role and the response of the democratic process themselves and particularly it was invented in the 1920s and 30s not just in world war i which was much less than in europe and still the new institutions were invented by the u.s. democracy institutions. so there is a lot to learn. we shouldn't just be me that they were starting years ago. they have been with us forever and there is a lot to learn on the perspective. >> as most of you probably know it is an extension of the property tax to include the attacks on the other properties and that has been called utopian by some people, but if the income tax was called utopian 100 plus years ago, could you talk about the iq test experience for the income tax? >> it's partly about the notion that we were appalled about the idea of the income tax but we began to tell a personal story. and as i listened to them talk about this, think about every time how it's the story of our understanding of ourselves and why we are in these economic circumstances. so you talk about one of them ie many cases of extreme inequality, people blaming the political leaders by saying it's their fault. it's that group or that other country. there is a question of how we can describe it any different time the pressures on most people, on the economy. if you feel like this is a work hard play by the rules economy -- where there are some ups and downs but mostly, if i work hard, my family is going to do okay. and if i work really hard at my kids are going to have a chance to do a little bit better than that and the bea their chaa little bit better chance. and that sets the stage if you can be leave that for everybody to participate in the economy you have a lot of stability and production and hard work. you get a lot of investment in the future and build a strong and robust future. at that moment an income tax is part of how we finance the things we did together and we did it progressively because people have more, partly because they have been rewarded by what we have done together. and we all have a sense of shared responsibility and shared investment in the outcome. those that are rich have managed to write the rules so they get more and more. the regulations told in their favor so they have better business opportunities, so they have better ability to earn than everyone else out there working and when it starts t that start, when that starts to happe have n then when we get is a country that is headed in the wrong direction. i think the risks i will work hard and end up with nothing that's when the pieces start to break apart and the way that i see this is the have a right to talk about where the taxes should be appropriately placed into which parts of the wealth and income we want to tax but it's a question about whether or not it is rigged. the gain in america right now is great -- rigged. everyone is on their economic strain. it's not because it's inextricable or had to be that way but to those at the top can hire the lobbyists and the lawyers. it affects the electoral system so powerfully that they get a set of rules written over and over and over year by year by year. the rules don't get better for the middle class. that is the profound or that we see from the great quality. >> there is a way that america is rigged that you described in the book and just now. i. señor research is it similar in other countries or does inequality grow in different ways. [inaudible] in competition with one another including four of the tax system including the system of the investment [inaudible] regarding the financing of the political parties in the political life and the difference between the countri countries. so there are very different fiscal institutions that can make a huge difference. >> but notice the first place he goes to the financing opportunity. it's about education and about making sure that everybody gets a good education so that you have talented kid that may not e been born into wealthy families but could still have opportunities. i would expand that by saying it's about investments in infrastructure. a business wants to start and has the power to plug-in. so those are the investments that everybody feels they have a piece of this. i have an opportunity. i play by the rules. but the world in which those investments are undermined its looks at something like iranian budget which in effect which none of you -- remember, not you, but look at the basic premise behind the ryan budget. preserved lots of loopholes with those at the top, cut taxes for those at the top and how do they plan to pay for its? by cutting the investments that create opportunities. cut the investments in education and infrastructure and research the things that help build a future. that drives us towards more inequality but it undercuts the basic premise of this country of work hard and play by the rules you have a stake in in the outcome >> diana from florida asks for this one how will the costs and consequences of climate change interact with economic inequality? >> i think it shows that we have much more difficult problems to extra -- to solve. what are we going to do about climate change? i think we have to solve these problems and the lack of transparency right away to get a sense of the real issue and part of the issue is to do something about the climate change. i'm very sad that we are losing so much time on these issues just making sure -- when the president was unaware [inaudible] are we going to be able to get this transformation and at the end of the day the united states government put sanctions on the banks that made a difference so the good news is that we can make a difference. they are smart and have proper sanctions that say we are all attached to free trade but we need fair tax systems we can solve it and move on to issues that solve climate change. >> you separate climate change from just this other debate. i see the same occurring with different words but think about it this way. we have now tens of millions of people who live right near the coasts just to pick one example. and so what is happening right now in the debate in the united states? there are giant industries that pollute and the consequences they make immediate profits and the effect of the pollution will be filled by lots of people around the country and the globe. it's in their interest to continue to be able to bloom crosby can make short-term profits and everybody also bear the cost. think about it. they are able to a mass of the lobbyists to go to washington, to influence lawmakers and their regulators to do everything they can to maintain their opportunities to poison the water in order to promote short-term profits. everyone else who has to pay the price on that doesn't have that same kind of organized ability to make their voices heard in the same way for the lawyers in washington. for me this is just one more example of how we have any quality and how we have a raid system where a handful are able to reap the benefits at the cost of everyone else and the climate change like economic inequality are both symptoms of the same problems. the same problem of those writing the rules too much in their favor and everyone else getting left behind. [applause] >> we have a ton of questions submitted on one particular issue that jumped out and that was student lending. i don't know what the situation here is in france but in the united states there are probably people that have student loans. [laughter] and there are a variety of different questions about but ba from arkansas and robert morgan asked if he would support some version of student loan forgiveness. you think we are headed in a direction where it's become so unsustainable there will be coming out right forgiveness? forgiveness? spinnaker would nee >> let me give a couple facts on student loans. right now we have $1.2 trillion outstanding in the student loan debt. 44 million americans are dealing with outstanding student loans. mostly young people although i should add people 60 and over over about $43 billion in student loans. >> 60 and over? >> people that guaranteed other loans and went back to school later in life. we have a lot of student loan debt out here. it's starting to be so much that it's dragging down the economy. the reports are starting to pile up from the consumer financial protection bureau, from the treasury department and what it shows is that young people are not going at the rate that we anticipate and they are not starting business at the rate we would anticipate. they are not doing the economic things we would expect them to do because they are so burdened with debt. by the way one more piece is growing and it's growing fast. over the span of decades the amount has grown by about 70% so think about that we are on a fast slope up in terms of debt so what can we do about student loan debt? there are multiple things we can do about the outstanding loan bet there are forgiveness programs that is a piece of it. we can bring down the interest rate of all student loan debt outstanding. [applause] and here is a critical part of that. keep in mind people have refinanced their home mortgages now that we are in the low interest-rate environment they've refinanced their business loans and township loans. you can't refinance your student loans so people out there are stuck in the 7% and 8%, 9%, just hit -- raise your hand when i get your number in the student n interest rates. the idea is that this gets to the heart of what we are talking about. the idea for the bill that we have pending and we have more than 30 cosponsors in the united states senate is debating on students is the title and it says what's refinance the debt to 3.86%. that was the rate the republicans in the house and the senate agreed to last summer for all new student loans issued last year. we said if that works we will pick it higher on undergraduate student loans but let's refinanced to the rate but here comes the trick. why does the u.s. government not just refinance the debt and the answer is because the debt out there at 7% fro and 8%, nine or% is producing tens of billions of dollars in profits for the united states government. in other words it's in the budget right now. that is from 2007 to 2012, just that little slice of the loans is on track to produce $66 billion in profits for the united states government. so to be able to refinance the bank down, we have to find that money somewhere else. the money somewhere else. the proposal in this bill is to say fine we will pass the rule and billionaires will pay at least the same rate of taxes that their secretaries pay. [applause] but that's why it's so critical right in the middle and this puts us directly -- i can't think of a better way to put this. the united states as a country can invest in young people by putting tens of billions of dollars towards reducing the interest rate on student loans. this is getting to the forgiveness question reducing the interest rate or they continue to invest tens of billions of dollars. in tax loopholes for billionaires and millionaires. think about it for a minute. there are lobbyists who will protect every one of those tax loopholes and who will be there morning noon and night to make sure that the rule doesn't go through. the loopholes stay open and billionaires hang onto every single penny that they can get through. what have we got on the other side on student loans? always got is our voices and our votes. that is fundamentally the best place that i can describe the inequality debate in america today. as the country going to be run for the billionaires and millionaires or are the rest of us going to say enough of this we want to invest instead of in the billionaires we want to invest in our students and we are going to take back our country and make our voices and votes heard? [applause] this event is sponsored by the group known in the united states as the patriotic millionaires and this is a group of more than 100 billionaires and millionaires calling for their taxes to be hired. do you have anything like that in europe? >> in europe and france we usually don't pay much to go to the city but sometimes we don't get that much in exchange eith either. we need to find ways to combine efficiency and the court opportunity and that's complicated. i think what was just said is extremely important [inaudible] it gets a little frightening. it is getting extreme. in the systems i'm not sure that it is the right concept to get moving in the right direction. >> we have a number of questions on the role of the free trade and inequality and also the role of organized labor. you don't write much about the labor or organized labor in the book and i was wondering your take on the role and inequality and also what free trade agreements have been in the equal 30 by allowing the capital to be the free flow? >> about globalization has put the medium stillbirths on the high-pressure in the countries. the union isn't playing the way they used to in the structure and then you factor in services and productions and it's interesting to see the number of countries that use the national minimum wage is to have been producing the national minimum wage is in britain and germany and the countries as of ten or 20 years ago we saw that the union was the right place to negotiate and these two countries have been introduced in the national minimum wage is because this can be the way to conduct that's more suitable in today so we need to think about this and white of the evolutio evolutions. >> i would add something more about the unions. in america the unions help build america's great middle class. and they did that in two ways. those were in every way that benefits negotiated for alternately workout for everyone else and raise the wages for the union and nonunion workers and get health advocates for the union and nonunion workers. but here is the key. the second thing the unions did is they were out there as a force to argue things in the interests of working people generally. so the views were on the front line in social security and the fight for medicare into the fight for civil rights. unions are out there to try to argue what benefits the middle of america. what benefits working people in america and it is no accident that a big part of what happened with trade policy was that it hit him unionized industries and helped take a lot out of from underneath the unionized workers in the united states and that the consequences not only economics but the consequence is political and that we see the rising inequality at a time when union strength has declined. i think those are deeply tied to each other. >> you call for a wealth tax and we have a one-time version of that in the united states with maybe one or two people. known as the estate tax. is a beefed-up estate tax in a word we need to go to something more and you will collect >> i think we need both. it was a tax of course it is important and it's good that it wasn't suppressed in the country ten years ago and i think it will be important in the future. the problem with attack the taxe property is that it does not progressive to the value of the real estate property and also it doesn't take into account the financial assets or liabilities. so you have a lot of debt and sometimes it can be even higher [inaudible] and thereafter and still the same property tax in the event of someone who in addition [inaudible] this is a system that isn't do we need to introduce but how do we make it work better. it was created at about the same time as two centuries ago at the time that property and land property and be financial assets for the liability that hasn't been changed for 250 years. of course this is not the right way to tax in the 21st century. so we could rewrite of the u.s. tax code [inaudible] i would take the team to beat kassim tax revenue generated intiniowa didn't increase it. i would keep it exactly as it is but i would transform it into the network so that it would reduce the property tax form for those in the network with a huge amount of data and it would increase. i think that is perfectly doable. it isn't like everybody is going to go to mexico or canada right of way. the problem in the organization thawhich is a local matter but t was the same thing when century ago with the income tax according to the constitution the government couldn't do anything and then things happen. sometimes things happen and we do not plan for them to happen. knowing in advance what might happen i think the tax system has to adapt and it may take time but this is the best way to try to help make it happen one day. >> how does that sound? >> i am in. [applause] >> i made on the notion that we have to rewrite our tax code. and just thinking about what you're talking about with the estate tax is a fundamental question in this country which do we think deserves more rewards? is that those that work hard to get something to happen or those that were born into the right family cliques and who are protected by the tax code that says generation after generation they just get out of there and live off of what has happened a generation before. and we have prided ourselves as a country being built by a country of people who get out there and work and make it happen. our tax system has to reflect that same value. it has to reflect the importance of work and people who achieve and people who accomplish over being born into wealth and i think that is how the system goes. [applause] do we have time for one more question? i want to read a little portion of the book to you and see if you want to elaborate. you write i worry that we are running out of time and i am determined to do everything i can to help us once again be the america that creates opportunities for anyone that works hard and plays by the rules. the last line of the book is i believe in what we can do together i and what we will do together. all we need is a fighting chance. now i imagine some people in this room could think of something you could do. [laughter] [applause] but you did everything in your power. [applause] [cheering] and the professor piketty isn't eligible for this question because he wasn't born in the united states. what do you think? >> i do believe in knots and i believe in us on days like this on the morning where a whole lot of people come together to talk about ideas, to talk about two books because what we are talking about in here is we are talking about economics, we are talking abou about power but wee also talking about values. this is a moment in time for the country and i believe for the world. a moment in time when we decide who we are as people and what kind of a future we are going to build. as your book shows it is tough. it is an uphill climb. it may not have been naturally that the world will even back out. but what it also shows is that these are not natural sources that make it happen. it's a set of rules that we govern ourselves. and here in america we the people get to decide what the rules are. so i guess how hard this is. this is about concentrated money and power on one side but it's about our values and our voices and our votes on our side. ideally that we can fight back and we can win. [applause] [applause] thank you all for being here. [applause] [inaudible conversations] she will give me the download later. i'm so glad you are here. it's nice. >> i'm so glad that you are here. thank you. it's very nice to see you. how are you? are you doing while? it's very nice to meet you. [inaudible] to see how you are doing. >> [inaudible] >> i promise i will read it. >> [inaudible] lets me read about it. roger is my state director. a very nice to meet you. thank you. >> you are most welcome. take care. >> thank you for being here. what your daughter ever consider entering politics? i don't know that it's a good question. thank you very much. when i came here in washington it only took seven months. [inaudible] >> he proved that it is certainly under. >> we could use the primary. >> we are getting a revolutionary space. how are you? good to see you. [inaudible conversations] what a nice thing to say. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. thanks for being here. good morning. do you mind if i get a picture with you? >> not at all. i will get a selfie with you. thanks for being here this morning. thank you. >> thanks for being here. every time i see you i'm thankful for every door that i knocked on for you. >> [inaudible] it's good to see you. thank you for being here. also i'm an officer in iraq left to be on the next campaign. >> fabulous. thank you. thanks for being here. is booktv satellitbooktv satellr secretary of state hillary clinton in little rock to discuss her new book, "hard choices." >> getting to the point that you can make peace isn't easy to make peace with your friend is. you make it with people who are your adversaries who have killed those he cared about from your own people or those you're tryinyou aretrying to protect aa psychological drama. you have to get into the hand of those ohead ofthose on the othee you have to change their calculation enough to get them to the table. i talk about what we did in iran. we had to put enough economic pressure to get into the table and we will see what happens, that has to be the next step in what we did in afghanistan and pakistan to get the tablet into the table for a comprehensive discussion with the government of afghanistan. welcome in iraq today, i think we have to understand is that it is primarily a political problem that has to be addressed. the ascension of the sunni extremist group is taking advantage of the breakdown in the political dialogue and the total lack of trust between the biology government, the sunni leaders into the kurdish leaders. >> more with hillary clinton saturday at 7 p.m. eastern and sunday morning at 9:15 on c-span2 book tv. >> the fox news host is the editor o of big ten and the history of the conservative movement in the united states. it includes essays by newt gingrich, not all rumsfeld and rand paul. he talked about the book at the hearing to china nation for 45 minutes. >> as we begin i do want to point out one aspect. our guest today is also a part-time fox news commentator. millions of americans of course no bill o'reilly as the factor. mallory in this case has been a factor long before the factor was cool. he is the john c. west professor of international politics in american government. he is the host and cofounder of the new york meeting a nationally recognized gathering of elected officials and journalists, business leaders and conservative authors in new york city and he also founded the similar charleston meeting the needs in south carolina. he previously authored "the new york times" bestseller which he is too modest to advertise that the government unions controlling america and robbed the taxpayers blind. he's a member of the council on foreign relations who served as the vice chairman of the council on the task force on terrorism financing. he's frequently testified before the house and senate committees on terror financing, regulation of the financial service industry and other economic issues. he also served as the chairman of the free enterprise fund, a free-market tank advocating economic growth, lower taxes and limited government and they also brought to the challenge to sarbanes-oxley legislation before this court. and of course today, we are featuring him on "big tent," where we learn about the recollections leading up to where we are today. please join me in welcoming our good friend, mallory factor. [applause] gallery? >> john, thank you so much. what a great introduction. [inaudible] with a better place to speak about the conservative movement than at the heritage foundation. i want to thank heritage or its support of the "big tent project." many people at heritage deserve my thanks starting with a folder for his early support and contributing forward to "big tent." thank you, and ed, for forever urging me onward. jennifer contributing to critical chapter on ronald reagan, edwards and the keen observations on the early version of the manuscript. most of all, i'm grateful for heritage's find work and conserving and renewing the principles of the american founding. my friends, i grew up in bridgeport connecticut, the home of pt barnum as he was known as the greatest circus showman in history. let me paint a picture for you of how it was when i was a boy in the industrial city and the circus came to town. a mile-long train with 60 cars pulled into the train station. trucks moved and local pitts began to gather to watch it to unpack. finally they sent out their rings and raised the big tent which seemed impossibly big. it held the promise of the thrilling spectacle of the flying trapeze act, tightrope walkers, a human cannonball, five-year readers and lion tamer's. and then when yo when it seemeds couldn't get more exciting, they set up a sideshow act. the parade of human curiosities, the freak show. these were the mysteries of the circus the children yearned to see. and yet that also haunted them later ladies, siamese twins, the living skeleton of a giant cannot spawn, the lio y. lionfa. it was wildly successful. as pt barnum put it nobody lost a daughter by underestimating the taste of the american public. the american public is still interested in sideshows and that is why every day the mainstream media portrays the conservative movement has sideshow and they present a parade of herbals the candidates uncaring about the needs of women and minority groups. politicians who promote xenophobia, and rich old white men who are seemingly focused on lowering their tax rates and preserving their wealth instead of paying their fair share. the day after day the media tells stories of these and through these reports the entire conservative movement is depicted as a parade of human oddities just as shocking and fascinating as a circus sideshow and many conservatives figured that the media reported shows me turn the next generation away from conservatism. in considering the situation it's important to start with the observations that on many levels of america is a conservative nation. earlier this year the "washington post" reported that conservatives outnumber liberals and 47 of 50 states. note my friends, conservatives, not republicans. in fact, 38% of americans self identify as conservatives. less than 25% self identify as republicans. as we all know there is a dissatisfaction in the republican bran brand among the conservatives and the reasons include attacks by the establishment of the republican party on conservatives. disappointment with the party's choice of candidates and the republican party's endorsement of certain big government policies. the republican party started out as a movement gathered around an idea. the idea of ending slavery. the republican party began as an abolitionist coalition of the democrats and the american party and other anti-slavery groups. at a meeting in wisconsin in march of 1854 abolitionists expressed the alarm into the nebraska territory of the republican party this is march of 1854. many statehouses as well the circus promoter pt barnum himself was elected as a republican to the connecticut statehouse and in 1860 just six short years after the republican party was founded, the republican abraham lincoln was elected to the white house. while the republican party started as an idea driven and committed the party is an established political party both political parties and ideologies are far less important than party politics. they motivate and invigorate the grassroots in contrast to the two political parties of the conservative movement is and always has been an idea driven movement. conservatism has several important and intellectual pillars. if you follow the mainstream media you can probably rattle those off and the mainstream media would say racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, economic inequality and militarism and a president obama personifies the viewpoint when they cling onto their guns and religion this is and what conservatism is about. the conservative movement is not about people who refuse to embrace progress and have been left behind. the movement is actually about the people who hold tight to core principles and hold e. central truths that are needed to save our beloved nation from tyranny. we all know what the pillars of the movement are. number one, that respect for religion and tradition of past generations. number two, the maintenance of the rule of law. number three, protection of individual freedom and liberty, and number four, the belief in a higher law above the man's law. the ideas are rooted in the most important values. these values, these are the values the american nation was founded on some of the belief in liberty, freedom and a nation under god. the american founding was an assertion by colonials that they were in title to the rights granted to english men. it was an evolution rather than a revolution. and in the book "big tent," speaker gingrich reminds us of this in the same pillars have brought new generations into the movement for decades. a movement has to have some pillars y'all agree on where the whole tend falls down. when the movers haul away from the core principles -- which they sometimes do -- you must step back and re-examine the course and select new leaders. what is conservatism? conservatism as a political and social philosophy is ancient. the personal human impulse to defend and fight for one's convictions is natural and timeless. conservatism as a guiding philosophy for social life, education, cultural institutions and government is natural and ancient. the word conservative comes from the time that means with which when combined means to guard, to keep or save. it conveys the idea of starting something for the purpose of safekeeping. perhaps because of the association with guarding many people confused conservatism with the blind tradition. the traditionalism failed to capture the movement adequately. conservatives recognized that tradition may be wrong or without meaning and it may be missing the essential truths and moral substance towards which conservatives strive. the tradition may need correction. conservatives have respect for tradition but are not inseparable from it. conservatives have numerous reasons they fight and conservatives want a government that functions according to the rights given to us by our constitution and respect for our anglo-american political heritage. conservatives want a government that is ordered and maintains the rule of law. conservatives want the government to protect freedom, liberty and property. and not to choose winners and losers. conservatives want the government to leave people alone to the greatest extent possible, to allow them to use the fruits of their liberty to build their livelihoods. and to let people worship as they see fit. conservatives understand that their objective truths must be defended and sides must be taken and battles must be fought. conservative principles stand in contrast to the democratic party slogan at the convention that you probably all recall. government is the only thing we all belong to. if the american people start believing the government is the only answer, it will be a wretched ending indeed for the great american experiment. conservatives first came together as a movement in the 1950s and 60s. this is well established history and i'm sure almost all of you in this room understand that. the modern conservative movement has emerged as a big tent with three central polls national security conservatives, social conservatives and economic conservatives. the idea that big tent harkens back to the late republican strategist lee atwater in 1989 regarding the conflict of the republican party, he said our party is a big tent. we can house many views on many issues. while he was speaking to the party, the conservative movement can and should also be seen as a big tent. conservatism as advocated by people with a wide range of views on the defense spending, national security, foreign policy, legalization, abortion, marriage, immigration and numerous other issues. we debate all these issues among ourselves, often clashing fiercely with those in the movement who disagree with us about policy. this vibrant and lively debate in the conservative movement stands and stark contrast to the orthodoxy of the left which seems to adopt a position of no enemies to the left. unless the special interest groups join in a grand coalition each group gets legislation that benefitbenefits than it and in n for their support of other coalition's members interests. this approach assures that all of the groups on the left get their piece of the government pie whatever the cost is to the nation. the idea behind this was originally pt barnum's innovation. it was pt barnum who started the quintessential american service with traveling in the tents that could be set up in town after town after town on the american frontier. when the crowds grew, pt barnum added more and expanded the tenth to fit in more patrons. the conservative movement has taken pt barnum and enlarged the tent. but the result has been frequent conflict that revealed the deep intellectual and cultural riffs between major constituencies in the conservative movement. the conservative movement is a truly big tent of people sharing common principles with wildly different worldviews area to the movement includes the neocons and neocons fo neocons, evangeld atheists, traditional and libertarian, foreign policy and isolation. the teeth party and the establishment just to name a few. to name a few. many of these groups really and truly disliked each other. it is amazing how that we can together in support of the conservative movement pillars support of the pillars but not frequently enough. the conservative movement is noble in many ways. but it certainly falls very short. many would rather burn heretic from a different wing of the movement in to fight the infidel center actively attempting to do tear down our beloved country. and conservatives of one strive to put a litmus test on issues important to them to keep the other conservatives that did not agree with them. the results is the movement seems fractured and divided in the media and in popular imagination. over the course of american history conservatives have had a difficult time electing candidates to congress and the white house to share principles because conservatives had not been represented by a single political party. even two-day conservatives are split 90 percent of democrats self identify as conservatives 35 percent of independents self identify as conservatives. and 30 percent of republicans do not. to have the opportunity to govern, conservatives had to come together as a political movement to get candidates elected. as a practical matter to get conservative politicians elected this usually involves compromise although it is not have to involve throwing out more principles. it is closely associated with the republican party to during the election of president reagan in 1980 although the movement in the republican party remain closely aligned, it is a very uneasy partnership. conservatives complain the republican party does not represent the tenets of the conservative movement faithfully and defines conservative groups focus on ideology and they are problematic for the party. there is the emerging narrative coming up through the election by the media and the republican party. than narrative polls with conservatives depending on who you are talking to of course, the chances taking the white house. at the space sec level these conservative groups have a great challenge to the party because these groups are focused on ideology rather than party politics. but of course, you know, as i do that at times these troublesome groups include everyone in the big tent except the republican party loyalist themselves. many grassroots conservatives fear america is facing the imperial presidency. this position is probably the hardest for progressives to understand and hardest to do with like media and even other conservatives to attack social conservatives and inconsistent with the liberal rolled you but would never fed each republican and democrats they think of social conservatives today they represent the core of the party. the republican party in the present configuration cannot win elections without them.é+b# evangelicals constituted a whopping 27 percent of the electorate in 2012. with other types of religious conservatives contributing an additional 10 or 12%. you may recall the media uproar in the west over the comments by the duck dynasty patriarch still roberson the held rage led to him being suspended by a&e network but the broad support from conservatives from all wings of the movement resulted in him taken off suspension one week after the controversy erupted. this example shows when the broad conservative movement defense the stage of conservatives the conflict dissipates and the media backs down. this stands in contrast to the example of two republican and senatorial candidates in 2012. they were abandoned by many wings of the conservative movement as well as the republican party. the question is are these cases different because of the statements each has made? it is also possible the main difference from conservative unity is the candidates for office in roberson was not. other wings of the movement did not like a kitten and murdoch they fought hard against them in the primary. so when the opportunity arose the other wing and quickly came out against the candidate in hopes to replace them with other candidates that would represent their particular ideology better and as we all know too well many of the worst public divisions in the movement results from conservative wing this fighting each other in primaries and in the political arena. the truth is this. for conservatives to win the right to govern foreign policy conservatives and social conservatives and the economic conservatives will have to work together to elect candidates in for the foreseeable future the conservative movement will have to get candidates elected or simply lose. but there will continue to be many freak show moments when the interest of the different groups collide. the p.t. barnum circus the freak show was a hugely popular attraction. so popular p.t. barnum could not get the patrons through as fast as he would have liked. something geared for hours. so he solved the problem by posting a cue to sign over the door that read to that egress. they would go through the door and stood find themselves outside. that means exit. conservative leaders wish they could find a simple way to show the egress but they try to phibro which groups should be cast doubt. it remains a movement of ideas. the idea of purity could be the enemy of victory. it is the role of conservatives of policies. and to get these policies implemented. only by winning the right to govern with freedom and liberty to the nation, my friends core conservative principles cannot be violated the policy differences need to be tolerated. governing according to conservative principles will allow our exceptional nation to use thrive and prosper. that is the contribution the conservative movement can make to our nation and the world. thank you for being with me in big tent. [applause] >> we will be glad to take questions if you'd be so kind to identify yourself. as the courtesy to our guest. how could you ever thought of p.t. barnum was coming to washington d.c.? and another'' famous is the trouble that we shoot. questions from the audience? a lot of conservatives and looking at the other side hoodies think from people we should be reaching out to? >> we saw something very interesting have been with contributors to use of book. we have 17 contributors by the way. even rand paul davis beach he gave the same speech almost at berkeley and got a standing ovation. we need people like that that can cross over with involvement from a broader spectrum that is a perfect example of how you can do it to. we need more of that. >> to show the egress sign. >> if i could just make a correction i worked for ringling brothers. [laughter] [inaudible] >> i will take that under advisement. >> to greatly encouraged that use could you give them a message? >> if they're real message is the four core principles we should be talking about those rather than a policy detail or fighting each other over that. i mention this as a member of congress using it in a speech yesterday and was surprised the four core principles with the number of people he used it but the way became a those principles and to the principles flows through all of them even end with the kind rand foundation they resonate and we can hang gets too caught up over policy differences. >> any questions before we dismiss? >> you said it was more of an evolution rather than a revolution what is the thoughts of the declaration is that something we should be united on? my wife says an attorney and she believes in the black letter lot. other people belief in using the declaration. that is say question beyond my ability but i will tell you that we live in two nations and to to do a piece of work recently and they ask people what they felt about abortion and 75% of the northeast said they should be available in almost every case 60 percent in the south disagreed. gay marriages 62% of northerners but not for it. it is fascinating how really be here to nations looking at the declaration of independence you could use that but i will not go there. it is shocking to me.roo i have lived in those nations york and south carolina and we really do have two different cultures and countries and it is getting harder and harder to bridge that. i don't know how we do it. are really don't. but writing something many years ago that i think is so important to look at today is the four cities that are important to western civilization in to talk about jerusalem giving us divine law combat since the basis for social order, rome , of the republic of separation of powers the universality of law and then talks about it with the american in the experiment principles with this administration is helping us lose them faster. but i worry about that. the first chapter is by al regnery and talks about that at great length it is interesting to read about that. he is just a great american. great. thinks. >> in light of these comments and the division within the country to focus with a great concept to attacked of infidels' before we burned the heretics any thoughts how to do that? >> that is tough. not really. it is up matter of continuing to talk about the principles working together on that. that is one of the hardest things to do. and it aiken and murdoch verses robbers and example to the show's everybody tries to fight their guide to the detriment of our country and the conservative movement. i don't know how. i worry about it daley and the left is far better organized. what i'd like to think about is something that break-in is credited with 80 percent of the time is a friend and ally not a 20 percent traitor. we have to keep reminding people of that because it is so important. azine to ed meese from the heritage foundation and talks about that a great length and there is a lot to be said. maybe we tattoo on every single members or legislators hand but i don't know how we do it. >> if i understand it you will be teaching? >> i will be teaching a cambridge next year's. >>s7 i will be teaching at oxford. >> what is oxford? >> teaching the young people have you seen changes in their behavior to in courageous nor discourage you? >> great question.89t our president said he wants colleges and vocational schools to train people for jobs for our society. and telling them they're trained to be a borisov. they are reckitt amazing that given what has happened end in our society they see younker people you need to have free markets and to have individuals the pretty to keep this grates experiments going and i use the rand paul example from a speech at berkeley i cannot believe a social conservative with a standing ovation of a general crowd that he put together at berkeley? we're doing is something seeing something happening that is very good and it bodes well but with all the 3ñá changes it is hard to unwind it is not a great answer but i hope it answers a little bit. >> to go to the last comment about the young people how we are attacked and vulnerable. with the one being social issues in where rand paul got his standing ovation is as long as the social issues are something that people dig their heels and the government does it need to tell us. and data we are divided on that's been the reason rand paul got a standing ovation they don't have problems with most social issues. >> i agree completely but i'd like to come back to history. for those of you better students of history with the first evangelical president was elected jimmy carter 66 percent the evangelicals got mad. four years later he lost with ronald reagan carrying 64% my point is social conservatives have to be kept with in the structure or we will complete the reformulate i cannot speak for senator paul because i know the man they he is the social conservative to the best of my knowledge it with the issue he tries to ram down the throats. i paid three. fact is important. >> day concept that might be useful how do you relate to the concept with the term american exceptionalism to the allied presented? >> we have 17 kids to readers of the book and to talk about that in the book to say we are losing that the way that we stifle the market our government is involved in by freeing people the can keep this experiment going. you remember the equitation would obama said about american exceptionalism. and that is the problem. i believe democrats and the liberals tried for uniform mediocrity. and feel that american exceptionalism is wrong. i don't. believe that our country and america and by having a big tent held up by polls or killers that we can save our country and continue this great american experiment. >> faq. mark levin and his supporters say given the size of government and the complexity of the allies say you need fundamental constitutional reform done proposed state level because if you have good people for leadership positions a permanent bureaucracy or a government what thought the you have about that? >> and i think bureaucrats today are politicians. that is what is happening they have not become civil servants but politicians with tenure. i know how we do it the state's become less and less important these are being shut down washington is the key to and the schaede dose 50 places washington is where past to start. >> do we have a final question? thank you. [applause] >> he will sign your buck in reducing chief for your kind attention. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] our guest this morning as transportation and secretary a one dash secretary foxx his first visit so thank you for coming here disagree at davidson college the first african-american student body president and from the york university. after law school he spent a month in new orleans played trumpet to become friends with marsalis after working in a law firm he attack a job as a repeals court judge and on the staff of the house judiciary committee he returned to charlotte in 2001 to work and offered their and was elected to the city council 2005 and reelected 2007. elected the city's mayor to thousand 90 and this person ever to hold that job and confirmed as the 17th transportation is secretary last june. so much for the biography. a word of thanks to my partner and monitor breakfast for the last couple of years heading off to graduate school. and share it who'd just8yq graduated from northwestern will takeover and she brought grace under pressure and kindness thank you. [applause] so now to the more mundane process matters on the record no life blogging or tweeting or no filing while the breakfast is under way to give us time to listen to what the guest says the no embargo when the session ends if you'd like to ask a question please send mae a subtle signal i will call on with the time we have available. it has said time to make comments and removed to questions from around the table. >> '01 to thank the "christian science monitor" for being here. i hope this is a thunderous said dauphin is that being the very best one. [laughter] and silvia of garcia as cfo of the department you will understand surely why i have faster to be with me this morning. the department of transportation has been warning for the highway trust fund is running out and we have been doing this over the last several months. we began in january with a sticker on the web site that gave the public in up to the minute you of how the highway trust fund is performing at that time we predicted the highway trust fund could run dry as early as august of this year. in april paid to the two were of the country 12 cities and towns large and small across america to raise the urgency of the issue to make sure the public understands what is at stake if the highway trust fund runs out for the legislation the president and i have put forth which would not only get the highway trust fund but to do what we think should be done which is go to a time of investment in growth and stability and predictability in the transportation system. as we predicted back in january the time is almost up. this morning i sent letters to the state departments of transportation and travel agencies outlining steps when the highway trust fund approaches cero.bu +[o normally states received the annual allotment they for the bills and me paid those as we get them. but during the first week of august the highway trust fund will drop below a crucial point and we will stop reimbursing states and instead implemented new process of cash management to move through this unfortunate period of time. each state is entitled to a certain percentage based on the annual formula. those same percentages will determine how much each state receives from whatever is left. they are paid not as they sent the bills in but every two weeks as money from the gas tax comes in in. this is the most equitable and prudent approach but there is no good option when we talk about a trust fund that is running short supply of dollars. i can tell you have been at the local level the most devastating part of this situation is many communities depend on the federal government for significant dollars to get projects done and no matter how we a escalate around the country because the confidence level has dropped and projects are not even put on the table to reduce congestion, improve quality of life and enable commerce to move freely and efficiently. and it will be made worse unless congress acts which brings me to the next that congress can still act we have proposed an answer to this question we think is a good bill that meets the standards and the test that many have made clear to us but we have also expressed we will listen to other ideas that emerge this is a crisis that can be avoided so thank you for giving me a few minutes to say that i look forward to your question. >> let me follow up on highway trust fund. we had a visit last week from the judiciary committee basically saying the chance to get immigration legislation out of congress you say that it could act but you expect them to? if you were waiting the odds for action wouldn't that be minimal? >> fin to go out to these communities along list of things to fix with the kentucky indiana border story even the investments that a company is building transit buses. this is the place the american public suspects to be first-rate as what becomes clear to people after this harsh winter and troubled times increasing around the country congestive in increasing the public will demand action. >> the cbo was saying they you need 8.1 billion and can you say where is now? can do not let it run dry? >> that number is a bigger we have estimated the trust fund will run short $63 billion for the rest of the year. i have said this and i will keep saying it has the country we have to stop playing small ball. it is critical. and i just saw a study a couple of weeks ago china has poured more concrete in the last three years than we have been 100 that is emblematic of race to create the reliable transportation systems around the world. and then we have been a first-rate as a country. in and we cannot take for granted what has been given to us. >> that is also about general motors. yesterday they announced another recall of 8.5 million cars and then as though st. george's journal pointed out said it is greater than the combined sales what does it tell you about how effective that transportation department is protecting u.s. motorists and what changes if any on the safety activities? >> keep in mind the time frame of which this issue should have come to light is exactly the same time with the set of issues giving rise to concerns with toyota. we learned an awful like it -- a lot as a department as part of the ig report to hearing is a delicate the situation internally as well. the recall activity is emblematic of the enforcement work of our transportation and department. the fact they you see this activity is part and parcel of the fact we have the stiffest penalty for anything we have ever levied against the company. i would it take the position what has happened is a result of an awareness we will take action if we see violations. the second and final point is we use data to revive might the safety of automobiles and the reason why we have that is because sometimes automakers are in at is why there is a know of penalty with a five day delay to provide that's information. we will always have to work with industry on these issues to promote safety but as you point out it is far more expensive for a company to go through a situation like this then have to fix it than to catch it on the front end that is so we endeavor to reduce. >> [inaudible] do you think the rule will emerge from the rule making process with us a disruption since of the balkan whale of a significantly higher prices? . . which ones will be impacted and the reason why is because the states are basically drawing on the funds available from the federal government. and so, the governors and the state department of transportation are going to have to make judgments based on the more limited availability of dollars. how they are going to manage that in some states projects may be slowed down. in some states they may be stopped altogether and still other states they may have available cash advance dollars for the future withdraw. so, i think the challenge for the governors are going to be how are you going to tell the project isn't going t to happenr that it hasn't been a longer schedule. the other complicated factor is that there is a limited window in many states around the country before actually doing construction work. so even if a state could slow down a project financially come in some cases it is impractical because they can't actually get the project advanced in the season of the construction so it is going to be all over the map. but the reality is no matter how you slice and dice it, it's going to be bad. so, the second question was -- i'm sorry. >> [inaudible] >> let me say it this way. i think people are feeling the impacts of the cumulative inability of the country to chart long-term. whether it is potholes or longer travel times or what have you a pipeline of projects in the country that we need both maintenance projects in the new capacity is so great that the dollars we are spending to do that are not in the comparison to what we do. i think this is going to create a massive golf in the pipeline that's going to slow down activity. it's going to chill the design and engineering the project that would have been at the state and local levels and there are going to be projects that people were expecting next year or the year after year after that aren't going to happen o or happen as quickly because of what is happening. so i think people will see it in traffic and in the condition of the roads. i think they will see it in a ae lack of peabody to fix the bridges and to put the new capacity in place. this would take years for some cases to get it done and if we take more it is only going to get worse. >> i have a question i guess it is the norwegian air international to serve the u.s. low-cost carriers. in the longer european application what is taking so long? >> there is a proposal to increase the cap on the charges and there are disputes about whether or not that should go up. the airlines do not like the idea of raising the fees. what are the prospects of raising that this year? >> i think the aviation sector is one that is undergoing rapid change. it's been in the consolidation activity in the industry itself among the commercial carriers. we are very bullish on the work that is involved in the next gen as basically framing the airspace to the 21st century technology behavior will make the airspace more efficient and create more capacity in the airspace to make it cleaner that way. so, what's interesting is that over the next year hopefully once we get over this issue with the highway trust fund and expedition transportation is going to be the reauthorization bill. and i think there are some issues in aviation that are on the table now about just how we structure and finance and set up the aviation sector to compete in the 21st century economy that would have a chance to work with the industry and other stakeholders to help resolve, but i think that's going to -- that time is going to allow all these issues to be laid bare in a much different dynamic than just in the budget season and i'm looking forward to having those conversations. i will say i think that conversation is going to be more complicated if we are still trying to deal with highways and transit next year. we need to get this done so we can create the space to be able to focus on aviation. >> automakeautomakers are in a r position to hear about the cars iand the federal government. this is why we have a time of the review bu review but not int matter, no. given the crisis nature of the recall is there any sense of the administration that this does require a robust response for the government to be so active with the lawmakers when these issues resolved into tablet using the risk to the automake automakers? >> you take this situation and there was data that was reviewed as i said before, had there been anecdotal information provided to ntsa the gm had the information that we were reviewing. sometimes it is a combination of the data and anecdotal information that is creates conditions to step up the activity on something. now as i said, we are going to go back and look at ourselves on this. it's not just -- it is figuring out whether there is something more than we can do. after toyota, one of the things that happened is that we worked with ibm to implement a system that actually analyzes the data much more rigorous than any point before. they have the issues before they emerged and that's been very successful. i don't think this is in the instance where ntsa didn't have all of the information that would have been to its review. >> on the highway trust fund they were politically a touchy subject. is this the issue of raising the tax something that we could only expect after the midterm election or after the presidential election? >> what you are asking is a political question. we have decided that this issue is one that is important in the legislation in place we've talked about the use of the program tax reform as a way to pay for this put forth and the reason based on the conversations that we've haven't had plenty of them with republicans and democrats on both the house and the senate side. one of the messages that i've got as many of them don't want to raise the rates and many of them don't want to increase deficits. so it helps us accomplish substantially more investment in transportation without running against those two principles. if congress comes up with a different combination and formulation to get their if they listen to what they have to say they have to speak with one voice. that's where i see the challenge. we have conversations are going on about the short-term. the senate has a lot more public discussion about this. i have concerns we haven't heard as much from the house although there were folks think in about this and working on it. but the cliff is coming. i've been saying it for six months and i'm worried that we may find ourselves running over. there was a crash in delaware where they didn't get a lot of attention but >> there are about 4,000 fatalities a year into the administration put in one very specific provision that is designed to change the way truck drivers are paid including in addition to the normal pay being paid by the mile they would get paid for time when they are at the loading dock. so i just wonder if you could talk a little bit about how big of a rarity it is for the administration to kind of change this economic system that we have where it seems like we have a lot of drivers out there on the road that are working really long hours and it has been shown to be a factor in a number of fatal crashes. >> that is an important question because when you talk about trucks or airplanes or what we saw in mature north of the new york area, tired of driving is bad writing. it's a risk not only to the drivedriver into him or herselft to other folks that are on the road way or the airspace. and at this very moment there are discussions going on in the senate about relaxing some of our requirements that are designed to prevent that of driving while tired. and as an agency, we are strongly -- i can't emphasize how strongly opposed we are to relaxing these research-based rules that have been promulgated to protect the traveling public. but this is a real issue and it is an issue that is particularly challenging in the trucking industry where the economics are aligned to promote for hours onn the road. so, our effort is to help assuage some of that. but make no mistake about our job is safety. that is what we are here to do. that is the central mission of our agency. and we will always take the side of promoting the public interest and public safet the public saff the economics proved more challenging. >> what they do a time check. we are about 9:28. we are going to go next to david wald, keith, paul, david harrison and martin. >> they do not recall any conversation. they didn't have these problems because they didn't show everything it knew. what are we going to do so we don't have this problem again to carefully accompany those that have the bad internal problems? when will we be able to rely on the government for years of fierce? >> [inaudible] >> over the last ten years this has -- ntsa issued over 1200 recalls affecting 95 million vehicles and that doesn't even count the latest round of the recalls that have occurred. so, i don't want to give you the impression that the way this works is 100% of the time ntsa is responding to the timeliness warning from the car company and then going back and look at the data to figure out whether it is going to happen. it happens all over the map. sometimes we issue the spot before an automaker has identified the problem. that happens. can we do better? of course in government we always do better and that's why i've asked ig to look at the circumstances of this particular incident to see if there are other protocols we can adopt that can improve our ability to handle the next problem. but in a sense, it is highly regrettable and our thoughts and prayers are with all of the families affected by

Related Keywords

Norway , New York , United States , Arkansas , Charleston , South Carolina , Jerusalem , Israel General , Israel , Germany , Iran , Afghanistan , Kentucky , China , Florida , Delaware , Wisconsin , Washington , District Of Columbia , Pakistan , Connecticut , United Kingdom , Mexico , Berkeley , California , Iraq , Rome , Lazio , Italy , Nebraska , Cambridge , Cambridgeshire , France , Britain , Americans , America , Iranian , Norwegian , American , Abraham Lincoln , Jimmy Carter , Ronald Reagan , Robert Morgan , Lee Atwater , Newt Gingrich , David Wald , Al Regnery , David Harrison , Hillary Clinton ,