in the same way with his program in schools that educate children to the degree to which they are ucatablewl -- ed did something remarkable. we do not think about it erie it he changed all america. people into not looking at the disabled at all or looking at them with nothing , to havingy and pity them look at them as equals, having them look at them in ways that value all that they had to offer. tom, you have not only changed the state of affairs for the disabled in america, you have changed america's soul. think how different it is than what it was 25 years ago. what people look for, a bold or disabled, is to be treated with dignity, treated with respect, and that is what tom changed. i cannot think of a handful of , and i and i have served am told it was supposed to make me feel good, it made me feel of, all but 13 people american history i have served longer in the senate. [applause] and so, it is astounding. but time does not leave it to just what happened here at home. think of what tom has done and how loud his voice has been for those around the world, not only for the disabled, bu

alcohol higher ucation accountable and create more competition.erri: maybe this would make sense the quality of that education has grown as much, but reality is i don't think they're learning as much as they used to . writing ability, reasoning ability, it is not improving. >> si sibila say you make a million dollars more in your lifetime if you had a 4-year degree. that is now down to 300,000. we have joanna prepare ourselves for this new technical aids. right now there is a use demand for technical degrees in engineering degrees. taking control of student loans and they're doing nothing to subsidize or incentivize. so i think if we are going to take control of education policy , we need to rethink it. lenders with looked at a student asking for a loan and say, how much money you going to make? the something that the federal government may step taken the consideration. gerri: there is another fact that blew me away. students graduate within six years, not for, not three, 56%. no one is graduating on time. this is just astonishing. when you look a

>> wl, listehere clrly a niche forrovi true ucation tohe children, and really focus on ah quality hhducational2008,e hd -- managementad make a decisionare w going to stay the same size we were itohe mket of 200 with t enomy being untaorhowe attack th market knowing that our competitors were going t sl up their growngines? we made a decisiono ck marke so we clearly made large investment in technology and llowed ouelves the opportunity torow t business by havg reesourcend owledge tugchlo r personnel. and we we able to grow the ins al 400%rom the 2008 period. ingto the 2008, we did about $27illion of revenue sysm de, and we'll go ito this yr with at132 miioinenue. ty:u' oning about two locations per month, plans togo erseasto england now, d youve done this rlly cool rtrshith boly which connects franchise see to lend el th g money. all of ts has to have added to the growthnd ma it tt much a rit? people to op thse >> asotey. listen, we got hit with the credit market ch and w knew that small binesses we going to get hit veryar so managent had to make a dision how are o franchisee going to cess bowfl

it was the most recent statement by the supreme court on the issue of affirmative action in higher ucation and it concerned the application of abigail fisher to the university of texas which at the time in 2008 as fisher was applying for admission to the university, xas was using a hybrid admissions program, a top 10% program that took from the top 10% of school districts in texas and also used holistic review of the kind that the supreme court approved in university of michigan versus gruder. and so when the supreme court took this case as you can imagine, there was a lot of concern about the sturdyness and the longevity of gruder. d to the relief of many, the gruder president was unchanged -- precedent was unchanged, at least not overruled. and we'll talk about in this panel what exactly the fisher case means for affirmative action in higher education going forward, but the doctrine al outcome of the case was that the diversity in higher education remains a compelling interest. but as the supreme court said, the fifth circuit had given too much deference to how the university of texas wa