tv Public Affairs CSPAN November 21, 2012 1:00pm-5:00pm EST
for television during the campaign. >> let's plan gen. when did this race become unwinnable for mitt romney? >> i am not sure when that moment was. when i thought we were going to win was a few days before when the early voting numbers look good for us. >> you thought it long before the election. i know that. [laughter] >> but i was pretty sure -- >> how long? could he have one after the first debate or where the forces in motion? >> sure, absolutely he could have one. -- won. it was competitive the entire way. i think governor romney could have one up until the end. i always believe in the
fundamental truth, we were building the best grass roots campaign in modern political history. we had the best candidate and the best message. >> in a way, the story of this election is the degree to which replicated the 2008 results. many people thought that 2008 was a once-in-a-lifetime result. you came very close to replicating it. i think the most fascinating statistic is african-americans in ohio, 11% of the electorate, 15% this time. you found 200,000 more african- american voters who turned out for you. mitt romney lost the state by 103,000. that was the election, right there. finding those extra african american voters. >> let me back up. we won this election because of barack obama. people volunteered and supported the president because of his message, because of the
campaign he built. and because they were making big choice about where they wanted the country to go. from the first day, he offered me this job, he said to me this has to be about the grass roots. we are going to run a campaign about the grass roots. that is how we got the numbers that of a bunch of people spend spent 18 months telling me we could not to. we give more people a chance to get involved, do very well in early voting and on election day. results show that we build the kind of campaign that made people want to volunteer and made people want to support the president. >> you started early on registering voters. how important was that? >> huge. we learn from the shellacking we took in 2010 a valuable lesson. to many democrats thought they could put obama's picture on a piece of literature.
it does not work like that. we have to run a sustained operation to have an ongoing conversation about why they should support the president. we did that. we had eight the subsections to target some of our constituencies, democrats, youth, women, minorities. we spent a lot of time messaging to them. you talk about a barbershop campaign, we had a nail salon campaign to get people to register. we registered 1.8 million people. 1.1 million people online. you do not do that if you are not where people are. we build a campaign that was about meeting people on the doors. >> tell us about targeted sharing. >> that was a hard and long effort to build software that
had a simple concept -- in 2008 we had two campaigns. a door knocking campaign that with sophisticated and an online thing that in many ways we did not control. will.i.am happened outside of us. those things did not come together. we spent a year trying to build pieces of software that allowed all of our different pieces to talk to each other through this thing called-board. -- dashboard. it said, very simply, we will build software that allows you to organize wherever you are. if you want to organize at 3:00 in the morning, you can do that. if you want to put your data into a database, you can do that. we are going to track every metric in this campaign and it is not going to be in one place. then we said, how do we use
this, how we use jim messina to reach out to his world? our research showed that the single most persuasive person in an undecided voter's life was their friends and family. this is very different than the traditional way of getting a lesson or getting an application with a list of addresses and their voting history in knocking on the door. this is talking to people that i know through facebook. >> yes, what targets sharing was, and it is one of the most important things we did, an application that allowed you to go and the match your world with our list. click here to send them a piece of content, send them a sheet, ask them to support the president. it sounds like an easy concept. it is not. it is hard to do.
it took a year of amazing work of our talented technology team. we were able to contact over 5 million people directly through their facebook world. people they knew. they are going to look if there friend send them something. they know that person. >> what was the likelihood i would do it? >> over half of the people we ask did it. of those people, 50%, they followed all the way in through to make sure their friends did something. >> looking at how you won, you can argue that campaigns will never be run the same way again. in the specific area, how is that going to change how a sophisticated campaign will run? >> what we learned is you can build analytics to use your volunteers' time more wisely.
it all comes back to the candidate. having people wanting to volunteer. we had all that stuff because people support a barack obama. in the future, actually, in many ways it is a return to the past. door knocking is going to be more important. the fusion of american media makes it harder to get your message out. there is so much television, citizens united created this cacophony of television in the final months of the campaign. people got so much of it, a simple door knocker from a neighbor mattered more than anything else to say, let me tell you why i am supporting barack obama. i live down the street. let me talk about an issue you care about. that became incredibly important. >> your volunteers spent less time doing what than 2008? >> knocking on doors of people
who end -- or never persuade a bowl. the best example was a friend of mine was door knocking before the election. he called and said that me tell you a story about why you are running a smart campaign. i was told to knock on two doors. one was to chase an absentee ballot. the second one was announced the -- and decided voters. i had a great conversation. i am pretty sure that person is going to vote for us on election day. that is honoring volunteers and saying to the contact, you will matter to us. i think it allowed us to hit more doors and more effective or is that the romney campaign. >> how did the data play in your wind? >> in the past two weeks, it has been a little bit overplayed. it goes back to the president and his message.
we built an army but when you're building that army, you have this thing called beta. data allows you to do one thing -- use your time and money more wisely. we used data for everything. trying to figure out using our time wisely. >> what is an example of that? >> whether or not people were going to volunteer for the campaign. everyone in this room has done calls to ask people to come out to the phone. remodeled every person who is for about the president about whether they would volunteer. you're forced -- first call -- >> history, what we know about you. we got a lot of data and you're giving history, everything we knew about that allow us to figure out whether you were going to volunteer. we knew whether people were going to be a better direct to
mail a giver or online. he did a test -- we did a test with a piece of mail, we did have the old way, direct mail, and half using our data analytics. both sides were convinced they were right. data analytics a report by 14%. that allows us to use our data better. >> there have been stories about sarah jessica parker fund-raising. seven versions of the e-mail, she mentioned she was a mom or that and an wintour was going to be there. -- anna wintour was going to be there. >> every e-mail had already been tested a variety of ways. our team, are ridiculously
talented team. >> what worked and what was a dog? >> willis had tests. they love giving me a little grief and testing against everyone. george clooney completely thrash to me. -- thrashed me. [laughter] >> tell us what you learn from the george clooney dinner with the president. >> at his home. >> and it was a lottery to get a spot. how much did you raise from that? >> we ended up doing on that event a little bit over $13 million. between the actual eve and then the online component. >> what was at about the e- mail, what was the perfect storm that every campaign tried to copy? >> with clooney, you can see all the women nodding.
[laughter] there was no analytics there. [laughter] first of all, dinner with obama was the most successful program we had in 2008 and 2012. it goes back to the canada. people say to me all the time, can this be replicated? no. the campaign cannot because it revolves around a bunch of people, whether you like the president or not, you have to add that that a lot of americans are motivated by his candidacy and people wanted to sign up and be part of things like dinner with obama because they supported him. >> tell us what works and the mellon what does not. >> that is a hard question to answer. what works is direct connection to people. offering them something -- we learned offering a chance to be with the president, a chance to be part of history, a chance to
sit down and break bread and have a discussion with the president. >> what about the format -- >> a huge difference. where you put the button, -- >> what phrases work? >> colom have dinner with barack obama worked pretty well. -- come have dinner with barack obama worked pretty well. [laughter] people want to care about your guide. >> what was the most helpful analytic tool you had this time that he did not have in 2008? >> i think targeted sharing was incredibly important to us. i think we modeled better. we build support scores for every voter on whether or not they were going to support the president. >> what would that have included? commercial databases?
>> that is overrated. the stuff we knew after five years, whether you slammed the door in our face, how you voted, how many primaries, things most people had allowed us to -- we went to an everyday ensample people to see whether or not our model was right. and how people were going to vote was within 1%. our modeling predicted our final vote in florida within 0.2%. >> you are confident in your data because of the redundancy you had. tell us about the date you got every night. >> i hope we get into my feelings on american polling, especially the public wants, we decided to go deep. we had an hour and alex team and do several thousand calls -- >> describe that.
>> it was a department they used to data across the campaign to make everyone's job better. we had over 60 full-time analytics people. every night they would do thousands of random sample calls. every night i had to look in all of the battleground states and every night they would run, a 66,000 bottles of the campaign. >> that has been said before. what does that mean? >> we built a model similar to run the campaign over and over and over. it gives us a likelihood of caring that state. that allows our media team to spend money wiser in the battleground state.
it means you run that many simulations to get a statistically relevant sample to make sure the data was right. every night they did that. then we had our talented pollster. then we had state posters. each had a different one. we really had three books at the electorate. that allowed me to, to have a look at how we were doing, where we were moving. which is why i knew most of the public polls were ridiculous. >> so, what do you think about public polls? [laughter] >> look, a bunch of polling is broken in the country. it is not for anyone's malevolence. cellphone usage has changed the industry. people like getting under 10% response rates.
the president believes in this. the new york times reported that if you went to obama for america, you would get a cookie if you went to way porn website. >> that is not true. >> it was on the front page of "the new york times." >> ok. [laughter] >> what about my surfing would have been relevant to you? >> most of that stuff is not true. the best data was things we collected at the doors. there was some commercial stuff that every campaign purchased. the truth is the more we learn about data, the more we learn how imports and the connection was. the door knocking, having a real
conversation, that mattered. >> what happens to the database now? >> we went out and survey the our entire world and said to them, what are you going to do? what happens to us? people want to be involved in supporting the president. how about looks is a discussion we need to have. he cannot run two campaigns and then say we're going to do it from d.c. that is not how it is going to work. what is going to happen is our people are going to get to make some decisions. we will go through a process where we sit down with them and part of the thing we did in the 2012 campaign was have a series of town halls online to say what kind of campaign to you want to run? that is why we did things i did not want to do like it involved in local elections in wisconsin because our people wanted to.
we're going to learn from them. >> what are the mechanics? this was an e-mail from you. asking people -- how many hours per week i might volunteer for the obama organization. what is it now? will there be something in chicago? >> we do not know. the thing people said to me since the election, and the president talked about this, it will take all of us. whether you voted for him or if you did not to come together and tackle the challenges of this country. people spent five years winning two elections together.
they are not going to walk away and become the change they want to see. >> is it possible obama for america will remain in chicago? >> i think anything is possible. what is true, the campaign needs to shut down. we have to figure out what we do next. that is the conversation we are having. >> there is an organization that could continue to exist. >> it could, in theory. >> you have this amazing infrastructure, why not institutionalize it and make it a permanent organization ready for the candidates? for the next nominee? >> some of it will live on. the tools we build, all of those things, i hope every
campaign uses. i hope it becomes important. the important thing to note is, you cannot give this to the next candidate for president. this organization was built for people that supported this and who were involved. we had over 32,000 liters to volunteer full time. those people were involved because of positions of president of. we learned this to our own surprise, you cannot handed to the next candidate. >> would you sell access to target sharing to any democrat? >> i do not think you sell. we are now calling to get in the business of selling things. there are many ways to do that. what we want to do is have a discussion about it. they are the people who know how to do that. what they want to use them on now is to continue to help the president advocate for his
agenda. >> how will that work? >> you could easily see people using it to say, ok, i want to talk about the choices in front of us on the fiscal cliff and organize my friends. it would be easy to start a group in the last couple of months. it would be easy to go and ask people to call members of congress. that would be easy and i am sure you will see our supporters do that. >> the legacy for obama for america will be an organization that will use these tools, use your database, use your supporters to advocate for the president? >> i think that everybody needs to work together to tackle some
of these challenges. of course obama supporters are going to be involved. i will be one of those volunteering. >> what happens to the day that? >> i am going to go to italy. the one thing i know is that i want to be involved in some way helping this president. that is what i will do. here is the truth. i have taken a 1 week vacation in five years. it is time to restore my energy. the president and i were joking about how bad i looked. it is time to take a vacation. >> what did you say about how he looks? >> i said i thought he looked great. [laughter] >> as a possible you will go into the white house? >> i have done that. i back to work on health care.
i think my future is probably outside the white house helping him becoming part of whatever happens to our social movement to advocate for his agenda. >> it is up -- possible you would run about love for america on the outside. >> what we have to do first is have a discussion about what our people want to do. >> what is the horizon for making decisions about that? >> you will see us make decisions by the and not grow. that is natural. that is what we did last time. last time everybody thought we were going to do one thing. i do not think on election day we expect it to do that but we had discussions with our people and ended up doing that. it is clear healthcare would not have passed without that decision.
>> the amazing thing the obama campaign has done, you were the first presidential be like to get 50% of the vote twice. and you did it in different ways. tell me what steven spielberg told you about that. >> when i left, i did a tour of the country to talk to people. the truth is, the world had changed since 2008. all of those things have changed drastically. i went to see a lot of people and steven spielberg said to me, you have to blow up the 2008 campaign. you are on the the 1965 rolling stones once and then you charge too much for your ticket. [laughter] it was an interesting way to think about that campaign. i said to the president i need you to promise me it is not going to be 2008 again. he said, what are you talking about? we've won.
i said if we run the same campaign, i think we will get beat. we need a new campaign because of technology. he said to me, ok, but as to be about the grass roots. >> and you have to win. >> so we -- he made the single most important scission to put us in chicago. i think that was a crucial moment. >> there was debate about this. some people worried if there was a natural split between the west wing and the campaign, why did it work? >> because you had a bunch of committed people who spent all day, every day, sitting in an open space in chicago, almost no offices, and built a brand new campaign.
the reason i knew it was going to work was in on august of 20 11, -- 2011, somebody said is there's something happening in d.c. these days? what is happening? we were focused on building. we did not have you poking and prodding us. we were able to spend a year building a whole bunch of things becoming helpful on the ground. we were able to spend 15 hours a day, every day, building a grass-roots campaign. >> how many people were in the building? >> 650 in july. then we started people -- putting people in the battleground states. >> what was the most you had on payroll?
>> a little bit over 4000. in october. >> and, did you -- can you imagine another campaign being that size? or is that what a campaign looks like? >> i think whoever has my job to blow it up and build their own campaign. everything is going to change again in four years. i think they should do what we did and spend a lot of time trying to dream their own dream. >> what is the smartest thing and the dumbest thing that the romney campaign did? >> the smartest thing, that is a great question. [laughter] i did not mean that snidely. [laughter] i thought they were amazing fund-raisers. >> what, specifically -- >> more maxed out money, more
maxed out checks. >> what did you learn from that? later, they got their checks earlier and you got your as a leader in the cycle. was that planning or necessity? >> we had a better model. our average contribution was $47. that has most of your money at the rnc or dnc, and that is a problem because you want to spend your money. our fund-raising allow us to do everything inside which allow us to spend our money on the ground. the majority of their money was at the rnc because they were raising $30,000 checks. >> what is a blunder, something that was costly to them? >> the jeep ad. that was the biggest one.
they spent the last 14 days of the election on the defense. day after day they had to answer for that. it put them on the defense for a long time because it was not true. >> the flip side of that, you put the events back in spring, defining him. a lot of regret among republicans about how early you define him. the kind of campaign -- why was that a brilliant insight? >> at the time it was risky because of super pacs. we were going to spend a majority of our money in the summer and not of the fall. we were going to get out spend because we believed that late tv did not matter as much. it turns out we were right.
>> based on what you know about the nation's mood and geography, everything you learned, what republican candidate would have had the best shot? >> that is a good question. we were honest about our concerns about jon huntsman. i think he would have been a tough general election candidate. as someone who helped manage his confirmation, he is a good guy. we looked at his profile and thought he would have been difficult. >> and you thought by bringing him inside, you would take him off the -- >> i thought he was a committed america and who would serve our country well. and he did. >> based on your knowledge of the country's mood, what of the candidates out there has the best chance of doing well in this coming cycled?
>> that is their discussion. their party is going to go through a soul-searching. that is a normal thing. my party went through that in the past. >> what do they need to look for it? >> they cannot continue to hemorrhage youth and latino votes. the future democrat perks of this country are changing -- demographics of this country are changing that is going to make their math difficult if they cannot appeal to these growing segments of the populace. >> we have already had an interesting conversation about reaching hispanic voters. you feel like there is the degree to which they do not get
it to? >> we will see. we will see the lessons they learned. whether or not they come together across party lines to deal with the fiscal cliff in a way that makes sense, whether they pass in immigration bill that makes sense for the country, those would be good signs. >> what was your immediate thinking about paul ryan and where did you end up thinking? >> my immediate was i cannot believe they're going to do this. just -- i -- axelrod always thought it was going to be paul ryan. >> he did not. he thought it was going to be tim pawlenty. >> ax looked at me and said they are going to pick paul ryan. at the time i thought to myself, they're going to spend a
lot of time on defense on medicare, medicaid, all whole bunch of issues. >> they were not divisive issues. >> did you see how close florida was? i think they spent some time defending it. we obviously thought it was important. we air anded several labs -- aired several ads. i thought he added some youth and energy. they had a base concerns and he helped those. so i am not criticizing the pick i just think there were other -- >> you are. >> i was giving an assessment of the good and bad. >> was the helpful? he gave them excitement. he bought them silence from conservatives.
did that help or hurt mitt romney? >> i do not think it did much of be there. here is the truth. we carried his home town. vice-presidential picks usually help you in their state or they add something to the national ticket. you have to ask governor romney. >> besides the automobile in the midwest, at what other regional issues? >> in iowa and colorado, wind energy tax credit. there was an issue that was important in both of those states. obviously models, jobs, the president jobs plan. and i think taxes. we had a fight where you had the president advocating to increase taxes on people who made more than $250,000 a year.
>> looking ahead at the agenda, how big is climate energy? >> if you look at what to this country needs to do to create jobs, having a sound energy policy makes incredible sense. i think there are it a lot of voters who cared deeply about this. i think a lot of the youth of voters have said repeatedly this is an issue they want addressed moving forward. it needs to be addressed and, from an economic standpoint and for the future of the country. >> you think the president will do something dramatic? >> he has a plan to move forward. >> is the new democratic movement dead or no longer relevant?
>> i think that our party has always been the big party and we have different views and that is healthy. that is exactly why i believe i am a democrat. i believe our vision of the country has a lot of people working across party lines and there are folks in our party who all want to do one thing. that is work to move the country forward. we just had an election two weeks ago. i feel great about the outcome. everybody needs to work together to deal with our challenges. >> a few more twitter questions coming in. rutherford b. haze, when did you think victory was all but certain? >> we call that going inside of the jar.
i thought 10 days before the election when early numbers did not cut into our lead, because early vote was predict of whether or not your segments of the population were going to vote. if they were going to take the time, it was likely they were going to do well. they were all over performing on an early vote. i thought to myself we are going to over perform on election day. >> something surprising this house that it was. there were a few moments, but it was pretty flat. >> it was. that is why -- going back to my issue, the public polls were crazy. they were all over the place. >> what searching and you need to do?
would you need to do to change about how they are conducted? >> you have to decide whether or not you're going to [inaudible] some pollsters do not go to party, deal with cell phones. you cannot auto dial cell phones. if you're not going to put them, you are going to under sample youth and minorities. that is going to make your samples, older than they should be and not enough minorities. that is why some looked so difficult for the president because they were under sampling. that is another place where they got it wrong. >> the majority of public polls were closed. within the margin of error.
>> their last poll got it right. i think the more descriptive thing was two weeks before that and a month before that. it is all up and down, inside, back-and-forth. that is people who are getting the sample wrong. >> you think the state of public polling is what? >> broken. >> what needs to be done? >> we have to have a discussion about getting more self loans into the sample, what the electorate looks like. it is expensive. >> politico -- what were you going to say? >> they give you a price. your prices more if you have a cell phone in it because it is more expensive. you do because you want your pole to make sense. >> you think even more cellphone sticky here is the truth -- --
>> here is the truth. raise your hand if you have a land line. raise your hand if you have a self on. all those people -- i am not done renting. -- ranting. [laughter] we did an experiment using the gallup electorate. 20% of people would have gotten thrown out. 20%. they said they were not going to vote. that is a completely wrong screen. you are getting a raw deal and a lot of people are putting these polls on the front page. in the lead of the news, obama is down and he was tied a week ago.
no, no he was not. he screwed up your sample. >> you mentioned cell phones. what else needs to change about the industry practice? >> what file are they using? are they doing random dial? are they using a list? are they doing a vote to file? are they doing something that has new registered voters? >> we registered a 1.8 million on the doors. most did not get those people because they did not by the new file. they did not know they were registered. the other thing, figuring out what to the alleged sort of looks like. as you know, who is going to vote was a difference between their models in our models. >> why were they wrong? >> you have to ask them. they did not think our coalition was going to vote.
they thought it would look more like 2004. >> what gave you confidence? >> of voter registration, enthusiasm, we can see our people excited. they were giving money. that was important. and early voting. when we started to see the numbers come in, we ran a campaign on the ground to do this, we could see our elector it was voting at the rates we hoped they would. more than that. we started to say if that is true, we are going to be ok. >> if you would write a technology book about what you learned, what did you learn? >> it would be a big book. it would start with hiring really smart people, regardless of their age.
give them a budget and support and hold them accountable. they will build you some amazing things. >> campaigns -- you hired technological people and people who were not political. >> one of the best pieces of advice i got from eric schmidt, the chairman of google. he said you do not want political people. you want people who you are going to draw what you want and they will build that. that was very true. we hired a cto who thought we were crazy be in from mars. and we thought the same of fame. -- of him.
we all, to get there, spent a year of learning each other's languages. then we would draw things on the white ford and say this is what we want you to do. build us a program to use facebook to get them to organize their friends. he said that is going to be hard and expensive. i complained about how expensive it was and then we built it. >> what did you learn from him a political person would never have seen? >> what did i learn? i think what he learned. if he was sitting on the stage, he would say that in the end, they did a lot of things to make door knocking easier. that is what this is about. he said this to me, all of these people in his room and in every door around the country were doing it because of barack obama. we got people to take pay cuts and giveaway golden parachutes because they wanted to work for barack obama. >> is that true, this was the
most expensive in history? >> totally. we had to weigh more than last time. we registered with more voters. we had more volunteers. 2008 was a magical campaign. 2012, we finally got good at it. we spent five years learning how to do it. the best story, in august, i went to a convention in ohio. this amazing team leader said to me, the simplest thing about the obamacare campaign, i have been organizing for barack obama since 2007. i know everybody in my neighborhood. i know the democrats who might forget to vote. i know the independence and i know how they make up their mind. she looked at me and said, the rounding guy just came from out of state.
could you think is going to be better? that was true. polls showed we got a majority of voters that this side of the final day of the campaign. in part that was because of the president and in part because they got a door knock, let me walk you through why i, your neighbor, why i support barack obama. they said i just saw this television ad and they said this about obama. the team leader said let me send you a facebook post why that is not true. let me make sure you understand. we could see those people were moving to west. they were moving to west at the end of the campaign. in an incumbent race, typically incumbents lose undecideds.
>> we are about to get the hook here. howre talking about surgical you were in getting out your vote. will swing voters, are they passe? will they not give the attention they have? >> here is what happened. it is partially wide polling is screwed up. a lot of people do not vote like independence, especially on the republican side. you have covered this. people are registering as independents because of the tea party and other things. they look like independence. they are in -- they say they are independent but they vote republican. moderates is a better way to define them. those are the people you're going to fight for. independence, we learned that a
majority are not independent. they usually vote democratic or republican. left in the middle are moderates. >> how many were on the bubble? >> hard to give you an answer. i know the president one that grew by 15 points. >> one was the last time they decided? what was the triggering a for the group of true swing voters? >> 75% of voters that made up their mind by the conventions. >> what this typical? >> less than that. i know that is set an historic number.
that shows the polarization the country feels between the two parties. so, the moderates way to a while to make a decision and then they looked at taxes, the economy, jobs, and they went to the president. >> what is an emerging trend in technology or how people consumer information that will have implications for 2014? the leading edge? >> that is a good question. the prevalence of people getting their information online has exploded. you look as swing voters and how little they are watching tv, we all had three places you got your news from. now they get their nightly news from 15 sources. jon stewart is an important moment from that. if you are a democratic-leaning woman, you love rachel maddow.
getting to those people is harder. they are way more online than anyone. you have to go to where they are. campaigns will spend more and more of their money online than ever before. until it reaches parity with television. >> and you think television will still be big in 2016. >> it is going to be the dominant media but online is going to catch up very quickly. i think it already is catching up for young voters who are looking -- >> within a couple cycles? >> no question. i think the next election is going to have to decide, as we did, what percentage you spent online, it is harder than ever
to reach people. there is a magical place you can reach every american voter and it is at the door. that is why the future of campaigns is going to go back. we beat them badly on the doors. >> karl rove says republicans should reverse engineer your ticket out the vote effort. >> i think they have to rely less on super pacs. that was a crutch for that. i think mitt romney was helped by them. but once they got into a general, and you could spend all of the money on tv, and we were outspent on tv, but i believe they're going to look at our campaign and realize the messenger matters and we had a better messenger. and that we'd beat them on the doors.
that really matters. >> if i am planning a 2014 campaign, what can i learn from you? what do i need to do differently? >> i think you need to look at online in a new way. in 2008, online was about putting everything through barack obama.com. in 2012, we had a world where we program content to different places. we did not care where you consumed the content. on election day, we sent out one tweet. now it is prevalent. he did tumblr, a whole bunch of things that did not exist in 2008 just to get to people. i think you're going to be cross channel in a way that we were not at all. cross channel means you are
going to be wherever the voter is. you're going to program content for facebook, google, wherever they are. >> let's pull back from online. if i am planning a 2016 campaign, what do i learn from obama for america? >> hugh learned the need for an online don't base that allows you to -- you learned the need for an online donor base that allows you to raise money. >> this time he raised 1 billion tax 70% online. -- you raised $1 billion? 7% online. >> the most important thing i would say to any campaign is it is about your candidate and the message.
what they're going to bring to this country. that is why millions of americans signed up. it was not because they got a t- shirt. they did. it was not because of a bumper sticker. they believe in the vision barack obama has. that is why we won the election. >> we thank our hard-working politico colleagues and bankamerica, c-span for being here, those of you streaming, thank you to anybody who got up early for this conversation. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [applause] >> you changed this army so it becomes a volunteer army. go and find your soldiers in america. we did that.
over five or six years, we created a splendid force of young men and women who are willing to serve their country as volunteers and they had the same tradition, the same culture, loyalty, and dedication. they prove themselves in the gulf war, the panama invasion. they prove themselves in the last 10 years in iraq and afghanistan. what we have to keep in mind is something that president lincoln said. to care for those who have borne the battle. to care. never forget that they are carrying the american spirit, carrying the american traditions with them. when they get injured or hurt or when they come back to be reintegrated, we have to be waiting to care for them.
not just the federal government or the veterans administration, but fellow citizens. >> more with colin powell thanksgiving day on c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. onn, the hollywood's impact american culture. later, nasa officials pay homage to the first men to walk on the moon just before 11:00. >> the name of this place still resonates with the shuddering in the hearts of the american people spending more than any other name. americans retain the knowledge that what happened here was the crux of our terrible national trial and even americans who are not sure precisely what transpired note that all the glory and tragedy that we associate with the civil war
presides most indelibly here. >> thursday night, steven spielberg on the battle of gettysburg and abraham lincoln's legacy beginning thursday on c- span3. >> in just a moment, we are going to bring you a program looking at retirement issues and the baby boom generation. and about 45 minutes, we are going to open up our phone lines to get your thoughts on retirement and the impact of the economy on your retirement plans. will also open up our twitter account. first, the program from the commonwealth club in california and th.
>> good evening and welcome. i am your host for today. we also welcome our listening audience and invite everyone to listen to us online. and now it's my pleasure to introduce our distinguished speaker. mark feed man is c.e. ofmente and founder of encore.org. an organization working to promote encore careers, second acts for the greater good. he spear headed the experience corp one of the biggest service programs engaging people over 55. and the purpose prize which annually provides five 100,000
dollar prices. >> freedman was described as the voice of aging baby boomers for who are sur suing meaningful and sustaining work for later in life. while the "wall street journal" stated he has emerged as a leading voice in discussions nationwide about the changing face of retirement. he's the author of "the big shift: navigating the new stage beyond midlife" published in april 2011 which "the new york times" called an imaginative work with a potential to affect our individual lives and collective future. recognized by fast company magazine three years in a row as one of the nation's leading
entrepreneurs he has been honored with numerous honors. he was a visiting research fellow at kings college. he lives with his wife and children in the san francisco bay area. now join me in greeting marc freedman. [applause] >> thank you to all of you for coming out at the end of a work day to talk about the future of work. i read a quote from joseph campbell four years ago. he said that midlife is when you get to the top of the ladder and discover it's leaning against the wrong wall. that made me think about the wall that my ladder was leaning
against. i had spent 20 years at that point focused on trying to create more opportunities for people in the second half of life to improve the circumstances of kids through the experience corp that john mentioned and other efforts and i felt like it was the right purpose in life. but i was flagging at the. i read a second quote around the same period and it was one that said that we'd stretched midlife so longed the become like a run on sentence in separate need of punk wation. and i decided i didn't need to change walls as muches as i needed to get punk wation. period no, a comma was too little. the semicollon, that's what i needed in my life. i went to the board of directors and asked them if i could take a southeast bat cal. they agreed.
i believe they felt i was flagging a little bit as well and i began making very grand plans. in fact i decided to go to the opposite end of the earth to australia and take a big trip for three months with my wife and two young children and began the process of accumulating guide books to the out back and that pile started growing higher as the days leading up to the trip began growing shorter. and finally i reached a point where i had no desire to go to australia and spend three months in a hotel room with two screaming children. a southeast bat cal is what touchdown do to recover from a trip with kids in a hotel room. i cashed in all my frequent flier miles and iv for a mere thousand dollars they let me
stay at home. instead of feeling like my one tount to do the big get away i felt a huge sense of relief come over me. there would be no airport security lines, no 14 hour flights, no coming back three months later to long piles of e-mails and correspondence and all those kinds of things. and i was telling this to a friend because i was amazed that i had that reaction and she said there was a body of research in psychology that showed one of the great pleasures in life is to plan a fantastic trip and then not go on it. i felt like well you got to do something, after all i had crossed this great midlife divide. so i decided to take a car trip with the family up to portland. began planning again and collecting guide books and i
realized i couldn't make it up to portland in one drive so i would have to stop in med ford. got on the internet and started shopping for rates and found a homewood sweets. called them up and having lost $1,000 not going to australia, i should get a discount. i found the big discount, aarp. i had gotten my card and this was the first chance to use it. i told my wife i saved us $14 and she remembered the thousand dollars we lost. she asked if i remembered to get the two cribs. so i called back and they said
mr. senior citizen. and i told them i needed two cribs. >> if you think about the way we treat people who are move sboog this stage of life, 60's is the new 40's. at the same time if you go to my pharmacy they give you senior citizen discounts at 60. so 60 is the old 80 and at the same time the new 40. we heard a year or two ago about aging boomers reinteresting the work force and they described them as the walking dead. so every continue diction in terms, every kind of objection exi moron has been invoked to describe this level. at the same time confusion is there more broadly.
this vast expansion in life expect ansi over the last 100 years in an amount that was equivalent to all the increases up to 1900. so this is a remarkable triumph and if you pick up the ed torle pages you hear about the gray tsunami. the age quake. it's as if the age queak has sponsored the demographic revolution. so how sit the best things that have happened to us, these longer lives turns out to be the worst thing that happens to us as a society? you go to your doctor and they tell you eat vegetables, walk around the block, reduce stress, live well so you can
live long and if you pick up any of the "new york times" issues over the last couple of months you see old versus young. we see the great coming trade off. all of these tremendously difficult scenarios that are supposedly going to be the hall mark of our future. and not only that, demoggrafi is destiny that it's inevitably. so this confusion more broadly, it's no surprise that in the context that you start seeing some separate prescriptions, the book booms day a couple of years ago proposed boomers at 70 their families got green stamps and gifts all in exchange for people willing to go to the great beyond. the most recent version a little less stark is in the mer
gold hotel. a film bilt around the proposition of out sourcing the elderly. if we can't figure out how to have a solet with so many people over the ange of 60 let's just send them some place else. after all it's less expensive to live in india where the stars of the movie end up going. i'm here to talk about an at native to youth nation i can't or out sourcing what soon will be a quarter of the population and to argue that the solution to much that ails us as individuals and as a society lace in rethinking the map of life. a map of life that was in many ways set up for three score and ten for those who seem like longer lives of the past century but is inadequate of five score life spans that more
people will be living in the 21st century. half of the kids in the developed rgp world are projected to see their 100th birthday. so we can't just extend this life course that was set up for a very different ark of life to one that is really -- has an extra decimal point and and extra 0 to it. so i think what is happening is today that the nature of life is under every bit as radical a transformation as the numbers are. all those numbers that we're so familiar with. and that the period that's been characterized in these terms is actually an entirely new stage of life. 60 is not the new 40 or old 80. 60 is the new 60 and these tens of millions of people who are flooding into this territory
are something entirely new on the landscape and yet something that is poorly recognizeds, seen mostly as a problem to be solved that i think may be an opportunity to be seized if we play our cards right. but this whole proposition probably sounds counter intutetive. it sounds like the oxygen in the air when their much closer to being fiction. if i trace the history of retirement in america, the idea of golden years which seems so much of a core part of the american dream for the last half century. if you go back to the 1930's when social security was invented 65 was picked as the eligibility age for social security.
they were convinced the state would never pay out a single pension. he was in his late 70's at the time. we gave out the first social security check in january of 1940 to a woman in vermont who put $20.75 in the system and lived to our 101 birthday. she saw the beatles come to america and the moon landing. not everybody at that point was going to live these long life spans but the handwriting was on the wall. in fact by the late 1940's retirees were described as too old to work, too young to die which was a problem for those individuals who were trying to figure out what to do for those spans beyond their working
years. it was a period when people hardly wanted to think about or talk about, definitely did not look forward to or invested in. so they began selling retirement as a period where people could go to the ball game in the afternoon. and that vision wasn't cemented until the early 1960's particularly by the retirement demuent developers. there was this idea that later life could be a second childhood, graying is playing and he built a community, invested $2 million in late 1950's early 1960's into the opening of sun city. and there was a wonderful
moment the night before the community opened when one of his lutenants was sitting around a table in arizona and he said how am i going to sell a 30 year mortgage to somebody who is 65-year-old. and they said we should have thought about that before. and they had sleepless nights and the next day 100,000 people came. and they managed to make what was seen as a necessity, a virtue. and this idea of the golden years became a hall mark of the american dream. it's not just retirement that was invented in the last century. even addlessens t idea of youth was concocted in the early part of the century. that word was coined by a 60-year-old. because we were at a situation
in the country where there was a proliferation of the night nors of that day. i was talking earlier about night young nor old as the characteristic of so many of news our 50's, 60's, sevent. well there were these young people who weren't children or quite adults. there was a lot of disruption in the country. there was concern about these young people who had physician cal maturity but not emotional maturity. we invented hools and child labor laws and it took forty years to create the word teenager. that was invented by somebody in their 60's but the main lesson is these stages of life were responses to problems. they were solutions.
and it's ironic that it was stanley hall himself, the inventor of youth who proposed twenty years later a stage between midlife and old age arguing that he had actually made a mistake. he should have invented this stage for people like himself. he promptly passed away a year later but in writing about this period, he had asset of beautiful images and insights which make a lot of sense almost 100 years later. he described this period as an indian summer. and he said human beings didn't reach the height of their capacity until the shad dozen slanted eastward. the idea was more and more people were reaching a point where they had the benefits of experience and the capacity to do something with it. there was a book a couple of
years ago that described the key traites of this period as active wisdom. i think it all comes back to a sense of time. the familiar way of thinking about this period in life and the assets people have as they continue trying to contribute to society is experience, time lived. i think just as important is the other side, is the question of time left to live. when i hit my 50's and i find that there is recognition there are fewer years ahead than there are behind. that's just the reality even in this era of longer life spans and that has an impact on people's priorities and perspectives. at the same time there's an awareness of mortality and time is being compressed. there is a sense of expansion
of time. you read articles about the continually growing life expect tan si here and around the world. and at the same time you realize how fast the last 20 years went by. so there is perspective and motivation i think of in terms of that great slogen of the french revolution, this is mortality, long jevty and urgency. you pick up your college yearbook and not everybody is there, parents pass away. you read the obituary stephen job dice. there is a sense of time you're not aware in your teens or 20's or 30's and yet the likelihood there is a stretch of time up ahead. it's almost as if in the past wisdom was wasted on the old. just the time you figured out
what life was all about you were too worn out to do anything about it. now you've got 10,000 people a day turning 60 who are reaching a point where they have all that benefit of experience and time lived. but there is a perspective on life and what matters most and the time to do something with it. and i think that's what hall was talking about when he talked about the indian summer. it doesn't help us get past the oxymoron problem. what do you call this stage of life? hall used a frace which explains why 90 years after he wrote his book we don't have a name for this period. other people have talked about the third act, third chapter. i was struggling against a publishing deadline and i had no name for this period and i found myself poised over a
laundry hamper with my mother-in-law who is one of those people who races through the cross word puzzle on sunday and gets every word and it's all said and done for her in less than an hour. i said what am i going to call this period? i figured this out long ago. so i said tell me. i was moving towards the computer. she said i'm on my next to last dog. she figured she's got about six years left in her current canine. probable about a 14 year pooch. it's not going to be she's going to be measured for a cask but clean up after it and walk it. we're used to measuring life in dog years. this is just a new application. in the end i was guided more by the national discussion that's been happening over the 20's
which i think is a parallel conversation to the one that's occurring in the 60's. there was a commission a few years ago that published a report arguing that the 20's are a new stage of life which they call emerging adulthood. so i thought maybe this third phase of adulthood the period from the 50's through the 70's could be encore adulthood. shakespeare said there are seven stages of life. i think as we stretch approximate mating five score we can't stretch those existing stages. we have childhood, addlessens, emerging adulthood, midlife, encore adulthood, retirement and old age. but i think it's going to take more than a vision to realize a life course that makets sense for this century. i'm struck a lot by a comment i
heard, read about of a critique of hall that argued he thought that addlessens was going to take place when it occurred in high school. i think the same caution applies in this period. i'd like to focus as a society on the segment that's planning to contribute in this stage of life that sees this as a time of productivty, of engagement and continued growth. and that's a time to provide personal meaning but that means something beyond yourself. a picture cries for water to carry and a person for work that is real. and i think that's as true at 60 as it is at 20. americans get up and go to work every day as much for daily meaning as daily bread and he
could have added daily identity. people are looking for work at this stage in life which they need income to be sure. but they're looking for daily meaning and identify and work that means something beyond themselves. at an core.org we've been calling for passion in life and a paycheck. 31 million have top priority to making that transition but are struggling getting from what's left to what's next. it's become a do it yourself process for so many people who are trying to get to this aspiration which is not only going to benefit them but also the nation. i think as a society we need to come together and develop
better path ways to help people navigate their way into this stage of life. and i think one place is what we do for young people. we have intern ships for young people. that's one of the best ways for people to find the next phase of work. in fact there was an insightful book a few years ago that described how people at all stages of life are far more successful if they're able to try on new career roles than if they just discover their passion. it's a process that is much more likely to be successful if there is an opportunity for trial by error. that's what we do with internship programs for young people. as i was writing this book i met people in their sivents, 60's and sevens who were neeking into these intership programs for young people. i met a guy who worked for the
public tv station in boston and retired from that job and wanted to be a park ranger. he couldn't figure out how to get there so he joined the internship program. there wasn't anybody nells his class over the age of 19. i met a woman in denver whose daughter went through teach for america and as she watched her daughter teach in a los angeles classroom she was so moved she applied for teach for america herself. she was in her late 50's herself and ended up in a dorm room in houston in 115 degree temperatures sharing a bathroom down the hall with three 22-year-olds. whether they were repelling down from the ceiling or speaking in the side door there are more and more people trying to find these path ways to purpose. we created at encore.org the
fellowship program which was designed to be a front door for many people who wanted to make this passage. it started in silicon valley with ten people who had careers in the corporate sector and wanted to work in the environment and with kids with poverty but had no idea to get there. they received $$25,000 for this fell ship half from their previous employer. and half from the non-profit where they were working. this past fall it was announced that every single retirement eligible employee could do an encore fell ship. they would pay the full $25,000 could be bra coverage and the administration of the program and they moved there to an hr policy. and at a time when all we hear is companies cutting back their
hr benefits here was a new benefit amed at the reality for so people people who have worked for 25 years. they've been so busy doing what they've been doing in midlife it's hard to know what is next. you need to try things on and have lower bar yes, sir to entry to do. that school for the second half of life. one of the triumphs was the invention of life long learning . it's been a huge triumph and now we've got a well developed system of education for young people and older people who are mostly focused on personal development and stimulation. what we're missing is school for middle people for the second half of life. and again, in communities around the country people are going through the do it yourself process. there's been a doubling of people going to divinity school
since 1990. a phenomenon that time magazine troferede last year as holy enroll letters. this has been happening in other places as well. we need to do a better job in making those prammings efficient and affordable. that same time magazine article i troferede described a nurse who became a priest. it cost her $100,000. she sold her house and car and took a vow of poverty to make it through that period. why not come up with better ways for people to save for this transition that so many more are going through? there was another article that described the growing number of boomers that are tapping into their children's accounts to go back to school.
individual retirement accounts i would like to see individual purpose accounts where people save for their own transition. they don't have to go through their children's 529 account. at the policy level why not make social security more flexible. why not allow people to take it in their 50's to go back to school or to do national service for a year and then half people agree to work an adjusted period on the other end. these are things that we should be speerpting with trying to develop and i think at the policy level we should come up with something that is much more dramatic than the small experiments i'm talking about here. when we had millions of soldiers returning after world war ii we created the g.i. bill. we did it for them and the country. because we knew having these individuals struggling at loose
ends would be bad for the economy. it would be a source of social conflict. so we created a vast policy invasion called the g.i. bill. i think we need a third age bill to help the tens of millions who are crossing different terrain. it's not geographic or from military service from to civilian life but it's a stage of life that has no name and few path ways and institutions but at the same way that we were deeply invested in those soldiers finding their footing, the same is true of all of these millions of people today who are in this period between midlife and anything resembling retirement and old age. and i'd like to do it in a way that promoted social mobility. the troops to teacher program that goes back to the g.i. bill
analogy which helps sergeants coming back from the gulf warp move into public school teaching. it was created by an 86-year-old retired history professor who watched a news account from soldiers coming back from the first iraq war, sergeants having trouble getting their footing in the economy and he realized we had a shortage of people teaching in urban schools, particularly people of color and he put two and two together and it's a great program that helps people get in a new career and better than they had in their first career. they went into the military because few other opportunities existed for them. i wrote about a woman who was an assistant principle in virginia who went into the air force at 18 because she couldn't afford college. she ended up through the troops to teachers program getting a
docket rat in education. so i think in many ways we can not only help people move into second acts of purpose but help them move up the ladder as well in this point. i'd like to see us do all these things in part because we have so many people who are at this junk chure because this time is alk ward. because it will be unsustainable for people without gainful employment and opportunities for productivty. the people in the mid rl too small to support all of these people who are in the second half of life. but i hope we can marshall the energy and create tivet to do equally because i think there is an extraordinary opportunity here. i think we can thaurn paradox into a vast pay off and i think the analogy is the movement of women into new roles in the 60's and 70's.
at that point we were thinking this is going to be a zero sum proposition. how are we going to have the talent, they are going to displace men and have a lot of conflict along the way. and we know we would never be competitive without that source of talent. i think there are going to be lots of surprises as well. we tend to write off the talent and experience of this group. but even more we tend to under estimate the create tivet in this segment of the population. there is an economist who studied create ivet and he studied it across the life course. he studied the value of every significant painting that was sold over the last 100 years. and as he looked at the patterns of this art work, what came across to him more
strongly than anything else was the most valuable work was done by people who were young or old. and it turns out that the reason for distribution is not that people who are old or people who are young more creative. it has to do with styles of creativety. it tends to bloom early and speerptle blooms late. it takes a long time if you're an sperptle general youse to reach the apex of your productivty. when you think about how much as a society we've tended to think about creativety and entrepreneur ship as the province of young people.
the facebook generation and write people off as they reach this point where they not only have years of potential contribution left but some of their best work and sol of their most creative work. so i think we're at a point we can take advantage of this vast human capital windfall but what potentially could be a great waive of invasion. we give out the purpose prize. civic venn chures is the name encore.org was previously called. we have 1200 to 1500 nominations a year for these awards. and we've given out in addition to those prices 50 fell ships a year to recognize the top 5% of people who are doing their best work. they are rarely examples of reinvention. they are taking what they've
learned from one phase of life and applying it to new challenges. i think that the two greatest pay offs from making the most of the longevity revolution and i'll conclude with these thoughts might be at the klr cultural level which i talked about mortality, long jevty and urgency. this perfect storm that people in the second half of life end up realizing but there's a direction to all that purpose and it's in the idea of general tivety. the hall mark of successful development could be encapsulated in the phrase i am what survives of me. as we get closer to our own mortality we realize the goal is not to try to live for ever
or have a second childhood but to be there to invest in those people who are young. i think as a society that's been a big part of american ideal that we invest in future generation that future generations will have it better than we do. and i think there is growing concern in the country today that we've lost that. and i think a big part of the reason we've lost that and lost that in the country is because we've consigned that our generative heart land, people in this phase of life to second child hoods. and i think if we did the opposite and and if it we would not only see much better prospects for young people but we would give to this next generation and to the generations after that a vision of the second half of life. remember these are all the young people who are going to see their 1th birthday. a second half of life.
there is more than one bite at the apple. i think the people here today are like the women in the 60's and 70's who were breaking through new roles for themselves and paving path ways for all those women coming quickly on their heels. so i think there is in this lonching gray waive of greedy geezers we hear about so frequently the opportunity not only for a massive wave of talent for the country but also huge opportunity for years to cosm. i'll close with a quote williams james who said the great use of life is to spend it for something that will out last us. and i can think of no better benediction than for what we're here to talk about today. thank you.
>> we'd like to remind our listening audience this is a program with the common wealth of california and you're listening to mark freeman. i know we have questions and i'd like to invite anyone who has a question to come to the microphone so you can be heard. who will be first? >> thank you for coming. fascinating having these ideas presented. i love it. it's working on me. one of the questions that came out of your book was discussion questions which prompted me to think about what has happened recently and i'd like to get your take on possible
solutions. venture capital investors making investments with entrepreneurs. they have said on more than one occasion we need a twenty something face on this investment. not interested in you. do you you have any idea why that is happening or what kind of solutions we can put forth to breakdown that resistence? >> i think we are at a turning point now. what you describe has been the case for many years despite what we hear about. i've seen a couple of developments in the past year. one is a venture capital investment in what was called the encore career institute which changed it's name to power ed. and it's u.c.l.a.'s continuing education program that the founder and that's focused on
providing a new kind of education for the i pad for boomers and focused on careers who have social impact. i believe they're going to launch in september. yat you whether they're going to succeed or not but this is a significant investment that was made and it was clab rat between public and private institutions. a investment i'm closer to is the film at many mer gold hotel. we were in partnership with one of the producers of that film. and we've been doing a contest called the mer gold ideas for good contest which people over 509 in communities around the country each month get prices for idea for social change in their community. and one person gets to go with
road scholar on a trip anywhere around the world. there are still a couple of months left in that contest. mer gold was a film that was made for $10 million and made upwards of $125 million so far. i think it's going to be a game changer for hollywood because it's a realization people are interested in stories and it cost less money to make movies about stories. and there are a lot of people in this demographic so that is a pretty dramatic pay off for the film. i was thinking about that in the context of your comments because i think time is on your side. midway through the movie there say wonderful scene in which the priority ter of mer gold hotel is acosted by one of the british retirees who moved there and wants to know why the
hotel doesn't look like the photo shopped brother sure she saw. everything works out in the end so if it hasn't worked out, it's not yet the end. >> our thanks to marc freedman, our speaking tonight author of "the big shift: navigating the new stage beyond midlife." we thank our audience here as well as those listening to the recording. and now this meeting is adjourned. thank you. [applause] >> here on c-span after that event we thought wed ask you about your retirement and how the economy is affecting your planning. we're going to take a few minutes to take your phone calls and tweets. here is how to participate by phone.
off a scrammle to fill the seat in the chicago area. pat quinn will have five days from the effective date of the resignation to announce the time of the special election. jesse jackson jr. resigning his seat in congress. we'll keep you posted on that. and we said we would take you live to the united nations at 3:00 this afternoon. that has been pushed back likely in response to the news of the ceasefire in israel today. that has been pushed to 3:30 eastern. we will take you there once it gets under way. >> james on our 65 and over line. good afternoon, sir. caller: i'm 85-year-old and i was living good up until the last four years off of my retirement. but in the last four years the cost of living has gone up so
much that i can't make it. i have to get out and get odd jobs to buy groceries. and this -- the first of this year i got a 1.7 increase in social security and cost of living went up 30% this year. host: what is the biggest thing that cost of living increase affects for you? caller: just about everything i buy. my grashries and gasoline so i go to a doctor and stores host: how old did you say you were? caller: 85. host: so you've been retired for some time. caller: yes. host: let's to -- go to susan in washington.
caller: the economy has affected most of us for a number of years as far as i can tell. i've tried to save money to invest it and when i tried to invest it i lost most of what i put in because of what happened at the twin towers and i don't know that the economy is any one person's fault. but what i do see when i am watching specials about profit tiering in iraq 2006 and black water were all taking 1.3 billion and sending our soldiers -- host: host: getting back to your situation what in particular have you done to react to how the economy is affecting your retirement plans? caller: well, for me, i've lost my home, i've lost all my savings, all my investments. i've turned out to be disabled
and i'm part of a pretty large part of the population and there is nowhere to go. there are a lot of helpful people but i wanted to work until the day i died. host: host: how has the economy affecting your retirement planning. that's what we're talking about. we're going to take a look at our twitter page. but let's talk to nancy in washington over 65. caller: well, i just want you to know that i have a great retirement. i retired at 60 and moved from washington to way up in the mountains. i live way out of town about 30 miles. host: how did you make it so great? caller: i do what i want to do. i have a small farm and horses and dogs and cats and wonderful neighbors and lots of good friends.
financially it has been a little bit of a struggle because i had assumed that i would be completely not working. i do work part time. i'm a part time instructor at the local community college and i have to drive quite a distance to work. host: where is thing biggest chunk of your retirement, is it from social security? caller: about half from social security and half from my retirement. host: the numbers are amazing where we are and where the 65 age group is going in 2030. as of 2010 the numbers of people over 6040.2 million. the projected growth is up to 72.1 million. that would be 65 plus in 2030. we're looking at twitter this afternoon. here is one from fill who
writes the physical cliff shouldn't change your financial plans. next up we go to michigan and russ sell is on our line 50 to 65. caller: i'm planning for a change in career when i hit the 25 years of service and age 55. how the economy has affected my plans is working in civil service a neighboring city, detroit has privatized non-profit organization there, their health department therefore likely that will take place in the neighboring health department cities, meaning that people that were my age inspecting the same fullback of years will be let go before they can meet their retirement
cite i can't. so they will be six months shy of meeting that cite i can't. i would like to have done the second act of purpose that we listened to marc freedman speak on. host: do you see yourself working once you quote retire? caller: yes, unfortunately that has been delayed. i don't have anymore freedom of choice because with the likelihood that our jobs will go private sector and with that we'll no longer be able to meet our retirement things, i'll have to continue an additional five and a half years to meet my age -- host: thank you for calling in. we showed you the numbers projected for 2030. here are how things stand currently as of 2006 so it's a bit less recent than the other
number we showed you. this is the percentage of the folks in country 16 years and older where the highest concentration of 65 plus and florida is one of them but pennsylvania, ohio indiana and across the northern plains and down into missouri and elsewhere. next up let's go to our under 50 line in alabama. welcome to the conversation. what are you demoing terms of retirement and how do you think the economy has affected that? caller: i don't think it's affected me at all in terms of my retirement and i don't rely on anything i think the government says they are going to give me later in life. host: are you setting aside in a 401 or what is your biggest way to save for retirement at this point?
caller: i'm basically retired as we speak but i may have to go back to work. i got lucky in the computer spri but land, gold, silver and i do know folks that rely on the government. host: how old are you dave? caller: 39. host: eric says i'm 24 social security will not be around and the retirement age will be 70 or higher. also from bob retirement today there are people working at your local wal-mart in their sevent making less a year than the c.e.o. of wal-mart makes in two hours. welcome to the conversation.
caller: i have been affected by retirement by the economy because i prepared to -- for a second career by going back to school four years before i retired. and i went back and got a law degree and found out at that time that i could also get an m.b.a. but when i retired at age 62, i could not find a law position that really little made sense for me and so i have spent some time on political campaigns volunteering and also in writing project in which i have taken what i have accumulated by the age of three score and ten and written a work that
attempts to take quotations from anywhere and everywhere and explain those to people in their 20's and 30's who have not been well mentored. and i hope to publish that at some point. host: thanks for weighing in this afternoon. staying in georgia jeff is on our line for those 50 and 65. caller: i'd just like to say that a lot of people out there have vested in different things throughout the years. they haven't panned out. the trust corporations for long term and doesn't pan out. i'm taking what little retirement basically social security. host: that's going to be the biggest chunk of your retirement social security?
caller: yes and i think it is with most people. i'm going overseas because look what understand costa rica. a stable country host: how cheaply can you live there versus the u.s.? caller: i was looking at a place in a number of places in the philippines a friend of mine i'm a veteran and talk to other vets and he has a very nice small apartment right across the street from the beach and it's $150 a month. host: do you get a military pension? caller: no, i don't. i just missed. host: host: we're looking at twitter page.
back to our calls in memphis. how is the economy affecting your retirement plans? caller: the economy is affecting my retirement plans. when the -- before the market crashed i had mutual fund and a stock in a couple of different companies. as the economy tanked even more i was one of the people who was without employment. i was able to draw unemployment and so i was able to have that until i received another job which was at a greater pay cut. now at this point trying to go back to school, trying to get my mutual funds back together because i did cash one of them out. my ira is together. i never rolled my 401-k over either.
at this point trying to go back to school, trying to live on less money, downgrading all the way, having a teenage child as well, i'm pretty much not starting over 100% but definitely starting over. and where i thought i was going to be okay because i started early, at least that's what i assumed in my mid 20's -- host: i'm going to let you go and get a couple more calls. caller: i'm glad i could speak to you because i'm 85 years old and i'm living in the same house that i was born in 85 years ago and i've held on to the house after my mother died and kept it and put it in
condition and i learned at an early age that i had to set my goals in life, my short goals and long goals and i retired at age 60 from the navy recertain and then i retired from the bank at 61 and a half years old and then i took my social security at 62 and so i've had freedom travel because i put aside money that i could utilize in the >> have your investments been in -- been effected in the downturn? >> i had a small investment and so now, that is keeping me going for now. by the affected at all conditions because my father
with nine children went through it in the first depression in the 1930's. i worked my point and i'm happy i did. >> we welcome your participation this afternoon. a look year from the bureau of labor statistics and the number of folks who continue to work after age 65 and a projection out, that just rises for those 65 years and older. they expect that number to rise considerably. let's get one more call here from potomac, maryland. how is the economy affecting your retirement? physician, i'm 52 years old, and given the obamacare coming down the pike, i would have to give up my private practice and join a
stupak hospital -- join a stupid hospital. i meant private practice, so the way the obamacare is designed, everybody has to be an employee of the hospital, group or something and it's a disaster. people who are used to practicing for themselves are going to have to either drop out or have something else to do. i think every senior should really be concerned because most doctors and most groups will not be able to participate with medicare and their rates and the way they are thinking of doing this. especially the physicians. it is a really scary time.
i know we have heard great platitudes and how it is supposed to be great for the economy. guest: we will let you go there. we mentioned that jesse jackson jr. has resigned his seat. he submitted his letter of resignation to speaker john boehner. -- that is from jesse jackson jr.. coming up in about half an hour, we expect to take you live to new york to the united nations security council meeting on the middle east as a ceasefire went
into effect about an hour ago, at 2:00 eastern between israel and a mosque. up until then, we will take you to the conversation from this morning's "washington journal" looking at u.s. military deployments around the world. > host: we turn now to a discussion of u.s. military face abroad and at home. it has been almost a year since the department of defense released its strategic guidance document that provides a framework for the u.s. military force in in the foreseeable future. how has the military moved to enact this new policy and where are the threats we will see in the coming years? guest: we have not seen nearly the kind of things we have been hearing about. we have heard about how we are winding down of afghanistan, for instance, and yet there is 68,000 u.s. troops there and
100,000 u.s. paid contractors paid by the pentagon still occupying afghanistan. the one change we have seen this year has been the withdrawal of the troops from iraq. that was the centerpiece from where u.s. troops were fighting around the world. now, we're looking at afghanistan as the biggest war zone that is acknowledged. the interesting thing that makes it difficult for people like you and i who want to look at where the u.s. troops are, the lists that we see are a very hard to actually get good information. i was looking yesterday at a few different lists on the pentagon's web sites. one of them is a list of
personnel where are u.s. shoulders are. there are about 195,000 u.s. soldiers and marines that are based around the world. we hear in general they are in about 150 countries. when you look at the list, there is only about 40 countries listed. why is that? we are only listing the countries where there is more than 100 troops permanently based there. that is kind of weird because that means is only about 1/4 of the country -- about 1/5 of the countries where we have troops are mentioned. ifcan say it doesn't matter you have 50 or 60 trips but it does matter because what those troops are doing in almost every case is preparing the way just in case -- just in case somebody in the pentagon decides we need to send more troops there. that becomes a little bit tricky. when we look at the list of bases, we see that the list of bases includes demona nuclear facility in israel which has a
u.s. base attached to it which has 120 soldiers. we'll look at the list of where the soldiers are, israel is not listed. wait a minute, what is going on here? it becomes very opaque. it is very hard to get good numbers. host: let's show some of the statistics from the defense department on u.s. military personnel deployment. the united states and its territories have the most at 1.2 million and afghanistan has 66,000 troops to. about germany and japan. why do we need 53,000 troops in germany and 39,000 troops in japan? guest: we don't, they should be brought home. host: is their mission there now? guest: their mission is left over from the cold war. there were trips that were placed there to prevent a soviet attack on eastern europe.
there is no more soviet union. there is no more cold war. we don't face the kind of threat. in japan, we are being told that they are there to prevent north korea from attacking. there is also about 30,000 troops in south korea. why do we need all those troops in japan? i think we will be hearing a lot about troops in japan because we will be hearing from president obama about the notion of a pivot toward asia. host: that was a big part of the priorities for the 21st century defense. exactly guest:, what we're not hearing about is a pivot toward better relations with asia which includes diplomacy at the top of the list. host: that includes the president's trip this week. >> guest: that was included i think there were problems because on the u.s. side, it is still based on pivoting our
military towards asia and away from the middle east which we are certainly not doing in practice. we talk about but we're not talking enough about re-working relations with countries. is far and we're not talking about the possibility of opening relations with burma who has been facing mass of sanctions for many years because of a repressive regime but there are governments that are terribly repress of all round the world. the u.s. has never had a good way of engaging with people in those countries that are facing those kinds of governments. we tend to send the marines. when we talk about pivoting towards asia, it usually puts too much emphasis on pivoting our troop deployments. i think we will be hearing about withdrawing troops from europe. i think we'll see a significant drawdown from germany in particular. the idea that we have 53,000 troops in germany. the list of bases that we have 23 u.s. bases in germany but when you look at the list of
the pentagon's installations around the world, you see there are 55 installations in germany. that includes things like golf courses. do we need the pentagon to be running golf courses in germany? i don't think so. host: we are taking your calls on this segment. give us a call -- we have also set up a special line for u.s. military members. let's stay on that pivot toward asia right now. you mentioned the south korea
having about 24,000 troops according to the department of defense. what other -- what are the countries where we will see the greatest influences as we do this pivot toward the threat from asia? guest: i'm not sure we will see significant new deployment in new countries, for instance, in asia. i think the assumption of what they are doing there is changing. i think the u.s. is starting to talk -- and i find is dangerous -- starting to talk about the need to pivot toward asia at least partly to challenge china. the way to challenge china in my view in the 21st century is not to try to surround china by military force in the countries surrounding it but by engaging. the u.s. and china have the two largest economies in the world. the u.s. and china share a lot of interests. most importantly, people in both countries sharon interest in dealing with climate change.
that is something that neither government are prepared to move fast and strongly enough to change. when we talk about pivoting in the context of sending troops, that does not help when we are trying to deal with climate change. i think what we really need is a pivotal away from the military being the centerpiece of our diplomatic shift and a shift toward engagement with people at an entirely different level. host: a recent study by the rand co. talked about u.s. overseas military presence and the strategic choice is that the government has to make. let me bounce a comment of view -- -- off you.
guest: that is one example of exactly the problem i am talking about. if we are worried about conflicts and crises whether it is iran, north korea or china and lumping those three widely diverse countries into one group is way too reminiscent of george w. bush paused notion of the so-called axis of evil where he talked about three very diverse countries, afghanistan, iraq, and iran and said not afghanistan, iraq, iran, and north korea like they were the same. those three countries you mentioned are not anywhere near similar. we should be talking about how
to engage with those countries, not how to isolate them or get troops to attack them. it will not take that kind of military assault assault host: do we need the troops based there if the conflict comes up in the future? should we have the capacity to get them there quick enough? guest: i think troops should remain in the united states. we should not think about how we best send troops to the united states. the fact that we think we are policeman of the world is outmoded. i think that to go the way of history. polar living in a multi- world. we're no longer the sole superpower. we are no longer the one empire in the world that can stand astride the world like a colossus of rhodes. there's a great map put out a while ago that is called "the united map of the united states." it has this idea of u.s. troops
covering a whole world as if that makes us safer. the report that my attitude did last year and we are just finishing up this year is called "america is not broke"that looks at a where secretary of the treasury tim geithner come from for health care and jobs and education in this country and one of the areas is cutting the military budget. we look at how you could close 1/3 of the european and asian bases and get back $10 billion per year, $100 billion over the course of a decade, by closing these unnecessary bases. you could bring 50,000 troops out of europe and gained back $7 billion per year over a 10- year period. this idea that we have to keep troops around the world -- if we look at which countries are not being attacked around the
world, is the countries that don't send troops elsewhere there is a threat of terrorist attacks against u.s. people. way to solve that is not through troop deployment, it is about changing our policies that lead to those kind of attacks. host: we have a special line set up for those in the military in this segment -- on that line with the air force is a william from detroit, michigan, an independent. caller: thank you and good morning to both of you and fantastic conversation. i want to ask because you make a very good point. i have a background in economics. i have noticed the president putting emphasis on asia with this most recent trip. i have been a big advocate,
being african-american, of a new african policy with america. if you look at the chinese and saudis in africa, they are there big time. they are buying other natural resources. i think american foreign policy and military planners are making a huge mistake in overlooking west africa. we could really change and uplift of that continent as well as use it because china is looking to make inroads there. i agree that the emphasis should be on diplomatic, people to people -- the chinese and the americans can have a permanent moon base being proposed by nasa similar to what we have at the international space station.
if you look at the beauty of that, for the last 10 years, we have that human beings continue living in space. that is a template for everyone on the planet for a new forward thinking. guest: you raised a number of questions -- the website for my institute and the report is called "america is not broke." the new report will be out next week. we're the institute for policy studies. the question that you raise and the question of the land grab in africa is a huge challenge for africans. one problem is in the number of countries around the world, saudi arabia being one of the biggest, there is an effort to deal with the coming increase of climate change, the coming food crisis, that many are
seeing around the world by buying up or stealing in many cases huge swaths of land in poor countries, particularly in africa and use them not to better the lives of people in those countries or get more jobs for africans but to keep access to that land to grow food whether it is rice or soy beans or what ever that can be brought back to the buying country whether it is south africa -- whether it is saudi arabia or some other country. it is a disastrous policy that is having a huge impact on people's lives throughout africa. i agree this is a huge challenge for the way to deal with it in my view is not to have the u.s. take up those same terrible policies that the chinese are doing in africa. the problem now is that the u.s. policy in africa is very much grounded in a militarized policy, the creation of afrikaan which was created in the last few years is based in germany. there is not a country in africa
willing to accept the headquarters of the u.s.-average income and because it is seen as a kind of read-colonization - re-colonization in the continent. we met with the original head of africa command and one of the things he said at the beginning was this is all about changing how we deal with africa. we don't want to just deal with the military. we will deal with hiv aids, we will deal with girl's education, we will deal with economic and trade issue. i was wondering why the pentagon is dealing with girl's education because they are the least capable. the military does not belong there. the military should not be assisting with girls' education in africa or anywhere else. we need to scale down the military so that we get back to putting diplomacy first. host: the caller asked about
your web site ips.org. explain a little bit about what you do and where you get your funding? guest: are an independent think tank, one of the oldest in the country started in 1963. our funding comes from individual donors and nonprofit foundations. we don't take any corporate or government money. we are very independent and work on linking issues of peace, justice, and the environment and turning ideas, research, new ideas into action for helping people change the world whether it is how to pressure lawmakers were to protest in the street. we do a range of work with social movement. we think people's movements here and around the world are what changes the world and we try to encourage them as much as possible. host: ips-dc.org is the website. caller: good morning, the united states needs to get out of these foreign countries and stop trying to dictate what these other leaders can and
cannot do. we need to focus more on what is going on in the united states. we have our own problems here. i think it is wrong for the united states to go all over the world to be the police dog and tell foreign leaders what they can and cannot do based on our ideology. host: from little rock, thank you for the call. i want to take the to the military line, kevin is waiting from woodbridge, va., an independent scholar and a member of the u.s. army. thanks for calling, you are on.
caller: good morning, how are you? guest: very well. caller: i have a couple of questions. i'm listening to what you are saying and your statistics. dealing with these things on a day-to-day basis, there are parts and pieces of information that you don't seem to be aware of and i am not allowed to bring that forward. the diplomatic industrial and economic pieces of strategy of united states and for other countries are parts that are used to put forth those pieces that are best for those nations. however, there are some governments that do not and will not adhere to those things in the interest of the united states.
if that is the case, we have to have places where we can bring troops into at a moment's notice or in a short period of time and ordered to be able to, when necessary, put forth military pace. host: you would be against the drawing down some of these bases around the world? caller: i agree that some of them are unnecessary. the military has taken that into account but i am listening to the ones she is talking about and i think that is not exactly the majority. host: which ones in particular are you concerned about with regard to countries? caller: places like japan. the base in germany, i could probably agree with that. in japan, you have a force of their in north korea. north korea is not a force that people should take lightly. guest: thank you, i think there are many issues you have raised.
who makes the decisions? this is information that may be the military has taken this into account. i don't think the military should be making the decisions about where we need troops. i think we have the hammer and a male problem. when you are a hammer, everything looks like a male. when you are the military, every set -- every problem looks like it needs a military solution. i think every decision need to be made by people outside the military. that is why we set up the system we have where deployment of troops has to be done by the commander in chief and not by the military itself and especially the idea that only congress can declare war. we have not followed that since world war two. i would take issue with one thing you said at the beginning and that is when you said that we have to be able to go into places around the world if they do things that are not in our interest.
somehow, other countries around a world managed to survive without doing that, without putting troops around the world, knowing there are countries, sometimes our own, that do things that are not in their interest and yet they manage without sending troops for example, to attack us. the idea that we stand above every other country, that unlike any other country, we have the right and the obligation and responsibility to send troops around the world when another government is doing kings we don't like, i don't buy it. i think we have to be part of the world, not standing above the world, cooperating with the rest of the world, not standing separate and by letting international law as we choose by demanding that everybody else up old international law. host: you talk about who was making these decisions. speaking last night at a d.c. think tank, defense secretary leon panetta outlined the latest campaign approach against
the widening al qaeda geographic threat. and the increased use of special operations forces to combat the threat. [video clip] >> this campaign against al- qaeda will largely take place outside declared combat zones using a small footprint approach that includes precision operations, partnered activities with foreign, special forces operations and capacity building so that partner countries can be more effective in combating terrorism on their own. wherever possible, we will work through and with local partners supporting them with the intelligence and resources they need in order to deter these common threats. for example, in mali, we are working with our partners in western africa who are committed to countering the
emerging threat to regional stability posed by aqap. fourth, in support of these kind of efforts, we have to invest in the future. in new military and intelligence capabilities and security partnerships. our new defense strategy makes clear that the military must retain and even build new counter-terrorism capabilities for the future. as we reduce the size of the military, we are going to continue to ramp up special operations forces which have doubled in size in 37,000 on 9/11 to 64,000 today. special operations forces will grow to 72,000 by 2017. we are expanding our fleet of predator and reaper uav's what we have today.
these enhanced capabilities will enable us to be more flexible and agile against a threat that has grown more diffuse. host: i want to get your response to mr. panetta's statements last night. guest: the secretary of defense is talking about something we have been talking about for a long time, expansion of drone warfare. it is raising levels of terrorism around the world. there is such anger and outrage that the u.s. is carrying out wars in places like pakistan, somalia, yemen, places that we do not even know about. there is no accountability. there is no knowledge of what we are doing except that we know that there has been a study done in london and in washington by various think tanks, and allies in the numbers of people killed in the drone wars. the numbers are about four-one of the numbers of civilians
killed relative to the people targeted. that is one aspect that enrages people. ordinary people are killed when a drone comes out of nowhere, from a country not officially at war with your country, going after someone that washington has decided to put on a list. this notion of kill or capture, that is something that every american is concerned about, they should be outraged by it. the idea that it is the president and the president alone -- president obama, to his credit, acknowledged that he makes the decision personally about to will be on this list. somehow the claim is made that if someone is on that list it is ok to go kill them. no due process. no rights, still? we have seen this with two u.s. citizens killed in from strikes.
imagine if another country decided to do the same thing. imagine if, for example, cuba, because there is someone in the united states being protected here who is known to have been responsible for the shooting down of a cuban airliner in 1976, killing 73 people on board at sea. what if cuba sent a drone to attack him, that he was someone who represented a threat to our country. what would we do them and we would invade cuba. why do we have the right to do that? yemen, somalia, they are what we determined to be a governable state, failed states, some other name. host: this from twitter --
guest: unfortunately come it is the the american way. it has become too, and in too many of these wars. host: james, republican line. thank you for calling. you are on with phyllis bennis. james, are you there? i think that we lost james. we will go to tony, a member of the u.s. army. thank you for calling in. guest: -- caller: i agree and i disagree with her. and i still think that we need to have someone above. i did not vote for obama, i did not agree with a lot of what he is doing. when it comes to the throne strikes. i still think that there has to be accountability. you cannot kill humans on the
planet because you have the power. host: are you still in the army? if so, where do you serve? caller: i was in afghanistan. i believe that we have to be responsible. especially when it comes to the good it, you know what i am saying? collectively we have to be somewhat above. we had all of these different factions out there. we still have to do the right thing. there is a uniform way, and we should be responsible with what god has blessed us with as a nation. i do not think that we should think like that. we should give that impression. he should not have the power and he should be accountable for that. host: on this same subject, from twitter --
guest: i think so. unfortunately, for those of us who saw a change being possible four years ago, when president obama was elected as a call to not only end of the war in iraq, which she did, but as he put it, he would end the mindset to war. unfortunately, the opposite has happened. we have had expansion of war through the drone wars. along with part of the death of civilians and people on those lists for reasons that we do not always know, we do not know who put them on the list, where does the intelligence come from, how reliable is it, it is usually problematic on a host of levels, but particularly on the level of civilians killed for no reason in drone strikes and how that antagonizes people.
we are looking for new ways of solving conflicts, new ways to avoid the mindset of war. this is exactly reflecting the mindset of war. in my view, this is the biggest violation, if you will, of the promises the president made from the time he was first elected four -- four years ago. host: marcy, you are on with phyllis bennis, of the institute for policy studies. caller: you mentioned that we have troops in 150 countries. i wondered, if we are spending our money, our taxpayer dollars in the countries, not only for their salaries, but giving a salary for them to be there and
partnering with them, if also president obama, mr. obama gets his way and stops the wars, brings the troops back as he is wanting to do, becoming a nation of peace, how do you think that that would resignation -- resonate with the countries we have already invaded and pushed our beliefs on to? guest: you raise a host of questions. there is a movement in a number of countries to challenge the presence of u.s. bases in their countries. in ecuador a few years ago there was a move that succeeded, there was a move in the constitution that there can be no foreign base in ecuador, because the u.s. base that had been there for so long was seen as having environmental problems, social problems were created.
there was a huge move under way in okinawa. where there have been far too many to count, accusations of rape against u.s. soldiers on young women in okinawa. there is a huge environmental crisis having to do with the bases being built. in italy, one of the bases in one of the great historic centers of renaissance art in italy already has a base in it. the u.s. is trying to build a separate base that would be within what a hundred yards of one of the great masterpieces of renaissance architecture. so, when we talk about how countries feel with our bases there, we have to distinguish between the government that allows them and the people that are outraged. that is before we get to the question of what happens in the
countries where we have invaded. when you look at afghanistan, you hear that we are there to protect the women. look at what has happened to women in afghanistan. when the taliban ruled, the country was at the very bottom. the lowest level of where a woman could give birth and survive. according to unicef, it was also the lowest for a child to survive faster first birthday. where is it now after 11 years of u.s. occupation? exactly the same place. the bottom of both lists. for a while it was one up because of a crisis in sierra leone, but now it is at the bottom again. women in afghanistan died too young because they do not have midwives. what if we were training 300,000 midwives instead of 300,000 troops in afghanistan?
host: good morning, debbie. caller: you know, these are all great ideas of yours that we should pullout. the world is a very big place right now. our military presence in the world is not just occupy, we are also there as players. we go there and we help the people. i keep thinking back to the fact that for years and years the world look to america as their savior, not their occupiers. that is a rib -- liberal term that you are all using. we went to a lot of countries and did nation-building. in germany, because of world war ii, they are not allowed to have an army. that is why our base is there. they are paying for our presence.
we also understand the culture of these different countries. we are not occupiers, ma'am, we do not occupy countries. guest: thank you for your call. i think that there are obviously very different approaches between what the u.s. did post- world war ii in germany and japan. germany has a big army, they have a right to an army. they have troops in iraq and have had troops in many places around the world. japan after world war ii put into their own constitution a prohibition against having nuclear arms because of what they had suffered at u.s. hands through the use of bombs. they also have an enormous army. when you look at what the u.s. has done in iraq, after almost one decade of occupation, what
it is doing now, it does look like occupation. we imposed sanctions for 12 years that led to the death of 500,000 children. a level of death that the secretary of state said that we think the price is worth it. i think that people in those countries view the u.s. as an occupier. people in germany probably do not, you are probably right. that does not mean they want our troops to remain. 55,000 troops is not something that we would tolerate slightly. i do not think the people of germany and japan tolerate it lightly. >> gail, thank you for calling. caller: the lady that said that we do not occupy countries, look back at vietnam, i was there.
the french were there to protect plantations so that they could have robert. everywhere that we have occupied, if you watched there will be big corporations that benefit from it. it is like halliburton and all of those contractors. they say they do not have but a few troops in there. look at how many contractors are in there that are being paid by u.s. taxpayer money. halliburton, k b r, all of those. if you look like in vietnam, standard oil. standard oil was in there. guest: thank you for raising the issue of contractors. it is a huge challenge right
now. in afghanistan today, we have 68,000 troops. we have 100,000 u.s. paid military contractors that some people call mercenaries. in iraq, the basis of the agreement that president obama reached with the president of iraq requires the withdrawal of u.s. troops and all pentagon paid contractors, but through a loophole, they did not explicitly exclude state department paid contractors. there are between 12,015 thousand u.s. contractors doing military things in iraq paid by the state department, not the military. all over the world, if we were talking about molli, one of the other places where we are seeing an increase in union troops.
they are sending large numbers of contractors. we are seeing that all over the world, that the advanced forces of the u.s. are carrying out things like interrogations'. incarceration policies. some of the things that have led towards the most antagonism towards the united states. troops, but contractors as well. even if they are not in the military, we are held accountable by people in those countries. they are in the hundreds of thousands around the world. host: in the minute that we have left, we began with the strategic plans put out by the defense department. how did those plans changed to reflect the looming budget cuts this morning? guest: the hard part is that when it comes to bases in the united states, because those
bases always provide some kind of job in the local community, it makes it harder for members of congress. not the case for bases abroad. we could close almost all of them. sending contractors to send the place of soldiers does not keep us safe. we need to cut all of that and use the money to help those countries build up their own economies and bring that home to rebuild the environment here at home. host: we appreciate you coming by. guest: it has been a pleasure. >> in just a few minutes, we plan to take you live to the united nations. the un security council is set to meet on the situation in the middle east. this afternoon, israel and moscow agreed to a ceasefire which went into effect at 2:00 eastern this afternoon. looks like the security council
meeting may be getting away momentarily and we will take you there live once it does. earlier this afternoon, and jesse jackson, representative from chicago, jesse jackson jr. submitted his resignation to speaker john boehner. nancy pelosi posted a statement saying it is of great sadness that we're learning of this decision. his service in congress is marked by as eloquent advocacy for his constituents abuse and his advocacy. that is from nancy pelosi and her statement on the resignation of jesse jackson jr. today. let's take you live now to the security council meeting at the united nations and the situation in the middle east, the conflict between israel and homospory this is a live look here on c- span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
the security council is called to order. the provisional agenda of this meeting is the situation in the middle east, including the palestinian question. the agenda is adopted. the security council will now begin its consideration of item number two of the agenda. on behalf of the council, i welcome the secretary general, his excellency, mr. ban-ki moon who is joining the conversation at via telephone conference. i now give the floor to the secretary. >> thank you, distinguished members of the council, excellency, ladies and gentleman. thank you for the opportunity to brief you today on my three-day
visit to egypt, israel, the occupied palestinian territory, and jordan. since the situation in does that and israel escalated last week, i made it my priority to contribute to halt the violence with a priority aim of protecting civilians. i canceled a previously planned trip to travel to the middle east as a signal for the need for international diplomatic mobilization and prevent the further escalation that would put the region at risk. to strengthen the commendable efforts by egypt to reach a cease-fire. i want to welcome the cease-fire announcement. i commend the parties for stepping back from the brink and commend the president of egypt for his exceptional leadership.
i will -- our focus now must be on ensuring that the ceasefire holds and all those needs in gaza, and there are many, that they receive the aid that they need. as i assure their relief for the people in gaza and israel and in the international community, that the violence is stopping. but we are all aware of the risk, and we are all aware that many details must be solidified for a broad, durable ceasefire to take a firm hold over the longer term. is imperative that both sides stick to the cease-fire in order to allow these underlying issues to be addressed in a sustainable fashion. today's announcement follows a week of devastating violence in
southern israel and gaza, including the attack today on a bus in downtown palo the which i strongly and immediately condemn. this brought us to an important moment after a week of intense diplomacy to reach a cease-fire. in this regard, i met with the egyptian president and the israeli prime minister, but palestinian president, to -- to -- and each leader -- including the minister of defense and president of israel and prime minister. i met with the u.s. secretary of state, hillary clinton in jerusalem. i have just spoken to prime minister netanyahu for the
second time today. my paramount concern throughout has been for the safety and well-being of all citizens, no matter where they are. innocent people, including children have been injured on both sides. families on both sides were forced to cower in fear as a virus -- as the violence raged at around them. the circumstances were similar to those when i visited in 2009 and recent events have been eerily reminiscent. this morning, i heard from the team in gaza who reported on the impact of violence, including increased civilian casualties which reached more than 149 palestinians killed and more
than 900 injured and the displacement of 10,000 gazans. ongoing fruit -- ongoing programs for food are experiencing funding shortage and [indiscernible] i am asking our emergency and humanitarian teams to do whatever they can to alleviate the suffering. attacks on both sides continue today as the cease-fire approach. attacks today injured 23 people, three civilians. the indiscriminate firing of rockets continued and one long-
range rocket landed on a health yesterday. since the 14th of november, rocket fires have resulted in the deaths of four israeli civilians and 219 are reported injured. most of whom are civilians. three are in serious condition. one israeli soldier was killed yesterday and 16 israeli soldiers have been wounded, one critically. overall, in that same time, more than 1456 rockets have been fired into israel. 142 have fallen. approximately 409 were intercepted by the antimissile system. 10 missiles were shot at tel
aviv suburbs and that embassy. five were intercepted. since israel's targeted assassination from the air on the 14th of november, on the chief of a moth, the offensive in the gaza, the israel defense forces reported it has conducted strikes on more than 1450 targets in gaza. that air strikes included a were not limited to rocket launching sites, police stations and sites
along the border with egypt. the israeli air force targeted what they said were installations belong to a palestinian armed groups. these were hit by israeli air force attacks. crews from television were targeted on the 18th and 20th of november resulting in the death of three media professionals and injury to 10 others. i condemn indiscriminate firing from rockets into israel and the proportionate use of force in danger's lives is incorrigible. it is unacceptable for citizens on both sides to permanently live in fear of the next strike.
put simply, all parties must respect international humanitarian law to ensure the protection of civilians. today, i travel to egypt for the second time to support the cease-fire talks in the final phase taking place with the acting support of several international leaders. several countries, including france, and germany, the united kingdom, the united states and many other arab countries were a strong indication of the concerns of the international community and its shared goal of stopping the violence. in my meeting only hours ago, he
said he was very close to achieving a cease-fire. he also agreed to address the underlying issues of concern to both sides said that a cease- fire can be sustainable. in addition, he expressed his concern that the comprehensive arab-israeli peace to which egypt is committed has not yet been achieved. i underscored the importance of the efforts, his leadership and contact with all sides. mr. president, distinguished members of the council, i know that palestinians and israelis have fundamental concerns. as the egyptian president says, these underlying issues need to be addressed as the u.n. is prepared to help facilitate all
efforts in this regard. but people are dying every day and cities are being targeted every day. this humanitarian crisis is growing exponentially. we need a ceasefire now. followed immediately by negotiations on the underlying issues. the crisis underscores that the status quo is unsustainable and the solutions must be found to the problems of gaza and palestinians as a whole. core elements of the city -- of the security council resolution remain unimplemented. once is fully restored and the violence ends, the cease-fire will have to address the underlying causes, including a fall opening of [indiscernible]
and an end to weapons smuggling. it is clear the international community must speak with one voice to prevent a return to violence. i plan to keep in touch with leaders and i have asked my special coordinator to remain in cairo to support the efforts to achieve a sustainable cease- fire. finally, mr. president, let me conclude, as i have in all my discussions with intensity, that in these testing times, we must not lose sight that peace must remain our priority. a two-state solution ending the
occupation, and ending the conflict between israel and the palestinians is more urgent than ever. achieving this vision, which has been expressed by this council, has been long overdue and necessary for the stability of the region. comprehensive peace can lead -- can bring lasting security. i am leaving shortly. i wish you a happy thanksgiving. thank you, mr. president >> i thank the secretary general for his briefing. there are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers. , the security council has just concluded the present state of the item on its agenda. the meeting is adjourned. [captioning performed by
and that is ambassador susan rice on your screen. >> coming up tonight on c-span, a look at this analysis from this year's election from david kofi who worked on president obama's campaign and stephen sykes who worked on mitt romney's campaign. and 90 minutes later, atlantic magazine asks "can women really have it all?" that is at 9:35 p.m. and after that, a discussion of the future of network news. jeff fager recently spoke to students at arizona state university. that begins tonight at 10:45 p.m. on c-span. >> you career officers, you changed his army so it becomes a
volunteer army. go and find your labor in the villages and towns of america and in the labour market. we did that and we created a splendid force of young men and women who will willing to serve their country as volunteers. they have the same tradition, the same culture, the same loyalty and dedication as any other generation of americans have gone before. they prove themselves in the gulf war and the panama invasion and they have proved themselves in the last 10 years in iraq and afghanistan. but the theme that we have to keep in mind is something president clinton said in his second inaugural address, to care for those who have borne the battle, women and children. to care -- that means to never forget they are those who are carrying the american traditions with them. and when they get injured, when they get hurt, or when they just
come back to be reintegrated into society, we have to be waiting to care for them not just the federal government, not just the veterans administration. >> the care of returning veterans with colin powell at 8:00 p.m. day a eastern, and then hollywood and american culture after that. ann space -- and then later, space pioneers pay homage to neil armstrong. >> the representative of chicago boise -- chicago's second district announced his resignation this afternoon. again, jesse jackson jr.,
resigning from congress and effective today. it up next, a look at education policy, school choice, and u.s. competitiveness. a washington d.c. city councilman out of the program. -- round of the program. and he was also an adviser to the 2008 obama campaign. this is hosted by gen next, and is just under an hour. >> thank you all for coming. i will tell you a little bit about gen next. we are an organization of accomplished an organized executives. and we believe in developing and employing an engaging talent. our mission isn't purely -- espy a purely generational
opportunity. we want the future to be at least as successful as the past. you hear some debate about our best days being behind us. and if we do not like that narrative. if you do not like what is being said, change the conversation. we're getting some successful people involved to lead the conversation. we will exposure to import ideas and and hopefully get you active and to help change the world, because you are all very interesting and successful people. your talent and resources can be used to help you be even more accomplished than you are now. one of the issues -- three of them are education, welfare and security. education is arguably the most important, because you are talking about true generational investment and preparation. there's a moral element, which you are giving your kid a shot. but there is an economic element, which is that you need
to develop human capital to compete and get ahead in a world that is more competitive than ever. we are struggling a lot in education as a country. as you read the news, the teachers in chicago are on strike. across the country you read about how other countries are ambitious and hungry and educating their kids. we cannot for the life of us refocus and marshall the energy and priorities to get ahead of it. we brought a speaker who is influential and inspirational on this issue. when it comes to history, there are those who let it happen, those who make it happen, and those who wondered what happened. our speaker tonight makes it happen. he is a -- a businessman, an attorney, and a partner in sunshine for 10 years.
he is a bit of an entrepreneur, and that makes him a remarkable. what is extraordinary is that he is a true leader. he was on the d.c. city council and helped start the charter and voucher program. i encourage you all to check it out. it is a testament to how kids can be an example to adults and overcome great odds. and are true inspiration for why this issue is so important and why we need to invest and lead on this issue. he also is a founding board member on the american federation for children. he advises governors, legislators, mayors all across the country on choice and charter and education issues out large. he is in the thick of the game, and without a doubt a leader on this issue. you will feel his influence on this issue across the country.
and we're very fortunate to have people like kim, who entrepreneurial, savvy, accomplished, and dedicated to shaping what future generations will experience and in herridge. please, give him a round of applause. [applause] >> thank you, michael. and >> your welcome. >> thank you all very much. i think i can go home now. i was wondering who you were talking about. good evening, gen next. and i love me some michael davidson. he is like my brother from another mother. [laughter] when he talks about education it is true that while that is the focal point of gen next, and it really is and should be the focal point of this country, i like to tell people that on my
way to public service i found my passion. i would visit schools and talk to teachers after a was elected in 1993, i would go to a school and i would see some of these bright eyed kids in these troubled, challenging and i would say, what is the kids story? and the teacher would tell me. those children that i pointed out seemed to be so energetic, so effervescent, so much potential. and lo and behold, a couple of years later, i would say, what happened to that kid? oh, well, he dropped out. he got caught up in the street. he never could read. it would strip -- it would strike me when i looked up the social indicators in washington d.c., similar to those around
the country, all of it was directly let -- directly related to the lack of education. in the prison population, 90% of the inmates in d.c. were high- school dropouts. in terms of homelessness, joblessness, drug addiction -- in fact, there are statistics out there now that if we increase the high school graduation rate in this country by just 10%, we reduced the murder rate by 20%. all of these indicators are out there that there is nothing more important than education. i became passionate about this. can in this state, 15, 19 years later, it is the only thing that keeps me up at night, the fact that there are children who will go to school in this country and it will not serve them well. and over a certain time frame, whatever potential that they had that they were given to the accident of birth, they will
lose. there's something tragic about that. while we look at all this stuff out there and this idea of having this one approach tailored to fit all kids, where you are putting a circle inside a square, that does not work. what a child needs who comes from a certain dysfunctional pop -- background or a certain poverty background, that child has what they need to learn. there are countless examples of our entrepreneurs, educators, people who invest in these kids and find them a way to learn. and when we say that every child needs to take algebra in the ninth grade, like your mama and her grandmamma, what about the kid who could take in the seventh grade, or the kid who should take in the 10th grade? the problem with public education as i saw it when i became a student of this stuff in d.c., is that we do not need
children where they are. we are trying to force them into learning the same way and the same things. and that is what i began to embrace change. what does that look like? in d.c., i was very fortunate. i took over the charter movement and now we have the most prolific charter movement in the country. the 42% of public-school kids are in a charter schools. and their scores are higher than traditional schools. and then we have the voucher program that allows kids from low-income communities to go to private schools, schools like where the president sends his kids. all of these grade private schools and now we've got nearly
2000 kids over the past seven years going to the schools. and the success of these programs has just started change in traditional d.c. public schools. now all of the innovation of the scale -- the school system wanted to do for many years, now they are wanting to do it. where are we? obviously, we have a long way to go. what i have found is that these innovative and creative programs, what parental choice does when you give these parents options to help meet these kids where they are, it allows us to what i like to call fly the plane while we fix it. people want us a a -- want to put us in these boxes where if you support traditional public schools or you are against traditional public schools. or you are a democrat and you will support some of the status quo pronouncements, or are you
going to be a progressive and support innovation and creativity? i do not think it is a zero sum game. i came to realize that when it comes to educating a child, there's no republican or democratic way to educate a child. there is no black or white way, no rich or poor way to educate a child when it comes down to the basis of learning how to read and write and count. there are two things that are important -- one, that you have a student who was there to learn, and two, that you have a teacher that as quality based and has a passion for educating the kids. i have seen in the past few years that we are falling short is that we are so stock -- stuck on the way we used to do things that it has affected our ability to be competitive. michael mentioned the economic argument. mckinsey and company did the
first ever analysis of our failure to educate our children. they looked at several achievement gaps, the difference between the education of attainment of children of color and their white counterparts, the education of attainment of all lower-income children of this country and the education attainment of all u.s. schoolchildren compared with children across the globe from other industrialized nations. when they finished the report it was interesting. they said, our failure to close these gaps, if we have worked diligently to close than 10 years ago, we would not have suffered the recession we have now. and our failure to do so has led to a permanent national recession larger than the one we are currently experiencing. they said, in effect, it has taken $2.3 trillion to our gdp,
money we would have had added to the economy of this country, but for failure to educate these kids. now where we are is we are in a place where we are playing catch-up with countries that used to crave being like us. our university systems are still where they should be in terms of reputation and entertainment, but no one from other countries wants to send their kids over here to go to our k-12 schools. they do that there, and then they say, we will transfer them to some ivy league school or some good college in the states. we are at the point where we need to seriously look at what is going to take to change the dynamic. in recent days we have heard about a teachers strike. i think the big challenge that we have is we put ourselves in
these partisan boxes and we force people when we talk about education to take sides. and you know the side that is never adequately represented in these discussions, these kids. i posted on my blog. i said, ok, how will a teacher strike in chicago help kids? i ended up getting all of these responses from people who love teachers, people who are mad at teachers. i had 40 people immediately responding. no one had answered that question. they start talking about teachers who do not want to have the evaluations that the mayor wanted. or there is a 10 year issue. . a tenure issue. the first ones to be hired are going to the first to be laid off. some of those who are laid off and maybe should not be in the
no one has talked about the fact that any time you take these kids out of a classroom, particularly those kids that need more time on tasks, they lose. it was speaks to the children -- who is thinking of the children when it comes to these issues? recently in boston, they renegotiated the teachers' contract that they had been fighting over for the past two years, and their contract in boston is very similar to what is on the table in chicago. but boston had the no-strike clause. even though they had been fighting over it for two years, they got a mediator to come in and they settle this thing. at the end of the day, no kids lost time out of the classroom. we are at the point where -- and i believe that we need to a valuate these educational proposals based on one simple
yardstick, will this help a child learn? if the answer is yes, we should be for it. if the answer is no, we should be against it. what will it take to change the dynamic? there are a couple of things. the solutions lie in accountability and quality teachers and autonomy, but it's also apparent choice. -- parent choice. my seen around the country that the more parents to step up and speak abandon pressure the system to change, the more they ought to -- and pressure the system to change, the more they have to respond. the fallacy is that we think these organizations will change from within. i do not know of any example of any bureaucracy that is change from within. they only change through external pressure. and basically, the best form of
extra pressure is parental choice. when people demand something different. and i have heard parents who have the benefit of quality schools that they otherwise did not have, and when i see and hear what they say when they have had their kids in a good charter school or a good public school and they can go to the neighborhood for the next kid coming out and say, my cousin has this over here. why can't i have a over there? that is going to change the system. one of the reasons why chicago lent itself to all of these adult issues and adult interests is because the mission was not clear. in fact, the machine in our school districts is not clear. -- the mission in our school districts is not clear. we need to realign the mission
in a way where there is only one thing important, and that is, the academic achievement of these kids. right now, that is not the mission in chicago. the mission for the teachers union and the leadership was, we want to maintain the integrity of tenure. and we want to make sure we are not giving evaluations that we do not like -- given the evaluations that we do not like, and we want to make sure that we get our increases in pay, and accordingly and in lockstep to the way it has always been. nowhere in there is a discussion of the academic achievement of children. if we go back to my general proposition, my promise that we need to make sure we have front and center the question of whether it will help a child
learn, just imagine if school districts across the country adopted as their mantra one teacher said, how will that help me? how will that help you? if we allocate money on a per basis, then you taylor everything you do and have toward meeting that goal. our objective, our goal is to have all of our kids and 90% to 100% efficiency. what do we have to do for little johnny and jane who crossed over their poor neighborhood and may not have support at home? we cannot get to 90% or 100% without johnny and jane. what do we do? we try to have the best reason -- the best teachers and resources there for them.
the way it helps teachers is that the thing that a lot of teachers complain about now and some of our urban and corps school districts where they do not have supplies and blackboards or if they need to have books, all of that is taken away. because a lot of these additional extravagances that we see in the central administration would disappear. everyone's main goal is the education of these children that is something we need to focus on. i going to take some questions. i know there will be a lot of softball questions. michael mentioned in my book. and i decided to write "voices termination" because as i go around the country and i've been in nearly every state and i talked to business leaders, i
always tried to ask the question, tell me this kids' story or tell me that kids story, just like when i first became involved in this as my life's work. i am amazed at the resiliency of our kids. oftentimes, it does not take but one or more little, positive influence in some of these children's lives to change their life's trajectory. it struck me that -- you know, even when we see it in chicago, you know, people talking about performance pay, no job left behind. -- no child left behind. it is easy to feel like it is not personal to us. the policy stuff is like numbers and words on a page. but if i go round the country and visit schools in rural and
urban america and find out this kids' story and have kids story , i would say, we've got to share these kids stories. we are a nation of storytellers. when you connect with the story, connect with a passion, connect with the challenge, it helps you to get motivated to embrace solutions to work to meet that challenge. i asked to grade school operators from around the country to introduce me to some of their most successful stories, kids who went through challenges but overcame the odds. you know, like the farm girl in indiana, who was the member of the national honor society, but knew she was not up to her grade level. she used to skin pigs and do all
that stuff. she was an old school country girl. and she was 14 years old and said, i want to be a veterinarian. her name was jeanie. but she said, i cannot be a veterinarian when they are giving me a grade that i have not earned. i have to be strawberry in math and science. she begged her mother to home school her. and her mother said, i don't know what i'm doing. and lo and behold, they found out about a charter school that had just opened up down the road. she went there and a -- and found -- get a learning disability that had never been diagnosed. she turned her life around and is now doing terrifically. or the young man and a high school in st. louis. the teacher knew he had challenges with his mother. and he had been abused by her boyfriend. the teacher said, but this kid is smart, and the child goal was
to graduate. and he knew that his mother would kick him out of the house every now and then at 15, 16 years of age. then the teacher noticed that this young man was always at the school. he said, why is donald always hanging out the school? one night, while dawdled wasn't nodding his head at -- donald was nodding his head and a civic association meeting, where he was the only one under 65 there, and he was waiting to eat this? -- eat the snacks that they had assembled, the teacher he had -- hid and followed him down the hall and up some steps and down another hall and up some more steps and then he saw him climb uphill -- up the roof into the boiler room and he relies that donald had been living in the school. he had been living in a school
for three months. and he got in a fight with his mother and his goal as a senior was to graduate. he did not want to go into foster care because they would throw him off. this teacher helped him to find a place to stay and he graduated. he was the first and his family to graduate from high school. these things are not about whether there should be private school, or charter school, or public school, were home schooling, were magnet schools, or religious schools. they are about making sure we have a whole menu of options. just like on the buffet serving line, so we can meet all of these kids, whether they are like donald oard jamie or like running, who grew up in public housing and his best friend was on a route to becoming a gangbanger and selling drugs. and running, for some reason, at
13 or 14 years old loved writing poetry, and quietly found a teacher that wouldn't enter his love of writing and poetry. he won a scholarship contest and went to college. the only one in his neighborhood in -- and it is all public housing community that went to college. and because of the pervasive nature of drugs and crime in that community, he was on a peewee football team at 14. by the time he was 22, 18 of those 22 teammates were dead. two were in prison. one, they did not know what happened to him. and ronnie was the only one who had graduated from college. and ronnie was the first to tell you -- and i talked to him recently -- that for him, he had
someone who invested in him and believed in him and made him feel like his love of poetry was not weird. that changed his life trajectory. i try to share stories like brahney and jamie and donald and others, all divers, all coming from different walks of life. that is the american story. those are the american stories that are out there that do not have anything to do with no child left behind, or the chicago teachers strike. they have everything to do with those things because that is the soul of the issue. if we are going to change the life trajectory of these -- we need toe
respect their need to get where they are and what they need. and we also need to make sure that all of those adult interests that predominates, they need to be front and center away from the equation and we need to put these kids were they need to be and put their interests first. one final thing before i take some questions, i happened to be on president obama's education committee -- policy committee during the 2008 campaign. and they did not kick me off. they may have wished they had, but i survived. [laughter] it is interesting to me as we look at this presidential race, and already people are drawing these artificial lines in the sand about the republican education plan, the democrat education diane -- plan, and i
offered a suggestion. i assumed the role of speech writer for both of them before the convention and i send a script to both of them. and i said, either one of you can bite out this. it doesn't matter which one. but you should start your nomination speech in the following similar manner. you say, my fellow americans, there is a lot that me and my opponent have stark disagreement over, and i will get to those. but before i do anything, i will talk about what i think is the most important issue facing the future of this country. and that is, the education of our children. and all too often, unfortunately, we have put ourselves in a position where we have allowed partisanship to dominate and dictate our policy directives as relates to the education of our children.
and as the nominee of this party, i'm going to say that we are going to end that. and i'm pledging that i will not entertain a debate question about what we should do to educate our children. but rather, i'm going to suggest to my opponent that he and i meet one on one and we sit down without any staff and we laid out a prescription of issues to be addressed to make sure that we fly the plane while we fix it and educate these children. a short term, and a long-term strategy, and we're both going to enter the room with the understanding that we are not guided by our party leaders. at we are guided by what is best for the future of this country. and we are also going to decide on a blue ribbon panel. you cannot have a solution without a blue ribbon panel. [laughter] we will have a blue-ribbon panel on both sides to hammer down
these issues as we move into the future months. and going forward, if i do not win, i support this process and will work to make it happen with the new president. and i would expect my opponent to do the same. because this is so important that american competitiveness, indeed, our democracy, will fail if we don't start educating our children. and we used to be number one in and science compared to other industrialized nations. now we are in the teens and 20s. and the good schools that we have in america -- we still have some good schools, but they are not as great as they used to be. and it is not a problem that just sales low-income children -- that just affects low income children. it is an american solution that
is not based on the politics of the day. i would not have been a nice nominating speech to hear? [applause] what is hopeful, and what is exciting, is that we are seeing that approach happening in some states. where a republican governor, for instance, like bobby jindal in louisiana, who is clearly republican and clearly on the right side of the republican party, but he worked with the urban democrats to improve their charter bill and put together a statewide scholarship bill. in florida, where they had the mccain scholarship program for challenged kids to get scholarships to go to private schools. when that thing was past 10 years ago, you had one member of the black caucus vote for it. when it came up for renewal last year, you have the majority of the black caucus and the hispanic caucus vote for it. and each of them said, we are
doing this because it is helping our children. as we go forward, that has to be the order of the day for country. thank you all very much. and i appreciate your generosity. as i said, i love to next. i want to take some questions before we -- i love gen next. i want to take some questions before we wrap up. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, kevin, very much. i appreciate what you are doing for our country. my question is, in california, we have not adopted a charter schools and vouchers and choice as much as you have experienced in washington d.c. might experience is that once we introduced choice, the bar will rise four parts -- for public schools because then they have to keep up with the charter schools and the voucher schools that parents like to go to.
is that your experience in washington d.c.? what happened to the public schools with how they performed when that 42% came into play earlier that he mentioned? >> -- that you mentioned? >> i do not think we can have reform without choice. and without choice, there will not be the incentive for brokers seek to change. -- for a bureaucracy to change. it is easy for people to fall into the category of bashing teachers, or tuesday if you push for change your -- to say that you push for change or not supporting public schools. i support of the schools. i gave the schools more money than they asked for. and over three years, they lost 10,000 kids in terms of their numbers. and their test scores and results went down. it got more money into the district, 10,000 fewer kids, and
the task force when down. and that is because it is like a blob, the bureaucracy. it is like a vacuum cleaner that sucks away the money from local schools and pours it into the central office. and you have all of these call centers and purchased resources, fancy, bureaucratic terms that , studiesy comes int show that 60 cents on the dollar goes to the classroom. in some places, far less than that. and you have the assistant to the assistant to the deputy assistant deputy. [laughter] i was at a hearing in d.c. once and the superintendent was there and he had folks with briefcases from central office, maybe 30 people. i would ask a question about the budget and he would say, did we give you money to build this? he would turn around and ask one of those 30 people.
finally i said, you, your swearing-in both. you are going to testify. i started asking, what do you do in your day? and he said, i am the assistant to the assistant to the assistant and i am the one who makes sure the books get done on time. and i said, how does what you do from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. help johnny learned over here in a school where 90% of the kids are failing? how does what you do every day to -- contribute to that? well, i'm an essential employee because of -- and so on. parents are saying, wait a minute, i can go to a school where is my teacher and a blackboard or books, they do not have to requisition downtown and get five people to check a box and maybe get it and maybe not?
wow. and they will get a computer and the folks know how to work the computer? again, i'm not bashing the schools, but the reality is that unless people know about what is possible, they will not ask for what is possible. that is the reality of choice. ulexite the possibilities. -- you excite the possibilities. vision is being able to see beyond what you see. if you cannot see, you do not know what to ask for. we are seeing it in indiana slowly but surely. and we are seeing it in d.c., in milwaukee. and now what is happening you see it in california with the parent turner law.
when parents say, i am mad and i'm not going to take it anymore, for the first time there is momentum to change. the one reference point that we can look at is destroyed. because when they changed their mission -- is detroit. when they change their mission to making sure they had a jobs program and working toward tenure, when they change that to quality cars, it changed everything. and the competition, when they saw those cars coming from , we are going to buy american. we have robust choice programs. we have robust pressure placed
on the bureaucracy. it just starts changed. -- it just starts a a change -- jumpstarts change. i had one superintendent say to me, you keep saying these things because it helps me to live a fire under my people. >> kevin, thank you so much for being here. i gave your book to my 12-year- old niece who is in klatten -- in catholic school. after she read the book she said, i want to go to public school because i want to meet those kids. [laughter] thank you so much. changing gears to chicago, your 350,000 kids there. the 40% are not graduating. there is significant poverty.
there are many single-parent households. where do you see that conflict ending? on the other side, they are looking for teacher evaluations, basically merit-based pay raises, and tenure for a significant time frame, longer school days. it seems there is some much entrenched interest. and then you have parents and a community that is for the most part is not engaged. and the kids are at the winds of, like he said, adult interests. >> mader -- mayor emmanuel is right, and not for a lot of the reasons that a lot of people are saying he is right. i'm not saying that he is right because he went eyeball to eyeball it is not because of false mustachio -- munchies maupin that i think he is right -- rightmachismo that i think
he is right -- false machismo that i think he is right. we need to think about 2020 and beyond. right here in california, teachers get automatic tenure -- at automatic tenure after two years on the job. and then they cannot get fired. you cannot even fire a pedophile. it takes years to fire a pedophile who is a teacher in california. and in this session, there was legislation to allow superintends to fire convicted pedophiles, and that did not pass because the union blocked it. because to them, the tenure issue is sacrosanct. when i talk about elevating the discussion, which i think mayor emmanuel is right on, as opposed to just being accepting of the
old view of jabr rules and tenure, and situations where people do not get evaluated at all, we need to start talking about what accountability should look like for children. i am not a big test for guy. i'm not saying that if every kid does not get 95% -- which should be an indicator. in boston, a 25% of the teaching evaluation will be based on the test scores of the kids in the class. that sounds reasonable to me. if you get a groups who evaluates teachers, and you've got to have some objective accountability, and it somewhat got to be based on what the kids are doing. i think he did a good job of
elevating the discussion. when asked about helping a child, i would not want -- i don't think the proper response from some of the teachers union leaders is, we're standing up for our rights. if the mission is making sure these babies learn, than the adults have to take a back seat. i think you will see more of that. now you have an interesting mix of urban, political leaders. and you've got some conservative legislators who are pushing this. and you know why some of these urban leaders are doing it? a city -- city councilman in baltimore said to me, kevin, in my district i have 70% of my people not working. i have a war zone in my ward.
and i cannot get -- and this is what he said to me -- i cannot get bill gates to bring a business. if he was going to buy a business, i could not get one to come to my word. i have no economy. the only way to change the dynamic in my urban neighborhood is to have a more educated population. you've got the city leaders who realize their economy, their tax base is eroding with every kid who drops out. that is why you see the mayor emmanuels standing up and saying -- and just think about it. if he had allowed the same contract to go into place, does anyone think it would have changed the 40% dropout rate? piniella -- no. at some point, you've got to
change it. >> talking about competition in china and india, is the model that we were taught that was built in the cultural age, the industrial age, is that sufficient for the current age? do they have the skills necessary to be entrepreneurs and innovators and to develop businesses that will bring our economy forward? >> that is a softball question are right? [laughter] and try not to jump out of my shoes on that. look, no. when we built this education , -- look,e 1993 model compa we built this education system because we were a farming
country and they have summer off so they could work in the farms. there were no cars, certainly no planes, and not even the electric light. computers? on and on politica. and the bottom line is that we had an over allegiance to that system based on this daud job. so many said, my mother or grandmother went to this school. you cannot close the school. i was at a school in hartford and 95% of the kids were failing and they were fighting to keep it open. i talked to one parent and i said -- and they said, my grandmother went to this school. and i said, did your grandmother passed? because you're a kid and passing. -- your kid ain't passing. [laughter] i believe in the south john. i believe in preserving icons. but if you are feeling 95% of --
i believe in icons. i believe in preserving this out job. but if you are failing 95% of the kids in schools, something has to change. we put this model in place, and then what happened with the workers' rights and the teachers' unions, and then the lockstep pay and then not being fired, it has served to prop up the system. it is so easy for folks who may see this to say, ok, you are bashing folks. i am not bashing. i believe in quality teaching. and if you know a teacher who is a good teacher, they will probably confirm everything i'm saying. because the good teachers, they hate it. when they know the teacher who had the kids the year before, they know they will be unprepared and a half to work twice as hard as the other to
make up for it. and they wished that they could get rid of that teacher, but because of the roles they cannot. to embrace the information age, going back to your question, we cannot embrace the information age by doing something in the same way that we did it in the 1800's. that is where these other countries are blowing us away. they studied us over time, but in places like belgium and finland, and taiwan and some of the other asian countries, they look at what we are doing and then they have brought told of this technology opportunity as a way -- they have grabbed ahold of this technology opportunity as a way of infusing learning, autonomy, accountability, choice, you know, making sure that teachers are judged in part
based on the performance of their kids. this turnaround did not happen just overnight. we have to divorce ourselves from this commitment to the history of how schools started, and view it as a continuum. you know, it is like evolution. we need to move beyond that neanderthal phase and start working -- walking on two legs, instead of allwe have to divorcs what we're doing with traditional education. >> thank you for being here tonight. it seems there is a little dancing around -- you are talking about choice. you gave the example of detroit. and they went from a socialist mind-set to a capitalist mindset with parents having choice. is there any direct conversation about saying, hey,
let's capitalize education. let's give consumers choices so that the customer, in other words, the parent, has choice. when there is competition, the bar rises. and those that are weak fall to the wayside. >> this is the way i view it. i don't think we need to be overly prescriptive about what the right education model looks like. because again, being true and pure to this "one-size-fits-all " -- i think each community has to figure it out. the first is to expose parents to choice within their community and they will gravitate to what works best for them. as i tell my friends through reform world -- because now, i love the tip schools.
but not every school can be a kid's school. -- a kip school. we need variety. and frankly, that engenders competition. and if relaxed a starbucks, i'm glad we have peace. -- and if everybody likes a starbucks, glad we have pete's. we do not need just one solution. and what comes to education, the dynamic nature of it is that we should have a diverse offering of selections for parents and children's needs. >> you are dedicated to this cause. you have been in it for 20 years. for the people that are here, if he were to say one thing we can
do in our community to make change -- here in california, we see our tax dollars going to nonperforming schools. what is something we can do? distill it down for us. >> that is a great question. i have said this to gen next before end it has followed my advice. you've got to have courage. our political leaders have to have courage to speak truth to power. i cannot tell you how many times i have given speeches and said some of the things that i said tonight and elected officials come to me and say, keep saying it. i cannot say it because i'm relying on someone so. you just do not have any background -- any backbone. -- you just do not have any backbone to stick up for kids. that is ok. [laughter] when you see elected officials
or people running your schools, you need to ask them pointed questions and not take the normal platitudes or the feel- good stuff. i believe in more money for teachers, larger classrooms, early childhood education -- all of that sounds really good. when the rubber hits the road, where are you going to do about work rules? were you when to do to make sure that a principal can run their school and not have the voices that come from the outside or someone from downtown have to check a box that has not been a classroom for 35 years -- in a classroom for 35 years? we are all recovering politicians. i go to meeting all the time. but i'm not running for anything. [laughter]
as these falls -- folks questions. challenge them. do not accept the same old answers. everybody has it within them to help another child in need. do something. i will give you a quick example before i take the last question. there is a friend of mine who i went to law school with who asked me once -- she said, you know, i've never been married. i'm a lawyer and i'm doing well and i feel like i want to help these kids. give me a suggestion as to what i should do. i said, you should go to our community hospital and you should just hold some of those babies on sunday mornings. they have a shortage of nurses. these babies need to be held, and they don't have enough nurses to hold these babies. batie shebaa for your time. she started doing that. she started doing that. and you