i hate to tell them that. there is a lot of ways to do it. they need to agree on a target. let's say we need to fix the problem. and be honest about that and defined the problem. the society of civil engineers has already defined the magnitude of the problem. say we are going to fix it and here is what it will take. them come up with funding sources. they can be multiple, but they must be long-term so everyone can plan. so the states can plan, construction companies can plan, so that everybody involved can

be planning without wasting money. host: we heard earlier today on one of the panels there have been ideas about handing money to the state. let the folks at the local level deal with the issue because they understand their transportation problems better than anyone else. why doesn't that make sense? panelist: state involvement is key. but we have a comprehensive national transportation network that it has a huge advantage. you have to have an integrated federal policy. you have to have federal involvement to support a national structure. panelist: she is absolutely right. look, you remember we were going to do high-speed rail. two states said we do not want high-speed rail. if you leave it up to the states, there would be 50 different policies.

that is why you need a federal policy. there cannot be 50 states doing 50 different things. that has to be a federal policy and an integrated system. how would one state to the electrical grid system? how would they do enough reports , inland waterways? it does not make sense to do it on a state-by-state basis. it must be done as a national plan. host: another question you get sometimes is i am a montana cattle rancher paying the gas tax in montana. but some of my taxes help the banker in new york get on the subway. why is that fair? panelist: that montana farmer gets a lot of subsidies. some of the states like texas get more subsidies than anybody else. as well as louisiana and mississippi. it is give-and-take.

we have a national system. we are going to create a transportation network that will benefit everybody. the product that montana cattle rancher could beget -- get could be cheaper if a rail system delivers things they may need. they will benefit by having an efficient system and have the country become competitive. they can get their products to market or export products easier when you have an efficient system. not when one in every nine bridges is about to break down. panelist: right now, there are federal taxes for transportation that have not been raised since 1993. gas prices are at their lowest level, cars are more efficient than ever. and the infrastructure that has been built, a lot of it was not

intended to last this long. that farmer in montana, or i come from oregon, where there is a lot of agricultural commerce, when the supply chains block up, products go to waste. when the ports are not efficient, products cannot get out to 95% of consumers in the world outside of the u.s. what we are saying is upgraded the infrastructure to make it globally competitive, enable people to sell products more efficiently and at less cost. host: is it hard to imagine a final solution that does not include an increase in the gasoline tax? panelist: if you speak to party leaders on both sides of the aisle, they know that in their hearts. it is a question of who wants to put their chips on the table first. panelist: i do not see a solution that does not include a hike in gas tax.

is done, available, and we are 30 days away from an expiration. if you are going to do a totally new funding source, it will take a long time, and we have to kick the can down the road another two or three years. i cannot see a way of getting it done. at least with a major part of it with the users. host: both of you mentioned competitiveness, what is happening in china. a lot of americans may not be able to go to china and see what is happening in other parts of the world. you obviously have to travel the world. you have been in china as well. what is really happening out there? where is it you can see america getting its lunch handed to them? panelist: i will begin with infrastructure. the roads, bridges, tunnels,

airports ports, run at an efficiency level that far exceeds ours. it takes us x number of days to get our material to the coast. it takes them less time. if you look at china, china is actually suffering from the same things we are suffering from. they have a slowing economy which means they have pressures on employment. they have oversupply, which we do as well. our country is a place where people want to bring their businesses. there are many companies bringing their businesses back onshore because our electricity is cheaper, our laws are clear and we have an able and ready workforce. it is that workforce that has really suffered and not gone back to work since the global financial crisis. our unemployment rate appears to

be improving, but participation rates have not improved. many of the people who have not been able to participate lost their jobs in the financial crisis. one of the things we agree on over and over again is jobs, jobs jobs. when you improve infrastructure, it attract business. our chamber did a transportation performance index, which showed a huge positive correlation between infrastructure that works and foreign direct investment. people coming on to u.s. shores to make cars, appliances, tools manufacture. that is where we are getting our lunch handed to us. we have the platform to become a platform manufacture, and we have to take it vantage. panelist: each year, our rails

our ports, our roads fall further behind. we become less competitive. china needed a deep water port. they did not have one. in four years, they built a six lane highway, 21 kilometers into the china sea. they created a port that did 14 million containers in four years. in two more years, that same port will be handling 21 million containers i year. that is what they are doing. that is the competition. it would take us two lifetimes to build a six lane highway, 21 kilometers into the sea and build a port that could handle 14 million containers.

do we need that? absolutely. me have a bridge system falling apart. we have water lines, a break every two minutes in this country. for water line breaks somewhere. seems like all of them in dc, but they are everywhere. it is a tremendous loss of resources and efficiency. it does not have to happen. they have figured out that infrastructure create jobs. in the u.s., you do and infrastructure job, for every three construction jobs you put to work, five other jobs are created in other industries. materials, transportation. it is a no-brainer. truly a no-brainer. and we do not do it. host: we have a short amount of time. ? your -- a question right here.

there should be a microphone. >> leslie blake, we work on infrastructure policy. i know you have been trying to get something going. besides needing to raise the gas tax the gas tax really needs to be for highways. we are talking big projects, infrastructure and prioritizing infrastructure. i would like to ask the business community about needing funding for infrastructure and draw on a designated source of funding

possibly from a business. any possibility the business community could support that? a fee that would support infrastructure. host: any thoughts on the? panelist: with respect to the comments i made before, there are multiple sources of federal state, private, and user fee taxes that need to be looked at to address the whole chain of transportation needs. to solve the problem and create capital funds that we need, we need to look across the board at a variety of funding. panelist: i agree it needs to be permanent. i agree it needs to be dedicated. i would be willing to look at the feet an -- fee and other

things as well so no one sector of the economy picks up all of it. so we can create jobs, invest, and get a return. you will get the money back. every person out there will get the money back. host: i know there are more questions, but we have a tight timetable with the vice president coming up. also, i have a message. we ask you not to get up the coast the vice president is arriving. we will be serving lunch in a moment. you are not glued to the chairs, but you are glued to the chairs. if you leave, you may not be able to get back in. lunch will be served in a moment. the vice president will be speaking shortly. [applause]

>> now, vice president biden testifies about u.s. infrastructure needs. [applause] host: thanks for joining us today as we kick off infrastructure week. a great discussion so far. infrastructure is unique. it influences where we live, where we work, how we get around , literally impact everyone and everyone has an opinion. professor kanter mentioned planes versus trains. i cannot tell you how much time we spend at bloomberg debating the merits of planes versus trains. my personal opinion is that

planes when the vast majority of the time. i think we have a difference of opinion. [laughter] as josh mentioned earlier, the vice president occasionally takes a 75 minute 108 mile ride from washington to wilmington, delaware. according to the american society of civil engineers, the bridges in washington, maryland, and delaware, 20% of them are functionally obsolete. 6% are structurally deficient. in washington, 95% of the roads are considered in poor condition. i am not a civil engineer, but i can give anecdotal evidence that the roads on my commute from arlington to d.c. are not in great shape. this is an important subject and we at bloomberg government are proud to have convened an esteemed group of panelists. we are grateful the vice president has taken time to share his unique perspective on the subject.

please join me in welcoming vice president joe biden. [applause] vice president biden: how you doing? good to see you. it is an honor to be part of bloomberg government. you are supposed to laugh at that. [laughter] vice president biden: i spent last weekend with mike, the only man i know who has a government. he is doing great things. you are as well. don, thank you for having me. rich it is great to be with you, pal. eric spiegel, made some significant investments in north america that make a difference to a whole lot of people. tamara, chair of the chamber of

commerce. can you all hear me? ok. understand that you have heard from or going to hear from anthony foxx and jeff sykes, but i would like to get to the point with you. as i said backstage with don the idea that there is actually debate in washington on capitol hill as to whether or not we need to invest in infrastructure is mind blowing. i have been here a long time. i understand the need for debate as to how to pay for what we need to do. i do not get the debate about whether or not we need to significantly invest in our infrastructure. 6.5 years ago, the economy was in recession.

just short of depression. even before then, the middle class was getting clobbered. the operative word that everyone heard constantly was "outsourcing." top-down economics governed our policy. when we entered office, we knew there had to be drastic changes and we made them. very unpopular changes. we cut back almost $840 billion. every outside expert looked at it, less than .4% waste or abuse in application of the legislation. tarp, if you want to talk about the hardest vote any member had to take, it is to bail out the same guys who put us in a mess. that was a difficult vote. but we did it and were told it

was a dangerous thing to do. the end result was every penny was paid back. back. the american banking system is sound in the taxpayers made $60 million in the process. dondd frank -- those of you represent corporate america, you had as much: wall street as we did. i come from the corporate state of america and i can promise you that is true. now there is transparency, things are functioning and the stock market is bouncing back and forth between 18,000 and 17,900. when we took office the question was what it go below 6000. we were told we would never be able to make more than 13 million automobiles and now we make 21.6 million.

as well as the affordable care act, which has grown our health care industry, and the slowest growth rate of health care cost in recent history. mostly because of the great and determination of the american people, our economy has gone from crisis to recovery, on the verge of resurgence if we are smart. if we act with a little bit of foresight. 12 million jobs, 62 straight months of growth, more jobs created in the entire industrial world combined since the recession hit. unemployment down from 10% to 5.4%, the deficit cut by two thirds. it's because of what we did and what all of you did, because people stood up and realized what was wrong. now instead of my grandchildren aren't going to hear about outsourcing, they are going to hear about in sourcing.

that is the operative word and it will remain that way if we are smart. there is a survey -- the 300 largest leading industrialists of the world. where's the best place in the world to invest? by large margin, they said the united states of america and every single solitary category. for manufacturing to i.t. to service. you have boston consulting group stashed some of you use them. every year, they survey every american company that has the investment in china, and a position in china. they ask -- what are your plans next year? this year, 54% said they are coming home. look, there is a reason for this. we have now and will have for the remainder of the first half of this century the cheapest

energy in the world. the epicenter of energy for the 21st century is not the saudi arabian peninsula, it is not nigeria, it is not venezuela, it is north america. we have the best research universities in the world. we basically have the only stable research universities in the world. it was decided during the sputnik era instead of investing in government entities, invested in research universities. we also have the best venture capitalist system in the world and the rule of law to protect not only contractual right but also intellectual property. i might add and i say this with my friend here, we also have the most productive workers in the world. they are three times as productive in the workers of

china, for example and i want china to be productive. i want china to grow. i want the eu to grow. in order to keep our edge in to make this a permanent resurgence , which it has the possibility of being, for real -- i don't know how many times i've talked to you before, will china eat our lunch -- come on, man. i'm serious. i'm being deadly earnest. we want them to do well. but as they say in my old neighborhood, they are not a patch on our gjeans if we are smart and we act with foresight and less rank partisanship. but there are two things you will know we have to do, among others. we have to have the world to keep this going. we have to have the most modern infrastructure in the world. the president asked me to put up

an eight-month study on how we could be making sure we have the most skilled workforce. that warns another in totally different speech. became up with a number of things and they are beginning to work. with the second thing we need is the most modern infrastructure in the world. first of all, let's get it straight. there are two things we need to get to this modern infrastructure. it needs to be modern because it is not now. it is not now. it is not now. we are 28th in the world and transportation infrastructure. the united states of america ranks 28th in the world in terms of modern infrastructure. american societies of engineers say we need to invest $3.6 trillion to get our infrastructure up to snuff by 2020.

assume they are off by 50%. they are not. the second thing we have to focus on -- because of the age complexity, and fundamentally changing nature of our energy needs and the increasing impact of severe weather occurrence -- that is a euphemism for climate change, but i don't want to debate you about that -- we have guys here in this town -- i got criticized for saying, one senator denied climate change and i also said he denied gravity. whatever you want to call it, there are severe, severe weather occurrences putting our energy infrastructure at risk, and there is a need for major repair, major reorganization, major investment in our infrastructure. this is important not only for economic competitiveness, but for simply our national security.

it is desperately needed. i can understand why my republican colleagues -- and by the way as you noticed, every time there is a problem, i get sent up to the hill because i am the least partisan guy. i have real relations and great respect for the members of the house and senate. but something is going on here. something different is going on, and all the 36 years i served as a senator chairing two major committees for half of that time there is something different happening. the old expression -- the tail is wagging the dog. the fact of the matter is that has got to change. i can understand republicans debating about how to pay for it but i don't understand the debate about whether or not we need to invest in our infrastructure. what is the debate?

that is the debate -- you all heard it. what to prioritize. there is still a debate up in the hill about whether or not it is even needed. you all know as well as i do, in order to attract and keep investment in the united states, companies have to go that they can get their raw materials on the factory floor and get their product to market cheaply and efficiently in order to remain competitive. otherwise, they are going to locate where costs are cheaper in the movement of product is more efficient and timely. businesses want to know -- what is the access to freight rail and interstate highway system? can ports reliably and quickly move my product? how fast and reliable is the broadband network? is it affordable and accessible transportation attracting talent in jobs we need to fill? how was the water supply?

the storm water runoff? sewers? are they available to handle our needs? how reliable is the energy grid? especially during extreme weather. folks, these are the requirements of the 21st century, and we need a 21st century infrastructure. i got in trouble calling an airport in new york as a third world airport. they used the phrase "close that third world airport." my point is, everybody knows. it affects everything from attracting talent reliable, certain access to markets and it doesn't exist. it increasingly is moving behind. i repeat myself -- american

society needs an additional $17.8 trillion in additional investment. 7000 bridges are structurally obsolete, making them expensive to fix and dangerous to drive on and when they become undrivable, extremely costly for business. cities like detroit are placing wooden water pipeline installing. you will laugh -- a number of your cities have wooden pipelines that are transporting your water and your storm water runoff. sitting in your car, stopping traffic costs americans $100 billion per year. loss of productivity at work, loss of time with family, less time spending in the community

and at restaurants. by the way, many of you live on the east coast. you know how much it costs to just take one linear mile to expand i-95 in the northeast corner? $20 million to $40 million. you realize that there are more people that get on an amtrak train on the east coast and every single, solitary person who gets on and off an aircraft from maine to florida every day? you all aware of that? where are they going to go? the population is expected to increase over the next 50 years by close to 35%. what do these guys expect? maybe by that time we will have teleporters. [laughter] and we might. maybe they know something i don't know. but i don't get it.

i genuinely don't get it. americans lose $22 billion per year stuck at congested airports, waiting for their flights. $22 billion per year. when our economy is growing in the middle class was prospering from 1946-1973, every economic study showed infrastructure investment represented about 4% of our gdp. that is federal and nonfederal investment in infrastructure. today, the federal government invests less than 1% of gdp in transportation infrastructure. the government can't do more when it is the indispensable part of the states, communities and many types of business who need certainty in planning and be able to bring in those projects on time and online.

we need to modernize our transportation infrastructure. the experts know what that means -- most people think it means our airports and our railroads and our bridges, but it is also our rivers. it is also our dams. there are billions and billions of dollars that are more cargo sitting on top of the back of the ship of an port, representing all the commerce of the world as i speak to you right now. they are building ships, and i took a group of friends down to the panama canal to see the eighth wonder of the world. they are twice as big can carry twice as much cargo at 40% of the cost, and they cannot dock at any port from houston to maine but two.

what are we thinking? what are we thinking? we can't get the money to dredge those rivers and harbors in the port. the former governor of pennsylvania can tell you that 40% of all the oil in the northeast goes up the delaware river to the delaware bay up to refineries. marcus hook, just south of philadelphia. what are we talking about? what do they need to another epiphany? look folks. we need to modernize our water infrastructure. sewage, storm water runoff, safe water supplies. go back to the town you live in. ask your local city or county councilman what the biggest

problem he or she has. it is an anonymous cost of infrastructure work, and by the way, they don't have the tax base to do it. and even if they did, nobody sees it. you get a chance to invest in the storm water draining system, which causes and enormous pollution, or you build a new park. it is not a hard choice. we are getting further and further behind. business will not grow and we will not relocate, because we have such a competitive disadvantage to our competitors around the world notwithstanding all the advantages we have here in the united states. with regard to the energy grid, and how rapidly it is aging and changing, we will not only

suffer in terms of economic growth if we don't make investment and we don't modernize, we will face a national security dilemma. we will jeopardize -- 50% of our nation's gas transmission in pipelines were constructed in the 50's and 60's. as we build up the pipeline network to meet the increasing and thriving demand of a post-world war ii economy. that 9% of those distribution pipelines and the united states are made of leak prone materials that require replacement. experts understand the problem we are facing right now in terms of leakage and the environmental threats. the potential for some real disasters. how and where we are producing energy is changing rapidly. that is the good news.

we used to import most of our oil from places like the mideast. today, we have more oil and gas rigs pumping in america than ever before. the north dakota, -- in 2011, we were the world's number one producer of natural gas. these are big changes from six years ago. and it has big and locations for our infrastructure and how these homegrown energy sources move across the country and around the world. are infrastructure has to capture the incredible growth. since 2009, solar power generation has increased to 20 fold -- twentyfold, and wind power has tripled. right now, the cost of wind power is as cheap as the cost of coal. and what a phenomenal

possibility that presents to the united states of america and to our environment. we need to ensure new transmission lines can carry this solar and wind, to power were more and businesses throughout the country and rural areas. our energy infrastructure is increasingly vulnerable to extreme weather as we see superstorm's, wildfires, and droughts. between 2002 and 2012, an estimated 679 widespread power outages occurred. it cost the economy between $18 billion and $33 billion each year. the president and i started with recovery act which contains the largest public works project since the eisenhower interstate highway system. we invested $50 million in transportation infrastructure,

improved over 6000 miles of rail more than 350 miles of road, 20,000 bridges and to connect the entire infrastructure system. and by the way, this supported millions of good paying jobs, millions of good paying jobs. there was only the first step. our budget and priorities have laid out an ambitious, long-term investment in our entire infrastructure system, including transportation and energy. this is what we should be debating. we at ministration has put forward a plan to do that -- the grow america act. a six-year, $470 billion transportation bill that would do the following. it would provide $317 billion over six years to our nation's highway system, so our roads and bridges can move forward with the certainty that they can see it through to the end saving hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs, i might add. continue the tiger grants, which

bring partners together to get capital off the sidelines to connect the different points of our entire infrastructure. doesn't matter if you can get a product to port coming in, but she can't get that product out on the road because you don't have a highway system, you don't have a rail system. since 2009, we invested $4 billion in these tiger grants leveraging $14 billion on the sidelines, nearly four dollars in private investment for every one dollar in federal investment. we want to build on the success of cutting red tape and expediting the process on major infrastructure projects, like the tappan zee bridge. we increased our federal commitment to public transit funding by more than 75% to meet the growing demands of rail

and bus and city suburbs all around the country. we pay for it through a corporate tax reform that would encourage companies to bring home profits and reinvest in the united states. we would levy a one-time, 14% tax on $2 trillion in overseas profits held by american companies, which is in some cases three times less the tax. that would generate a one-time surplus of $268 billion dedicated directly to modernizing infrastructure. it will benefit american businesses as well as the american middle class, because we can begin to grow the economy again. and we have a plan for energy infrastructure. last month, we released the energy report, which calls on congress to do a few things -- help state and companies cover the cost of digging up and

repairing the miles and miles and miles of pipeline that has to be repaired, and expand transmission access transmission line access. modernizing the mobile hubs so that puts connected to freight rail and highways to move around the world and bring our products to the world market. we did something down at the port of baltimore -- the problem was that as much progress as we made, it turns out that you couldn't get products to the port of baltimore. one of the reasons why -- manufacturing is still growing in the upper midwest, where it used to be thriving, is through a tiger grant in a place called east baltimore. the largest rail connection head anywhere in the country. you go there and you see thousands upon thousands of rail cars. they are directly connected to a line where we are allowing them

to double stacked containers because we are increasing the height of all the tunnels they have to go under going from east baltimore to the port of baltimore. if you take the ports of baltimore, the port of philadelphia, the port of savannah, the port of houston they generate anywhere from 90200 and 10,000 jobs in that state. millions of jobs, directly related to these ports being able to function. we will be able to move product -- westinghouse can move product on the back of the ship at 40% the cost. generating economic growth not only in the midwest, but throughout the country. folks, we did to provide the federal government more resource asking congress to prevent -- so we can get solar

and wind energy and transmission lines running quicker. as they got these agencies, they take longer to get these permitting down. i think that is part of the process. that is the effect. accelerate the adoption of smart technologies to help technologies move faster and more efficiently during power outages. i spent two hours in an area that looks like a norad command center up in philadelphia, looking at the largest electric company up there and how they try to balance these needs. this is compensated stuff. but it always made easier and significantly better if people have smart meters so they can move quickly. folks, we also ask them to help pay for investments through what i just described as a grow america act.

what else we have is -- if they don't like that, offer something else. tell us what they want done. we will be willing to listen. i will sit there for hours and compromise to get this done. look, these kinds of infrastructure jobs create a virtuous cycle. they attracted retain business. these are good, middle-class paying jobs. you can raise a family on them. they create and support millions of jobs, and it is not just the jobs at construction sites. it is the job at the steel mill at the asphalt plant, at the kiln. in addition, it creates jobs because they are able to buy new cars, able to stop at the diner lunch at the site, move and make

sure they can take their kid on vacation. these -- this is a virtuous cycle that is generated. it is not just minimum wage jobs, these are good paying jobs. i will get back to the basic question. i think there is absolutely no reasonable rationale, no reasonable argument against the need for these investments. i have yet to hear one. we can argue about specifics but i have yet to hear that we can be in the same position we are in now, with deteriorating infrastructure. you can't even come up for a funding for a highway bill. a highway bill. we will have a patch hopefully occur very soon. so folks you know, we will get through this period of

dysfunction. the question is how much pain and how much loss of opportunity will we suffer as a consequence. but we will get through it. but we have to get to the point to understand that it is not about compromise, it is about consensus. how do you govern a country as big as strong, as powerful, as promising, and as diverse as this one? without being able to reach a consensus on every major issue? if the republican congress disagrees, i invite them to propose an alternative. but don't just do what they recently dead and walk away. they just passed their budget in the house and senate with virtually no authorization support. they lock in sequestration, they added another $500 billion in cuts to discretionary spending

slashing infrastructure education, the medical research. just the really smart things we need to be doing right now. insisting that by 2025, nondefense discretionary spending, infrastructure, will be 35% below the lowest level in the past half-century. they would/local transit, -- they would slash local transit by 30% of the budget becomes law. they reduce the capital budget for the faa. that is how we repair and modernize airports. the lowest level in 15 years. what do they expect to happen? i'm being very serious -- i know you can sense my frustration

but what do they expect to happen? if we actually implement a bunch like this? how can we lead in the 21st century and not invest in infrastructure? with our economy surging back, we are only spending 1.5% of our gdp on total infrastructure, .5% on transportation infrastructure. where are the huge shifts, where are they going to berth? what american businesses are going to be able to take advantage of them? 70% of the cargo to and from that canal is currying a product -- is carrying a product going from the united states abroad or coming to the united states. how are we going to transport 70

million barrels of crude oil and month from north dakota to the refineries in the gulf without a dependable, safe, reliable infrastructure? all you have to do is turn to the television. there are not enough railcars. there are not enough railcars in the united states of america to meet the need, and the danger of the transportation on an antiquated system is real. israel. -- is real. it can blow up entire towns. how can american businesses in an american economy lead if we ranked 28th in the world? now that wind energy is as cheap as coal, having to climb 50% in the last four years, now costing $.85 or megawatt, how will we get this clean, renewable energy

to the cities, the towns, the homes, the factories without more transmission lines? what is going to happen when a category one hurricane, which is predicted by the way, wipes out 300-400 substations in the gulf of mexico, texas, and louisiana because they are underwater? what do we do that? what is the cost to the economy the cost to citizens' healthy? let me end where i began. we need a debate. we need a debate. that is why i am really here. to say thank you and tell you we need you. i don't ask you to agree with the way we propose funding. i think it is the most rational way to do it because i think it is a win-win for business -- you may not. but at least he will think we have to do it. we need you. we need you to talk to the house

and senate. we need you to make concrete, real examples of what it means if you do not get the investment we need here. this is critical. and every day, every year, every decade we wait, it gets more expensive, the dangers increase, the consequences are immense. my dad used to have an expression -- the only war worse than one that is intended is one that is unintended. the only thing a legislator and the president or vice president can do that is worse than coming up with a bad idea is coming up with no idea in the face of what

everyone acknowledges as a pending, looming, present crisis. so please, i hope you are all republicans -- i really mean it. i hope you are all republicans. i hope you all have contacts. i hope you all are prepared to go up and make the arguments because folks, i remember the day -- and many of you do here -- when the fight about infrastructure, there was no fight. republicans led the fight. republicans were the ones out front. what happened? what happened? ideologies became the master. to one of the most non-partisan issues the country can face.

it made a partisan how we pay, we may not like it. but pay me now or pay me later because the price is going to be extremely high if we don't step up. thank you for what you're doing and i appreciate it. [applause] >> senate majority leader mitch mcconnell spoke about his relationship with the white house at an event in boston over the weekend. that is next on c-span. then president obama talks about global entrepreneurship.

later, a discussion on the future of congress. >> on our next "washington journal," robert woodson looks at the effect inner-city poverty has on neighborhoods. after that, demo bar -- dan lamarr discusses the j helm 15 military exercises. plus, your phone calls, facebook comments come into tweets. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern each morning on c-span. >> presidential candidates often release books to introduce themselves to voters. here's a look at some recent books written by declared and potential candidates for president. former secretary of state hillary clinton looks back on her time serving in the obama administration in "hard choices." in "american dreams," marco

rubio outlines his plan to restore economic opportunity. i cut the begin systemic on politics and culture in "god and guns, grits, and gravy." and in "blue-collar conservatives," rick santorum argues that the republicans must focused on the working class to retake the white house. in "a fighting chance," elizabeth warren recounts the events in her life that shaped her career as an educator and politician. scott walker argues that republicans must offer old solutions to fix the country and have the courage to implement them in "an intimidated." rand paul, who recently declared his candidacy calls for smaller government and more bipartisanship in "taking a stand." more potential presidential candidates with recent books include former governor jeb bush in "immigration wars."

he argues for a new immigration policy. in "stand for something," john kasich calls for a return to traditional american values. former virginia at senator james webb looks back at his time in the military in "i heard my country calling." independent vermont senator bernie sanders recently announced his intention to seek the democratic nomination for president. this book, "the speech," is a painting of the eight hour filibuster against tax cuts. in "promises to keep," joe biden looks back at his career in politics and his guiding principles. ben carson calls for greater individual responsibility to preserve americans'future in "one nation." in "fed up!" rick perry says that government must get out of the way. former rhode island governor

lincoln chafee in "against the tide" recounts his time in the senate. carly the arena -- carly fear fiorina discussions are triumphant "rising to the challenge." bobby jindal criticizes the obama administration and explained why conservative solutions are needed in "leadership and crisis." and in "a time for truth," ted cruz recounts his journey from a cuban immigrants son to the u.s. senate. look for his book in june. >> next, remarks from senate majority leader mitch mcconnell at edward m. kennedy institute in boston. he stock about that she spoke about leadership and his relationship with president obama. >> good afternoon, everyone. [applause]

welcome. i have the great privilege of being the president of the edward m. kennedy institute for the united states senate. this wonderful new building and this wonderful innovative technology exhibit outside leads to this wonderful replica of the united states senate chamber. it outside leads to this wonderful replica of the united states senate chamber. it is the heart and soul of the institute. it is a full-scale replica with a little bit more technology, as you can see. if this is your first digit -- visit, i hope you will come again to see all that we offer you we are very pleased to welcome you today for the launch

of one of our public program series, "get to the point." we are very excited have majority leader mitch mcconnell be our first speaker. our formula today will include remarks from senator mcconnell. it is my pleasure to introduce mrs. victoria reggie kennedy. we know her well in massachusetts. [applause] >> i think all has been said but

you do know that she is a founding president of the institute and we would not be here without her energy, determination and her vision for making this place that will inspire a next generation of leaders. mrs. kennedy. [applause] mrs. kennedy: thank you so much for those warm words. it is so great to be with all of you and i would be remiss if i did not say a warm word of welcome to senator paul kerr, thank you for being here. also, our founding chair is here. [applause] thank you so much. good afternoon and happy mother's day to all of you.

it is my great pleasure to welcome you to the edward m kennedy institute for the united states senate. this institute was created to educate the public about the important role of the united states senate and our government. to encourage participatory democracy, invigorate civil discourse, and inspire a new generation of leaders. this afternoon, with our esteemed inaugural speaker, for our get to the point program series, i believe we fulfill every single aspect of that ambitious mission statement. let me make something clear. we call this program "get to the point" not because we are concerned about filibustering but because we are located here

at columbia point. next of a john f. kennedy library and adjacent to the massachusetts archives. how fitting it is that we are surrounded by its authors of learning, intellectual inquiry in history. how fitting it is that our first speaker is the majority leader of united states senate. the senior senator from kentucky who is also longest-serving senator in kentucky history. mitch mcconnell. we are honored by his residence today. he is by any measure a man of the senate and a proven leader. he was an honored graduate and political science from the university of louisville. he received his law degree from the kentucky school of young --

law where he was also the president of this bar association. are you sensing a pattern? leader mcconnell was first exposed to the senate in a personal way when he served as an in turn. as much as we left the emk instituto hope to inspire new generation, senator cooper inspired mcconnell to serve, too. i feel very certain that senator cooper would be very proud of all his protege has accomplish. by the time he was elected in his own right in net unity for unseating -- in 1984, unseating an incumbent, mitch mcconnell

had finely tuned legislative chops. our speaker worked hard and rose through the leadership ranks. first as chair of the republican senatorial campaign committee, a make or break proving ground for many. it was a make for our speaker. he was asked to serve in that position for a second cycle. then was elected by his peers to be minority with and then -- minority whip and then minority leader. mitch mcconnell was unanimously elected for the 115th congress. leader mcconnell has shown tremendous judgment in his personal life marrying a woman with extraordinary grace and a couple spent.

former secretary of labor and my friend, elaine chao. she has the distinction of being the longest serving labor secretary ever. he served during both terms of george w. bush and i am proud to say that the then senate, edward m kennedy, happily and proudly presided over are unanimous confirmation for both terms and thoroughly enjoyed working with her. teddy also enjoyed working with her at the institute of politics at harvard, a place that was near and dear to her heart. i'm happy she is here with us today. i know it is fashionably to say that washington is irretrievably broken and pulverized. i for one, do not believe that. as teddy would say, you can disagree without being disagreeable.

even though they didn't often vote the same way, they did sometimes. when they didn't, it wasn't personal. teddy was honored to speak at the mcconnell institute of the university of louisville. we here at the kennedy institute are likewise enjoying our collaboration with students in developing programming for here. both my husband and our speaker today revered the institution of the senate and understood what senator mcconnell has said, that the senate is, and i quote, one of the greatest tools we have in this country for guaranteeing a durable and stable legislative consensus. it is my great honor and a distinct pleasure to introduce him now. the majority leader of united states senate, the senior senator from kentucky, mitch

mcconnell. [applause] sen. mcconnell: it won't surprise you when i say that everybody loves vicki. [applause] elaine does. i do. our colleagues in the united states senate, regardless of party, have deep respect and admiration vicki, for what you provided for ted and what you are doing now. this is an extraordinary contribution to the country. not only in commemoration of

ted, but to underscore the importance of the institution of the senate. i don't think it is any secret that vicki, you gave ted a sense of stability and tranquility in his later life. even as he retained all of the passion and intensity with which we associate him. boy was he passionate. that bellowing voice from the back of the room. there was no mistaking when kennedy was up and doing his thing. you made more of him than he was without you. it was an extraordinary coming together of two outstanding people. i want to thank all of you for coming here. i see justice prior sitting

there, you must have had a slow afternoon. [laughter] i know there are others here involved in state government. i am pleased to see all of you and to be with you in boston. it is not hard to feel the mark that the kennedys made on this great american city. with a name like mcconnell, i feel quite at home here. even though i am told that the fitzgeralds came from county limerick and the kennedys from county wechsler, during a period in the civil war of the great migration because of a potato famine, i must tell you i am scotch irish. for the most part, they got here earlier. i learned a big deal about that from jim webb's book "born fighting."

about the scotch and scotch irish. they loved fighting the british. they did it in scotland. which is one of the reasons the british pushed them to northern ireland. they wanted to get rid of as many as they could and in addition to that, they wanted to turn ireland into a protestant country. that didn't work out too well. the scotch irish got over there and found they hated the british and could not get along with the catholics either, so there was a huge outward migration of scotch irish to america. beginning in 1700 and going down to the american revolution. one of those people was james mcconnell, whose revolutionary war pension application said that he was brought to the port of charleston, south carolina when he was six years old. it was during the andrew jackson

administration that they decided to pay a pension to veterans not unheard of in this country. what i discovered was, he got to fight the british again. the scotch irish got over here just in time to fight the british again, something they endued -- enjoyed doing. my scotch irish ancestors actually got here earlier, but i'm sure there are plenty of mcconnells in boston. look around this room. i don't know how many have been on the floor of the united states senate, but this is really close to where i work every day. i sit at that desk right there and harry reid sits where vicki is sitting. the rest of the desks are doled out on a seniority basis. it doesn't mean you have to move. ted preferred being in the back, given how long he was there he could have been sitting right

behind the democratic leader. he liked to be in the back. seniority gave you an opportunity to pick your spot on the floor. when i first got there i was in the very last week in the corner. very seldom do we sit where we are supposed to. there are a few solemn occasions where everybody sits where they are supposed to. the first on that happen to me early in my career, in that corner, the light wasn't very good and everybody was sitting where they were supposed to, i look around the room and i thought, none of these people are ever going to die. [laughter] retire. or be defeated. but i have a pretty good seat now. that is how we dole out the seats. the democratic leader, minority

or majority sits there and the republican leader sits there in the whip. everything else by seniority. vicki, this is a remarkable replica of the senate chamber. it was in that senate chamber in 2006 that i asked ted to do me a favor. to come to the mcconnell center at the university of louisville. he spent an our talking to the students. delivered a thoughtful and engaging speech and quite frankly, wowed the audience. i can assure you he was not down there because he owed me legislative favors. that is just the kind of guy he was. i can tell you that the students who were there at that time are still talking about it today. we had a lot of great speakers.

secretary clinton was there, vice president biden, chief justice roberts, but of all the people we had, ted was my favorite. he was truly extraordinary and i am always grateful he came down. i occupied his old office in the russell building. which vicki and i had occasion to talk about. it is a great office and i can see why ted kept it for so many years. here is the story you may not know. if the wind is blowing the right way, you can still catch a whiff of portuguese water dog in there. [laughter] you think i'm kidding? [laughter] many years ago, i chaired the rules committee and my office was right near there in the russell building. there is a balcony on that floor. the only florida has a balcony. -- only floor that has a

balcony. so the dog would go down the balcony and go into each office and greet everybody. it was the morning wake up from ted's dog. trotting down the balcony and right into the committee office. in a sense, i got to know the extended kennedy family better than most. i will not pretend that we were close allies. we worked. -- we were not c-span.org. we were on the opposite side of almost every issue. we worked together when things did a line -- did align. we worked closely with sanctions on the apartheid regime in south africa. a veto-proof majority. an overwrite of ronald reagan's veto, something i was not

routinely involved in. elaine and i got married on ronald reagan's birthday. on purpose. you get the drift. ted and i shared something else the senate as an institution and what the new majority is redoing to restore -- is doing to restore the institution that ted and i love so much. ask the kid what they want to be when they grow up and you get familiar answers astronaut movie star, president. for me it was always this. u.s. senator. my first goal was to become a baseball player. but my passion for procedure proved stronger than my pitching arm. so here i am. from a young age, i have always

admired the grander of the senate. it's complex rules, its freewheeling debate, and it's strong protections for the minority make it one of the most unique legislative bodies on earth. it is the only legislative body were a simple majority is not enough. that is the uniqueness. the senate is a place our country comes together to solve some of its most complex and intractable problems. it is where men and women of good will have often worked out durable compromise and lasting reform. only rarely does the party have a big enough majority completely impose its will on the institution. most of the time it requires some level of bipartisanship to accomplish anything. the rules and traditions are

what allow this to occur. listen to this. people matter in the senate because most of what we do is unanimous consent. if any one of the 100 says i object, you are stuck. you are stuck. so we have to talk to each other a lot, as you can imagine. this is a body full of class president types. they are pretty good or they would not have made it this far. i often say, leading this crowd is an experience you ought to have. for members of my caucus running for resident. i said you think running for president is hard, you ought to have my job. i have spent a little more than eight years as leader of my party in the senate.

it's like the difference between being the defensive coordinator and the offense of coordinator. i enjoyed being the defensive coordinator but it is harder to score. if you are the offense of court nader you to call plays and there is a chance you can put points on the board. harry reid would tell you the same thing and so would george mitchell and bob dole. i love every minute of it and i love the institution of the senate. so did ted kennedy. which is why this is such an appropriate way to remember him. i got my first taste of the peculiarities as vicki indicated. a great friend of president's kennedy and served for 10 years with ted kennedy.