friend join the in welcoming the jobs and prosperity to the northwest region including north wells, therefore closing the north divide. [cheers] p.m. may: i know my honorable than has championed the cause of a chest tube. it shows we are willing to take the big decisions that will help our economy. >> now the very special relationship between the u.k. and the republic of ireland has splurged. a major part of that is the support in my constituency. the reason for it is free travel and both have enjoyed that within the european union that

they both joined in 1973. now the k has voted to leave the european union. the prime minister assure us that there will be no extra their ears so that can concentrate british tourism and threatened that special relationship? p.m. may: the honorable gentleman refers to the free movement arrangement. in fact, the travel arrangement was started in 1923. it is for some considerable time back when the travel area existed. there working with government of the republic of ireland, with the northern ireland executive. we are clear that we don't want to see a return to the borders of the past. we want to ensure that we recognize the importance that those amendments of trade and people are on both sides of that border. >> order.

watching primen minister's questions from the british house of commons. watch it live wednesday at 7 a.m. eastern, 4 a.m. pacific on c-span2 or anytime at c-span.org where the video of the past prime minister's questions and other british public affairs programs.

>> right now we take you live to lima, peru. >> peru is one of the united states strongest partnerships in the americas. from standing up to democracy, to promoting jobs and growth and fighting climate change. this summit has been a great success to the great work of our

peruvian friends. the summit, and my trip over the past week has occurred against a broader debate over globalization and trade. over the decades, our global integrated economy has helped to improve the lives of billions of people around the world. press. games --rous prosperous gains of health. when wealthy corporations and global elites too often seem to be played by different set of rules, and workers and communities can be hit especially hard, the gaps between the rich and everyone else grow wider. and that can reverberate through our politics. that is why i firmly believe that one of our greatest challenges in the years ahead across our nation's and within

them will be to make sure that the benefits of the global economy are shared by more people and that the negative impacts such as economic inequalities are dressed by automation. when it comes to trade, it is , buto pull back trade rather, the answer is to do trade right. making sure that there are strong labor standards and strong environmental standards. that it addresses ways in which workers and ordinary people can benefit rather than be harmed by global trade. all of this is the central work of aipec. as of this debate ms. fortin united states, it's important to remember how vital the asia-pacific is to america's prosperity. the 21 asia-pacific economies

here represent nearly 3 billion people. a majority of the global middle class. six of america's top 10 trading partners. more than half of the global economy. and the world's fastest-growing region. words, these 21 countries represent tremendous opportunity for the united states to sell our goods and support u.s. jobs. that's why it's part of our rebalance of foreign policy to the asia-pacific, we boost u.s. exports to the region by 50%. nearly 60% of our exports go to the region. this is part of broader progress . with 95% of the world's customers beyond america's borders, i made it a priority to open up new markets overseas and during my ministration we have -- during my administration we , have increased u.s. exports to the world by more than 40%. to record levels. these exports support more than

11 million american jobs. moreover we know that companies , that export tend to grow fast and hire more employees, and pay their workers more than companies that do not export . all of which is why exports of help to drive our economic recovery. it's one of the reasons why u.s. businesses have curated more -- have created more than 50 million new jobs. it's a kind of progress that trade, when done right, can deliver. that's a kind of work we have tried to do here at the summit. we're continuing our work to make it easier to do business between our country so we are creating even more jobs. in the united states we are simplifying the process of starting a new business, increasing access to credit, all of which will help more ventures, especially small businesses, get up and running, and helping them to be able to ask as well so they can access -- helping them to be able to export as well so they can access the global market, even if they can't afford fancy lawyers and accountants and foreign offices.

we agreed to increase our collective efforts against corruption by targeting the bribery that enriches elites at the expense of people, and we committed to making it easier to trade in services as well as goods. we also discussed the excess capacity that exists in certain sectors, such as steel and aluminum. it distorts markets and hurts businesses and workers. even american workers. even as i've argued that we cannot engage in protectionist measures, my administration has been at the forefront of cracking down hard on unfair trade practices and brought consistently cases under the wto against those who are engaging in unfair trading practices, and we've had a great track record of trade enforcement that has to be a part of this process. i've been very clear that excess capacity is not the result of market forces, it's the result

of specific government policies and needs to be fixed. here at apec we have been taking steps as we were at the g20 to start addressing these issues in a systematic way. with regard to the digital economy, we endorse rules to protect the privacy of personal information as it crosses borders. he discussed the importance of her mating the moratorium on custom duties for digital goods and innovation, and given growing cyber threats, our 21 apec economies affirm that no one should conduct or support cyver-enabled threat of intellectual property. we are also moving ahead with making our economies more inclusive. one particular area of focus is making sure that women have fair access to economic growth, expanding education, expanding access to careers in science, technology, engineering, math.

helping more women entrepreneurs to access finance and integrate their businesses into the global supply chain. according to one study, if women around the world participated in the labor force, it could add up to $28 trillion of additional output for the global economy. $28 trillion. when women are more prosperous, the families, communities, and countries are all more prosperous as well. my meeting yesterday with my fellow leaders at the transpacific partnership was a chance to reaffirm our commitment to the tpp with its high standards, strong protections for workers, the environment, intellectual property, and human rights. our partners made clear during the meeting that they want to move forward with tpp. preferably they like to move

forward with the united states. a number of countries are starting to read i tpp. we are already hearing calls for a less ambitious trade agreement in the region with lower standards, lower protections for workers, lower protections for the environment. that kind of agreement would exclude u.s. workers and businesses and access to those markets. for all those reasons, i believe that tpp is a plus for america's economy, america's workers, american jobs. not moving forward when undermine our position across the region and our ability to shake the rules of global trade in a way that reflects our interest and values. finally, our cooperation with apec has been critical to our historic progress in fighting climate change. bringing the paris agreement into force, agreeing to limit aviation emissions, phasing out dangerous hfc's. in lima we continue our work to phase out fossil fuel subsidies

in countries that made commitments towards their goal of doubling a renewable energy over the next few decades. as i wrap up my last summit, i could not be more proud of the progress we've made together. the work is never done, and given the prosperity and security we seek for not only the united states but our allies and partners, i continue to believe that america will have a vital role to play in creating and sustaining a strong, enduring leadership role in the asia-pacific. with that, let me take some questions. i will start with darlene of ap. >> thank you, mr. president. you have been telling world leaders this week that president-elect trump is unlikely to govern in the

divisive way he campaigned. but i'm wondering how can you be so certain of that given the first group of people he has chosen for top national security and law enforcement positions hold the same views that he espouse of a candidate? to follow up on your meeting second, earlier today with president putin, did you discuss with him russia's alleged meddling in the u.s. elections? are you concerned that the kind of involvement we saw in this year's campaign will be the new normal going forward in future u.s. elections? pres. obama: well, what i have said to world leaders is the same thing i've said a number of press conferences, which is, the president-elect now has to put together a team and put forward specifics about how he intends to govern. he hasn't had a full opportunity to do that yet, and so people should take a wait-and-see approach in how much his policy proposals once in the white house, once he is sworn in, match up with some of the rhetoric of his campaign.

my simple point is that you can't assume that the language of campaigning matches up with the specifics of governing legislation, regulations, and foreign policy. i can't be sure of anything. i think like everyone else, we will have to wait and see. but as i've said before, once you are in the oval office, once you begin interacting with world leaders, once you see the complexities of the issues, that has a way of shaping your thinking and in some cases modifying your thinking because you recognize this solemn responsibility not only to the

american people, but the solemn responsibility that america has, the largest, most powerful country in the world. and i can't guarantee that the president-elect won't pursue some of the positions he has taken. what i can guarantee is that reality will force him to adjust how he approaches many of these issues. that's just the way this office works. and i said before, if these issues were easy, if ensuring prosperity, jobs, security, good foreign relations with other

countries, if all that was simple, then it would have been done by every previous president. i'm a pretty good presidential historian. i've looked at my 43 predecessors. it seems that for all of them, even the best ones, that you end up confronting realities you did not anticipate. i think the same will happen here, and that's a good thing. that is an important thing. with respect to president putin, i didn't have a meeting. we talked briefly while we were in between sessions. and the conversation i had with him was consistent with the conversations i've had with him over the previous several

months, indicating we are still deeply concerned about the bloodshed and chaos that is being sown by preston bombing attacks by assad and the russian military against populations in aleppo, and the need for us to arrive first at some sort of humanitarian cease-fire and begin moving towards a political transition of some sort. i talked to him about ukraine. i urged him to instruct his negotiators to work with ourselves, with france, with germany, with ukraine to see if we could get that done before my term is up. as usual, it was a candid and courteous meeting, but very clear about the strong governance as we have --

differences we have on policy. the issues in the election did not come up because that's behind us. and those focused in this brief discussion on moving forward. i already made clear to him our concerns around cyber attacks generally, as well as specific concerns we had surrounding the dnc hack. i don't think this will be the norm, but as i've said before, the concern i have has less to do with any particular misinformation or propaganda that is being put out by any particular party, and a greater concern about the general misinformation from all kinds of sources, both domestic, foreign, on social media, that make it very difficult for voters to figure out what's true and what's not.

and let me put it this way, i think if we have a strong, accurate, and responsible press, and we have a strong, civic culture and an engaged citizenry, then various attempts to meddle in our elections won't mean much. -- it we've got elections that are focused on issues and are full of fake news and false information and distractions, then the issue is not going to be what's happening from the outside, the issue will be, what are we doing to ourselves from the inside.

the good news is, that is something we have control over. garner harris? >> mr. president, thank you for holding this press conference. if you had hotels, real estate, and other businesses around the world prior to becoming president, would you have thought it appropriate to sell them off and put the cash proceeds in a blind trust or is it ok for the president of the united states to be personally vulnerable to the policy decisions of the foreign leaders he meets and in the foreign-policy decisions he makes as president? and also, just briefly, what is your complaint about how the nsa and cyber command have done their job, and are you considering firing admiral mike rogers? pres. obama: that was a rhetorical question, that first one. [laughter]

rather than comment on hypotheticals -- let me say specifically what i did. obviously, my assets were significantly smaller than some other presidents, or president-elects, but we made a decision to liquidate assets that might raise questions about how it would influence policy. i basically had our accountant put all of our money in treasury bills. the yields have not been massive over the course of the last 8 years. just because it simplified my life. i did not have to worry about the complexities of whether a decision i made might even inadvertently benefit me.

that is consistent with the broader approach we have taken throughout my administration, which is to not just meet the letter of the law, but to go well beyond the letter to the spirit of the law. not just for me, but for the people in the white house and in our leadership positions, we have established a whole set of rules, norms, playbooks that just keep us far away from the line. early on in the administration there would be questions about could a staff person go to this conference, or what should they do about this gift that was provided?

i think, it was maybe our first general counsel who is responsible for setting up our guidelines and rules inside the white house that said, if it sounds like it would be fun, then you can't do it. that's a general test. if it sounds like something you would enjoy or appreciate, no go. and the consequence -- i will knock on some wood here because we have two months left -- i'm proud of the fact that over 8 years, we have not had the kinds of scandals that have plagued other administrations. when i met with the president-elect, i suggested to him that having a strong white house counsel that could provide clear guideposts and rules would benefit him and benefit his team because it would eliminate a lot of ambiguity.

i think it would be up to him to make determinations about how he wants to approach it. i know what works for us, and it served the american people well. because i had made a promise to the american people that i would not fall into some of the familiar habits of washington, that i wanted a new kind of politics, this was one indicator, and at the end of 8 years i can say the american people, i delivered on that commitment. with respect to cyber, the nsa, admiral rodgers is a terrific patriot and has served this country well in a number of positions. i generally don't comment on personal matters here.

i can say generally that we have spent a lot of time over the last several years looking at how we can organize our cyber efforts to keep pace with how rapidly the environment is changing. increasingly, our critical infrastructure, government data, financial systems are vulnerable to attack, and both state and nonstate actors are getting better and better at it and it is becoming more and more rampant, and it is inevitable that we will have to modernize and update not just the tools we use to defend those assets and the american people, but also how we organize them.

it is true that we are exploring a range of options in terms of how we organize the mission the currently exists. -- that currently exists. >> good evening. thank you, mr. president. earlier this year former president george w. bush reportedly said he warned he would be the last republican president. now republicans have won back the white house, controlled house and senate, 2/3 of state legislatures, 34 governorships, and there are charges of a shallow democratic bench behind you. are you worried that you could be the last democratic president for a while? speaking of your predecessor, he made sure to offer essentially no public criticism of you during your time in office. will you withhold criticism of donald trump, even if he attempts to dismantle much of what you have accomplished?

pres. obama: i'm not worried about being the last them a death i'm not worried about being the last democratic president, not even for a while. i say that not being cute. the democratic nominee won the popular vote, and this is an extremely competitive race and i would expect the future races will be competitive as well. i certainly think it's true that politics of america right now are a little up for grabs, the sum of the -- that some of the within botht parties, democrat and republican, are being reshaped. although the results of this election involves some of the specifics of the candidates and aren't going to be duplicated in every subsequent election, democrats do have to do some

thinking about how did we make sure that the message we have is received effectively, and results in winning elections? this is something i have been wrestling with throughout my presidency. when you look at the proposals i put forward, they garner majority support. the majority believes in raising the minimum wage. the majority believes in common sense gun safety rules. the majority believes in investing to rebuild our infrastructure and create jobs. he majority believes in making sure that people aren't going bankrupt when they get sick. the majority agrees with all the individual components of obamacare.

i think there was a gallup poll this week, subsequent to the election, that show that the general public has a more favorable view of democrats and republicans. -- of a democrats they -- democrats than republicans. and as i noted, my approval ratings are quite high. and yet, what has been true during the course of my 8 years is that that does not always translate. too often, it hasn't translated into working majorities, either at the state level or the federal level. now, some of that is just the nature of our system. and, geography. as long as wyoming gets the same number of senators as california, there's going to be some tilt towards republicans when it comes to congressional races. the fact that a lot of democratic voters are bunched up in big cities, and a lot of republican voters are spread out

across geography, gives them an advantage when it comes to congressional races. some of it is just political bad luck, for example, i came in as an economy was in free fall and the we took the right steps to save the economy, in my midterm election 2010 people could not yet see the recovery, and the president's party got punished. we lost control of a lot of not just congressional seats, but gubernatorial seats and state legislative seats. that happened to be the year that the census was done and you start doing redistricting and those republicans took advantage of political gerrymandering to lock in the majorities, even though in numerous subsequent elections democrats have actually cast more votes, or more votes have been cast for democratic congressional candidates than republicans.

yet you and a having large republican majorities. there are structural problems have to deal with. you can't make excuses about the rules. that's the deal, and we've got to do better. doing better involves us working at the grassroots, not ceding territory, going out into areas where right now we may not stand a chance of actually winning, but we are building up a cadre of young talent, making arguments, persuading. we are talking about the things that matter to ordinary people day to day and trying to avoid some of the constant distractions that fill up

people's twitter accounts, and if we do that, in confident we will be back on track. i don't think there has to be a complete overhaul. i think there does have to be better organization, a smarter message, and one message i do have for democrats is that a strategy that is micro-targeting particular discrete groups in a democratic coalition sometimes will win the elections but it's not going to win you the broad mandate you need. the more we can talk about what we have in common as a nation, and speak to a broad set of values, a vision that speaks to everybody and not just one group at a time, the better off we are

going to be. that is part of the reason why i was able to get elected twice. i always try to make sure that not only in proposals, but also in message, i was speaking to everybody. you had a second part to your question? [inaudible] look, i said before, president bush could not have been more gracious to me when i came in. my intention is to for the next two months just finished my job, -- my intention is to, certainly, for the next two months, just finished my job. and then after that, to take michelle on vacation, get some rest, spend time with my girls, and do some writing, do some thinking.

so, i want to be respectful of the office and give the president elect an opportunity to put forward his platform and his arguments without somebody topping off in every instance. as an american citizen who cares deeply about our country, if there are issues that have less to do with the specifics of some legislative proposal or battle, but go to core questions about our values and ideals, and if i think it's necessary or helpful for me to defend those ideals, then i will examine it when it comes. but, what i do know is that i have to take michelle on

vacation. [laughter] juliet alpern? >> they, mr. president. given what you just said about the strong differences that you and president putin have on the future of syria and the conflict there can you talk about how you , see that unfolding, both at the end of your tenure and at the beginning of donald trump's, and if your concerns that even if we eliminate the islamic state and eastern syria and western iraq, we may be allowing a permanent al qaeda safe haven around aleppo? on aleppo, can you can you say to what extent the united states has fulfilled its responsibility to protect in that instance? in terms of finishing your job, , -- which you just didn't, --

which you just mentioned, and the last week you have exercised your executive authority on multiple fronts, finalizing oil and gas leasing rules on public lands as well as issuing a five-year plan banning chilling in the arctic and atlantic great many republicans say you should hold off finalizing anymore rules as you are headed out the door because they oppose many of them and will seek to overturn them when they control both executive and legislative branches next year. what do you say to that suggestion? pres. obama: on the second question, these are the same republicans who suggested that they didn't need to confirm a supreme court justice when i was nine months out, until the next election. i think the general approach twos to be that probably days after my reelection, i should stop until the next election. i don't think that's what the constitution calls for. the regulations that we have

issued our best the ones we have issued our ones we have been working on for a very long time. they have been subject to extensive public notice and comment and everybody has known they have been out there. these are things we have been surprising people with. -- aren't things we have been surprising people with. they are the right thing to do. they're part of my task of finishing my work. i recognize that when the new administration comes in, and a new congress comes in, that they will have the option of trying to undo some of those rules and regulations we are put in place. that's their prerogative, that's part of how democracy works. i feel very strongly that these are the right things to do and i'm going to make sure i do them. with respect to syria, i think even on this trip in a previous press conference, i am not optimistic about the short-term prospects in syria.

once russia and iran made a decision to back assad in a brutal air campaign, and essentially a pacification of aleppo regardless of the potential for civilian casualties, children being killed or wounded, schools or hospitals being destroyed, then it was very hard to see a way in which even a ttrained and committed moderate opposition could hold his ground for long periods of time.

and, the issue that obviously i've wrestled with for the last five years, how involved should the united states be, whether our legal constraints in such our legale constraints in such involvement, obligation, moral what are our strategic interests? those haven't changed. i continue to believe that we did not have a legal basis for military intervention there, that it would have been a strategic mistake given the work we still had to do in iraq, counter-isil campaign, ongoing operations in afghanistan, that we have worked tirelessly to arrive at political transition of some sort, and they could alleviate the suffering and provide humanitarian access.

and, we will continue to do that work all the way until the last day that me and john kerry and others have the authority to speak for the united states government. but ultimately, it takes two or in this case, four or six or eight to tango. we are just not getting help or interest from those parties supporting assad, and assad as a consequence has been emboldened. but this is a man who has decided that destroying his country, turning it to rubble, and saying its population scattered or killed was worth it for him to cling to power. when he had the option to peacefully engage in a transition i could've kept the

-- engage in a transition that could have kept the country intact. that's his mentality. it's not a mentality we support. that's a mentality that the russians and iranians have been willing to support. at this stage, we are going to need to have a change in how all parties think about this in order for us to end the situation there. our ability to go after isil can be sustained. there is doubt there will continue to be extremist forces in and around syria because it still will be in chaos for quite some time. there will be elements in iraq, just as there have been elements in afghanistan even after the taliban was swept out, even

after we killed bin laden. but, i think we can effectively reduce the risk and take their key external operators off the field. the thing i'm probably most concerned about is making sure that even as we do that, u.s. policy, u.s. statements, u.s. positions don't further radicalize muslims around the world, or alienate or potentially radicalize law-abiding muslims who are living in europe or the united states, and that's why it is important for us to understand those are key allies, not enemies.

pres. obama: mike maloley. trip as the last of your presidency is playing out in a different way you anticipated. given that, did you think to intentionally approach this trip reflecting more on the power and the influence of the president on the world stage so you can offer the kind of counsel to your successor that he says he wants to draw upon. you talked often in your reelection campaign about this fever that had consumed the republican party and affected the political tragedy -- the they imposed.tegy what would you say to democrats who used the same kind of strategy? what would be your advice to help democrats about whether or not to reelect nancy pelosi at

the leader of the house? pres. obama: i will work in reverse. i think nancy pelosi is an outstanding and distort political leader. accomplishedat we we have accomplished because of her smarts, her tenacity, her and i don'tskill ,ormally metal with party votes and certainly on my way out the door, i shouldn't meddle here. but, i cannot speak highly enough of nancy pelosi. she can buy strong progressive

values with extraordinary political skills. and she does stuff that is tough, not just of that is easy. she is done stuff that is a popular in her own base because it is right thing to do for the american people. she is a remarkable ader. with respect to democrats and republicans and how democrats will deal with a new administration, give them a hearing. mitcht than to do what mcconnell did when i was elected, meet the day of and say, our soul objective is to not cooperate with him on anything even if the country is about to go into a depression. we can gain seats in the midterms and ultimately defeat him. that is not why the american people sent us to washington, to play those games. that is not my advice to democrats.

my advice to democrats is know what you care about and what you stand for and fight for your principles. even if it is a hard fight. where the newreas administration is doing something that is going to be good for the american people, find a way to work with them. if you think it is going to be a problem, then say something and make the argument. good -- and is what is the touchstone is what is good and thatmerican people has worked for me. and means that at the end of the day and at the end of eight years i can look back and say consistently did what i thought was best.

that doesn't mean you don't make mistakes, but it means that you are being true to yourself and the commitments you made to the people who elected you. in terms of reflecting on the u.s. presidency in regard to traveling, i think the main have and the main advice that i give to the incoming president have and then is the united states really is an indispensable nation and our world order. and i say that as somebody who to gone out of his way express respect for every country and its people. and to consistently a knowledge that many of the challenges that we face are not challenges that american can solve on its own.

thewhat i also know is that basic framework of the world order coming out of world war ii and then on through the end of the cold war, was shaped by a set of ideals and principles for the vastked majority people throughout the world. a free press and independent judiciary and open markets. a social welfare state to moderate some of the sharp edges of capitalism.

and to lift up human rights not just within our own borders but within the world and working with multilateral institutions like the united nations. making sure we are upholding international norms and rules. that is what has made the modern world. and, there have been times where we ourselves have not observed some of these norms as well as we should and have been accused of hypocrisy. here in latin america, there has been times when countries felt disrespected and on occasion had cause for that. there are times where we have not observed these values in our fallenntry and have

short of our ideals. but that basic structure is the reason why the world is much wealthier, much more secure and yes, less violent. healthier. better educated. more tolerant than it was 50 years ago. into that requires constant work. it does not just happen on its own. i said this in europe. i said this in places where there is this pushback against this modern order. but we take an example like europe. before that order was imposed, we had two world wars in the span of 30 years. in the second 1, 60 million people were killed. not half a million. not one million. but 60 million. entire continents in rubble. in places like the asia-pacific,

youre that order existed routinely saw famines of millions of people. not just concerns about low wages. dying because they did not have any food or drinking water, or died of cholera or simple diseases if somebody had some penicillin. so what i would say would be that we all share responsibilities for improving that order and maintaining an and making sure it is more inclusive and delivers greater hope and prosperity for more corners of the world. we all have responsibilities. every nation in respecting the

dignity and worth of their citizens and of america cannot do it all for everybody else. to know, there are limits our reach in other countries if they are determined to a press their people or not provide education for girls or siphon off development funding into swiss bank accounts because they are corrupt. you know, we going to be able to handle every problem but the american president and the united states of america, if we are not on the side of what is not making thee argument and fighting for it even if sometimes we're not able 100% everywhere, then it collapses. and there is nobody to fill the void.

there really is not. there are other very important , where iflike china it were not for china's cooperation we could not have gotten the paris agreement done. not the one who was going around organizing 200 nations to sign on to a paris agreement. or putting together the paper and the policy outlines into the conceptual framework. russia it is a very significant military problem but they are not worrying right now about how to rebuild after a hurricane in haiti. we are. and i have said before, that is a burden we should carry proudly. just would hope that not

the 45th president of the united states but every president of the united states understands but is not only a burden also an extraordinary privilege and you know, if you have a youce to do that right then seize it.son -- all right. thank you everybody. [applause] announcer: tomorrow night, civil and race. harvardl was hosted by at university school of government. among the speakers, harvard university ronald sullivan spoke about the limits of executive power in the area of civil

rights. here is a portion of his remarks. : a presidentlivan cannot wave a magic wand and say "civil rights repair." they have to be trained in rural ways. -- onee net has been sign that has given me some hope is that this justice department and civil rights division has been busier than it has been in any administration priority except for one. it has been busy. the laws that congress passes though, constrains its reach in very, very real ways. i will give you one example and then i will pass it on and hopefully we will talk more. there is a mention of trayvon martin in the last panel.

you know, it was the correct decision for the department of justice not to intervene in trayvon martin because the law is written in a way that makes it nearly impossible for them to intervene in that way. they have to show that at the time that george zimmerman dealt the deathblow, he was motivated .olely by racial animus >> is civil rights activists, scholars, and political operatives discuss president obama's legacy on the areas of civil rights and race. tomorrow night at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two. president-elect donald trump continued meeting with advisers and possible cabinet appointees in new jersey. including governor chris morris rogers, and rudy giuliani.

after made with general john kelly, he spoke to reporters. trump: really fantastic day. tremendous talent. tremendous people. really we have some incredible people going to be working for the president. make america great again. right? fantastic. general management, we really had some great meetings and you will be hearing about it soon. thank you. [crosstalk] announcer: tomorrow, it discussion on the presidential transition process with former presidential white house chiefs of staff. it is live beginning at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span.

>> we're asking students to participate in this shares studentcam video documentary competition by telling us, what is the most urgent issue for our next resident, donald trump to address. the competition is open to 6-12.ts grades students can work alone or in groups of up to three to produce a five-evan minute documentary. will go to the team at the best overall entry. $100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded and shared. is january deadline 20, 2017. that is an inauguration day. for more information go to our .ebsite, studentcam.org >> followed the transition of government on c-span is donald trump becomes the 45th president of the united states and republicans maintain control of

senate. house and we will take you to key events as they happen without interruption. demandn his c-span, on at c-span.org, or listen free on our c-span radio up. -- radio. >> at the recent wall street journal council meeting, gene sperling, economic advisor for hillary clinton's campaign discuss the campaign and reasons why donald trump was elected. [applause] host: thank you very much.

thank you, jeanne. playing cleanup. let's talk first if we could about this election. you were an advisor to the principal campaign. you worked as john said, both in barack obama administration. andhave been a key advisor policymaker in economics. you were an advisor on the clinton campaign. you heard this no doubt today about some of the issues. not pressurent to for a postmortem but what went wrong? why am i not talking to you now is the next treasury secretary? gene sperling: i think there will be a lot of conversations about campaigns and strategy. i think we have an excellent person in hillary clinton. i think for his fortune our misfortune is we had somebody

who was perhaps extremely qualified, vast experience, at a moment and time where that was instead ato fly but deep weight. my first campaign was the dukakis campaign in 1988 and george herbert walker's experience was tough for us. it was like a positive thing hard to overcome. here, i think it did make it harder for her to capture some of that anger hand out rage that perhaps trump and bernie sanders were able to capture. but look, you know -- host: well, because she had been part of the incumbent operation. gene: she was first lady, she york, sher from new was secretary of state, and she had to have a delicate message in the sense that to those of us who really believed barack obama save our country from a

great depression and deserves a lot of credit for how well things have gotten and yet we are a little bit like the football team that was 0-16 and now we are 10-6. a lot of improvement by people want to go to the super bowl and it is not there so she had to both be a change candidate and yet somewhat build up the support of the legacy of this, you know, past president. so it was difficult but you you know,ll say that having been involved in all of this i believe one should be very passionate about their values. you know, to me, i am in policy because, you know, i believe we should have a country where every child, you know, the accident of your but should not overwhelmingly determine the outcome of your life. where there is room for poor americans, immigrants, and for people to rise and that working families can work with dignity, raise their families and many, retire with dignity.

those invited as i hold dear and i think you have a lot of humility. host: one thing on the line was how disastrous the last eight years have been for the democratic party across the country. you can measured. their plus half a dozen senate seats, 25 house seats it since 2008. republicans have astonishing control across the country of governorships. extraordinarily strong position presidency, the too. what has gone wrong from 2008 where you took everything and you seemed to be advancing across the country and now you are in a worse position than you generation? freight gene: that goes to the humility that we won twice but there were problems. warren said earlier, yes, they won the electoral college and that is how you win the presidency and they get to govern but you know, they are going to have -- they

have a respectable public laws and they laws in the house and senate so i guess what i feel in my heart is with barack obama coming into a terrible financial crisis, was no doubt a mixed blessing. it absolutely made it easier for a democrat to win the presidency and 2008. the terrible financial crisis, as i think others have said, they are terrible and at least three ways that are difficult. number one, the degree of pain and suffering in people who lost their dreams, houses, savings, was terrible. secondly, when you have recoveries after great financial crisis you do not get the morningdemand to 1984 in america. you get people deleveraging and when you get that when you need that robust growth so you do not

get legions of long-term unemployed people who never get back in. into third, the remedies are almost inherently unpopular. you have to stabilize the 75% of the system which is larger financial institutions. you stable them to help the average person path savings but that person still sees you stabilizing the people who look like they are the culprits. so you get yourself in a situation where you have to do what you have to do to save the economy but it is not out of anybody's at agenda for what is popular. host: save the economy but destroy the democratic party? i think when you inherit a financial crisis like that it helps you get reelected but it makes it harder to completely meet the expectations of people when you are overcoming the type of -- i mean look, this was not an average of

recession. this was the worst recession and crisis since the great depression. you did not bounce back as quick. we could talk about other things. i think people got kind of stimulus fatigue. you know, if you want to know what was the chart we used to show barack obama withdrew drive them absolutely crazy, we would say, what would growth he and the economy and unemployment if state and local spending had been the same under your presidency as an had been in the bush and reagan recoveries question mark it was devastating. gdp has beenr 2.6%. it has been over 2% is the contraction at state and local level. the public tolerance for keynesian when they see you do a bit and there are two ways to look at it. for us, it was like know you

need to keep increasing demand, do more infrastructure, get people to work. host: productivity has been poor, one of the week is. private sector productivity is now back to the 1970's, that is a reflection is a net on the -- is not an economic achievement of this administration. gene: no, but i think there is a lot of mystery about productivity right now. whether it is accounted for right. the fact that whether gps clearly makes us more productive does not come into the gdp factor so it cannot be part of productivity. i think they lot of us feel there were still demand issues at a time when you needed to get things back and to be fair, barack obama did try those things. you can think they are bad policies but you cannot say he them. implement all of

many progressives are united in that we need more full employment economy. you see a lot of us being more dovish than janet yellen and would like to see more demand. think that is, i more pervasive even in the business community right now people who are hoping that donald trump actually succeeds and what has been the democratic , more of a stronger significant infrastructure boost into the economy. host: when we has the audience -- when we get the audience questions. >> i'm from snap on tools. presidentaid about clinton and his focus on the middle class and promoting it, i would suggest that i just spent last week, election week, in a factory in iowa. from their perspective, if you look at the campaigns as the balance between priority among social issues versus economic

issues, they clearly saw the them a chronic campaign as prioritizing the social issues before their own economically-based issues where as they saw donald trump on the other side, whatever they thought of him, as prior touring jobs and economic issues. despite the fact that karl rove said it, is the middle class stupid and stuff like that. it was almost like the democratic agenda departed from bill clinton. going forward, how do you see that playing out? you see the democratic agenda going back to emphasize economic issues of the social issues or even trying to double down on the social issues? obviously, this week has been very painful and it is painful to hear you say that because from our point of year-end from i think her point of view, the economy was first. i do not think that is a aspiration of the campaign.

but we will have to look at why that did not break through. maybe it is the idiosyncratic nature of donald trump, a once-in-a-lifetime personality. we were forever on a really ititious college plan and came out the day he was fighting with make and kelly. and we could just not get any coverage. that was what it was like. -- fighting with megyn kelly. that is what it was like. if that bad luck? failure? policy wise, think there was no question the focus was still the economy, stupid. the focus was, and this is different than what david comey was saying, think we were trying to focus on an economic plan. a plan that aligned it tax incentives and investments in what would create jobs on our shores. it would be good for middle-class and infrastructure

plan. even exit polls are very mixed on who they thought had the as ir economic policy but said, you have to have humility and you cannot sit there and say, we meant to do a, b, and seed. if we fail, we have to look at that going forward. i do not think it reflects there was a conscious desire for it not to be an economy, stupid, campaign. because i can't i did that that was her aim. if it did not come through, that was more of a failure of execution none intent. host: other questions? .> mark from hyatt hotels. the first two major economic initiatives put on the table are infrastructure and tax relief for tax reform. first, what is your take on what has been indicated so far and

what level of congressional support amongst democrats do you think there will be for those two initiatives? gene: well, i think that is to be seen. because they will try to do this as a reconciliation measure, which not to bore everybody, is a process by which you use a budget resolution to essentially only need 50 votes in the senate. obviously, vice president pence can do the tie-breaking vote. that creates the opportunity for donald trump and the republicans to pass a tax reform and perhaps anyastructure built without democrats. now, you know, reconciliation is a complicated term and you know, that is a possibility. part of the question will be, if

you can do it, do you want to do it? and i think that if they wanted to pick up democrats they are going to have to move off division. there is going to have to be more focus on the progressive video of that tax package on ourher it is draining fiscal situation for tax relief -- theygoing mostly have this challenge even in the campaign which is on the republican side there is a lot of pressure when they cut the corporate rate to cut the other rate to the same level. we all know everybody would be kind of for that if the pass-through -- if every pass-through was the owner of a hardware store but pass-through is every corporate law fund manager, every hedge fund manager, every consultant and

for a lot of people that is going to be just a backdoor way of lowering taxes for the most well-off. whiteeople have both house and the house and senate, they tend to look at it as their moments and sometimes tend to overreach. they have to be careful and i would say to people in terms of corporate tax reform, obviously, as part of president obama's team we were engaged in that process. we do believe the current process is irrational and you want something that is more simple, fair, and encourages more job creation. here it has your brilliant cfo spending more time helping you create new products as opposed to doing international tax arbitration. so we kind of a agree with that. but i think that people will judge this a lot in the and as how i wind it those benefits are

with the kind of job creation and investment impact and in 2004, when there was a repatriation holiday which lots voted for in george bush signed, the analysis was fairly clear, almost unambiguous that almost 90% of the money brought back was used for dividends, stock ibex, stock ibex to raise the compensation of executives, etc. and if people look at the end and say they did tax reform and it led to this rising tide and it really helped workers but if it looks like quite, this was just something where they were able to do whatever they want it has democrats did not control a ihing and this was just guess what elizabeth warren -- two elites, i think it will backfire.

i think when you have the prevention of having the whole interestinggain be -- it will be interesting to see whether you can run the table or if it will be in your long-term benefit to try to buy more support from progresses. host: jeanne, thank you for coming all the way from california to join us. some quick housekeeping notes. decided to go to the sponsor dinner tonight, the shuttles are leaving at six: 15. the french ambassador, a couple more seats left if some of you folks want to join. i will see you on may 16 at the tokyo palace hotel for the ceo council asia. back to jerry. host: thank you very much. thank you, gene. job in theoughest world is to be the quarterback in the super bowl and have to go right out for a press conference

afterwards. 2016was gene in the election. that concludes the townsend. i want to thank those on our team who worked so hard to make this a great event. we had just gravel pretty hard in the course of the last week to make sure that we had an appropriate, relevant topical agenda for you to enjoy and i hope you have enjoyed it. thank you for coming. a reminder, these sessions and discussions will be published in a special report in the wall street journal next tuesday, november 22. i want to thank our sponsors, 80 carney, nasdaq, said tian j, tech mahindra, and workday. thank you, it would not be possible without your support. we will be sending you a short survey tomorrow morning and just to elaborate a little bit more

on what john said, as ceo council members you are all invited to a number of events. next year.nts in the the ceo council and demos tuesday, january 17. dinner with the wall street journal editors and few months. one in menlo park, california, on march 28. one in chicago on may 16. we will be holding our first annual ceo council meeting atside the u.s. on may 16 the palace hotel in tokyo with very senior asian officials, ceos, and others. and next years annual will be right here next november. it won't be after such a momentous election but it will be just as interesting and we to digesthad a year these extraordinary events. and we will be doing more the present next year and you will hear about them. joining us,or please join us outside now for cocktails. thank you.

] pplause >> president obama talks with reporters at the end of the economic summit in lima, peru. ♪ announcer: this week on q&a, author okey ndibe. brian: never look an american in the eye is the name of your book. -- is the title of your book. but i have to start with the obvious. tell the story. okey: it