commonplace view, which is that everybody needs to go to college. in fact, most of the jobs that will be available in 2020 do not require a college four-year degree. so for welders and machinists and die makers and technicians and so many others, let's get the word out. there are really good jobs for people right now and there will be more in the future if you get the skills in high school, at community college, in an apprenticeship or other training and i want to acknowledge the great role the community college here has played in working with companies like this one to make sure people do have the skills. i imagine some of you might be thinking that all sounds good, but what about trade?

after all, trump talks about it all the time. let's start with this, it is true too often passed trade deals have been sold to the american people with rosy scenarios that did not pan out. those promises now ring hollow in many communities across michigan and our country that have seen factories close and jobs disappear. too many companies lobbied for trade deal so they could sell product abroad but then they instead moved abroad and sold back into the united states. it is also true that china and other countries have gained the system for too long. enforcement, particularly during the bush administration has been too lax. investments at home that would make us more competitive would

make us -- has been blocked in congress. the answer is not to rant and rave or cut ourselves off from the other side of the world, the answer is to finally make trade work for us, not against us. so my message to every worker in michigan and across america is this, i will stop any trade deal or kills jobs or holds down wages, including the transpacific partnership. [applause] i oppose it now, i oppose it after the election and as president. as a senator from new york, i thought to defend new york manufacturers and steelmakers from unfair chinese trading practices. i oppose the only multilateral

trade deal that came before the senate while i was there because it did not meet my high bar. as secretary of state i fought hard for american businesses to get a fair shot around the world and stop underhanded trading practices like currency manipulation and that's left of intellectual property. as president i will stand up to china and anyone else who tries to take advantage of american workers and companies. [applause] and i am going to ramp up enforcement by appointing for the first time a cheap trade prosecutor. i will triple the number of enforcement officers, and when countries break the rules, we will not hesitate to impose targeted tarrifs.

[applause] now, mr. trump may talk of big game on trade but his approach is based on fear, not strength. fear that we cannot compete with the rest of the world, even when rules are fair. fear that our country has no choice but to hide behind walls. if team usa was as fearful as donald trump, michael phelps and simone biles would be cowering in the locker room afraid to come out and compete. instead, they are winning gold medals. america is not afraid to compete. thousands of companies are exporting billions of dollars of product around the world.

we want them to sell even more and create even more jobs here at home. corporations do not abandon profitable operations in the united states to move abroad just to give shareholders a quicker return. ceo's a bigger bonus and unions of weaker hand to play. before he tweets -- [applause] about how he is really the one who will put america first and trade, let's remember where trump makes many of his own products, because it sure is not america. he has made trump ties in china

and donald trump suits in mexico and that a michigan. he says it is not possible to make things in america. we created a website. hillaryclinton.com/makeithere. on it we list 100 places across the united states that are already producing similar goods. one positive thing trump could do to make america great again is to actually make great things in america again. which candidate will fight for fairness? this is an urgent need. we need to grow the economy and make it fairer. the tide is not rising fast enough and certainly not listing all both. since the crash, too many of the gains have gone to the top 1%. the rules and incentives of our

system reward corporations for putting short-term stock prices along long time investment in equipment and research. while corporate profits are at near record high, paychecks for most people have barely budge. incomes are growing fast -- are not growing to keep up with the cost of living. like prescription drugs and childcare. i believe every employee to the ceo suite and factory floor contributes to a business of success. everyone should share in the rewards. especially those putting in long hours for little pay. i am proposing a new tax credit. more broadly, we will fight for a more progressive or patriotic tax code. that puts american jobs first.

right now when a corporation outsources jobs and production, it could write off the cost. we must stop that and must make them pay back any tax break they ever received them any level of government in our country. for those that move their headquarters overseas to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, they will have to pay a new exit tax. if they want to go, they will have to pay to go. wall street corporations in the super rich should finally pay their fair share of taxes. that is why i support the so-called buffet rural. multimillionaires should not be able to pay a lower tax rate than their secretary. [applause]

we should also add a new tax on multimillionaires. crackdown on tax gaming by corporations and close the kerry -- carried interest loophole, something i have advocated for years. compare what trump says. there is a myth out there that trump will stick it to the rich and powerful, because somehow he is really on the side of the little guy. don't believe it. not when he pledges to rip up basic rules that hold corporations accountable. when he wants to scrap regulations to stop looters from poisoning the air our children breathe and the water we drink. trump will roll back the tough rules we have imposed on the financial industry.

i will do the opposite. i think we should strengthen those so wall street can never wreck main street again. trump even wants to abolish the consumer financial protection bureau. a new agency has already returned more than $11 billion to 25 million americans who were taken advantage of by corporations. then there is the tax plan, he would give trillions to money managers. that would explode the national debt and eventually lead to massive cuts and priorities like education, health care, and environmental protections. in his speech monday he calls for a new tax loophole.

let's call it the trump loophole. it would allow him to pay less than half the current tax rate on income for many of his companies. he would pay a lower rate than millions of middle-class families. one nonpartisan expert at the tax policy center described this plan as a really nice deal, for donald trump. it is hard to say how nice because he refused to what every other candidate has done and release his tax return. [applause] but we do know the 400 richest taxpayers and america would get an average tax cuts of more than $15 million per year from the trump loophole.

then there is the estate tax, which trump wants to eliminate altogether. if you believe he is as wealthy as he says, that alone would say the trump family $4 billion. they would get a $4 billion tax cut, and 99.8% of americans would get nothing. just think of what we could do with the $4 billion? we could provide a years worth of health care to nearly 3 million kids. or we could fund a years worth of federal assistance to local law enforcement. there is a lot of better ways to spend the money. monday i will be in scranton -- scranton, pennsylvania, with vice president biden. he says don't tell me what you value, show me your budget and i

will tell you what you value. donald trump wants to give trillions in tax breaks to people like himself. i want to invest it in veterans, police officers, and so much more. you can then draw your own conclusion about values. he is making a big promise, but his advisers have said, he may not stand by them. the tax cuts he doubled down on offer trillions to the richest americans and corporations. what are the differences between donald trump and me?

i am telling what i will do come laying out my plan, and i will stand by them, and want to you to hold me accountable for delivering results. this reminds me of the old saying, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. that brings us to the third question, which candidate can you count on to go to bat for workers and middle-class families you come it is not enough to pay lip service to be on your side. we have to recognize how americans actually live and work in the 21st century and then offer real solutions that make your life easier. we know women are now the sole or primary breadwinner in a rowing number of families. we know that more americans are cobbling together part-time work or striking out on their own, so we have to make it easier to be good workers and caregivers all at the same time.

that is why i have set out a vision to make quality, affordable childcare available to all americans and limit the cost to 10% of family income. on monday trump offered his first real idea on this topic. previously he dismissed ideas about childcare. he said it was not an expensive thing. you just need some blogs and some swings. now he says he wants to exclude childcare payments from taxation. now he said he wants to exclude childcare payments from taxation. because it is transparently denied for rich people. she would get -- because she would get 30 or $.40 on the dollar for her nanny and little or nothing to families trying to

afford childcare so they can get to work and keep a job. i think instead we should expand the child tax credit to provide real relief to tens of millions of americans working and struggling with the cost. the same family that his plan ignores. that is just the start. the more we do to help working families, the more the entire economy will benefit. guaranteeing equal pay will boost family budgets and get incomes rising across the board. i don't understand why trump is against that. paid family leave will only make life easier for moms and dads. it will keep skilled, talented americans in the workforce and grow our economy. that is why every other advance -- advanced country already has it.

raising the minimum wage will not just put more money in the pockets of low income families, it means they will spend more at the businesses in their neighborhood. this is something that even the original automakers understood way back at the beginning of the 20th century when they decided to pay the unbelievable sum of five dollars per day to auto workers. and when they were criticized by other businesses, they have the best answer, we want people to be able to buy our cars. this is economics 101. we need to get incomes and wages rising, and it will help the whole economy grow and be fairer. from texting and expanding social security, it does not just help older americans. it helps to ease burdens.

i often think the same thing about comprehensive immigration arm. we already have millions of people working in the economy and paying 12 billion per year to social security, even though they are undocumented. by moving toward reform, we will unleash a lot of new income and growth and level the playing field so american workers cannot be taken advantage of because undocumented workers can be ex -- exploited by employers, which is one of the reasons we have this disconnect. finally, strengthening unions does not just serve members, it leads to better pay and benefits and working conditions for all employees. [applause]

so i have also said i will defend and improve the affordable care act. that includes giving americans the better choice of a public option health insurance plan that will help everyone afford coverage. it will strengthen competition and drive down costs. these are all causes i have worked on for decades, and i believe they point to a fundamental truth about the economy. it can seem like zero sum when you are competing for a job, promotion, or contract if someone wins and loses, but that is not the full picture. if you step back, you can see we are all in this together. if we grow together, we can all rise together. you know what i like to say, we are all stronger together. the fourth question is this, who can bring people together to get any of this done?

well, i believe i can because i think i can provide serious, steady leadership that can find common ground to and on it based upon hard but respectful bargaining with the other side. leadership that rises above personal attacks and name-calling, not revels in it. i just do not think insults and bullying is how we are to get things done. i do not think that is the appropriate approach for us. there was a time when democrats and republicans actually work together. i know that's true. i did it as first lady.

it is how we created the children's health insurance program. it is how we rebuilt 9/11 -- new york after 9/11. how it has to treaty for reducing the threat of rush nuclear weapons. so i am convinced based on my experience that we can do this. one of the reasons i asked tim kaine to be my running mate is he is a record of working across the aisle to get things done as a mayor, governor, and senator. we will make full use of the white house power to convene. we will get everyone at the table, not just republicans and democrats. business labors, academics, but most importantly, americans like all of you. [applause] i think there are a lot of great ideas. i want you to have a say in your government, and that means we have to get unaccountable money out of politics, overturn citizens united and over 10

-- expand voters rights not restrict them. i intend to bring together leaders from across the economy, from a lot of different places to talk about jobs and competitiveness. i hope mark and john can join me. we need the best ideas that are out there making a difference. we need to pull together. the bottom-line is this. i am running for president to build an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top. [applause] based on what we know from the trump campaign, he wants americans to work for him and his friends at the top. he has offered nothing on student loans of the cost of description drugs, nothing for farmers or struggling rural communities.

nothing to build a new future with clean energy and advance agriculture. nothing for the cities to overcome the barriers of cyst in the graces him. nothing to create new opportunities for young people. nothing for cities to overcome the barriers of racism. his own addition of trump ideas that even republicans reject. as we heard him say at his convention, he believes that he alone can fix our country, but clearly he does not know the people of michigan. he does not see the businesses and labor unions, local government and clergy coming together every single day to make things better. yes, they are still a long road ahead, but michigan is on the

rise, and everyone is contributing. that is america at its best. i hope you will work together to create jobs and strengthen its own communities. i hope you will work to get out the vote in november. because if we are able to win, then i want you all to work with me. build the kind of progress in america deserves to see. we will do this together. we are stronger together. let's go out and build the future. [applause] thank you. ♪ and you can see hillary

clinton's job plan. donald trump spoke in orlando florida. he spoke to the american renewal project talking about religious freedom, the supreme court issues. >> t is such a terrific person. a terrific man. he is a special guy. into too much get of a debate with them. that could be very unattractive. he is tough.

he is a good man and i appreciate being here. i know some of the pastors and i used to put them to sleep. let's talk. i thought i would tell you a story that took place not so long ago at a big conference in manhattan. we had many pastors, and 55 people. we had ministers and we had to rabbis, great people. agoit was maybe six months and it was before that also and i noticed there was tremendous tremendous power from

this people. their personalities, their speech. hearing real estate people. they are smart, they are tough. but such great people in the room. i'm pretty good at this and i know when people like me and my people don't like me. that's ok. and listen to all of the people. peoplee very religious and they are believers and they believe so much and religious liberty as i do, very much because without religious liberty, if you don't have liberty.

some of these pastors and both cases then rabbis, they have tremendous followings tremendous congregations. meeting where i think his people. love for donald trump. i said play for me. and not immediately. everything was beautiful. said, i hope you can get out there and really support me and be an endorsement.

all of those political things and i saw there was a silence. said was going on. where was the enthusiasm. i can say they really like me. they know i get it. state. go into a pastor jefferson city on television and he was great. his great way of speaking. the donald trump may not be perfect but he knows how to win. maybe he is not as good or as perfect on the bible.

he may not be perfect. he is ours. then he said something that was very interesting. reagan, new ronald every word in the bible. he'd gone through a divorce and was probably not on paper the same. he said his father was under from thes pressure church groups and from the evangelicals to endorse jimmy

carter. that's when you had that iran hostage crisis. it is happening through weakness. reagan's andonald he was always so proud of that decision. it was a great decision. you're talking about a great but he would get up and say he's not perfect but he knows how to win and he is going to win for us. i said it liked that guy. he said things that were very nice. we have such great support with , veryangelical community largely the religious community.

i'm in the room with many of the pastors. and they are saying, we can't really do that. he says why? me, whyi know you like can't you endorsement? we had reverend paula and we had some others that were amazing. they are strong people and they said we can't do it. they said they didn't want to tell me. it is almost like they got used to this thing around their neck. it is almost like they couldn't see and i said why?

they said we don't want to lose our tax exempt status. what is that have to do with your tax-exempt status? and it basically has to do with the 501(c)(3) status. they can't get involved from the of the of these powerful people with a great voice. christianityhat and everything we are talking about has had it. if you were a christian, it was virtually impossible to come into the united states. ,f you are a muslim from syria it was one of the easier countries to be able to find your way into the united states.

think of what that means. i didn't know this and i didn't but it played such a big role. basically i looked back into it. you get used to something that is wrong or you live with it but that is why they weren't telling me. these are the smartest people. people that got so used to invade and even now what was wrong. they knew there was something wrong. i wanted to look into it. it was lot the same people. but with lyndon johnson, they

are all nodding their heads. they say he was having a problem with either one or more churches. he wanted to silence the church. very much different from what we have today, we don't have tough. we need tough. [applause] we certainly won't have it is hillary clinton gets it, it will be former years of this nonsense that goes on. it was very interesting and i had the meeting. to him about lyndon johnson.

so lyndon johnson wanting to silence people that didn't feel so good. in particular one church. maybe it was many churches. he was powerful and got it approved. he basically silenced the andors and the ministers the rabbis and the priest. and i saideligion well, that's incredible. reason, the churches and the pastors in the didn't dols, they anything about it. i know how tough you are. happened?d

you're smiling. imagine if you women. very is helpful tips. religion, that's not 50-50. present. whatever they may be, it is the most powerful lobby there is. yeah, you've been totally silenced. that means you have less power as powerful people than people that are representing thousands sunday, that means you have less power than people

walking up and down the street. that means you less power than they do. yet you should be far more powerful and if you look at what's happened to religion and what's happening to christianity and the number of people going it is not this kind of a client. slow and steady in the wrong direction. with theit has to do fact that you have been silenced. strong, brilliant, great people that want to do the right thing. they say don't do that donald.

great people. and mercer, i'm going to take this into my own hands. this is where he's right. i started telling people about it because it did have an impact on me. are ourre silenced that finest people. their power is taken away. your has been taken away. they are so afraid to even mention the word endorsement as opposed to saying you like people, you should be able to support that person and able to is the bestay trump or whoever you want. you can't do that now.

pay to tell you folks, you have two choices. you have two choices. in one of them, you're not going for that choice. i felt confident. go out andbe able to stand up and say that's the one i want, i want that one. you should also represents perhaps someone who represents and youlings about life should really talk about it. some of the churches do great work. they can't do it. i decided to work on it. i was lucky enough to win the primaries in a landslide.

think about that. that is the 17 people. and the highest number of votes it was like a landslide. a lot of that was from the evangelicals. this one. we went to south carolina and went to north carolina and said, they are they will have problems. carolina a lot. that's a good thing, isn't it? i said i don't know, i don't think so. i turned out to be right because they voted for trump, they wanted trump. i appreciate that. i am protestant presbyterian.

first presbyterian church of jamaica, jamaica, new york, out in queens, new york. and i'm proud of it. but i said i'm going to take this into my own hands and i and going to figure a way that we can get you back your freedom of speech. it was taken away. [applause] you know, this wasn't taken away as part of our constitution when our great forefathers went out and wrote it. this was lyndon johnson in the 1970's. this is an something we need great legal dialogue on here and this was lyndon johnson in the 1970's.

i respect lyndon johnson because he was one smart cookie. but lyndon johnson was a major player. he was a very tough cookie. and he was able to silence his critics by doing it. so we're going to get your voice back. we are going to get it back. when it looked like i was going to win -- we still have these never trump, never trump, all these people, never trump. that's why i love mike. mike said, hey, he's doing a good job. and he is such an amazing guy. we always got along. somehow, we always got along. and there are a few others, too. we have some pretty good relationships. i said, you know, we're going to do something. and when i got the nomination, and as we were getting a and is working on the life form, i said to my people, see if you can add in the johnson amendment. call it the johnson amendment. that we are going to get rid of the johnson amendment. [applause]

now i wanted to come and explain it because a lot of people don't know in the kind of detail, in depth i have explained it to you today. i was at a couple of pastors a few weeks ago but they weren't really sure. i hope you can spread the word. this will be so great for religion. but it will be so great for the evangelicals, the pastors, the priests, for america. no, they took away your voice. they took away the voice of great people. they took away the voice of people that want to see good things happen. it's not like they took away a bad voice, and evil voice. they took away a voice -- and i mean, took it away. i think two people in this rumor there. but if you were in that room with me, they were silent. they didn't want to get involved

with good things. so we are going to put it together. and we actually put it in the platform. and i have to say the republicans were great. they were great. [applause] i will get it approved, too. we will get it out. we will be able to terminate the johnson amendment. and you will have great power to do good things. and religion will start going instead of this way -- i mean, christianity, when you think of what's happening, you look at the numbers -- i talk about sunday school and people don't know what i am talking about anymore. it's true. they don't know and talking about. instead of going this way, you're going to be going this way. you may be going this way, but we are going to bring it back. because it's a good thing. it's a good thing. they treated you like it was a bad thing. but it's a great thing. so if i get elected president, one of the early things, one of

the absolute first things i am going to do is work on totally knocking out the johnson amendment. now, it is not going to be that hard. even the democrats, the power you have is so enormous, it's not like you have -- you represent 2% of the country and it's going to be difficult. you're probably 75% 80%. and if you want to put your full weight -- can you imagine if all of you people started calling up the local congressman and the local senator? i mean, they don't have a chance of winning that one. and i don't need lobbyists like hillary clinton needs, and pay them a fortune, by the way. we don't need lobbyists.

they get paid a fortune and have total control over hillary. special interests, all of these people. they have total control over her. the hedge funders paid her $48 million. i'm funding me. where doing well in florida. and were doing well in ohio. [applause] the polls early -- rasmussen just came out. we are doing well. 11 or 12 or 13 points down a few weeks ago. now on three points down. so something is going on. this happened in the primaries, too. you know. somebody got up the other day. it was geraldo rivera. geraldo is a good guy. he was in one of the fox shows. nobody's gotten rich by betting against the donald trump. [laughter] so who knows. i don't say that in a bad way, but i've beat 16 politicians, etc.

so i think we're going to win. i think going to do well. she's a very dishonest person. new e-mails have come out today. you heard about this whole deal. now the fbi it seems, is very upset because they made a recommendation to justice and justice turn down the recommendations. whats going on now has never been seen. not the say that it hasn't gone on, but it hasn't been seen publicly where someone can go out and read charges that someone is so guilty, that other people's lives have been destroyed, including general petraeus. he got two years and what he did was peanuts compared to -- she burned out 30,000 e-mails. so the other day, they had a thousand e-mails. and these are probably the good ones. but they found a lot of bad

stuff. pay for play. pay for play. it's illegal. it's just happening, but i hear everybody is upset at fbi. the situation was not pursued in this is having to do with other things beyond all of the things -- for a while, i said, wow, because there is point after point after point -- wow, she is guilty. and then however, we've decided -- it's really bad. we've never seen the inner workings of our government. it's looking so bad. a lot of things are happening to crooked hillary. because i think, you know, personally, i think that her single greatest achievement, when you can burn out or delete or however she did 33,000 -- but of course, those were ok, but they were the wedding and yoga.

[laughter] i could see for yoga, two or three. i could see for the wedding, 10. but 33,000 e-mails? yoga and the wedding, right? and i made the statement before that barack obama and hillary clinton, these are the founders of isis. these are the founders of isis because of bad judgment. these are the founders. some, well, that's not very nice. if they said it about me, that would be fine. as a something about them, it's terrible. they get the most valuable player award. isis is going to present them with the most valuable player award. [laughter] you know, like in high school. [applause] most valuable player award. no, these are bad people.

incompetent. i just read with isis, the jv, remember the jv? it's gone from eight countries to 28 countries. they were trying to clean up the books. did you see it just came out that they were try to make it look like it was much less powerful than it is? and there have been 143 attacks over the last short while. 143 attacks in 29 countries. and we are allowing them to come in through syria, we are allowing them to come in by the thousands. and hillary clinton wants to raise it up 550%. and we don't know -- in all fairness, we want safe havens. we want to help them in syria. we will get the gulf states to

pay for it because they have plenty of money and they are not doing anything. and if it would for us, they wouldn't be there very long, believe me. they've got nothing but many. and we are going to make them pay for it. but i have a big heart. i have as big a heart as anybody in this room. you got some pretty good people. i know one person in particular. he's actually better person than i am, but that's ok. [laughter] but he knows that i can do stuff better. so we are going to hopefully win. and the way we are going to win is you have to get your congregations and you have to get your parishioners and all of your people and you've got to get them to sign those cards early. in many cases, you can vote before november 8. this way, there's no excuses. i joke a lot. i say, if you are sick, if you've got just the worst

prognosis that a doctor can give you, if you are lying in bed and you just know you're not going to make it, you have to get up on november 8 and you have to vote. [laughter] [applause] honestly, you did not vote for romney. if you had voted for romney, it would have been much closer. you did not vote for romney, evangelicals. religion did not get out and vote. i don't know why and whatever the reason. i'm not sure why. a lot of different reasons for. the people did not get out and vote. but you have really now a one-time shot. that's it. it's a one-time shot to get out and vote. you have to get the people in your churches.

you have to get them to go out and vote. whether you have bus drives or whatever you have to do. for instance, we have a close race in virginia. if we get the evangelicals, we get the different people that are represented by you, if we get those people to vote, we are going to win in virginia. we are going to win in virginia. if they don't vote, not going to happen. it's never going to happen again. you're never going to have a chance again, 501 c3 for yourselves. you can talk about you like. think about that. you can have your people -- i mean, dialogue within the churches and temples and whatever it may be. you can actually have dialogue, talk about who you want. it's never going to happen again, folks.

how it happened in the first place is amazing. it told me what a great politician lyndon johnson is. how they got that through his amazing. he is a strong, tough guy. but you are never going to have this chance again. the reason i wanted to do this instead of a ho-hum speech where i say, talk about my childhood, talk about whatever, have a few people yawning in the middle -- you notice i took the teleprompters down, right? [applause] i had teleprompters. i had a speech. written by a professional. and i said i am not reading this. [laughter] and you have a chance to do something that will be earth shaking. i literally mean it, or the shaking. you have got to vote. and especially in those states where we are represented -- i'm having a tremendous problem in utah. utah is a different place. is anybody here from utah? i didn't think so. [laughter] we're having a problem. i mean, because, look, you know,

it could cost us the supreme court. we are going to have four or five justices put on. we are having a problem. i have been given a false narrative. but we are doing really well in some states coming putting -- including florida. how many are from florida here? [cheering] look, if you get your people out to vote, we are going to in florida. even one point upper one point down, it's even. and i haven't started yet. i haven't really started. remember, don't forget i won the , primaries by a landslide. and people were really shocked. you remember the story, where we had marco and jeb and we had, like, initially 17 people. they saw marco and jeb and will do winner take all. one of those guys will pick up 99 delegates. i said i don't want that. you have a governor for eight years and a senator who is a

rising star and you have trump. then the first poll came and i have 48% and they had 12% and 11 the percent -- and 11%. and i thought i do like that. [laughter] we won by a massive amount and that was great. we need help and ohio. the fact that you are in florida, most of you, many of you are in florida, but if you can send out the word to ohio, pennsylvania, some of those really important swing states, i'm telling you, we will -- we will do it. we are very close -- because we are close. we are very close. in pennsylvania, she wants the miners out of business. she is a disaster. she's a disaster. i think we are going to win pennsylvania. but if we become president, we are going to do something that will be so great for something we all love, ok?

something we all love. we have 90 days. not long. 90 days -- when i started this, it was june 16. it's been a long time. boy, that's a long time. all of a sudden, we are down to 90 days. i think it is so, so important. i just gave a speech to a great organization, the homebuilders of our country, great people. my father was a home builder. that's what he did. he built homes. and i'm driving over here -- that was two hours ago -- and i'm driving over here and i said, you know, in a way, your home builders, too. but you are homebuilders with a spirit. youre spiritual homebuilders. which is actually more important if you think about it, than the brick-and-mortar, ok? [applause] i just want to tell you that -- i wanted to discuss this because usually it is just one line, that we are going to get rid of the johnson amendment that nobody knows about. i explained it in more detail

than i am a half you could spread the word to everybody, to all the other pastors all over -- and if you get everybody out to vote in florida and if you get everybody out to vote in, like, virginia, like, pennsylvania, like, ohio and some of the other states, especially the ones that are really the pivotal states, we will win. and you will see things happen for the evangelicals -- you will see things happen that you wouldn't believe. and really, most importantly, for religion, you're going to see things happen, for religion. all religions. so important. so i hope it can spread the -- you can spread the word. on november 8, i hope you can get everybody out. and before then, you know, they have early ballots, especially in florida. they had early ballots and you can sign hundreds of thousands

of early ballots for people that can't get out the vote, for just about everybody. and whatever you can do, i would and whatever you can do, i would appreciate. i say pray for me. i pray for you. i just want to say, whatever you can do, this will be an election that will go down in the history books. and for evangelicals, for the christians, for the everybody, for everybody of religion. this will be may be the most important election that our country has ever had. so go out and spread the word. and once i get in, i will do my thing that i do very well. and i figure it is probably, maybe the only way i'm going to get to heaven. so i better do a good job.

[laughter] ok? [applause] thank you. thank you very much, everybody. thank you very much. thank you. thank you all. thank you. november 8. [applause] hillaryer today. foreigndiscussed u.s. policy.

[cheers and applause] i oppose it now. i will oppose it after the election. and i will oppose it as president. as the senator of new york, i thought first deal makers from unfair chinese trade practices. and i oppose the only multilateral trade go that came before the senate while i was there because it did not meet my high bar. and as secretary of state, i thought hard for american businesses to get a fair shot around the world and to stop underhanded trading practices, like currency manipulation and the theft of intellectual property. so as president, i will stand up to china and anyone else who tries to take advantage of american workers and companies. and i'm going to ramp up enforcement by pointing for the first time a chief trade prosecutor. i will triple the number of enforcement officers.

break the rules, we will not hesitate to impose tariffs. mr. trump may talk a game but his approach is based on fear, not strength. fear that we cannot compete with the rest of the world even when the rules are not fair, fear that our country has no choice but to hide behind walls. if team usa was as fearfulness trump, michael phelps and simone biles would be covering in the locker room. instead, they are winning gold medals. america is not afraid to

compete. we want them to sell even more and create even more jobs here at home. corporations do not abandon profitable operations in the united states to move abroad just to give shareholders a quicker return. before he tweets -- [applause] about how he is really the one who will put america first and trade, let's remember where trump makes many of his own products, because it sure is not america.

he has made trump ties in china and since in mexico and that a michigan. we created a website. hillaryclinton.com/makeithere. on it we list 100 places across the united states that are already producing similar goods. one positive thing trump could do to make america great again is to actually make great things in america again.

later tonight, we will take phone calls and reactions to her speech. earlier today, donald trump spoke to evangelical pastors in orlando. lifeshington journal, every day with news and policy issues. on friday, william barber on his efforts to mobilize people of faith in regards to political issues like minimum wage. eorge mason university toronto on the security of america's voting system. and with the recent news that exit the exchange talks, zachary trainer

about the impact the affordable care act is having on insurance providers. watch washington journal on friday morning to join the discussion. next, discussion on how the obama administration is working with the clinton and trump campaigns on transitioning the white house from their administration to the next. we will hear about how a new administration takes cabinet secretaries to staff. and what qualities they are looking for. out of the george w. bush presidential library in dallas, this is 1.5 hours.

that.nsitions ran against it is now commonplace for people to think it is a responsible thing for candidates to be measuring the drapes and what they are going to do if they actually manage to prevail and so now the job of the transition project is to convince people that measuring the drapes or preparing to leave is the new equivalent of not changing your stocks and so that is an easy transition into today's topic for this panel, the last panel

was essentially about what it is like a transition the white house and to this group of people have walked into the white house on day one but another interesting aspect of these people is that they have all walked out of the white house before the president walked out of the white house and moved into the executive branch where the mission of the administration also goes on and so, this panel will be a bit about walking into the building and what that experience is like because they have had that experience but it will also be about how do you take on the responsibilities of running what the president is only and the white house is only the top part of which is the full executive branch of the full american of larget which is one -- world's largest organizations, obviously one of the most powerful organizations and one of the most complex

organizations especially if you are interested in actually making it fit your ambitions, so, one of the things -- if i am allowed to -- i will give you a brief synopsis if you miss the first panel. leadership is a team sport. it starts at the top. leadership is a team sport and practice matters. regardless of whether or not you face the same game you think you're going to play, practicing together helps everyone. those are topics that these three people have had, what they are just learned last night is that not only did lisa brown walked into the white house with president obama, she also walked out of the white house with ice president gore and clinton. -- vice president gore and clinton. she has been on both ends of the spectrum. clay johnson started planning to

walk into the white house even before governor bush announced he was going to run for the white house. he was deputy director of management. the management and management. the same job that lisa brown was assigned to buy president obama and put a twist on it to make her key performance officer. i will let her talk about what that means. chris lu, likely johnson was the

executive director of the obama transition planning group which means he was the guy who started way back before obama was a presumptive candidate. he was the guy who major to know what they were doing if they one and he is now midway through the m initiation has walked out of the building on his own into the executive branch and if you anything about the agency, -- he is the person whose job it is to make sure ambitions of the secretary and ambitions of the president are the actual output of the agency. what i plan to do is ask a series of questions of each individual and author will have a check to, tell them because they all have a similar expenses. -- experiences.

you have all walked into the building. you have all been part of the process before where your person was just a candidate and now the president-elect and he walked into the building and did the job and what i would like you to do is think back to the end of the secondly, not the first week, the second week and ask yourself if you could only draw on that two-week experience, what thing would you tell your successor that would help them walk into the building with more confidence and strength. >> ferc, what to say thank you. thank you for the bush library for hosting and the moody foundation for making all of

this possible. i think both mac and just talked about this. you want to come in with a very clear plan and roadmap for what you want to do clearly for the first two weeks and there are executive orders unannounced and that time period, you set a tone very quickly. what you want to do is know when you walk into the door, we had a very clear set of we knew it was happening on day 1, 2, 3, specially for the first two weeks. i was to have a clear plan but also be willing to be flexible. we are always trying to balance is being proactive and josh mentioned this, we hope the next president will have a honeymoon period. and it is a remarkable time we can get things done. you want to take advantage of that. you also don't know what is going to happen. you also need to be able to be agile when something does happen so that you can respond to

appear -- to it. >> i agree totally. i want to expand the common which is you need to take charge of the kind of president you want to be and want to be confident and comfortable and assured that you will be able to be. one of the first -- one of the things you want to do in the first two weeks? educational things, statutory things, whatever you want to do. one of the things that could be risks if they showed their own we face or opportunities where our countries threat, unlike ever, their economic risks.

so the president needs to be thinking, how prepared do i want to be to deal with a threat to our country, or a health risk, and so how well staffed do i want to be in the key areas in those departments, how well briefed do i want to be, how knowledgeable of the potential circumstances i might get faced with? make sure that happens. the key is, the thing that is not secondary or should not be a variable but should be fixed is, what the president, with a candidate for president today, what kind of president do they want to do, if they want to be those first two weeks. without a doubt, do they want to be? you think about how much time to i have between now and then that is not fixed. time fixtures in terms of man days, do you have someone working on it? two or three people, a three people man month, but if it is

300 -- am i devoting the resources, and my expanding the time, adding more days to the calendar them really exist by adding more people to really be prepared, have people around me in key positions to deal with stuff i will want to accomplish if nothing else, encourage? and those other things that might occur help from a national security standpoint. take control of that. that is the picture of success you want to accomplish, that you want to have painted it your two weeks in the presidency and own that and take responsibility. >> this is why the transition period is so important. you want to come in and hit the ground running. you want to start governing the minute the president is sworn in, instead of, "where is the bathroom" equivalent. using that seven days or 34 days as best as you can, so that when you do governance like clay just described. you can immediately start acting and setting the tone for your

presidency. terry: and not really 77 days, that is president-elect. he did not start thinking about the transition on election day, right, chris? started months ahead of time. every one of those days, it is growing opportunity to be prepared. chris: we started planning in may of 2008, maybe actually april, before candidate obama had even grabs the democratic nomination. we understood the importance of planning in a very positive way. planning a transition is one of these really unique experiences where you cannot ask for an extension of time. on the noon of january 20, you have to be ready.

that time goes very fast. many decisions you make during transition ultimately affect the success of your presidency. the key to all of this is understanding that the matter how great the planning is, you have to be prepared for the unexpected. in the beginning of 2008, the spring of 2008 we started planning, we had probably a dozen different policy groups looking at everything from education to health care to the environment, economy was one of them. he was just one of the 12 to that we had. by the fall of 2008 as the financial housing market started imploding, the economy expands to take over everything else. so you have to plan it also be nimble as well. host: planning is partly about the people you want to put in place and what positions they have and who is going to be the

best fit for the president's ambitions, but it is also about the ambitions themselves, right? the ability to pin it were an unexpected event which like a crisis, everything else is already in place. it is easy for -- i think it is hard for people to understand is the president could actually say, something is on fire, and is really important, but i have got other things to do. don't mess this up while i am gone, but i have got to do this other thing. so the president's ability to give it during a crisis depends upon the fact that notion, while he is focused on a crisis, the left of the government is not standing still. there is a general policy being pushed forward by others that

depends upon him and that matter to him. so this planning stuff that you do is not simply, what are we going to do the first couple of weeks? i have to give a topic beach on this day four, but where is the president's agenda, how far advanced, how well organized? now i have got to focus on this other thing that i know was expected. that is a part of the transition as well. everyone agree with that? so if we set that out as an objective, first set out the president's agenda, and then how can we use that agenda to help him for the things that are unexpected or her, toward the things that are unexpected? where does the personnel fit into that? the nice thing about the campaign is the ready group of people of the now president-elect is now familiar with, but there are now all these other people like mac and

josh talked about you to draw in from the washington community. you are not clear what their objectives are. this is a question for clay. you have this responsibility. how do you decide who the president needs from washington, and how do you decide who the president needs from the campaign? clay: the president is charged to me when he was governor. i was the appointments person for the governorship, which is the equivalent of president to personnel. you decide who to recommend to me to do the work we want to get done while i am governor or president. so for his administration, what does he want to do? that is the goal every we all want the people that do the best job of our desired work

accomplished. and so he did talk about politics, done in a political environment, and is very important you have to understand first of all what you want the deputy secretary to do, or whatever or the assistant secretary overseer or the head of fish and wildlife for the parks and recreation, what do you want them to do? so the first thing you do as residential personnel, you go to the corporate policy section or national security or whatever, in the white house and say, what does this administration want from parks and wildlife to take care of, or whatever? and the health department or hhs, what do they want? in the three or four years they will be in the particular job, we want them, we think they should accomplish this, this direction, south, north, reduce or add it. then you confirm with them and others what kind of person they

want to do that. a change agent, subject matter expert, management expert? you want someone publicly associated with the issue or somebody for very different reasons have no association because they will be a lightning rod? what kind of person are you looking for? and then you go out and you say, here is the target of the person i would like to recommend so i can explain to the president, this is the person we recommend because you want to get this and this and this done, this person wants you to get this and this and this done because they are behind that. so you do that and go out and find people in the various ways networking. so what happens to politics? we did not try to do with the political matter as well as the accomplished matters in the personnel office.

personnel was charged with confidence the matters, the other was political. their charge was, make sure we don't do anything stupid politically. or politically stupid. [laughter] clay: anymore. so they would recommend people that were politically safe or maybe people that were sure to be loyal to the president, like-minded as the president and so on. maybe they were people that did not come from them, but they would check their political background, people that worked in the community, who would be acceptable. it all started with what kind of person are you looking for that is best qualified to accomplish what this president wants to do? he was very clear charge again from the conversation with the president, find the person best

qualified to get the work i, we want to get done while i am president. terry: so you do that without reference to a set of names? clay: without reference to a set of names? terry: you were describing the charge is, described the person we want, for the department of labor, secretary of labor, what does that entail, what kind of person do we want, all within the context of, we don't already know who that chris lu is? clay: you have to be disciplined to go and decide that. somebody overseer might a as soon as you get to to finding them i can tell you chris lu would be a fantastic secretary of labor. or i think chris lu would be a fantastic -- we would find out, what are the policy, what do the policy people, what do they suggest a labor be focused on in

the first three or four years. and if chris lu is qualified to do that, has the skill set to do that, because it means working well with congress or doing this operationally within the agency or as a manager or fiscal or whatever. so you are not given a name. your first job is to place these people in management positions. maybe it did not happen with us. terry: on the other hand, you are directing, and the obama transition, you are directing 600 people that are looking at agencies that are basically agency experts, policy experts, people like that. are you telling those people

that they are the policy people that have an in-depth understanding of what it is like to deal with employment training or something like that, because that is what they are interested in in the department of labor? are you also saying that? also keep in mind there is no way he will meet all of the cases to be the assistant secretary of training. or do those people go to work only because this is their ambition? lisa: people join because they care about the government and to be honest, they hope they will go into the government. we were very clear you would not necessarily be given a job. we put together a transition team, we were very clear with folks that while we welcomed the participation, they should not necessarily expect a job. you hear about people drawn to, people prove themselves through the job. and then they are thought of when you are looking to see who will be your deputy secretary of justice. terry: did you guys start with -- did the obama team start with a profile? lisa: can i say at one thing? i don't know if it was mac or

josh earlier, but we had our transition team was completely distinct from the campaign. so what we did was, we actually drew a lot for the agency. these were teams, individual agencies that tried to learn as much as they could very quickly so they would know the secretary came in, not only would they know what the president wanted to accomplish but also they would hit the secretary in the face when they walked in the door. whether it was regulatory or legislative issue. we chose people who had previous government experience. if somebody had worked in justice previously, you knew they went in knowing about the

department, knowing about the issues. you don't really want somebody who is trying to get up to speed on this set of issues. when you were talking about the balancing of the campaign and people with previous experience, often that was the half that would be from previous experience. terry: the people from the campaign, why is it that the transition planning people are sequestered from the campaign? chris: it is not that you are try to keep them separated. the whole goal is to win a campaign. they should not be looking over their shoulder, trying to cut around quarters at their next job.

if there is a moment in time when they think about it, and truthfully, the skills one needs to win a campaign are often different than what it takes to govern. there is a lot of people that campaign and transition over into administration. some people can't because it is not their skill set. terry: whose job is it to tell them their skill set will not land them in the administration? clay: everybody has a place. there is a key and appointments which is how to say no. and personnel types, we say the president makes the appointment and the others make the disappointment. [laughter] clay: so the question is, how do you disappoint somebody? terry: sure.

clay: you never say you -- something negative. you never tell senator so-and-so about his person is not going to be, you know, the king of something, a small country at his request. you never say your constituent, something negative. what you say is, something will happen, why, and i am very interested in your qualifications -- which is all true. your ability to serve and campaign. and we hope that you will hang tight because of all kind of different roles. they can be challenged. chris: i think the challenge also is you have to hear out the different to people on campaigns. your senior people, policy people all have a role. there are real challenges, what do you do with the 23-year-old field organizer who has camped out in a battleground state for the last six months and has organized and really has given up a huge part of his or her

life to help win? trying to translate that skill to governing is a harder challenge. and also that person i would expect to be assistant secretary for nuclear defense, it is just

-- there is a fit for just about everybody in the campaign if they want to be involved in this administration. terry: you don't have to say no very often? clay: you might have this person over here, and how about this? you know what this is that the time. but again, the key is, you are trying to fill positions. you are trying to get work done. the first step in that direction is, find them qualified, lead the work needing to get done. terry: the work you are doing is the agenda the president is pursuing. that is the defining anchor. lisa: people are policy.

you think about your priorities, and you will do your cabinet quickly. you want to think about, what are the key things the president, the candidate has, the goals they set on the campaign? what do you want to quickly do you come into office? you need people to implement those. one of the challenges is what the senate confirmed, what mac was describing in terms of the cooperation that he got on the hill, is more of a challenge today. and so one thing and incoming administration needs to think about is also taking advantage of the positions where you can just appoint someone, and getting people into agencies in those. there are more than 4000 positions, is that right? it is a lot, so inevitably something where it slows down. for an incoming administration to try to back that up as much

as possible, so when you come in, you have people or slates lined up you can start to move and get an agency that will be important. clay: what is an example? the question was, somebody had said -- i just got an idea yesterday. norman would be a great democratic member of -- senior member -- of our administration. and i said, we found some great thoughts. he knows housing. i'm sorry, transportation, he knows transportation as well as the chairman of the whatever committee. and i say great, what do we want the secretary of transportation to do? be really effective at working with the congress. [laughter] clay: touchdown. so he has that background, well regarded in congress, both sides of the aisle and so on.

it is win-win. but that came up originally because he was a democrat looking for a political thing of, the whole thing is this is bipartisan. the thing that drove it primarily was the nature of the background, and that fits exactly, what the policy people said they would want at the head of their department. terry: so to take this example, transportation and country's airline infrastructure was not george w. bush's primary policy structure. it is probably 13 out of 13 on the list. how do you decide to pay attention to that nomination and that, the qualifications of somebody who is not obviously in the cabinet? skip the cabinet because you have got to fill out the cabinet.

how do you go out feeling below the agencies? do you focus on the agenda or find -- we can fill out the entire transportation department in one fell swoop. do you go for the guys you can get in and stand up that part of the government whether it is important to the agenda or not, or do you fight what you have to fight for the people that you really want because they are key to the president's education agenda and you want the education department filled top to bottom to promote the president's agenda? clay: you tie it to the work you want to get done. and so you fill up the transportation positions. he has been asked by the president -- it has been announced. norman and i are good friends. now. [laughter]

and he comes in and he says, i have a whole bunch of people i want to bring with me into the transportation department. and i said, i kind of went, i said, here is the way we would like this to work. you, nobody is recommended to the president that you don't recommend for future positions. and nobody is recommended to the president that we personally pushed out. so we will name, and you have to agree. so maybe you have 15 people with 17 jobs, and we will be looking at it from a different perspective, perhaps more focused on other things than your relationship. but if she agrees that is the right thing because she is the one held accountable for filling

the ranks and transportation for people that can get the work done, the president wants to get done, then you will be happy, she will be happy and is recommended to the president. if you can't agree that this person is significantly more successful getting it done, this person is the risk and so on, then you agree to disagree and find somebody you can both agree on. terry: so you take it to the president? clay: no. you argue your relationship with the secretary. they feel good about everybody on their team. but we have had, we have had people, in who were governors of states who remain nameless, and their suggestions for who they want on their team all caps from that state. they were all came from their staff as governor.

every one of them. we said, you know, this person is going to be the secretary of x for the united states of america, not united states of whatever. this will not work. this is -- it is not going to work. we can't agree on this. we will take one job at a time, he can we both have to agree. it is harder to do it that way. i think nixon told his cabinet, you, you can pick on your own people. b your team. disastrous. others have said, i will pick all the people. and i will tell you your team, who your direct reports are. disaster, because you are an extremely well-qualified person. your the secretary of something, but you have never met your direct reports before. you have no relationship with any of them.

i don't believe i want that job. it is a mistake looking for a place to happen. terry: and the guy that says, i will take that job is not the -- chris: i will add diversity. it is not only diversity as gender, race, it is people that bring variety of experiences whether it is state and local government, private practice or nonprofit, you look for people that do not just come out of the typical washington establishment. washington lawyers, bankers -- to be sure, there are jobs for which specialized experience is necessary. you are head of the faa, you want somebody who knows who knows aviation. you want a good, smart manager who has got some level of policy with political savvy.

terry: is diversity something you expect the democrats to talk about and republicans not talk about? in other words, this attitude you have because democrats typically are thought of his having a giant coalition of a whole bunch of groups that have a bunch of different interest, so the number she dashed so that notion of diversity is a critical way of doing business in the democratic party, because it is a big tent with a lot of different voices, and the republican party is one voice articulating one position -- didn't seem like that to you? clay: no, here is the way we did it. the president said about a month in, by the way, let's every once in month tell me how we are doing on various types of diversity. ethnicity, gender, by washington

insiders versus washington outsiders, by different ways of -- because if it is all different -- if it is only the usual suspects, you are going to get only the usual type of government. so you want new thinking, you want fresh thinking, you want -- and all these studies about the more diverse a group of people is that is making decisions, the better the decision it is. diversity can be defined as many different ways as you want to. tell me how that compares to higher administrations. so we have talk of how many washington inside the beltway people we have pointed, outside the beltway, what percent are from mississippi, whatever, alabamians, whatever. let's work harder for whatever.

but it turned out that we, the first time we started looking at it was probably march. and we were very diverse. it is not a conscious ring. there were no quotas are goals. we were pretty proud of the way we, you know, had done that. terry: is that something that gets decided before he is president-elect? clay: what is decided? terry: this thing about diversity. chris: president obama said early on he wanted an administration that reflected america. there is no specific quota, no saying, we needed this and this and this. we should look for diversity of

people. every study that has been done on this in the context of organizational dynamics -- the more diverse set of views the better your decision-making will diversity of age. i think it is about a well-managed organization. >> when you do the policy panels that are going to agencies, is that a concern or is it just about their policy expertise? do you say, look at this group? >> the expertise is the piece that you focus on the most

because he want somebody who knows the faa, the standards act. mind that youp in want a diverse group, that you want a variety of perspectives. transportation may have been 13th on the list of the agenda 11, there were a lot of important decisions. sometimes you set yourself up to that wasissue unexpected by how you set up the personnel that you want. you want to find the best qualified people because you actually never know even if an item is not your top agenda you

never know when something is going to come up. one of the things that happened during the obama administration was the deepwater horizon oil spill. folks know really devastated the gulf coast for four months. we appointed. we nominated and confirmed a physicist, a nobel prize physicist and while his agency in the have the lead response and recovery effort, to have a physicist on the staff who got detailed there and could actually help design the mechanism that actually topped the oil well. it is a luxury to have expertise like that which is a you want to get the best people on your team. >> i'm not necessary for the best people to do the work -- who would say that?

who would do that? lay it out go to -- there is what your goal is, we are finding the best people to do the work. you know? turned out -- was a fantastic guy to be the secretary of transportation. -- we didw that predict that going in and it turned out when 9/11 hit and transportation was being led by knowledgeable -- we had one >> ironically, i would say that one of the most if not the most effective cabinet member was ray republican, schmidt from illinois who was the secretary of transportation and so -- i am not sure everybody would have said at the outset, this 1410 republican congressman

who had touched on endsportation issues would up becoming an effective secretary of transportation but he was. demand tolk about the have somebody from the other party? to identify the cabinet? >> if the person is incompetent. >> is that an advantage? among the five people that would do a good job, does it matter that one is a democrat. diversity is good. when the cabinet is seen around the president and the president throws out a sizzling issue are in a cabinet meeting in some of the other party sitting there, i

can tell you, this may not go down well, diversities good. diversity is good. >> can you talk about how come you start with the candidates and have been assigned this responsibility, he had taken care of the transition, you have walked into the white house and now you have this job for three or four years we are carrying out the ambitions and the agency and you decided is time to go do that job down in the weeds. how do you make that decision? [cheers] i will tell you -- >> i will tell you having i will tell you having >> this decision, we have all had a multitude of different jobs, when the president asked you to do something you do it. i do think there is value in having people move throughout the government.

many jobs and political jobs are really high-level project managers. it helps to have expertise in those areas. the people who understand how government works and understand how to craft and implement, you can use those people throughout the government. government. >> everyone of these people made the decision at some point to lead the white house and go into the better of government, into the executive branch. executive branch. >> you are in the executive branch in the white house. the president suggested to me, i've been the personnel guy for two years. got almost all the positions filled and he said, you want to think about getting of the role? i want to make sure you don't get burned out. i said that is great. but i would like to do is be the

deputy director for management. management. >> why? why? >> i bring method to madness. that is what i do. there's a lot of madness and the federal government so there's a lot of method and i think i would be good at it. and he said go get them. i got nominated. he brought up the idea. time to get people -- make sure they're not a flat learning curve. excited about the daily challenges. in my case, i had enthusiasm. my case, i had enthusiasm. >> why labor? why labor? >> i had not worked on labor issues that i had a passion for what the department of labor does. we help people find jobs and when we get the jobs, we protect them on the workplace. it was hard for me to see a more noble way to spend my career. it was also a chance to work

with a really dynamic secretary of labor with tom perez people are reading about these days. and working hard challenges. i had spent most of my career as a political person but what i lacked was true management experience. when you are the deputy secretary, you are the coo of a massive organization if that means budget and hr and i.t., these are the nuts and bolts of the organization and that was a challenge i wanted to make and i was fortunate and got that opportunity. that opportunity. >> getting down and focus to peace and/or prosperity. labor. labor. >> most of the work of the government is done in the agencies. a lot of young poets come to the white house at think, i'm in the white house, i don't want to go anywhere else. i encourage them to because the

practical expense to get, you are working on programs, most people out of the country know much more about the department of labor thing to do about the lip -- white oak. you can make a difference in those jobs. a difference in those jobs. >> you want to office of management and budget as well. >> that is because the president asked. >> not because you bring the madness? >> it was similar to clay that it was a management position and ended up being interagency work. >> is there a point at which you sit down and say, on election day we had these tell things, these were the 12 banks most important to the president that made up the big book that just talked about. key items. and they are all gone.

we either succeeded or we swam our length of the relay and it is time for something else to pick it up. out there and executive branch, there all caps of responsibilities. someone has to make sure the faa radar system working and that is not terribly sexy thing but that is an important part of the government so you get to a point where you say, we are replacing the president's agenda with this regulatory responsibilities of maintaining the government. there's been seven years and we have done all we can do. there's still a lot that we need to do as opposed to want to do. somebody still have to do these things and that is an important part of the labor agenda of the democratic party. how do you keep doing that everyday knowing that there is a time it is going to run out and you need to be preparing the next generation, if there's

going to be another democratic administration, you have been in this situation where there will be a successor of possibly the same party. how much do time -- time to spend preparedness got to get ready with the problems facing labor or management regardless of what party? they are the statutory things. not the big legislation. do you know what i mean? >> fortunately, or unfortunately given the state of gridlock, you never at the point where you have gotten everything done. until the very last day you will keep trying to push her agenda forward.

as we have learned and i think future presidents will learn given the dynamic in washington, the agenda of your agency will be the agenda of the administration. we will continue to have divisive government. the billions of dollars of grant money that the federal government gives out, the multitude of regulations and initiatives that derive from government agencies is the, makes it a competence of the white house tried to push. tried to push. >> the record of the administration will be what you have done the record administration that we set out in this big book that josh was talking about we want to check

the things off, didn't, didn't, didn't wear in the end administration is just the list of things we checked off we did? >> we got health care past. those of the website of a competent. did we get a comprehensive i'm a change legislation done? no. but we were climate change treaty we have signed. we have done significant changes in the missions of motor vehicles -- emissions of motor vehicles and trucks. you can either go about it with one big legislative a which is what people often think about or 10 regulatory changes which may have the same affect. same affect. >> it is not an on-off switch. you're continually working on the priorities of the administration. during even when vice president gore was running for president, the clinton administration was working very hard to a cop was all the things that president clinton wanted to a copy. also to the other part of your question, you have a discrete set of people that are working

on transition and so it is not an either/or. >> is that an important thing? if you're worried about transitions, he need to have a discrete people -- group of people whose job it is to focus on that. is to focus on that. >> if you want to get anything done, he to have discrete people. -- you have to have discrete people. all generalizations are false including this one. here's another one, the primary reason every government organization, every government in the world does not work to satisfaction is because they don't have, they don't govern with desired outcomes in mind and there's little transparency about how well they are performing relative to the goals they do have. that is the case of the federal