Transcripts For CSPAN2 American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee National Convention 20170922

Convention with a discussion on palestine, one state versus two state. What is maybe in the best interest of the palestinians now and later, the Trump Administration in light of this administration. With that i want to turn it over to our moderator. Great, thank you so much. Good morning, everybody. Thank you for coming out. Im the director of opinion analysis. And ill be moderating todays panel. One state or two state solution, whats best for the palestinians. Thank you for everybody from the adc who helicopter for with the timely progress and well have an introduction and each panelist will speak, on a one state or two state solution. And then well open up the audience. A dominant paradigm for making peace in the middle east, increasingly challenged by activists who believe its inge practical given whats on the ground and undesirable. They are looking at arabs and jews, and including the palestinians of israel and refugees. Look the at apartheid of south africa, in the struggle for african apartheid, they advocate the use of boycott to put economic and political pressure on israel to respect palestinian rights. With the new Trump Administration looking at any withdrawals, it seems a twostate solution. And shortly after taking office, the president said he didnt mind if it was a one state or a two state solution. A spokesperson said if the Trump Administration declared support, it would quote, unquote, say its bias on his part. And the best solution to realize rights is the superintendent and independent state and thats the only way because. Concensus against it. And poll last week for the policy and survey research showed that 52 of palestinians support twostate solution and others a one state solution. And many who support the twostate solution, many they believe that the twostate is not viable anymore. And moreover, depending when and how the question was asked. Showed that 44 of palestinians supported the twostate solution. Interestingly, the same poll showed they supported a onestate. And creating facts on the ground to cement over all of historic palestine. There are settlers moving illegally over Palestinian Land and 100 outposts over the west bank and jerusalem. They represent the greatest obstacle of a palestinian site and a twostate solution. And a century after there was a declaration nearly 70 years after the american plan, 50 years after the west bank in gaza and a quarter of the century, theyre framing what would be our national interest. Well continue this conversation today. Now i will introduce our speakers. First, we have an arab american comedian, speaker writer and academic. Add adjunct professor at Detroit Mercy School of law and politics, society the arab world and islam. As a comedian and speaker hes addressed packed halls at Carnegie Hall and the performing arts. And he possesses a masters and middle east studies at university of michigan, ann arbor and maker of the film were not white, and recognized on the census. He will be talking about a onestate solution. And also the general director of the pilo in washington d. C. And he was advising palestinian leaders including the president , Prime Minister and various ministries. Hes involved in initiatives in palestine and the u. S. He will be speaking of the twostate solution. And a human rights facility and studied at george nmason university. And she is taught at Temple Law School and Georgetown School of Foreign Service and cofound edit editor. Shes worked as a Legal Counsel for the conventional committee and for refugee and residency rights. Her multimedia production include solid day and a 20 minute documentary. Shes completing a book project tentatively titled justice for some, law, politics and the palestinian stretreatment. I was not involved in organizing todays panel, but ill try to make sure the conversation is a balanced one. If you be so kind, would you start us off . Sure, all right. Good morning, everybody. Im very happy to be here, especially to kick off the conventi convention and on stage with two great palestinian american intellectuals and activists and im just a comedian so ill try. This whole discussion has gotten a little harder this year because if you remember, back in, i think, february one of the first visits to the white house was Benjamin Netanyahu and they had a, you know the press conference in the white house and trump started talking about and he said something about, sure, two state, one state, whatever. Something very trumpish and the discussion sort of started again. There are a few principles, i think, we have to start with when we talk about whether or not there should be a onestate or twostates in palestinian. First of all, israel has shown us, not just in the past 50 years, but the past 70 years, that it has no intention of going anywhere and especially when it comes to the west bank. So, in the west bank, we have now, as chris said, somewhere in the neighborhood of 600,000 illegal settlers. Some of the largest israel cities, i guess they can now be called, theyre settlements, exist in the west bank, you have these huge settlements around jerusalem, and you have aerial, one of the biggest outside of nablus and they built a university somewhere. Generally when you build a university somewhere youre not leaving. The notion that israel would leave any part of the west bank, the populated areas, is a dream. Theyve shown clearly theyre not interested in doing that. And also, we have to rest on the principle that all of palestine is occupied. There is no you dont just say the west bank is occupied and the gaza strip is occupied. All of palestine or the recognized borders of israel, sort of recognized borders of israel, all of it is occupied, all is a colonial enterprise, its a progression, the west bank and gaza strip are progression of what happened in 1948. If we talk about them separately, it would be a problem to begin with. And also we currently actually in many ways have one state, right . If one state means that there is one entity sort of ruling over everything, thats currently whats going on. Elon has talked about this many times, right now we have one state, it just functions legally in different ways for different people, based on sort of where they live and more importantly, who they are. But, everything is administered, occupied, governed, by israel. When we talk about one state versus two states, the problem is, we get into a question of palestinian to me to me, a question of palestinian identity, right . When you recognize the twostate frame work and you work within it, what youre doing by default is acquiescing to this idea of classifying palestinians into many different categories. Right now, theres five classes of palestinians throughout the world, right . There is the west Bank Palestinians have one legal status. The others have a different legal status. Jeruselem palestinians, they live inside israel, benefitting for the states, and ap then you have others are palestinian and arab schools get 1 for every student or excuse me, arab students get 1 for every 3 that the jewish students get in the school system. And then the palestinians who are a part of the palestinian global identity, but have no place, it seems, in any of the oslo frame works or as far as israel is concerned. One thing that oslo has done more than anything else, its dismembered the cohesive palestinian identity. We dont see ourselves as something different, or see ourselves from haifa or the discussion of two state, borders and the whole thing has dismembered us in a certain way and those of us who participate in that discourse are furthering that idea. So i am in favor, if its not clear yet. In favor of one state solution and i have six sort of reasons that i think it would work, all right . And i think that we should move forward. Number one is what i call the solomon effect. All right . This is the solomon story from the bible, dont split the baby in half. Right now, if you ask any of us on stage, except maybe chris, any of the palestinians on stage to draw their country we draw the same thing, we draw that triangle that looks like mandatory palestinian. Its all the same to us if we get that tattooed on our bodies or appended on a necklace, thats what we get. If you ask an israeli to draw their country they draw the exact same thing, they dont true it without the west bank and we dont draw it without. And existentially were talking about the same piece of land, talking about the same area. If you split it in the half, as you saw in the bible, it doesnt work out. Not only is no one happy, no one recognizes all of their disparate parts in that. Number one, lets not split the baby in half in we dont have to and theres no reason that we have to at this time. Number two, as this is more of a logistical thing. The Financial System and infrastructure actually would not have to change at all. Currently inside the west bank and gaza strip are completely, everything is from an infrastructure or a financial point of view is israeli. Everything is done by the occupying power, that shouldnt come as a surprise, even in gaza, this holds the discourse that we hear all the time, they didnt create their own currency or Financial System. Everything is still run under the israeli Financial System and infrastructure. For instance, Cell Phone Companies that exist in the west bank, water, utility, all they do is buy from israel and resell to palestinians. In fact, a stateless palestinian in the west bank pays more for her cell phone bill than an israeli who leaves in tel aviv. Theyre buying secondhand, theyre reselling. The infrastructure is all there, you wouldnt have to change anything. If jesus using this, you dont have to change anything. Number three is the settlement issue, in fact, in a weird way, one state solution would solve the settlement issue. Settlements arent settlements anymore theyre one state. If people stay, of course, theres issues of confiscation and of reimbursing people for their losses and that kind of thing, which are rights that lie within individuals that people should always impose. But settlements would not be settlements anymore. Number four, this is a big one, is jerusalem. To put on a nerdy law professor, very parttime law professor hat for a second, jerusalem is and always has been since 1948 this living under this latin term called corpus speratum which means it has its own status. In the participation of the u. N. In 1947 or 48, jerusalem was going to be an International Zone sort of like the vatican and that is never changed under international law. So jerusalem, the entirety of jerusalem, west and east belongs to nobody and is under no ones sovereignty. This is why, because israel pro claims their capital as jerusalem, that nobody recognizes it, because the u. N. Has never recognized that anyone has sovereignty over that city, thats why no countries locate their embassies there. Thats why its such a big deal in america whether or not we move our embassy to jerusalem. Thats why we had that Supreme Court court case a couple of years ago, you remember a Jewish American family whose child was born in jerusalem and they wanted his passport to say israel and the state Department Said no, and there was a legal constitutional cries ises between the legislative and executive. And the Supreme Court ended up saying the executive gets to decide this and if the state Department Says its not part of jerusalem, its not. And many like to say the determined undivided capital. Whatever this is called. It could be immediately opened to the world and open to everyone who lives there and about many the capital of this new state. Number five, and i dont know how to say this one nicely, we palestinia palestinians, we reproduce a lot. We are, we love each other very much and we have for the last 70 years and more. And when netanyahu calls us a demographic threat, hes exactly right. We are, we are a major demographic problem for any sort of racist apartheid state thats going to exist in our land and israel has never really decided how to deal with this. In fact, everything that israel has done for the past 70 years has been to get rid of us. Theyre bad at it. Theyre not good at it at all and in fact the opposite effect. Back in 1948 when they kicked out palestinians from what we now call israel or the green line, whose i think many people in this room might be refugees or descendents of refugees of 1948, i know i am, they called out 60,000 palestinians and 150,000 palestinians still remain. If they had grown at the normal population growth rate of the world. They would be after 70 years, 450,000. They are not, theyre 1. 7 million people. So, this is something thats been going on for a long time and if israel thinks theyre going to get rid of us, whether its inside the west bank and gaza or inside the 1948 borders of israel, its not happening anytime soon. And so this is a problem that only exists, you only see this as a problem if you believe in sort of an ethnic supremacist racist idea of a state. If you get rid of those ideas, then its not a problem anymore. Finally, number six is what i call holy disney, which is hour economy in palestine would be the most amazing economy in the world. I mean, right now, palestine is cut off to maybe a billion or more people throughout the world who dont go either because their countries dont have diplomatic relations with israel or theyre afraid of the political situation. Im from nazareth like jesus, thats what i tell white people, im from nazareth and i was in nazareth a few years ago and i couldnt get a hotel room because there were pilgrimages mostly from africa they were coming and they were there. Now, that was under the current situation. If we were to open up the country and make one state and make one relation with the whole world, theyd have to build 50 hotels in nazareth and bethlehem and jerusalem. And there are other resources used to build their economies, oil obviously being the primary one. The Natural Resource in palestine is god. God is our Natural Resource and its like renewable. Its completely renewable. It never diminishes. So you have to economy that would rival any economy in the world, especially given how small the land is, how small the state is. It would be an amazing economy. Everybody would get rich. But under the current circumstances, could have,that cant happen. If its opened up, it could. So, obviously, we have to both sides have to make a few sort of existential concessions, right . There would no longer be anything called the jewish state. There wouldnt be anything called the palestinian state necessarily. Just a state, as weird it might sound to some people it shouldnt sound weird, but just a state, regardless of ethnicity, right, secular democracy, its worked in other places in the world. Doesnt seem like a crazy idea. So thats what but both peoples would have to give up some kind of idea of a palestinianonly or jewishonly state. And obviously, practically some other things would have to change. You have to change the flag, the flag right now is a little onesided you know, maybe you have to change the flag and maybe be like a brown, green brown, to represent a flalafel patty or Something Like that, change the name of the state to other things, holy land, call the whole thing jerusalem. Call the whole thing palestine, and it doesnt matter. So, but you would have to obviously make some real world changes, but these are things that people would have to get over. But at the end of the day, the only way, right, that we to me the most important element of this is making sure that palestinian identity is united and it really gets totally uniteed with all palestinians under the same umbrella if we start changing the discourse. Thats what it is at the end of the day. We can talk about it academically. Its getting us collectively to change the discourse to only talk about a onestate solution. There is a statue of Nelson Mandela in ramallah. Its been there for a few years now. We are not acting like Nelson Mandela. Nelson mandela didnt ask for separate states inside south africa. He asked for the rights of all of his people under all of the land from the entity that was governing them. Its about time we palestinians start to do the same thing. Thank you amer. Good morning, everyone, thank you for having me on this panel. Im fine with being a minority, probably 30 is probably the proportion of palestinians that still believe in the twostate solution. I would want to start from where amer ended. Theres a lot of points i agree with, but its mostly, my point is really on palestinian identity and whether people are going to have to catch up to the program and just live with the fact that their identity is going to change and be a palestinian and jewish identity. I think thats where the onestaters are mistaken. I dont think either population are happy or satisfied with a state that defines or in which they are nationally defined amal gum. Right . We know the reasons why zionists feel that the the importance of a jewish state to be jewish and to be a ma jo are the jewish, it has to do with their experience and their narrative of never being really fully able to exercise the right of selfdetermination wherever they are, even here, and its only in the last 20, 30 years you see people wearing things publicly and all of that experience, whatever weng of from their perspective, theres a sense, or the way that israeli courts work, where the actual system is one where, based on the fact that no jew gets a fair trial if a judge is not jewish. Thats the narrative that they have. On the other side, the palestinian experience, and im going to share some personal stories because i feel that thats how thats what shapes our identity is those narratives. Theres likewise a very strong ethos of palestinianhood thats strongly based on the struggle against occupation, based on the narrative of the original sin, on balfour, that makes for a state that we are going to have to share it with opressors, a very difficult sell and im going to share some examples. I was born and raised in dubai, a father that was active in the plo. I was raised on stories of olive groves and all of that stuff. So, i had this amazing romantic picture of palestine. So ultimately in 99 when through the oslo process we were able to go back, i was looking forward to see that and found a different palestine, right . I came to actual testing and as my cousins and my aunt to who lived through the first interfata. And i dont have the same state that they have, its not my place. It took me a while to create my own palestine because until then it was my fathers palestine and i felt i was less palestinian because i suffered let less. So much of our identity is into that struggle, but i was also taken aback when i heard my cousins say israel, right . Because we call in 1948 palestinian, right . And to see my cousins who for me were on a pedestal, they were who were in more than i, if they call it israel, how can i criticize it. Theyre the ones that are more palestinian than i am. And thats the germ that got me thinking about what it is to be palestinian and what about israel that defines some of us palestinians. Another, lets say story that also stuck with me bass the palestinian friend, a palestinian citizen of israel, a friend of mine from haifa, hezbollah and hamas. She was educated and dated israeli guys and i think one was an army, like sleeping with the enemy kind of thing. She was rebellious in that sense, however, she loved ramallah. She was in awe of it. Like despite the fact that her life in haifa was much, economically more prosperous and she had more freedoms, she would come to ramallah and go to a place in ramallah, you probably know it and you could see she was alive because for her, right, she wanted a purely palestinian space, a space where she just could be herself and not like be politically correct, careful what she says it comes out wrong and what have you. So it struck me this was coming out of my seventh year in palestine and i was getting living in the functionality of palestinian society, a lot of it a result of the occupation, but we still have functionality weighing on me and i felt like i was getting jaded, i was feeling that we as palestinians have a lot of work to do regardless of the occupation and internal fight. In a state where the jewish is, the israeli oppressor would be there equal. We would say god help the jews when we take control because we are going to do worse things to them them they did to us. That sentiment is there. More importantly, the need to cleanse the land from the oppressor. We cannot feel completely emancipated if there is any residue of the oppressor. That is a much bigger conversation to the palestinian identity than what they let on. I think the one state solution is a fair solution, one man, one vote is the right thing to do in an ideal world. The challenge is, is that enough for the people were there. I would love to see one state where people are treated equally. There is skepticism that people in the gaza strip would accept it. I think yes we do need to have a representative that represents all palestinians. Thats part of the conundrum that we dont have that currently so we are on able to transform this legislatively into a political platform. Therefore the idea continues in process to be an idea that is inapplicable because we dont have the vehicle to apply the idea whether its one state or tuesday. The final point is in ethically moral point. I hated israel, i hated the jews, i was a big fan of suicide bombers. They are the enemy and the victimizers so anything that happens to them is okay because theyve done this to themselves. I came to a point that ive realize theyre not going anywhere and more importantly i cannot exercise my right of selfdetermination in a way that i know its going to be impeding on someone elses right to self determination. Its very paradoxical that we palestines are a majority and we are in the same space in the 1930s where they were in the position of believing they have a right to selfdetermination and being okay with exercising that right at the expense of the palestinian. No zionist had any. [inaudible] they actually admit that. In 1919, it was very clear, even if you are a strong believer in zionism and the right to selfdetermination, there was no way of applying that. Ironically now we palestinians are in this position. We might not be powerful, but we are in that position. Are we willing to exercise our right of selfdetermination at the expense of others but this is something i would not wish for palestine. I feel we deserve to occupy the highest moral grounds and answer that question. My contention with the one state conversation is it does not answer that question. Just as everybodys equal. In the u. S. , theoretically africanamericans are equal but they still get unequal treatment. The quality and the law does not answer how people feel about the state. It needs to be a state that the people think and feel represents them is a state that stands for enough of their identity they can stand with. And ellison succeeded because he mandela succeeded because he understood he needed to create a new south africa that included blacks and whites and where blacks and whites could identify just as much with that country and he brought in a symbol of races is racism. Though white rugby team, he stood for them. I do not see them being able to represent jewish identity and palestinian identity and one state. [speaking in native tongue] its amazing youre here. Thank you for being here. What an honor to a not great this abc convention and what it means for the Arab Antidiscrimination Committee which is central and integral to fighting the battle against the muslim ban and against daca and helping those with immigrant status to fighting the attack on transgendered people including those trends tendered people in our community, and notwithstanding that spectrum of the struggle for arab america and arab americans. The first panel comes back to something that is central to the identity which is the question of palestine, something that has animated the left since at least the 1960s, as has been documented in a recent manuscript published by pamela. I think thats amazing. Thank you for including us in this. I want to do something slightly different than what my colleagues have done. We have been talking about the one state and two state solution almost in a vacuum and taking for granted what that means. I think if we were going to have a theoretical discussion , which one is better for palestinians, right, we can have that discussion. The two state solution doesnt include the refugees and the citizens of israel or us, the one state solution will render us minorities who are securitized and capped as a fifth pillar were going to be subject to institutionalized racism, early death, unequal access to educational funds and medical care and so on. Having that discussion in that way makes this about whether or not, whether or not, let me use an analogy. If we have a condition of cancer, then the two state solution is nearly tylenol to address the cancer and its not good enough. If we have a condition of cancer in the commission is still the same prognosis and the solution is a one state solution and what were sol suggestion is chemo, it doesnt necessarily work and thats not good enough. The ultimate thing we need to do is remove the cancer altogether which means, beyond one state or two state and regardless of where you want to end up we must embark on a settler decolonization process regardless of what the outcome is. Without that, neither approach is going to be enough. At the present stage, both of them suffer from critique of a lack of pragmatism. Both of them suffer from the fact that neither will lead to you utopia and both will be paved by inevitable violence. If we can accept that at the base of it that we are dealing with similar circumstances in terms of challenges and prospects, then what is the question we need to ask ourselves, and what is the prerequisite in order to establish any solution. For those who are asking how can that be true, why embark if you have a two state solution because then you just establish one state for each people, consider what they lamented which is if we admit that the west bank is occupied, we have to admit that tel aviv is occupied. That is the thing that continues to dominate israeli thinking. In that process there is a denial that the Palestinian People are people who have the right to selfdetermination in any form. We get to define what selfdetermination is. It is not merely the establishment of a nationstate. It is the right to be selfdetermined. We can decide, but israel had denied in continued to deny that palestinians have that right. And insist that we are nomads from surrounding countries that should be absorbed to anyone of the arab states or, what they propose to us in 1978 in the middle east framework which is the idea that we are self thoma thomas, we govern ourselves in an autonomous framework without any substantial sovereignty, and interestingly, its in that moment that the plo, the palestinians in the west bank and the palestinians in the gaza strip convene conferences and congresses that reject the idea of economy and say nothing short of sovereignty and selfdetermination and 15 years later we sign on to almost the exact document verbatim. So, i would like too, i would like to suggest three things. One is that the problem is not one state or two state, but the problem is actually whether or not were talking about the strategy to achieve selfdetermination. What often happens and is somewhat happening here is a subtext is we are not discussing one state versus two state. We may very well be discussing the different approaches to strategy. It becomes a euphemism of boycott divests and allout resistance versus we need to embark on a Peace Process dialogue and diplomatic approach. We are refracting a strategic discussion through framework of one versus two state. I would like to address that. Id also like to say that the thing that we must all agree on, you want to states or one state, you want Something Else altogether, but in addition you have to be ready to dismiss our slow. What it does, let me take a step back and say that the idea of a one state solution is not new to these millennial palestinians who are now 25, 27 if they were born in 1997. Its not new to them although they are very much at the forefront of articulating these demands. The idea, the radical proposition is the two state solution and it only emerges after the war in critique that palestinians were not being pragmatic enough. Sony aftermath of the 1973 war, it became clear that no arab conventional army was going to fight israel until victory. Egypt and syria had make clear they were only going to fight in order to enhance their negotiating position in order to recoup the territories that were occupied in 1967. Egypt encourages the plo to moderate its position for a one state solution in order to accept the west bank and gaza strip and so does the soviet union. So its an idea, its a seed that becomes planted in 1973 that continues to grow until 1988 when its no longer about all between moderates versus rejection us but in 1988, palestinians unite and affirm that we want a two state solution, but at that time, we articulate that demand based on two principles. Un resolution 181 which envisions partition for two people and one lands but where minority rights are protected for each people so no ethnic cleansing is necessary. Today the language of this two state solution predisposes that it is a good rather than evil. Even as we establish new International Norms after genocide in yugoslavia and rwanda now we are seeing purity of race as a good. Theres something horribly wrong with our moral compass if that is what we are articulating. There should not be purity of race. That is not where we are heading toward. It cannot end well. It has never ended well. But in 1988, we articulate the principle of Un Resolution 181 and Security Council resolution 242 which is establishing these basic principles. Iconic palestinian poet who is the most Ardent Supporter of of one state solution revered and drafted the declaration of independence along these terms. The two state solution is not [inaudible] what is, when they establish backdoor negotiations that undermine all of the work that palestinian negotiators were doing in washington and madrid and rather than insist on what our declaration of independence articulated, instead we accepted the 1978 framework that gave us these and severed jurisdiction and sovereignty so that we do not have sovereignty over the land. We only have autonomy over our people and some lands so that our jurisdiction doesnt spread of the west bank and the gaza strip because if it did then the settlers would be under palestinian jurisdiction and it does not. We have basically enshrined a situation, enshrined a vision articulated in 1978 and has been that framework that has led us to the condition that were in today so even if you want the two state solution, you cannot accept that we not dismantle our slo as the first step of our liberation. Lets just assume as many critiques, its too hard. Palestinians dont want to live with israelis print they want to live on their own. Israelis are running over palestinian children in cars and not being prosecuted and able to kill with impunity. What you talking about. What is this land youre living in. We have to be clear about the facts that both approaches are difficult, almost impossible without tremendous political will, and will have forms of violence embedded. The two state solution is no more pragmatic than the one state solution. They are inextricably populated. Only the vast difference of treatment that makes palestinians subhuman or not human at all. Think about this february when the outpost of a mona was evacuated which was home to 250 palestinians. The up he will that that caused, not only was it a big deal to israelis but they passed a law to ensure that no other outpost would undergo a similar fate, and at the same tim time articulated that 6000 new colonial units would be built. What is more pragmatic or practical about a two state solution than one state solution . The critique, its not a utopia. Just because you articulate your going to have one state doesnt mean that suddenly we have a banner of equal rights and we are Holding Hands and marching together. The example of the end of jim crow in the United States is the most telling where today, in 2017 black people are killed with impunity and represent one third of our penal incarcerated population and our president , well it depends on how you feel about that, the president of the United States wants to retool the department of justice to dismantle affirmative action and actually defend white students who have suffered under affirmative action. This idea that somehow will have a one state solution and we enter utopia is very shortsighted. Its not whats going happen. Palestinians, within israel who have had supposedly equal rights as citizens, but not as nationals because there is no such thing as israeli nationality, is only jewish nationality have been incarcerated at higher populations, are being right now removed from their homes in this place in order to create new settlements in the south of israel, who are citizens of this date and have been displaced more than once. We will be securitized, we will be killed with impunity, we will be run over and shot and have knives planted next to us and deemed a terrorist threat. We have to face that reality, regardless of whatever situation we have, and thats why we have to embark on this process that insist palestinians are people, palestinians exist in israel is a settler colony. The only distinction between israel and the United States or canada and australia is that our demographic balance means we are still controversial. We are still in active frontier of elimination, unlike, in the settler colony we are the frontier of elimination has been accomplished but settler colonies him has continued but its no longer controversial. In palestine, its not settled. As benny morris said, we just didnt kill enough palestinians when we had the opportunity. Its not a settled frontier and thats why this remains controversial. The worst thing we can do is to capitulate that israel is a normalized state and as a legitimate state when in fact it is a settler colony. If jews want to remain there, they remain there, but not as masters, and not as colonial masters, not as a privileged supremacist class by virtue of law. They remain there as humans. We find a way to create a better world. We have the opportunity to create a model that the rest of the world has not created. Weve already learned from everyone elses mistakes. If we are condemning genocide , why would we endorse it in our context, and why not have the first to critique that if we wanted to recreate a european model of the state, why not let europe do that in our country of colonial masters. The whole point of decolonization and independence is that we have the opportunity to create something better. Thank you. Thank you nora. [applause] will have a bit of a backandforth between her painless before we opened up the q a. At like to start with you, what you say to those who argue that the two state solution is not actually a solution at all because it leaves palestinian citizens vulnerable and denies the right for refugees, et cetera sure. My first critique is in making a conclusion to any policy option is certainly going to end with a certain result. I take issue with many of the points that were made from a logical point. There are many ways in something in which something can play out. The two state solution is not also necessarily that. I agree with you precisely because the plo [inaudible] and arafat and third word he was weak when he didnt have country support and he did it to consolidate his power so course i do not endorse that but at the same time that doesnt equate the two state solution to the way it was. The two state solution does more justice to more people because what i see is more important to the Palestinian People is in fact selfdetermination and selfexpression and actual sovereignty with the National Identity that is both cultural and political. It would also be part of the conversation, one of the Main Elements is precisely that it did not discuss the city and since as palestinian nationals and it was not so implicit tradeoff that we get the state in return of letting go of the right of the refugees which is not right. I agree with that point. You can have the two states we have refugees that have citizenship and have the right to the rights and their properties in what is now israel and you find a solution to all the other ailments. The important thing on the issue of refugees is in fact [inaudible] did not want to take their opinion on what happens to them. Its the vulnerability, the challenge that i see in the one state is because it will take 50 or 100 years for the one state to actually materialize is that to the many of the refugees in syria and lebanon, we saw what happened in the city and war precisely because they are stateless. Because they are stateless they are easy scapegoats and become vulnerable population. Not providing a solution to ease their suffering is also morally objectionable from my point. Having said that, i still think the more important aspect to that is in fact representation, that all of this talk is theoretical until we actually have a good enough representation of the Palestinian People in the people in the west bank of the gaza strip, and the second thing that i push back on is that we need to first agree on the destination in order to decide how to go about to decolonize. The decolonization is a step in a certain direction. If we dont agree, that is something temporary. It helps alleviate suffering but what is the ultimate end goal for palestinians devastated their own that is 20 of their historical homeland but where they feel that state actually represents them enough and represents their cultural identity, or do we go for a one state where that identity will be changed into something that is less, thats the other thing, of course im not advocating ethnic cleansing or ethnic. The. That is a flawed and immoral position. My point is whether we have a one state or two state, both could be bad solutions. Both of these solutions are bad. The test of a good solution is whether the rights of selfdetermination to the majority of people are addressed or not. How do you make sure the majority of the citizens actually have the greatest amount they can have given the situation. Out of the conversation on the one state is that it actually dismisses and does not answer the question to what happens to jewish israelis and their sense of selfdetermination and their sense of their jewish identity. Do they feel safe and able to exercise their right in a state thats articulated, thats what i feel is missing in the conversation. Thank you. Ive seen you taking some notes. Would you like to respond on your last point, the land of israel, or whatever you call it right now because of israeli action is the most dangerous place on earth for juice, not the safest place. Whether or not they feel security isnt something theyve been able to achieve. Building a state on ideals of secularism and democratic equality, obviously these ideals and you need the political will and the collective will to undertake it. I heard a lot from everybody appear. Even when i was listening to nora, i heard historical analysis of a problem, its all true, but whats the prognosis. We have to articulate a vision at the end of the day. To to me, thats what this is about. We are not part of the political vehicle, well our job, hopefully as palestinian americans who live here is to do our best to our institutions and organizations to influence these political vehicles. We dont just need a rejection, we need a reversal and along with that, and we shouldnt be afraid to say it, comes a rejection of the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority is a corrupt mechanism which has come out, its an israeli invention. Its important to recognize that and say thats what one state means. This is where i think a lot of people sometimes are reticent to talk about it because thats ultimately what it means. On the issue of the culture, im not afraid of palestinians losing arab culture. Weve done a very good job of preserving it, may be more than others in the region because it has been under attack as a matter of israels objec objectives. In fact, go to jerusalem. If you go to the old city of jerusalem, when everyone said jerusalem is the problem there are 33000 People Living there, only 3000 them are jewish. All the rest are arab. That means if you go to the old city of jerusalem, if you dont want to get cheated you speak arabic. The place is still arab. It has been for 1500 years. Fifty years of some settlers from europe doesnt change anything. The most popular Israeli Jewish band is a yemenis band that sings in arabic. So the Largest Group now, the largest single or group of jews living in the israeli state are arab jews from morocco, tunisia so the places arab. You cant do anything about that. It has been for very long time. Theres an reason, its not because they are trying to steal it but part of it is because thats whats there. Im not worried about us losing our arab identity. Weve done a very good job in the land has done a very good job at preserving that, but for me, at the end of the day, im very worried about dismembering and disjoint in palestinian identity. Its very important for me to collectively articulate a vision of one state where everybodys interests are the same. Not where gazas interests are different than jerusalem and israelis, and as far as palestinian refugees, no solution, no amount of negotiation can negotiate away the right of return or reimbursement for refugee. That is something that resides individually with the refugee. No movement to negotiate that away would be valid and israelis can never say that can be part of any future negotiation because that resides under international law. But, im not worried about some of these critiques because books, i think the generation before us which talked about two states and they were down with [inaudible] they did a lot for our generation. Take thomas to keep palestine alive. They taught us to make sure we always knew where we came from, ben said the old will die in the young will forget. Thats not true. There are still some old palestinians i see in this room have not died yet and there are 6yearold palestinian americans Walking Around america right now that will tell you what village their grandparents got kicked out of in 1948. Nothing that israel has tried has worked. None of their colonial stuff, as far as the way we emotionally think about palestine has worked. So, that has been reflected in the land. There is a reason there are israeli flags everywhere when you go around palestine. If youve ever been to the wall, they have this line of flight 100 israeli flags. Its unbelievable. I used to get really mad when i would see all these flags and i realize very quickly, they are not for me. Those are for them because they need these flags, they put up all these flags to feel like they belong. We dont need flags. We have our names on our villages, we know we belong already. They put up all these flags because they know they dont. People talk a lot about palestine, it hasnt worked. I think that a one state solution sort of confirms all the answers look, this didnt work. It didnt work with our parents in the previous generation before us but they were wrong. The strategies didnt work. What israel has tried has not worked so its time to move along. Thank you. Will have a short time left so after this will go to the audience and excited to get my hands on this because i did articulate a vision we have to move toward one state solution because that is the solution thats going to yield a better possibility. If both solutions are going to have the same negative, then what solution is going to yield the better possibility. Better possibilities of the future in palestinian citizens and all of our nation are being holistic. Just be clear, my vision very clear. The second thing that i hope is very clear and which wasnt addressed, unfortunately, which is the subsumption, i dont know where it comes from. How many of you, between yourselves your hands up, im a teacher so hands up if you think the two state solution is more practical. There is the subsumption that its more practical, based on logic. Lets just think logically why its not more practical. I wrote just a few things here. The gaza strip is under siege for over a decade. Five points of egress is unlimited. It will be unlivable by 2020 and it subject to three large military offenses with weapons, technology provided by the United States against a besieged population that does not have the right to become fiji of war in the past seven years alone. Since 2004, 2000 military offenses. There are 600,000 settlers. They are okay with apartheid and said lets annex areas were 62 because were okay with that. We been dehumanized to that level. We cant dismantle an outpost without 6000 new colonial units being declared in a land. Netanyahu has said multiple times there will never be a palestinian state. The western source of water wise under the west bank. Israel derived 80 of its yield of water from that water source which, by the way is facilitated. They have all said that under any framework it will not share that water. So, i want to ask those who believe a two state solution is more pragmatic, on what basis do you make that claim other than this kind of theoretical thing that we have of two people in one land when everything on the ground tells us that israel is not okay with the two state solution and has created the fact on the ground to make the as impossible as a one state solution. I dont want to say its more difficult but its certainly not less difficult. Lets not fall back on that argument. In terms of if you want to think pragmatically. The last thing i will say is we have more in common that we disagree on. Everybody here wants freedom for all people. Everybody wants children to live with dignity and safety and stability. Everybody wants to see families happy regardless of religion, ethnicity, nationality, geographic location, legal jurisdiction. We are all in agreement. We are disagreeing on how to get there, and im making a suggestion, let us agree then on three basic things since we are in agreement. Lets agree on three basic things that regardless of what your final destination is, and clearly mine is one state, offset again since i was told my vision wasnt clear, even if youre one state or two state, lets agree, we have to dismantle oslo. It is the enemy of the two state solution. It is the reason they stepped down after the court. It is the problem, number one. Number two emma we have tos agree on settler decolonization. This idea that they dont exist and have the right to selfdetermination, its been turned from a fishermans port for elite jewish israelis. It says alive we have to agree there is no road to freedom without a resistance platform. We must resist. We must resist. You resist in always. You resist by filing petitions and boycott sanctions, you resist by kicking them out of pfeiffer and insisting that the Political Prisoners need to be free. These are forms of resistance and we are not pursuing that strategy. Im saying we have more in common than we disagree on. We have to agree on those three fundamentals. And, in order to get there, we have to agree that both solutions, that neither is more pragmatic than the other thank you. During open things up to questions from the audience. We only have a few minutes left so if you could please keep your questions short and to the point, we would appreciate it. Thank you. Hello. Thank you all for sharing. I have an open question, kind of a dual pronged question about what would the ideal political scenario be or what are the political conditions on the International Scene and domestically in the United States that would lead to the realization of the three goals or what will most strengthen the hands of palestinians at large to self determine. The short answer is i think the political conditions have to be that we remove our eggs from the u. S. Basket. Theyve impeded an incapacitated all of our mechanisms that are available to generate the political will necessary. Accolades, where they are due, what is their expression . I was born here and i function like someone fresh off the vote because im the proud daughter of immigrants. Im firstgeneration. Give credit where credit is due. Thank you. The Palestinian Authority at the un actually established a database of all companies doing business is in the west bank in order too, just create a list. The implicit suggestion is that all International Community boycotts as corporation. Theres different ways to resist. Corporate resistance is one of them. Business and human rights is one framework. The u. S. Is waging its largest battle and you heard in the un speeches that they want to dismantle even if you enlist and see it as bias. The conditions that will get us to this place are still us a third world solidarity of liberation and requires the International Communities uphold their own obligations under the un charter and uphold what we are demanding in the form of sanctions against israel. That political will, in order to generate it means that we remove the u. S. As the primary obstacle to achieving those goals via these other countries we could be doing this work with just to add that, specifically to , but also, we need too, one of the main obstacles is not only internationally but the issue is not urgent enough. Too many key actors are fine with conflict management and no one sees the urgency of canconflict resolution. No one is putting the money or the attention to actually and the spread thats one. Whether we like it or not, we cant get anywhere with lack of unity. If theres anything that needs to happen, we need to not accep accept, the position from both side were not generally feeling the urgency of a unified palestinian front including reviving and including, the proportion, i think thats also part of why things are not moving forward, there is a serious lack of representation of to Palestinian People on a whole. I think any palestinian gave up hope that america would ever be fair about this or that any part of our salvation would lie with our neighboring arab states or their governments at least. To me it all has to start with an internal palestinian rejection of the Palestinian Authority, and everything theyve been fighting towards political. Oslo has noticed that, and then a very loud rejection of arab states normalizing or attempting to normalize which we are starting to sort of see now, saudi arabia is already doing it but other states that are talking about this to be very loudly and our rejection of those things in the Palestinian Authority has not been loud on those things at all. We have time for one more question. Maybe we are a little more practical because we lived at all. The question i have for you is, you mention south africa and lots of things, and you mentioned the resistance. Do you believe resistance should include [inaudible] this is a really difficult question. Do i think it should include arms struggle . I dont think that necessarily now, there was a time when arms struggle yielded very significant results for palestinians. There was a time when the use of force by palestinians resonated with the rest of the world because most of the world was colonized and suffered from the same conditions. When palestinians were resorting to arms so too were african and asian nations of this condition of colonial some goo , today those tables have turned and we seemed like an anomaly on the rest of the world stage. That said, every single achievement, so to speak, or whatever has been produced in terms of the palestinians has been produced as some sort of coercive pressure. Violence and arms struggle has been part of it and i believe they have the right to armed force as a matter of long legitimacy. You are asking me a strategic question of whether or not i think they should use it. Im thinking, today, it is producing counterproductive results rather than the results that we want to see. Its not completely controlled, its not completely coordinated units being used against us. However we decide to wield our resistance, it has to make the occupation more politically and economically diplomatically expensive for israel rather than cheaper. We can do that in many ways, boycott dives divestment and sanction sanctions. Whether or not we do that in the form of arms resistance, im not convinced that its right now producing the results we want. When theyre using it strategically in moments when they are not budging. Even when, in 2012 the results they received was an actual extension of this naval siege from three nautical miles to six not go miles so palestinian fishermen can actually fish. In the aftermath, they reduce that back and made the siege more tight and not less. To think strategically is to think what is it actually producing and is it outweighing the cost of not engaging in it thank you nora do we have one first of all, youre asking us about arms struggle. Were on tv. As nora says, of course we have the right to it, but the first partier question you say maybe were more practical because your generation has been through it. I dont think thats fair. I think palestine is something that spans generation, i think its something that belongs to all of us. Like i said, i think the previous generation did a great job making sure we didnt forget, but obviously their tactics and strategy collectively was wrong. It hasnt brought us to where we need to be. The question about arms struggle wise with one central question, ask yourself this. If you were in jerusalem and you were sitting next to a 16yearold boy that was about to go out and stab an israeli soldier and you knew he was going to die, what would you do . If you have the control to stop him, what would you do . Would you let him go do it so could be on the news to me because a demonstration and some good spirit among palestinians or would you stop him and hold him because of not worth it. Thats a question you have to ask yourself thank you everybody for being here. I hope you found the discussion interesting and provocative. Im sure it will continue throughout the weekend and beyond. I apologize to anyone who had questions and they werent able to ask. Perhaps you can come up later. Thank you all. We will try to stand time so the next panel will start at 11 00 oclock sharp and that will be a panel on the consensus. Please be back here in ten minutes. [inaudible conversations] the American Arab Discrimination Committee is taking a short break. They are due back shortly with a panel about the possible inclusion of the middle east and north africa category for the 2020 population county. Several candidates running for house seat talk about how this group can engage in todays political process. Been sessions on Media Training and violence in charlottesville. Tonight at eight, President Trump will be in alabama at a rally for Luther Strange who is in a september 25 run off for the republican nomination and the gop candidate in decembers general election. Cspan will have that rally live from huntsville. Around nine, after its over, a rally held last night for senator strange opponent for her judge. Sarah palin was that bad about. Next week in the senate, possible consideration of a new republican healthcare bill. Live coverage starting monday at 3 00 p. M. While we are in a break, a fema official in houston talks about his relief work in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey. Ahead and tell us a little bit about femas mission here and how long you have been here since Hurricane Harvey we actually got here in texas on the 27th and came down to houston on the 28th. Some of my colleagues were here before me and the bulk of the team arrived after that. Our goal is to support the state of texas as they respond and recover from the events of Hurricane Harvey. There are a lot of things that go into that. Moved some people into the recovery term where they start looking at shortterm and longterm housing. This is a Disaster Recovery center and we help people register for assistance or answer questions they may have. We understand it can be a very confusing process so we tried have that facetoface interaction to help walk them through that company disastrous interest you have and how big is the staff able to handle the dez asked her recovery we have 22 but the number is growing every day. We have about 4000 people supporting harvey here in texas. That number will increase. So far we registered the 750,000 survivors. Will it take one application. Household so the number of people we are serving is actually much higher. Walk us through what happens when the victim walks through a Disaster Relief center we actually call them survivors and as they walked through they will go sit down with someone in the last some basic questions, why are you here, what is your impact, how can we help you. From there will direct them to a variety of agencies and services that are inside the Disaster Recovery center. Right now we have two different portions of fema in there, we have individual assistance which is what most come here looking for and at each of those tables they can register as a survivor or update their information and answer any questions they have. They can also sit with her mitigation folks to figure out as they start the recovery process, how can they make sure there at less risk next time. Theres also a number of state agencies including a number of Disaster Recovery centers we may have to help with lost document documents. The department of Veterans Affairs is here at the federal level to help with their Healthcare Services as well. We also have a large number of representatives because we really partnered together as we look at how we can help you work. We can provide assistance in the form of grants. A lot of people come close to that maximum grant but we want to make sure were providing as much assistance as we can. When you look at the damage, even if they did get the maximum grant are not talking about it be enough for the recovery. The Small Business administration, they can do a lot of assistance for people in terms of individual disaster and they can provide disaster loans. Regardless of whether or not people want to take the loan, they need to fill out the application they can make a decision after words for whatever they been approved for but we need that information to continue with the loan process. Its part of why it every step we provide those services and answer those questions and help people figure out the application process. When you say low interest rates, how low is that so when you, i think were talking a 1. 75 or 2 range. Were talking very low interest rate. That really depends on this credit score and application once a registered and have their fema number, whats the next step . How long is it before they are denied or get assistance so right now, let me back up to the next step after they register is to come out look at damage. Right now the wait time is about 30 days. On average, most disasters are about ten days. Weve got 750,000 applications in right now. Although weve already approved 240 applications, it still a long way to go. Its a long time frame. For people registering, that leaves about 30 days. Part of why we encourage people not to start the cleanup processes he said the amount wont cover everything. When theyre in here, you talk to them about other prevention plans. Tell us about that. Well weve got Homeowners Insurance and renters insurance, for a lot of these people they dont have Flood Insurance and not something were strongly pushing for because of the huge gap. Homeowners insurance wont cover flood damages. They could be left holding the bat on substantial damage. We also talk about reducing risk. They can answer Flood Insurance questions and talk about the Little Things people can do to reduce their risk or damages. It can be Little Things at this point of the arno fema traitors in texas at the moment. Theres large reason reason fort not tie to katrina. We had a bit of a background for what happened. Weve changed to make sure things like formaldehyde are no longer an issue at a lot of that is up to industry standards, not something we control. We buy the same products people normally buy. It becomes part of our assistance program. One of the reasons we look at mobile housing travel trailers as more of a last resort for a lot of people is because its not a solution that is right fr everyone. We want to encourage people to use rental assistance to rent a property or use transitional sheltering assistance which is the Hotel Program because those resources provide more stability, more Wraparound Services. The other thing to provide for people is economic influx back into the community. Where a travel trailer doesnt. Renting a property or stay in hotel is pumped money back and economy we know economic recovery is a huge part of efforts after disaster. If we get to that point does a lot of things that become concerns and things that work through to make the possibly to include space. We are in downtown houston, not the kind of place to put those kind of things. Youve got to make sure as was mentioned program the other being put back into the floodplains and they got electricity and theyve got Water Services and all of these other Wraparound Services that most homes are not designed to handle right off the bat. Its an indepth program and we tried to work through the process and try to find the right solution. Right now the state is leading that task force and they are looking to come up with a solution quickly make an estimate of that. I dont know what theyre talking about but there are a lot of options on the table in the state has taken the lead on that. The hotel, that included in the application process or is that separate . Part of the same process. We ask them whats their living situation like, and if their home is unlivable but something they could remedy quickly we may look more towards the rental per Hotel Program. It will be a longerterm solution than probably rental solution is the right answer. We need to check things like eligibility but those are conversations happening through the regular application process. Fema offer some of the kind of assistance like funeral arrangements at stuff like that you were talking about. Through our other needs assistance program, we like using new terms and acronyms. We can help with the contents of your home, clothing, furniture, appliances. But we could also help out with vehicle or medical, dental expenses, burial expenses. When you start having a conversation with a survivable want to make sure they understand what types of services we can help with and if theyre telling us trying to look at the big picture because there are other resources we may be able to help with but also we may be able to connect them with voluntary groups or other agencies that may help with some other needs. And do you guys have all you would use with two major hurricanes. What are some of the challenges youve encountered that with two major hurricanes back to back . We are designed to handle to catastrophic incidents. I know hardy was catastrophic, i dont have a greater do is happening in florida but im sure will find similar thinks there. Our workforce is designed to handle that. What were talking about is do we have the shared resource to respond to disaster and we are built this. We have a number of our Partner Agencies, the sba being inside, Veterans Affairs, hhs, the coast guard, a lot of different partners have played a role. We really rely on them on any disaster and they have come to the table and this one is a when we Start Talking t our manpower, we have resources of the Surge Capacity force will be can look at some of our Partner Agencies for bodies to help and use the skill sets to transfer. You can always watch more on Hurricane Harvey at cspan. Org. Now back to the Live Conference with the americanArab Antidiscrimination Committee. Some of the issues right now and, of course, will go into the mena category itself. [inaudible] were going to start off with a discussion, sort of a background as to what the mena category is and sort of the proposal that we have right now. The force that has been no decision made but this is sort of whats been out there. As you know the adc of many other groups past 30 years have been trying to get the Africanamerican Community to finally be counted. This is sort of become a compromise with various stakeholders within the community. So were hopefully, we will be counted on this years 2020 census. Leading off from the Census Bureau is going to be roberto ramirez. Roberto leads a Research Team that analyzes census data on hispanics, middle eastern, north africa demographics. Is a leading expert in the hispanic population of the United States, a key member of the Census Bureau providing finance for the 2010 census. Also a question or experiment aninthe 2015 National Content tt and is going to basically discuss the content test with us because that is the test with the actually tested the mena category. He will go over the results. Roberto. Thank you so much for the kind introduction. Good afternoon again. I name is roberto ramirez. Its truly an honor and a pleasure to be here. What im going to discuss here today as you can see on this slide show here is the Census Bureau testing and developing middle Eastern African category response category and classification. Im actually going to talk about the results we found, some of the backward from Key Stakeholders and then talk about next steps, okay . So leading to the research of the mena category, theres been a growing number of population groups that find the current race, ethnicity questions confusing. We have a separate question format right now you might be familiar with, the hispanic origin question and the race question. And actually leading up to the 2010 census weve been having a number of groups at all financials in those categories. Thats been a big concern to the citizens we been hearing. We also have increasing response to some of the race category where increasingly more and more americans are just checking that box and writing internationality. This is what first heard about the mena category and group that said hey come we dont find ourselves in your current classification, would you look into creating, looking at testing the mena category . We also heard from a number of campaigns and lobbying to the Census Bureau and congress for changes to the race and ethnic questions with the last decade as a mention. Which led to Census Bureau to conduct two key milestone studies. The alternate question experiment, a qb, the National Content test and we conducted in 2015 which is one going to talk about today. The nct was the first test that we ask a tested a unique response category for mena and we also conducted a number focus groups back in 2010 where we heard for the request for mena category as a ninja before and that relate to all of the research we have done now. I think whats important that we do today is give you all the context and some of history about the mena category, because contrary to popular belief, the Census Bureau didnt just develop a mena category within the last year or two very actually this been a grassroots effort from the Community Center with adc, americanarab institute and th a number of otr organizations have been petitioning the Census Bureau and omb to consider, when i say omb him talk about the office of management and budget that axis sets the standard for race and ethnicity collection in the country with the Census Bureau follows those, okay . If i can draw your attention to the slide, although the lefthand side you can see where omb starts to begin examining the potential classification for an arab middle eastern category back in 1994. And this is the first time the government starts hearing request for this category, and in 1997 the last time office of management and budget issues stand and look at race, ethnicity collection country. The original stencil issue back in 19977 make and 77. They were revised and 97 and now they are currently being reexamined again with the potential new revised standards coming out this fall sometime this late fall. Leading up to the 2010 census we heard a number of writein campaigns, hey, i dont find myself here, can you please develop a mena category . We heard from other communities like the brazilian community, the Caribbean Community saying the current race classification jeff now dont fit our community. So after the 2010 census we tested the alternate question experiment as i mentioned before and we moved forward with in 2013 where we basically having a from stakeholders like adc and arab groups and other nonarab groups by the way saying hey, can we Start Testing and move forward in 92014 we announced testing whether bureau said we will move forward and testing a mena category. The federal register noticed that what is some omb saying were going to be examining this category and other standards in the census, the way they collect race and ethnicity. In 2015 we have landmark mena form. This was a real unique form. We invited experts throughout the whole country to come visit the Census Bureau and give us feedback under our current mena classification were proposing. We wanted to hear from experts about how we were classifying the mena category to we were having, with under was no consensus and now the mena category is to find it we found to a lot of different examples, some agencies, for example, have 29 nationstates that a defined, others dont. Some have 15. We wanted to know hey, how can we classify, what is recommendation . We also wanted to know how they felt about the acronym mena, a middle eastern north african category, do you agree with it or not . Wone owe two from these experts that was back in 2015. We conduct the 2015 National Content in 2015 and so this is where i actually to take you and talk kilobit about the national test. So census data was september 1, 2015. It was was one of the largest race and ethnic test the Census Bureau has ever conducted, over 1 million Housing Units were sampled, including puerto rico. This test was an experimental test testing different excremental designs of race and ethnicity combined format where we combine race and ethnicity into one format. We also tested separate question, hispanic and race and, of course, mena category which ill talk about the results surely there would also tested ways, the way you can respond to the census. You may not know for the 2020 census, the Census Bureau testing and considering having a different response option where you can respond the internet. Traditionally its been pretty much a paper and pen operation and now were looking at having the public respond electronically so that something also tested at nct. And nct what was unique, we also had a reading of your component to the test. We took a sample of those individuals that filled out a form. We called you back and said hey, you said you were mena. We have like a series of additional questions and the confirm to see a consistent the responses were. That was part of the interview and we did that by all race and ethnic groups by the way. Im not going to go over the whole report because its over to edit pages we dont have the time today, but please visit and read the report. Its on a website. You can see the web address. I highly encourage you to read it. So what were the key dimensions we explored in this particular test . As i mentioned we would look at separate question versus combined questions, which question format performed the best, if you will, as far as response rate, as far as the detailed responses that we received from individuals. We tested a unique middle eastern north african category as you can see. We also tested unique instructions wording and terminology. So many of you in you may know what race means, or ethnicity but we find a lot of the different definitions of what that means. And so actually tested that in this test. We actually even had a panel and we didnt have the word race or ethnicity. So which best categories described you. Just use with the public would say and how would they respond to the site of different experiment designs. And, of course, the webbased designs as an agent to you previously where we are considering using a webbased data response option for the 2020 census. So this right here on this slide here, this gives you an example of some of the paperbased questions that we tested. On the lefthand side you can see, this is an example of one of the combined questions we tested where you can see the major race and ethnic groups defined by omb. You can see white, black, asian, et cetera. And in this particular, in this particular experiment we have the mena category, that mena example like lebanese folks have in the white of it thats exactly where mena responses are currently classified or currently classified under the white category. On the righthand side you can see an example of experiment we tested a unique response category for mena you can see on the right answer. Just to give an illustration. I just wanted to mention that both approaches right now, they both come if you say you are mena, have the current standards that we speak with u. P. Classified under white. That is what the office of management and budget is considering for the fall weather not mena should be a new minimum category and reboot from white so thats something omb decides and thats what they are considering. Next slide, please. Going to circle back to the classification because i think this is important. The Census Bureau spent many years researching classifications mainly from 15 major government academic and nongovernmental organizations like the world organization, the united nations. We actually consulted with the university of berkeley. We consulted with a number of state and local governments, including folks, good friends in dearborn about how do you classify mena, who should the income who should be out. That is going back to the mena for were we invited all these experts from across the country to get a seat back. Because probably many of you in this room and not even agree what the middle East North Africa classification should be. What countries can what nations states should be income what nationals be income what chris asher group should be in that. This presented the Census Bureau a very big challenge. So we wanted, the way we approached it was that we looked at all these key classifications and for the Census Bureaus working classification, we included those nationalities that were in the majority of those classification. So for example, in egyptian was basically in every classification that became that we begin across the armenian, not very much. Very low. This is to give you an example, you can go to the next slide. This is the Census Bureau working classification for mena which includes 19 nationalities you consume the top. These are the 19 nationalities that formed on working classification that we tested in the National Content test. It also includes 11 ethnicities and ethnic terms as you can see. You may not realize this before a lot of folks that are mena, people like right in and terms like error. Thats identity. So we capture that. We like we know people like identified with her ethnicities or nationalities or ethnic religious terms. We had a syrian and their, curtis, for example, the user also made up the working classification as well. At the bottom of the slide you can see we also heard from Key Stakeholders a number of other groups that had potential, possible inclusion of the working classification where people say you should look at some always come for example, sudanese, armenians. So what we did, although these groups did not form or were not part of the working classification, we did oversample them in the study here because we wanted to see how did the report if they came across the mena category. Youre probably wondering about that. So lets find out. Go to the next slide. So one of the things i really want you to look at, dont want to throw to me numbers and five you but i think the main thing its hard to see . Im going to read it for you, absolutely. Can we turn down the lights a little bit. Is there anyway we can do that . I dont know if i want to its a very tiny print. One of the things i can do is i would be more than happy to share this powerpoint with you and i be more than happy to meet with you after the presentation and i can walk you through the slides. But for in the interest of time, basically what i want to point out is this. You want to focus on the dark, if you can click on the slide, please, on the dark orange bar. Basically what we found that those individuals who are mena, if theres a mena category most of them, vast majority of them, 80 of them will check mena, okay . If youre from the middle east or north africa, remember the 19 classification, i mentioned earlier, so they would check that. For those folks who are mena who received other experiment a form without a mena classification, the vast majority would just check why. White. If there is no mena they will check white instead. This is one of the major findings we found in the in cd. So if you can go to the next slide. We also got a lot of requests about regarding, so that was the total overall mena classification. Anyone was interested to know hey, what about the nationality that compose the mena classification . How do the lebanese, iranians, syrians, respond to the race question . If it was a mena category are not, the race and ethnicity question. If you can focus on the lefthand side of the graph, let me walk you through this quickly. If you were lebanese for example, iranian, egyptian and et cetera you can see the vast majority of these folks when it was no mena category most of them checked white. You can see that. Thats the main finding you want to get from this graph. However on the right inside, opposite is true. But if it was a mena category the vast majority of these nationalities, ethnicities will check mena. If mena is available they will check mena. I was a very interesting fighting and it held true for working classification that we found that a working classification was really a bus and it worked really well overall. Now, what about those nationalities and ethnicities that did not compose of the mena classification . Number those of the nationality that was recommended to us about hey, you should look at armenian, look at some always an sudanese. Most of them did not check mena. In fact, you see for somali an sudanese and also check they were black. We have a good mix of reporting white and some other race. These folks didnt identify with the category, and so this is an important finding in helping as refine and approve are working classification for mena, okay . [inaudible] some other race. Some other race category. One of the things i want to share with you is this. When the Census Bureau develop a hispanic origin question and we had it in the short form for the first time in 1980, we probably had about maybe 50 terms, right . Now its probably over 200. Its an organic process. So what i wanted to share with you is thats the same thing with mena. Mena, weve never tested mena category before. We never had a working classification before. So what i like to tell stakeholders is this. This is something that were going to keep refining, keep improving, keep hearing feedback from Key Stakeholders and this is why im here because i want to hear what you have to say as far as wor worker classification and, of course, the findings that we have. Thats what we hope to continue from now all the way through 2020 if there is a mena response category in the 2020 census. Such as real quickly that he summarized the findings real quick the use of distinct middle eastern north african category has highquality data for people identify as mena. They had no problem identifying the mena category. The nationalities come ethnicities in the 2015 in cd working classification as a set identified and worked well with the mena category, and those nationalities, ethnicities that were not part of the working classification for the most part did not identify as mena. Okay, so what i wanted to share with you is this is the optimal design, if you will, question your design backing out of the National Content test, this combined format. When you compare this design to the separate questions and other designs we had interNational Content test, we found that this question format that we have right here was the optimal design, at the best Response Rates if you will, at the most detailed reporting if you will. And as you can see, move forward, if you could keep clicking, please. We had instructions to say select all boxes that apply. One of the things we like about this design is most people dont realize you can check more than one box by the way. Think about yourselves now i think about you, your unique background. How many of you can check and say that palestinian, im german, im french et cetera, right . This question will allow you to do that. Thats one of the things we found on the ncta, people did that. If you had a complex background, if i get up at war with or ethnicity, people did and this is one of the findings we did. We also found the optimal design had, this is a terminology that we feel has the strongest understanding people have was they use race or ethnicity. So as you can see, this question is a mix of race and ethnicity groups, and people can identify that way. As a software latinos they can check the hispanic category and they were fine with that and thats of a selfidentified, just like the mena folks. If your mena they just checked mena and moved on. So the Census Bureau we do a lot of testing at the Census Bureau by the way, and believe it or not we have a very long history of improving our questions. Since 1970, over the last nearly 50 years, we have a long tradition of conducting National Content test to improve the content for the following census. This is what we are doing now in 2017. This gives you an image of the mena question we tested and the test which is conducted this past year. You can see how the unique box for the middle eastern north african category, response category, and when checked boxes represent the region, if you will, and we also have a right and because unfortunately we cant provide checkboxes for all the different groups. We wouldnt have enough space on the form to do that. We went with the Largest Groups have represented the region and if you are not represented in the checked box you can write it in. That also worked really well as well, okay . So where are we at now . What i wanted to let you know is moving forward, so we also conducted another content test in the American Committee survey. What i been talking to primary is about the census, but we have a very large survey called American Community survey that we want to make sure that the proposed changes that the sensor is doing works well with the American Community survey because its a landmark survey. We just released this report just yesterday, and i have positive news. It worked really well. The combined version with the mena category so were very side excited about that. Right now as an agent omb has begun the review, and limited review of the standards and hope to issue some standards this fall. Omb did issue a set of notice, for those enough familiar, this is when the government meets with the public, they make an announcement, we tell what your testing, why that we are reading and we like to feedback. What i can tell you is these notices concerning the mena for the National Content test and omb federal register notices we have received thousands of comments. Mostly positive about the mena category tested. This is why she test, et cetera. Its been a great favor for everything that weve been doing so far. If we can move forward. As i mentioned on people make decisions this fall, and then the final wording for the census, the Census Bureau needs to provide the final wording, the actual wording for the questions for the 2020 census this spring, april 2018. That is what the Census Bureau will be delivering after we hear what omb decides. We have a very important test in 2018, this spring which was called the into intense what were testing all the different operations of the census, and so thats kind of like a dress rehearsal if you will as we get ready for the 2020 census. Then of course conduct the census in 2020. I just want you to know that we have a very strong tradition of outrage at the Census Bureau. Its important we hear and listen to Key Stakeholders and this is just an example of all the different organizations that we have consulted with. Not only about the mena category because thats all of the category of talked about today but we also talked to the africanAmerican Committee, the asian community, native American Committee et cetera and hearing all the different decides for the race and ethnicity category for as a billboard for the 2020 census. So give you a quick timeline. As im doing right now we are speaking and talking to Key Stakeholders about the findings. We are preparing for the 2018 into two and test. I would be will make this fall. Where preparing a final question mark again this spring in 2018 and, of course, as im doing right now are praying for the 2020 census. Many of you may not know what it takes ask about it uses are preparing for census. This is within is the 2010 we pretty much started right after practice out his. When 2020 is done we can start on the 2030 census. This is how long it takes is we can over 300 million people, over 109 Housing Units. Units. We have a really big beautiful country and it takes that long to get ready. Okay, questions or however you want. We are going to hold off questions and to all the panelists have had a chance to speak but theres couple things i think i would like you to expand on. And that is the decisionmaking process. At the end of the day what goes on the census, the mena question, combined question, who actually makes the final decision . Is that the senses, omb, the administration, congress . Thats a really good question. The trench will make that decision. They will issue office of management and budget will make the decision. The Census Bureau will follow the standards. Like all the other federal agencies will. The office of management and budget issued the first standards in 1977. They have comparable data for all the different federal agencies. You want to define hispanics the same, blacks the same so thats how it all came about. They were revised in 1997. We are going to have some decisions made this fall and so thats what were waiting. Ultimately, the categories on the census questionnaire, that doesnt have any effect,