Existing distribution of power, wealth and property, conserve tim has been associated with societies where the few dominate the many, and i just think, especially the first part of that, that the conservativism, that the argument gets used to justify Big Government in many ways, that this idea of a resistance to change which, again, i think thats a good instinct. Its in the declaration of independence. Dont change unless you absolutely have to bass it will bring bat beside things but that argument, resistance to change, is corporateist protectionity. People use protectionism to use to tariff us but i use it to refer to stuff like the wall street bailouts. It was pinstripe protectionism. Wall street, people saying we have0 this economy, five big banks and they do good things, and yes, there are good things brought about by having giant investment banks that can create mere efficient flows of capital and can do things maybe 100 small banks cant do. So the pinstripe protectionism is looking at that and saying because there are good things to this arrangement we need to preserve that and it ignores all the bad things, so the wall street bailouts were directed at saving the big banks, at saving the way wall street was working in 06. They said we need to do that because there was good. Its a lack of imagination and a sort of conservative mindset that if things are good, lets keep them that way, even if the invisible hand in Creative Destruction would destroy that. I. Sitting in an of the record conservative meet little where somebody shows up and says, look, theres a new technology on the internet. This is ruining the record labels ability to make a profit. So somebody raises their hand and says why should we worry about the record labelsnh abiy to make a profit in the conservative argument is, this is a legal legitimate institution which makes profits, which pays taxes, which has employed all sorts of people, and so we ought to protect it. And buggy whipmakers were a legal, legitimate institution that employed lots of people but it works to some extent. Ask and one of my favorite things about the book it warned conservatives theyre using conservative arguments to subvert the free market and justify the protection of the status quo. One guy who wrote this most clearly was a liberal, 50 years ago, i think he called himself a socialist, gabriel cocoa, wrote a book called the giant of conservativism. He was just talking about that mindset, the preserve vacation of the status quo, the people in power ought to stay in power. The current structures ought to be preserved and he was one of the most formidable riders in i my thinking and the book channels some of that. Im glad you brought up eminent domain. Thats where i had liberal friends saying its so confusing, i cant root for this little lady in new london to have her house taken but then im rooting for scalia and just it takes moments like that and like the bailout for the right to get your preconceived alliances smashed open. And where you see it today is things like, Small Business, mostly on the local level. Fruit trucks. The restaurants in washington, dc, and in many other cities, are trying to get regulations on food trucks. This is not because the Restaurant Owners are tripping over the long lines on mcpherson square. Its because they dont want competition and you see it with uberwhere the taxi drivers are driving around, decidings that upsetting people, not providing service, and messing up traffic was somehow a good way to win popularte sentiment over towards regulations they that deny consumers choice. You see it on all sorts of other things, people can rent out their houses. Places where technology is allowing for competition with the incumbents is where you get a lot of leftright coalition, and we won on the soft Online Privacy act, where you did have some corporations opposing the corporatist thing, google was against it. Almost all the lobbying was for it. But why did we win that . All these congressmen sponsored the bill and then all withdrew their sponsorship, because you had an active elite, upper middle class, elite, willing to fight against it. Of corporate welfare often arent as visible and arent as prominent as they are when they say, you know, your blogger wanting to give the limo ride on u. Street or whatever. That used to be the neighborhood. Im learning my hip references are now outdated references. I think unstoppable miss the target on a few points and so i offer this criticism in any constructive life. Kind of like we are in a new relationship, things are awkward to get to know each other a little better. Some of the things identified under the word conservative enough book included the American Bar Association and bring clancy and neither of them would probably be identified as conservative. We all look the same to you from far away. Its understandable. I have to defend one of my employers, the American Enterprise institute identified as corporatists of the book could have hired me to fight against corporate welfare and this is maybe a new priority for a lot of groups on the right, but it is becoming one and lots of groups on the right that historically mightve been more corporatists are coming around to again it took a while to realize it. A lot of these conservatives full text you can incorporate as an excess. Aei also has railing against fannie mae and freddie mac. You have her chief economist peter bush for the ethanol subsidies. So in every corner not every corner, there is some organizations bought and paid for by boeing and Lockheed Martin but there are coming you can see some mobilization against corporatism thanks in part to the bailout. I i think fdr doesnt get in the scrutiny entry into. Ft argues the National Recovery act which is a government enforced cartel businesses that crush Small Business. Schechter brothers were the two brothers who want a jewish deli poor abused by the nra. At roscoe phil burton. Mightve heard his name during the Obamacare Mandate debate because what they did it so youre not allowed to grow corn for yourself. You have to be putting it into the economy because the article trueness treated like people doing that. Ralph, you do a good job of pointing out a left and right are people who are principled and people who basically are either corporatists were partisan. But sometimes you miss how the liberal games are really tied up in the liberal entities are tied up at the corporatism. Minimum wage fight is not an easy issue. Part of the reason there is so much Popular Support or it and then some conservative opposition is because, in income and this is obviously a selfserving answer for someone who imposes a headache but tricky economic issue in that we think it will cost issues. But walmart at cosco both support a hike in the minimum wage. What i look at that, they think is that because well crush mom and pop were more likely to pay lower wages . Every regulation as to overhead cost that will far more disproportionately on momandpop. For probably the skepticism of regulation, huber airline regulation, all these things not to teach us every regulation makes it harder for the small guy. Sometimes its justified, but typically they make it harder for multiunit put the ball mcwhorter. Every time i bring something into the arena government, it is big as this. Thats not against all regulations. Its just a warning. I would say a final note and then i will go on to where i think the fed can. In your argument discussion with phil crane and Grover Norquist, the question is sort of who started this, who is to blame . Is corporatism a question of government taking control of the answer is that a question of business taking control of government. The answer is both and a lot of people on the left including dont see the culpability. A lot of it is the institution. Average of the definition of corporatism and critique it. Corporate status and is Grover Norquist calls it is a doctrine of supremacy. Whatever status over the constitutionally from sovereignty of the people comprises of widening allencompassing corporatist agenda. That leaves out the corporate culpability government. He downplayed the fact corporatism is an alliance between government and business and that needs to be more strongly seen. Conservatives need to be much more wary of corporations. Liberals need to be made much more wary of politicians and government. With that said, theres a couple fights that can win. The easiest way to do it when getting something passed is really hard. You might think thats good if youre a libertarian especially. By killing things a little easier, especially the way a lot of things work in washington is writes that could eat the real fight of a left right coalition against corporate welfare. The current price has to do with experts that city. At the end of the fiscal year, the Export Import Bank expire. Typically almost unanimous. In fact, theres been unanimous consent a voice vote to renew it. This year there is a real fight because you have just had serling has somehow became chair of the House Financial Services committee despite not doing everything the bank asking to any of the opposing reauthorizing it. Youre eric cantor as majority leader who is a champion and something happens rare cancer a month ago where two new replacement Kevin Mccarthy flip up and said no, were not going to authorize the bank. So if no bill passes in the Export Import Bank is dead. If no bill passes, the private Corporation Investment instead. Its not an easy fight to chamber of commerce, manufacturers are lining up a time server in the fight. Thats winnable because you dont have to have a majority of either fans chamber. You just need one for the majority leader stopping it. Before last month, nobody heard of Export Import Bank. He said xm, the teacher talking about the satellite company. You say opec, they think youre talking about the herb oil companies. But these are the people cared about and knew about, they would say its a bad idea for u. S. Taxpayers to be forced to subsidize boeing sales to the chinese government. At the knowledge another one. It has to get renewed. The ethanol tax credit died in vietnam and a half to get renewed. This took place for some people used to think he was good for the environment. Its not. Its supposed to be good for farmers to help score farmers at the expense of. It is simply there for a few companies to profit. Now heres where it gets murky. In a comfortable, especially for liberals and for me is the way to kill ethanol is probably to rope in big oil and mcdonalds who pays more for their corn. Although that said, if theres anything youve done over the years that make you uncomfortable alliances work and the other one i would put up there after export subsidies and ethanol this one source of the sugar program. Part of the farm bill. Its unconscionable. We keep out foreign sugar and loan money to Sugar Growers and if the prices are high enough, they forfeit to the government, just repay it. We pay 20 cents a pound for raw sugar, and then we sell it to the ethanol makers for 1 cent a pound. Its wonderful. Sugar export subsidies come ethanol or three fights that are winnable because they all involve killing a piece of legislation. I think there is broad left right agreement on the senate would be amazing to see that they concentrated industries about the strategy bringing together businesses that lose from them and trying to get people to care about it and the groundswell. Going forward we could have some exciting time. We could change the way business is done in washington if he can get enough people, enough libertarians, not conservatives to concentrate on this idea. You got to get to know each other better, figure out where we agree about are nothing to bring bring up like the relationship. Maybe minimum wage really beside her publicsector unions and just focus on the government should not be taking money from regular people and giving it to big business. That is something we can rayon and that is the fight that i think we can actually win. Thank you. [applause] row are did you want to or commenters have said before we open out the yeah, listening to the interaction reminds me one of the purposes is to go right down to the neighborhood in the living room the people were left right can have this discussion are and move the firm back home all the way to wall street washington later. Recently on this book tour and in the audience, they actually form an ad hoc group right in the audience and said they were going to meet and discuss a number of these issues and then try to move them operationally. So its in the peoples hands. No one can stop people from doing this. The whole point of this discussion is to show what the potential is for people now that they are watching on c. Are watching on c. Span, people all over the country can or russian. Theres no one more fearful of a left right alliance, not them then the plutocrats of the oligarchs. In the congress, whenever there is a rash of emails or letters, the senator says, where are they coming from quiet to usually know they are coming from the lefties or righties. When they say they are coming from both, the center pales. That is why i call it unstoppable. When the fcc put the rollout in 2003 to allow more concentration of big media over local tv radio and newspapers, there was such a huge uproar coming from the nra types, common cause types on congress that for the first time in congressional history, the house of representatives challenge big media and voted to overrule the fcc rule i4 hundred to 21 and was about to go in to the unnamed. There it getting a left right arise from the public in the senate machinery slowed it down until the stamina of the big media prevailed and blocked it. You see that is why when you get the left right, there is this idea of gridlock, this idea of paralysis, severely destabilized in terms of reflecting the will of the people. All right. Lets open up for questions now. I will call on you if you can give your name and make give your name and make it a crush rather than a comment. Rehear. Citizens united was greeted with as much enthusiasm in this building of the return of the hidden imam greeted in some shiite circles. Is there any hope of ending the wedding of government and big business without overturning Citizens United . Is that for which one . I dont think that corporations should have differing Constitutional Rights of human beings because i think there tension for concentrating power in receiving immunity and impunity make sure that there will be supreme over ordinary people. So when it comes to Citizens United, i think that was a bad decision not only because it enhances secret money and influence over our election procedurally bad decision, but it basically allows corporations to independently spend as much money as they want at the local, state and national. Theres no contest with individuals on that. The entire president ial and Congressional Campaign in 2012 was late the under 8 billion, right . That is a quarters profit for exxonmobil a few years ago. So i would be against it. I found left right are worried about big money and politics cant agree because they havent spent enough time with each other and how to get it done. I think there are ways to get it done. First of all, look at the Republican Party of what happens in Citizens United. One of the indirect effects has been a second power center against k street. The business lobbies to be the only way for republicans to get money can buy you have groups like the club for growth, heritage action, outside groups funded by basically which conservatives, which is different than big events and they go ahead and win one of these contests on primaries. We have come you know, just in a mosh is getting attacked by the business lobby, but other groups are able to back him. Thad cochran almost got driven out of part because theyre outside groups. The same groups opposing Export Import Bank and not sort of thing. The second thing is regulation in general puts the ball in the court when you get government involved in his life to participate in political debate and how much come you are going to skew things. We see the individual campaign where you can only get 2500 to a politician. First of all, why you get 2500 is beyond me. We are supposed to be libertarians here. To each his own. That means politicians a month started getting a big check have to go around to get safety checks from a bunch of people. Who do you know that could go out his friends at a politician friends at the politician in the safety of their business then click empowers lobbyists because a lot of times its the unintended consequences. Looking at the revolving door be a good place to look for my regular politicians more of what they can do for regulating outside players in political debate. Theres an argument for it but im incredibly wary of it. You zeroed in on one of the issues that could completely blowup the left right romance that awkward getting to know you phase. Right here. Hello, i am interning here in the summer in washington d. C. At a Venture Capital private equity startup fun. My question is certainly so my question is certainly a really good point came from both sides about how we could eliminate the corporate state, but wouldnt it be a challenge especially to convince the republicans to say a corporate state is not the best given the chamber of commerce or wall street donors have been flooding into the Republican Party in many has been taken by people who do support by these business lobbies in the wall street many contracting firms in particular. How hard would it be to convince the Republican Party to challenge the corporate state . Well, would simply reiterate tim has just said. What weve seen over the last five or six years has been the rise of a counterforce up in the Republican Party against the chamber of commerce in making so much of the corporate state. Now sometimes it is not her one set of rich guys versus another set of rich guys, but having a competition is much better than having a system which combines economic power with little party to restrict competition. Answering this question than the previous one in some of these cases with Citizens United, for example, you can perform judo here and say the case in favor of Citizens United and not having regulation and political spending is a part of speeches you want as much competition as possible. You want the money to come from as many different sources in whatever quantities as possible in order to have the most evolutionary and combative system possible so you dont have a few people who of all the resources in terms of power in terms of money. You can connect that with the themes will talk about in terms of access because the argument about access and widening the availability of ballot positions to third parties and independents is the same as the case for having unlimited donations in terms of our political system. If you should have as many voters as possible, you should look closely restrictive regulations that dictate only certain kinds of candidates, only certain parties have the most Privileged Access to ballots. You can create a left right fusion here come the madness fairly long blind bluff has envisioned, but maximal decision within the political system. One of the points in the book is community selfreliance, whether energy and agriculture food credit unions, community banks, which is burgeoning around the country as a way to shift power back from wall street to main steam. This is a huge area of convergence and theres a lot going on here just magazine is a magazine that chronicles whats going on around the country in terms of local community selfreliance. The most interesting comment by david ratto overturned eric cantor and this reflects liberals. Why is concerned with too much money in politics from all sides. But too much emphasis on this begins to ignore the wisdom of his comments, which was he was outspent 27 to one by eric cantor and on the evening of his election he was interviewed by fox news and he said money doesnt vote. Voters vote. He said that as a reflection of get down to the grassroots and mobilize people. Said the obsession with money and politics we should not forget about the other side, which can negate a lot of money in politics, which is local mobilization of the voters. Woman here on the i o. Thank you here this is a question for the panel, but mr. Nader in particular and particularly the housing collapse we spent a lot of time talking about balancing the benefits and risks of governmentsponsored enterprise like fannie mae and freddie mac. What i find interesting is we are not the discussion about what is happening with the farm credit system, which was intended to help Small Farmers, but is now giving multimillion dollar loans to corporations like verizon. Im curious to see if you guys think this is an opportunity for a left right alliance to try and read in the mission and return the focus back to Small Farmers by the credit system. Ive never heard of that issue and thats great. Also, my fatherinlaw worked for the administration was i probably shouldnt say anything until he retires and then we should abolish it. But in general, what you are pointing that happens in all farm subsidies with the purpose of working fish that ends up serving the big guy. In my mind i actually learned the phrase regulatory capture from ralph nader and his regular. So the guys were supposed to be regulated capture it or if its an organization that hands out money come in and that the big guys get their hand on it. Even the Small Business administration is happening. For me that is a lesson in that kind of conservatism of saying when you create an institution in washington, the guys at the best lobbyists are going to be the ones to get their hands on it. Let me just at the beach or regulatory capture is it simply in the fact that the regulated industries can buy politicians to do their favor. Its the fact you cant regulate an industry without having massive amounts of information so you can make intelligent decisions. The only place you can get the information is from the industry itself. They have a monopoly on the relevant information. They feed it to you, regulators and the right way. And so, its very difficult over time for regulators not to succumb to the world view of the regulated industry intellectually or fiscally. One more quick point. This is a convergent point on this issue amax, dumb rules instead of smart rules, these Bank Regulations are going to raid this, regulators do this and this, that is asking for capture, cap on the size of the bank doesnt involve as much math, doesnt as much expertise or lobbying so when rules are called for such as the banks which are back slapped by the taxpayers then rules should be as simple as possible and as transparent and that is one of the great ways to make it not get captured. The gentleman in the. Church. Alan abel. You mentioned the phrase 12 years. I dont know if you were referring to two terms of hillary and one of chelsea. Someone needs to ask you about 2016 and your thoughts about it. Fought about 2016 especially in terms of the enlightened billionaire. It looks like right now if you want to guess, the two dynasties, jeb bush and Hillary Clinton unless the republicans want to implode on people like marco rubio or ted cruz but the big business is going to get behind jeb bush. He is different from george w. Bush. He is known to read a lot of books. Up painter in the back. Good afternoon, jeff steel. No the skepticism, and given that the argument can be made that the american system has been deformed against two arguably very deformed systems, nazi germany and soviet communism. Given that we our power structure has been built up to compete against those monstrous entities and we still have a 1party state in china, the argument is made the islamic risk is a monstrous threats. It seems easy the status quo continues because this power structure has been built and is difficult to deconstructs this massive power structure that was necessary to defeat the 20th century enemies. I think the issue of past dependence, how we got to the National Security state in particular is of great importance and the failure of imagination to rethink the promises of a National Security state after the cold war and the reflexive look for enemies of equivalent stature is part of what is maintaining the failure of imagination. Some of it is a matter of time. In some of our discussions before this event, you talked about the experience of the cold war shaped his perception going into the war on terror. I can now the experience of the war on terror will shape our perceptions billing forward and hopefully will lead to substantial reforms of our military industrial and National Security states. Only if we have a different level of civic motivation back home. People define themselves as powerless and take themselves out of the equations and it is a selffulfilling prophecy. People have no idea how powerful they are even if you point to areas in American History again and again major changes have occurred by less than 1 of the people organizing, reflecting broader public sentiment. Right through American History. Occupy wall street made a big deal of the 1 , the richest 1 . They might have talked about the 1 that mobilize reflecting public sentiment can turn this country around again and again. That almost inherently mean the left right reflection of opinion. The book does talk about shift of power from the a few to the many in some rather unique areas, providing facilities so people can voluntarily band together more easily as consumers, taxpayers, voters, workers but we didnt have time to discuss it. A lot of these titles of big money and politics and the rights of big business can be handled by shift of power in the private sector and you can see a lot of the and environmental changes came by a handful of nonprofit Environmental Advocacy groups starting with earth day, they represented a majority sentiment of the people about choking air pollution, contaminated water and unsafe food. That is why they got it through and they represented a broader Public Opinion but it was just a handful of people. The book cites a lot of examples like that. One more, this gentleman here two thirds of the way back in the aisle and the mike will come to you. I think on the aisle, two thirds back. My name is brian from louisiana and time in turning in d. C. And my question is based on the Ballot Access you were talking about earlier. The federal Election Commission is seen in my opinion as one of the Biggest Barriers for third parties and other candidates on the ballot and my question is would you recommend reforming it, abolishing it ended the recommend reforming and how would you do so . During one of our president ial campaigns we assembled enough information about the Democratic Party pushing us offbalance, all kinds of unsavory manners, tying us up in court. We were sued 24 times in 12 weeks to get us off the ballot in the states in the summer of 2004. Our petitioners were harassed and intimidated on and on so we compiled this major revamping of the federal Elections Commission to investigate and they turned it down and never since the brief to in effect the defendants, it is Paralyzed Agency because it is 33 and the will break 33 in deadlock, three republicans, three democrats so i urge the complete abolition of that and start new in a much more effected and simpler manner because there are bad behavior is between parties and candidates that have to be dealt with but not the way the fcc has been doing or even been avoiding. They are totally deadlocked. Any major accusation against one party or the other. I will just say this brings up exactly my skepticism, when you say this organization doesnt work, it has been captured by the power so lets scrap and make a new one. It sounds to me like lucy pulled the football away from Charlie Brown last time but this time it almost suggests the problem with something just in this particular Government Institution and if we can just wipe it clean and make a new Government Institution that when wont get captured by the industry and that is where my skepticism pops up. If it got captured last time it will get captured this time. A tool for the powers that the last time it will become that again. I also worry about that too but i dont associate it with inevitability. I always think that some persistence that give incentives to go to court instead of the fec are very preferable but if you strip peoples standing to sue, all kinds of procedural obstructions to them so they can never have their day in court, you got to give them more rights to initiate their own grievances in a court of law and if you do that, a lot of what the fec is supposed to be doing but doesnt do can be replaced. When you cant have your own day in court, we file all kinds of cases on what happened to us in pennsylvania and every time we were thrown out we were thrown out by a procedural issue, never on the merits, we never got a single day in court on the merits. So if you block the access to the courts you got to go with some sort of regulatory agency. If you open access to the courts you dont need that level of regulation. I think we are out of time. Let me at inclosing there was a Radio Program recently about rolfs book and we bring interviewed separately so i heard his segment and at the end it was noted by the interviewer that route had recently marked his 80th birth day and ralph replied that the only real aging is the erosion of ones ideals. Someone whos experiencing lots of unreal beijing these days, remarkably inspirational. On that wonderful note, lets thank the common tears, thank you all and coming. [applause] we will go upstairs for lunch and routes will be out side to sign books if you would like one so thanks again. This weekend on the cspan network, tonight at 9 00 p. M. Eastern former secretary of state colin powell talks about World Affairs. Sunday evening at 8 00 on q a, robert timber talks about how as a marine in vietnam a land mine explosion nearly killed him as a changed his life. Tonight at 10 00 on booktvs afterwards surgeon and author on why he feels medical science should be doing more for the aging and dying and sunday just after 7 00 syndicated columnist naomi klein on freemarket capitalism and its impact on Climate Change tonight at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv on cspan3, the king georges war of the 1740s, how it helped the american colonists to establish regional ideas and the invaluable fighting experience for their own revolution and sunday night on the presidency at 8 00 p. M. President fords congressional testimony on the nixon pardon. Find our Television Schedule at cspan. Org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. 2026263400. Email us at comments cspan. Org or send us a tweet at cspan comments. Like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. Be part of cspans campaign 2014 coverage. Follow us on twitter and like us on facebook to get debate schedules, video clips of key moments, debate previews from our politics team, cspan is bringing you 100 senate, house and governor debate that you can instantly share your reactions to what the candidates are saying. The battle for control of congress, stay in touch and engage bob wallace on twitter on cspan and liking us on facebook at facebook. Com cspan. Next, congressman and former vicepresident ial candidate paul ryan talking to mitt romney about the Republican Party and conservatism. This took place at the union league in chicago. It is about 45 minutes. [applause] thank you. [applause] thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It is great to be here. Is not where we wish we were. But it is great to be here and wonderful to be with paul again. We had quite an experience and i know a lot of the thing that must be just awful running for president because you have to go every night to a Different Hotel and get debate after debate after the debate in the primaries and general as well and the adoring press always at your heels and yet the truth is it is a magnificent experience because you get to see the country person by person, state by state. The people who make the news are doing something strange or unusual typically not good but the people we got to see were wonderful people and we learned about their life stories and it was very touching and it made me more optimistic about our future so if you get the chance for to run for president , do it. It is a great thing. Third time is the charm. [applause] i made a couple good decisions in my life. One was who i married an the other was who i chose to be my running mate. There was no better person to be Vice President and paul ryan. [applause] if youre going to take a shot at me, you wouldnt be a bad president yourself. We had an interesting [applause] we had some questions about a book that you have written this year , and i would note that i have read it and i hope some of you have as well so your questions can reflect that but i know paul pretty well and as i read it recognized the actually wrote it. Most of the books you read that written by politicians were not actually written by politicians. Albritton for politicians by professional writers but paul wrote this book, i can tell because it is his voice. It is written like he speaks and that makes it even more touching and personal but i want to begin by asking paul the american idea of the subtitle is the american idea. Bring it down for us, what does it mean for you, the american idea . A way of life, a way of life that has been brought to life by some critical ideas and principles that founded this country. In a nutshell is this idea is that the condition of your birth does not determine the outcome of your life in this country. That no matter who you are or where you come from or how you got started you can make in this country. It is the land of opportunity and it is a country that was built on an idea where our rights are hours naturally and our government is designed to protect those rights so we can live in freedom and fine opportunity and prosperity. No other system is quite like this one. No other country was created on an idea like this one, the reason for writing the book in a nutshell is because a lot of people dont see it. They dont think it is there for them. They are worried that it is not going to be there for their kids or grandkids and so if you dont like the direction the country is going which we dont, or the policies that are in place, but we think is crowding out, we should offer a different way forward. That is why i decided to do that because the whole point is the american idea and maintaining each generation, securing it for the next generation like our parents did for us. [applause] that is without question something we subscribe to. At the same time there are a lot of people who say that american idea has not worked for them or for their life. A lot of people are poor, a lot of people in the middle class saying it is harder and harder to make ends meet, they look around them and watch tv and see the rich and famous doing extraordinary things they cant afford as why is it some people are doing so much better and i am not doing as well as i could . How do you deal with this growing income inequality, wealth inequality and the issue of poverty . You spent some time looking at poverty and your book describes that but give us your thoughts on dealing if you will with the income gap, the wealth gap and the extent of poverty in this country . This is something i talk a great deal about in the book. My friend bob is sitting with me tonight because for the last couple of years we have been touring america meeting with people who are triumphing over these difficult circumstances, who are fighting poverty, doing it very successfully and there are some incredible stories that i tell in this book about that. To your bigger question there are a couple ways of looking at this. You can look at the status quo which is as you described it and the lot of people dont think that opportunity is there for is them. They are trapped in generational poverty or situational poverty or middleincome person running on a hamster wheel and not getting ahead and so what kind of an agenda and what kind of principles do you need to reignite this opportunity of the portability and Economic Growth, healthy economy and i go through all of that but at the end of the day i would say we are at the 52 anniversary of the war on poverty. We spent trillions on this and we have the highest poverty rate in degeneration. The poverty is the highest since we have been recording and you could easily argue that success in this war on poverty has been measured based on input. How much money are we spending, how many programs are we creating, not on results, not on outcomes. How many people are getting out of poverty. How many people are finding that american dream, how many people getting from where they are to where they want to be in light . That requires a systematic review and overhaul of our approach to fighting poverty and it means the government needs to be respectful of Civil Society, of our communities, those who are doing a good job fighting poverty and the federal government needs to play a more significant role in mining the supply lines, not the front lines. In so many ways the federal government this places all those great things that are actually happening in our communities that can bring people together, stop isolating people and get them out of poverty. In so many ways the inadvertant casualties in the war on poverty, it will be, american taxpayer this is governments job, pay your taxes and we will take care of it. That is not true. It doesnt work like that. Everybody needs to get involved. People without faith, people with aids, with time, with love, with whatever and reintegrate and bring people back together in our society so theres a whole series of reforms that i call for. I am not one of these people do things i have all figured out. This is a very humbling thing to do, to look into and research this but i want to get the conversation started. If all we do is measure advice on input and talk about status quo that we will never actually have the kind of conversation and reforms to actually break this cycle of poverty, instead of managing it, actually solve it and it means a strong, healthy, growing economy and policies in place today based upon the philosophy of governing that is triumphing in government today is Holding People back, hurting Economic Growth. It looks like a fixed static thing and the governments job is to redistribute it when our goal is remove the barriers so people can blossom and flourish and really have a strong, growing economy. [applause] we will go through the will book tonight but basically what i try to do is articulate Core Principles and policies that flow to reignite this american idea because i do feel it is under duress. We are going in the wrong path but the good news in this story and i tell these stories about amazing heroic americans from all parts of this country that have done incredible things. The seeds are there. We can have this come back, we just have to get a few basic things right. I have every bit of confidence we can turn things around and get ourselves on the right track. [applause] for those that have read the book derecognize that paul contrasts two cities, detroit and james ville. I would have expected the tour and chicago to be more natural comparison. I grew up in detroit. Redwings fan, blackhawks fan. Big rivalry, great fun. Those were terrific times. They were competitive in some respects, detroit and chicago. Im talking the 50s and 60s and yet chicago, look what it has become. The city and the hub that it is of activity and industry and innovation and technology and deflate has suffered. You described in some detail what has happened to be for a new contrast chicago and detroit and jamesville which also went through tough times and continues to go through tough times but you compare them. What happened to detroit . Why has it gone through what it has gone through . How does that contrast with jamesville or chicago or other places but winter tough times the town the way out . Uncomplicate it story and one that the comparisons arent easy but i think the story of detroit is a cautionary tale for the country because if you go back and look and to a fiscal autopsy on detroit and see the failures that have occurred is because of poor leadership and that government, taxing and borrowing and spending and passing the buck to the point where they went bankrupt, they couldnt afford the police force or the Fire Department or the kids in the schools are getting the worst scores in the country. Is a cautionary tale of what i would call a philosophy of governing that if we play that out throughout our country or the federal government we will have a similar ending. The other thing is the come back i hope is coming and the seeds that have been planting, the cornerstone, what dan gelber it is doing, what pulte homes are doing, what citizens in Civil Society are taking matters into their own hands to regenerate their community and the reforms that are happening. It is detail of what america could become if we go in the wrong direction but also what detroit could be if we apply the right ideals and principles. Will live on the same block i grew up on. I come from a big extended Irish Catholic family, and theres always a ryan in the room. These at the only illinois ryans i am related to. [laughter] at ryan. Dont we all . Jamesville was one of those communities where john and i grew up. It is there for people when they fall down. The lions club, the optimist, catholic churches, lutherans, all the social groups in Civil Society, we had a pretty hard knocks in our family and my mom and grandmother went through difficult times, and for jamesville, our community, not just our friends and relatives but people we didnt even know who teamed together and helped make a difference and then getting involved in that community and seeing what it does to support people, when we lost our General Motors plant, we live two hours outside the loop. It was a huge punch to the stomach. Hundreds of millions of dollars of payroll into a town of 60,000, 60,000 people. A lot of my buddies from high school, worked there, fought like their parents, they would have the same job and career their entire life which made a good living, gone. To see the economic havoc that it reached in our town, to see the city come together, we have a ways to go. To see the healing and the Civil Society, and it gives the perfect story of that middle space between ourselves and the government, where we have Civil Society, written so brilliantly about which is a unique fabric of American Life. If were going to we believe in where i am. What is the state of americas social capital. And was so unique about this country. That is where i discuss the downside of liberal progressivism. A principal of governing, what it does is seeks to fix Government Solutions which displaces and crowds out Civil Society. And social capital for a long time. And the economist has written social capital. And engage in communities, and this is something that has to be revitalized with Economic Growth and bottom of Economic Growth. And the culture and communities, and they themselves have to get involved. And respect its limits so that can mature and occur. Dont get in the way, and courage, crowd it out or discourage it. At that to me is the secret sauce of American Life and idea. It has been revitalized by each of us and the government has respect its limits and doing what it is supposed to do and do it well to maximize Economic Growth and increase social capital. [applause] let me turn to a topic that is not what you spend much time talking about which is the National Ballot sheet and income statement. A lot of people looked at bowlessimpson and the work done by this commission. It is part of that effort to try to rein in the excess in washington. I dont know if anyone would agree 100 with what came out of the commission and you agree with parts and not with others ended didnt deal with entitlements which is an important part that should have been part of that discussion but nonetheless in the view of a lot of people in wonderful starting point, a bipartisan commission, taken apart the federal budget and look forward and forecast what is going to happen given demographic trends and Financial Trends and lane down a path way to stability such that we dont have to worry about a future where we might not be able to count on Social Security. Might not count on a military that was second to none in the world. And why did nothing come from that extraordinary effort. Until he was released, just nothing. As we put it together, alice rivlin and i teamed up to have an amendment to bowlessimpson to do Medicare Medicaid reform which is the biggest driver of health care entitlements, as the democrat that is clintons budget director, and as an amendment, which had that occurred, i would have thought this is a complete package. I was worried about the deep cuts and defense that were in it. I looked at bowlessimpson and there was a lot of good work here. I will take the good work here and at what i would do differently on defense and taxes and introduce that and pass it through the house of representatives and i did it four years in a row. We passed four years in a row, to pay down the debt. [applause] before we go on, that is that the house passes important legislation, the republicans are not the party of no. The house has been passing legislation, your roadmap has been passed and deals with entitlement reforms and getting our country at a fiscal footing and it doesnt get picked up by the senate. Ours is the party of no, that is simply wrong. Ours is passing legislation, putting it forward to the senate, and if people want to deal with problems from education to health care to immigration to fiscal needs, tax reform. If people want to see those things happen people have to vote for republican senators and a republican president as well. [applause] i have respect for it bowlessimpson, theyre great guys. The numerical benchmarks you have to pass any budget plan to stabilize your fiscal situation i didnt like some parts of what they did and i thought it was missing a lot so we put our own together and exceeded those benchmarks. We had assumed the president would do the same nick the didnt like bowlessimpson he would put his own plan meeting these benchmarks to stabilize the fiscal situation and he chose not to do that. We really did expect him once we decided not to support it, the House Republicans and do our thing, we thought he would have trying deleted for the sake of 2012 and support it and it jettisoned it, demagogued what we would doing and did not offer a credible fiscal alternative that met anywhere close to the bench marks of bowlessimpson and we have the same problem moving over us. Why is that . The personal pherae is ideology. I wrote about this in the book at the particular moment was clear what the decision was being made, it was an ideological interests that was front and center of his mind versus something more moderate or moderate seemed at. At the moment he decided not to do bowlessimpson to demigod republicans and not to offer a credible alternative that it was what the administration was about. I concluded we are going to need a new president to fix this mess. You might describe that. You might describe how it was unveiled to you. A personal story which is interesting, whether or not to remain. Three House Republicans, the chairman of the ways and means and Financial Services and the budget guy who were on bowlessimpson and the white house invited us to a budget speech the president was going to give and all the media was coming up the day or 2 beforehand saying it was going to be Social Security reform. And do something to reach out to you guys to we were conditioned into thinking, he went pretty far left on these other issues but on fiscal issues he is going to move to the middle and triangulate. And everybody else from the commission that we he will embrace bowlessimpson. We had that front seat, and 20 feet away. 400 billion in defense cuts on top of what they have already done. 3 defense which he pursued absolutely demagogue the work we had been doing, nothing about bowlessimpson. It was clear the demagoguery coming out of his speech was aimed at doubling down and going hard left, hit the fence, raise taxes, go after republicans. And move to the middle and have a text from get up and leave right now. We looked at it and discussed it and out of respect for the office of the presidency that we wouldnt do it that even though it was over the pail and so we got up and left afterwards. And did a press conference. And one more here and one or two if you like. I happen to think the president hasnt been successful. [applause] that is the understatement of the evening. I will put aside Foreign Policy where his failures have been most glaring recently but domestically there was an article this week in the wall street journal by United States senator who calculated what america would be like if the recovery were like other post for recovery said he calculates approximately 14 million americans working and the percapita income in this country would be 1,600 higher. A dramatic dickens between the president s record and that which he campaigned on. The president said he would bring america together. He would be in a post partisan presidency reaching out across the aisle. These things have not succeeded. And work across the aisle. And the time frame will come back. And find a way, that is what our innovators and people do but it has taken a long time. I wonder from your perspective why has it been so unsuccessful or taken so long for people to get jobs or higher incomes, and the kind of unity. This is the worst postwar recovery we have had. The average of the prior 10. And would have had those metrics. It is not just this president did is all going to be better. The philosophy of governing and the policies pursued by this administration so but for government i believe we would have had those recoveries. If you take a look at the enormous uncertainty, hikers to the regulatory state that is occurring, was canceled for production this year because of fear of these new fda regulations. Very concerned. Tapped uncertainty, higher taxes. The Federal Reserve is out there priming the pump which has produced sabers in this country and the money is not getting to smallbusiness this. Credit is over Small Businesses, doddfrank makes things bigger. Obamacare is putting an incredible amount of uncertainty with that limit employer mandate hanging out there so people are not getting hired and even the cbo tells us the equivalent of 2 Million People nick network, and taxes, regulations, and 17 trillion, and a reduction in sight going, and political modus operandi which doesnt seek to bridge differences but to basically polarized and intimidate and divide people and prey on the emotions of fear and anxiety. Versus an aspirational political system that speaks to people, unifies people based on aspirations connaught Ronald Reagan did it well in 1980. It could be done again. The philosophy of government that was employed and the third obama term would keep these things going. This philosophy and the policies that basically believe, and power and decisionmaking, to run our lives. To micromanage society and the economy it doesnt work. And the application of the rule of law the privatesector potential as a result. [applause] you and i had fantastic questions on a lot of issues. One issue we didnt discuss here that we didnt discuss quite a bit is Foreign Policy. We see things similarly in the world for our Defense Program and the state of things now. Give an assessment not just of the obama Foreign Policy but americas Foreign Policy. Tell us what you think where we are and what we want to be doing differently. Big topics and dino you have questions for the audience and let it take much time on this but we have had a Foreign Policy as a nation frankly since truman who after the Second World War said we have gotten dragged into awful things as a world and as a nation and for that to not happen in the future again and again we have to adopt a series of policies. The secretary of state wrote a book called present at the creation. The creation of a Foreign Policy that has been the basis of americas Foreign Policy ever since. That book says a few things that were fundamental. One is that we would be involved in the world. That doesnt just mean with guns but with diplomacy, our economy, we would promote our values and ideals, that is a second point, that american principles of freedom and free enterprise, these things would be promoted around the world and the combination of being involved in the world, promoting our values and linking our arms with our allies, being strong and having a strong military, those three things, being involved, promoting our values and being strong and doing so with our allies is the foundation of our Foreign Policy. The president campaigned and adopted a different Foreign Policy. Hillary clinton said Something Interesting the other day, she was critical of the president s Foreign Policy and basically said he doesnt have one and i used to say that during the campaign but the truth is he does have a Foreign Policy and it is very different than that the truman and every president since truman has followed. His Foreign Policy is one based on the view that everybody has the same interests and all wants the same thing and i dont believe that. I believe some people want to dominate and oppress other people and take over other nations. I believe there are some people that are fundamentally evil. We have seen some of the monte these this week so that premise was wrong. He looked at Vladimir Putin and others and said lets have of reset. Hillary clinton tries to distance herself from the Foreign Policy of the president , that would work better were she not his secretary of state for four years. [applause] was the one with a picture of herself and the Russian Foreign minister with Big Red Button reset with a big smile. Can you imagine such a thing . Did they not understand people have very different objectives . Vladimir putin that objective might be as George Shultz said the other day to rebuild the russian empire. Those mistakes combined with some other capital mistakes. In syria for instance, to draw a red line, and to say i cant react without getting congresss approval but right now he is willing to act without congresss approval in iraq and then steps back from the red line altogether. That sent a message to russia and others that has been unfortunate for americas so we have seen the explosion of very bad things throughout the world because the rest of the world has calculated what is happening. One more element of Foreign Policy, a dramatic reduction in our military capabilities. And the quadrennial review that was recently completed and reported on by a commission including president clintons defense secretary. Take a gander at that and see what is happening to our navy and our air force and our army and our Nuclear Capability and say to these other nations america is not here and we are not there. We can compete, we can shine at is investing enormously in the military including a deep water navy. Russia is investing and their military capabilities and other nations as well that are expanding their military might and ambitions. I happen to think the president s policies, going out with a personal charm offense and believing people all want the same thing and we can all get along and a multi polar world militarily is the way to go. Who else besides us if it is a multipolar military world, are the others russia and china . Is that what we want to see . I believe in having an american economy, american diplomacy and American Military so strong that no one in the world would never think of testing it. [applause] as a good republican i would like to return to the principles of harry truman. I would like to once again say it we will be involved in the world. Is important to be involved in the world to the bad things from happening. Intelligence telling us that isis was being formed and might come into iraq and attacked a city, what did the president do . Watched. As it spread across iraq. That is difficult to pull out. Is important to pull it out. This kind of group having a base would be a terrible conclusion for the world and for us so i returned to the idea of being involved in the world and not pulling back and say we hope that things dont happen to us. That is like paying the cannibals to eat you last. We have to be involved, we are the leaders of the free world and number 2, if we are involved in the world we promote values of free enterprise, humanrights, human dignity, and finally we are going to be strong, we have a military that is strong. We will link arms with our allies and stand with israel and not waffle about who is our friend and who is not. [applause] i think you have to see that for americas security, for our safety, for our confidence that our children will live in freedom and have prosperity we have to have that as our Foreign Policy. Foreign policy and domestic policy are inextricably linked. You cant have one effective without the other. They have to Work Together and i think the president has been ineffective in both areas. I wasnt expecting that i would love his second term but i have been even more disappointed than i expected. I am hopeful that we will be successful in electing more good colleagues like you, more people will read your book and that we will get to the president s desk and take a new direction. America needs a real leadership. [applause] are obvious goal is to build a coalition that will win a majority of the country to do just that. One last question before we go to the audience. It is an important one. Pretty easy to answer from my perspective. If you had to decide, would you choose Julius Peppers or jerry allen. That is easy. Julius peppers of course. [laughter] there is a packers fan. Now we are ready for audience questions. I received cards from 14,000 people. I dont know how that happened. Their role in 450 in the room but we screened them quickly. What is the status of Immigration Reform in the house, is there the possibility for compromise between the house and the senate . I dont think there is right now. Part of the problem is the administration has decided to go outside the purview of the law in so many areas you have a crisis on the border, three weeks ago the house passed legislation to deal with that, legislation to deal with the trafficking lot that needs to be amended and to deal with problems on securing the border. We heard nothing from the senate yet so while we have of border crisis that needs to be attended to. This is first thing first. If the president goes it alone with his routine to write laws by changing immigration laws. That is the legislative branch, that makes it more difficult to come together as a fan of the Immigration Reform. As a person who was supportive of Immigration Reform i dont think he goes alone. I think he sticks within the confines of the law, confidencebuilding, fix the border crisis right now and then maybe we can Start Talking but we are at long way from that right now. Thank you. Next question, what do we do on health care . How much time do you have . I will be brief. We want a system where everybody can have access to Affordable Health care including every person with preexisting conditions and we can have that system without a costly government takeover. We can have that system which is a patient centered system where each of us as patients are the nucleus of the system and Health Care Providers out there, doctors, hospitals, nursing homes, Insurance Companies are competing against each other for our business. It is called a marketbased system. I had a 6 surgery 14 years ago. It was elective and that surgery is half as much as it cost 14 years ago and three times as good so not as if these great principles of choice and competition, quality are immune to the Health Care System but they havent been fully applied to the Health Care System so i put in the book in great detail what kind of patient centered system we ought to go to and this is for medicare, medicaid, individual based patient centered marketbased system where we each elaborate and serve each other and the providers have an incentive to innovate, to create. That would increase obamacare. [applause] i am sorry you cant see me more clearly. I apologize. How did the two of the maintain your sanity with all the terrible things that were said about you during the campaign . You want to go first . More terrible things were said about me than him. I got some good advice when i was running for governor in massachusetts. The political strategist that i hired said he had a couple rules, that i was not allowed to read the paper as it related to my campaign. I could read about other things that no articles about the campaign at all. Watch tv, we will win on tv. I want to read these articles. He said no because you will have some 22yearold person who doesnt like you write some article in you will find yourself subconsciously referencing it or refuting it in your comments all day long and you will be off message. I dont want you to read these articles, is great advice. I didnt see the awful stuff that was said about me. In the president ial campaign we were working. Early in the morning, event after event after event and late at night. A lot of fundraising, rallies, you might think at the end of the day you cant go to sleep at the end of the day. You have so much energy. A crowd of 20,000 people cheering and cheering. This is important, this is great and at the end of the day thank heavens for the gideon and bibles, i could read that for a while and i was ready to go to sleep. It is a marvelous experience particularly if you dont spend a lot of time worrying about the attacks the come your way. It is carter on your family but you are in it because you care about this country, desperately care about america and if you worry what people say i you shouldnt get in the race. You have to have thick skin but not in permeable skin, dont let it change the you are, dont let it get to you and if you believe in what you are doing, dont do it and dont worry about the rest. How about your families . They adjusted. My kids were pretty young and everyone treated them well. The media treated them well. The obama campaign. It was respected. My wife doesnt like the criticism i get but she also learned how to grow a thick skin as well and both our wives are strong women, smart, intelligent, strong women who understood the states of the country and they were able to see it through as well. This is interesting. Using the four year college is necessary to get out of poverty . Is the debt worth the payoff . It depends. It is not necessary, jobtraining reforms, skills training is essentials. I go through great detail on how that ought to happen to bridge the skills gap. We dont have to emphasize that as much as we have. We have to make it cool again that it is okay to go wild in degree, is the case to go to two years and get high values skills that can give you a good livelihood and College Tuition inflation. If we keep feeding the beast with more federal spending in one pocket, out the other, you will feed tuition inflation. We need to flatten this and go to the root cause of i would say a credit asia reform is necessary, we have real competition against we all went to one of those, but lets look at the fact the we are in a new and Innovative Society and have more competition so if a person who may not be able to go to a college, and that not math course from mit, engineering from university of wisconsin, put them together and allow these new innovative things to happen and take down the barriers to entry that are already erected against innovative ideas that are out there to allow people to excel at education and threaten the costs. We need more competition, less barriers and that to me is one reason we get to the root cause of College Tuition with transparency just Like Health Care. Does this degree get me where i want to go . What is the success rate just Like Health Care . Give me data on quality, outcome so that i know before going in what i can expect and i want these Health Care Workers and these educators competing against each other for my business based on outcomes, valued, delighted good job, and i educated for . Make them compete and right now they are not. [applause] the most important thing these gentlemen are going to do in a cold water plunge. I cant wait to see that. I am aplenty and he is the plunger. You have been plunged. My daughter dumped a bucket of ice water on my head. On a regular basis. Last question. Do you think the children of illinois and i expand that to mean the states by gay and lesbian parents are better protected, more likely to lead happier lives now that the sexual marriage act is legal in illinois . I dont know the illinois act but if theres a child that is an orphan, that is adopted, that finds a home of loving parents, that is the child that is no longer an orphan, no longer homeless. [applause] i cant thank you enough. Good questions. Not bad question coming from you to him. Again, thanks to all of you for coming today, just one request and that is that you create this isle because actually the two of them have to get to a press conference and rather quickly so we have if we could have let them get through, that would be much appreciated. [applause] this weekend on the cspan networks, tonight at 9 00 p. M. Eastern former secretary of state colin powell talks about World Affairs and sunday evening at 8 00 on q a author robert timber talks about how a marine in vietnam a land mine explosion nearly killed him and changed his life. Tonight at 10 00 on booktvs afterwards surgeon and author u guwande on what medical science should be doing more for the aging and dying and syndicated columnist naomi klein on freemarket capitalism and its impact on Climate Change. Tonight at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv on cspan3, king georges war of the 1740s, helped establish regional identities and the valuable fighting experience for their own revolution and sunday night on the presidency at 8 00 p. M. President fords congressional testimony on the nixon pardon. Find our Television Schedule on cspan. Org and let us know what you think about the programs youre watching. 2026263400