tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN October 14, 2015 7:00am-9:01am EDT
>> we invite your participation via twitter. prior to question time members are finishing up other business, and now live to the floor of the british house of commons. >> that is exactly what has happened. >> order. questions to the prime minister. >> thank you, mr. speaker, i know the whole house wants to pay tribute. both of the men died along with
personnel when they had a crash on sunday in afghanistan. they have given our life and given our country and make -- making the world more secure. i also wish to pay transcribe out to phillips who was killed in the line of duty last week. i know the folks in the whole house are the family and friends. i have meetings with minister and others and in addition to my duties in this house i should have further shuch -- such meetings today. dra -- dr. lisa cameroon. >> we cannot have session medical with resource services, would the prime minister address
issue and priorities treatment, ohio lighting these concerns. >> congratulate the honorable lady and raises the important issue. medical services do absolutely outstanding job. i have seen in afghanistan year after year just what an amazing service they have provided. times almost do equivalent of a hospital on the back of a helicopter. it is extraordinary. we will be approaching that review with a rising defense budget during par -- parliament. [shouting] >> today we see the claim by 20% of last year. [shouting] >> with a 44% part those
claiming. since my honorable believe clear long-term income -- [shouting] >> secure national recovery and that it would be put in jeopardy by shambles of party lead by the honorable member opposite. >> first of all, let me congratulate businesses in lincoln for their record in providing people with jobs. the unemployment figures today are the extremely good, we see 140,000 more people in work. we see the employment rate at its record level since records began. unemployment has gone down and long-term unemployment has both come down. all of this, job fairs are important, but above all, having economic plan of a strong and secure economy and getting the deficit down. that is what we should be
focused on. [shouting] >> jeremy. >> thank you. thank you, mr. speaker. first i would like to echo the prime minister's tributes and also saddens of the death of phillips in the line of duty. i absolutely concur with remarks about that. i'm sure he and the whole house would join me in expressing sympathies and saddens, attending a peace rally of all things. our sympathy to go for all of them. i want to ask a question about tax credits. i have had 2,000 people e-mail me offering a question to prime minister on credits.
aisle choose just one. kelly, mom to disabled child, i get paid 7 pounds 20 per hour in april the prime min ter is not taking wage up but taking credits from me. can the prime minister tell what salary would be? >> our thoughts should be with those families of those who suffered, and also can that country as it struggles against this terrorism. let me answer directly on the it the issue of tax credit. 20-pound a week pay rise next year. obviously kelly will benefit as
it rises to 9 pounds. sorry, what happened to the new approach. i thought we were -- questions asked so that they could be responded to. so that the introduction to have negotiational living wage will reach 9 pounds that will benefit kelly, we raised to 11,000 pounds and also kelly if she has children will be benefiting from the 30 hours of child care that we will be bringing in. in addition to that, the point that if kelly, i don't know her circumstances, if he's an association tenant. we are cutting her rent. all those things are important as increase in employment and wages taking place today. >> can i tell them that she's
going to be 8,000 pounds a year and another 3 million families in this country who and after housing costs 500,000 more children in poverty compared to five years ago in 2010 and on top of that, his new tax credit policy will put another 200,000 children into poverty. isn't it the triew of -- truth of the martha they are limiting chances of thousands of children from poosher or middle-income families in the society and shouldn't he be aware of that decision he makes? >> there are 480,000 fewer children in households when nobody worked. there are 2 million more people in work. there are almost a million more women in work. a quarter of a million, more young people in route. the best route out of poverty is
to help people get a job. even though unemployment figures came out today and we see 140,000 more people in work, he still hasn't welcomed the full unemployment. the point he needs to focus on is this, all these people benefit from a growing economy where wages are rising, unemployment, inflation is falling and where we are getting rid of deficit to create economic stability, and that's that stability that will be voting on tonight. [shouting] >> could he not tell us something else. the reality is people in work often rely on tax credits to make ends meet. his party put forth a budget which cuts tax credits, gives tax breaks to the wealthiest in
society, inequality is getting worst and not better, should he not think for a moment about the choices that he's making and the reality it is for the very poorest people in our society? >> the gentleman talks about reform of tax credits, let me tell him why it is necessary. between 1998 and 2010 the bill from tax credits went to 6 billion to 30 billion and yet in poverty went up by 20%. the system of taking money away from people and giving it back in tax credits wasn't working. we say it's better to let people earn more and take less in taxes. we have 2 million more in work.
[shouting] >> deliver the strongest world anywhere in the western world. tonight the party has the work. for some reason they decided to do 180-degree turn and vote for more borrowing forever. is that not the position of the labour party? the reality is that 3 million and low and middle-income families are going to be worst off. if the prime minister wants to change his mind on tax credit, he's very welcome to do that. an opportunity next week when there's going to be opposition debate on this subject. i'm sure the prime minister wants to take part in that
debate and explain why is it a good idea to make more people worst off. i have questions on housing on the last few of days. i just want to say this, a question from matthew, it might be funny to some members but not to matthew or others. i live in private rented house in loaned open with three other people, despite earning a salary well over median range, buying the cheapest of properties is well beyond my reach for years to come. does the prime minister think it's fair -- does he really believe that 450,000 pounds is an affordable price for a new home for somebody on an average income to try to inspire him? >> first of all, he's right to raise housing, affordability of
housing in london, what i will say is we are doing everything we can to build more houses particularly affordable houses that he can buy. now, the the honorable gentleman quotes, that should be for a starter home in london, we want to see starter home at 250,000 pounds so people like matthew can stop renting and start buying. now what have we done for people like matthew? we've increased, introduced help to buy. for the first time we actually helping to get people their deposit together to buy a new home. we are also giving people like matthew to buy housing association home and now we have -- [shouting] >> we hear from the labour party, the entire housing association movement is backing our plan and helping people to
buy their homes. so i would say to the honorable gentleman, let us work together and get london buildings, get prices down so people like matthew can afford to buy a home of their own. [shouting] >> could i bring the prime minister back to reality. [shouting] >> the last -- the last five years have seen a low level and rapid rents, rises homelessness. we need to be building at least 240,000 homes per year. will he address the problem that local authorities face in order
to undertake necessary of counsel housing rather obsession in the government to selling properties rather than building homes that desperately need them so children can be raised in a safe and secure environment. >> first of all, the housing association movement is backing the right to buy. up to a million extra homeowners with that money going into building more homes. that's the first one. the second point on could believe housing, in the last five years when i was prime minister we built more homicide -- hom -- homes than the last. we need a strong and stable
economy. we are not going to have a strong and stable economy if we adopt the new labour position which is borrowing money forever. i would urge in members that believe in strong economy to join us in the lobbies tonight. >> it would be very nice if the prime minister would answer the question that i asked. [shouting] order, order. these proceedings should be done in seemingly way. remain calm, be as good as you can be. >> thank you, mr. speaker, i'm totally calm. i just put the question,
actually put to him was is what is he doing to allow local authorities to build the homes that are necessary for people that can't afford to rent in the private sector. i would be happy if he wrote to me about it and we should share the lessons to others. i want to turn my last question to one of the subjects. i realize he may not be able to give me the full answer today. i'm sure he's aware that yesterday was breast cancer awareness day. i met two women who are suffering from terminal breast cancer and apparently the prime minister met their organization in 2010, they raised with him a very serious problem of the collection of data and the treatment or success rates of
treatment that goes on. apparently this information is not being collected as efficiently as it might be. the data is going to be collected and centralized to make sure that every women that's going to breast cancer, knowing it's terminal, maybe some treatment can alleviate the pain and get with me as soon as possible? >> i think he met them at his conference and i had a good discussion with them. we all know people who have the tragedy of having breast cancer. i can only imagine to recovery and survive breast cancer and to find that you have a secondary
cancer that's incurrable. what the campaign is asking is better information to make sure we are spreading the best practice in every hospital so that we really do treat people as quickly as we possible can. i had a conversation with them. i relayed that. i'm happy to write to them about it. but making sure people get the right the diagnosis, get it quickly and then we use the information to tackle secondary cancer is essential for our country. >> mr. speaker, the prime minister spoke and shockingly about the life of despair that lies ahead for too many of looked after children. i wonder if he could expand on reforms he proposes for the most vulnerable of citizens. >> i'm very grateful who knows a lot from his work in london when he worked for the mayor. there are two areas we need to look at, first of all.
we should be reducing the number of children in care by making sure they can find loving homes. we made some progress. we had setbacks, not because of judgments in our courts, we need to get that level of adoption back up again. the second thing is to use some of the knowledge we had in education reforms and bring it to reforming social services, so to the get the best graduates. >> thank you. [shouting] >> the uk has been involved in three military interventions in three years. there have been severe unintended consequences. the taliban controls afghanistan again. in libya toteal anarchy and
chaos. what has prime minister learned from past mistakes? >> of course, intervention has consequences, but frankly noninterventions have consequences too as we see from number of syrians fleeing. it is worth making that point. in terms of the lessons learned, i can't wait for them to come out. we learned lessons, making sure we act on the basis of clear legal advise and attorney general attends all important meetings and working with allies and working partners. one it's frustrating what is happening in iraq and syria, one is to work with local partners,
it is iraqi troops that are the boots on the ground and that's why we need to give them the support on the war against isil. >> sadly taliban are back. the uk spent 13 times more bombing libya than rebuilding the country and there has been anarchy. the u.s. dropped 500 million-dollar program to support syrian opposition, russia is bombing syria and the uk has no plan to help refugees from syria who are now in -- [shouting] >> the uk has no plan to help syrian refugees who have made it -- >> i think the honorable gentleman is reaching the conclusion of his question but he must be allowed to. >> they're not acknowledge that the uk has no policy to help
syrian refugees who have made it to europe. there is no surprise that there's growing skepticism about the drum beat towards war. would the prime minister give assurance that he has learned lessons of iraq, afghanistan, libya and he will never repeat them? [shouting] >> i'll take a couple of things to the honorable gentleman. we are the second largest bilateral donor to syrian refugees in jordan, in lebanon, in turkey and that's because we are spending gross national income on aid. more than any other country in the world to help syrian refugees, frankly, i don't recognize the picture he paints of afghanistan, the fact is we have supported an afghan
national government that are in control of the country. the final point is well standing on his high-horse and lecturing about the past, would he be happier with afghan with go ged. >> thank you, mr. speaker. already benefiting from infrastructure investment such as significant improvement -- [shouting] >> does the prime minister agree that the reasonably announced and independent national infrastructure commission will play a key role in improving and securing our nation's long-term economic prospects? >> i'm delighted we are establishing the national infrastructure commission. i hope it can put some of these
questions about infrastructure beyond party politics. i think that would be thoroughly good thing. i'm delighted that made a great contribution in government will be someone who is running it. i know that the honorable friend and i will want to make sure that it's looked at very carefully as it does its work. someone is shouting neighbor policy, where we find neighbor policy we implement it. [shouting] >> you know what we are doing tonight, we are implementing what was a week a labour policy. [shouting] >> prime minister has finished his answer. [shouting] >> but we are extremely grateful
that progress is being done slow and i want to get back and i will do so. >> thank you very much. mr. speaker. the government has estimated interest by the chancellor, 146 million pounds coming back from the public sector. there has been no confirmation that a single penny of that will come to scotland to fund our distinct program. will the prime minister confirm that scottland will receive fair share of this funding or are we seeing, picking up for -- [shouting] >> we haven't yet set the rate of the apprenticeship levy or set what level of business size has to be before it starts paying it. the guaranty i can give them that scottland will be treated fairly, will get full and fair share of apprenticeship but they
invent a grievance before it even exists. [shouting] >> will bring 1900 new jobs. new facilities. does the prime minister agree with me that you simply don't get 50 million pounds investment without economic confidence and would he like to join us in the opening in due course? [shouting] >> i already made the visit to my honorable friend's constituency. i'll make the point, that yes, you need strong and stable economy to make sure to get investment and housing going. we need counsel to put placements in plan and that way we can deliver extra housing. [shouting] >> during the campaign prime
minister came to my constituency and promised financial mes, since then the government has backtracked some promises, will the prime minister show a man of his word by meeting with me to discuss ways election -- [shouting] >> we haven't backtracked on what we promised. we will put more money on nhs. we talked about 8 billion. we are delivering 10 billion more. we believe that these decisions should be made locally and vital service. [shouting] >> thank you, mr. speaker. [shouting] >> welcomes sustainable growth. would my honorable friends oh who knows our area well agree
it's a promise funding for infrastructure must be provided instead with development? [shouting] >> well, first of all, let me welcome my honorable friend to the house and she replaces very good friend, my former neighbor tony who worked so hard for the people and when people say in the size of england there aren't councils that don't want to build, they should look at vista. shows that we can build, build sensibly and provide homes that young people want to live in. >> thank you, prime minister. concerns the recent biography, he told the prime minister in 2009 about his tax and he didn't
know the detail, clearly someone is telling porkies, is it him or lord? >> i would think of many better uses of his time than reading that book. [shouting] >> i manage to procure a free coffee and in order oh not to give anyone royalties i will gladly lend him a copy. i think you remember that in this house labour and conservative agreed to legislate, i fully supported and suggested at the time. [shouting] >> thank you, mr. speaker. i'm delighted to tell the house that we set a new record. unemployment is at its lowest since records began. [shouting] >> does the prime minister agree with me that if we return to bad
>> the government is even talking about the disablement. what is the prime minister going to do? >> i'm going to deliver on the promises of 2 million apprentices in the last parliament. 3 million apprentices in this parliament. what the you can see in terms of changes is a record number of students going to our universities and a record number from the income backgrounds going to our universities. we are going to go on the record in this parliament as we uncapped student numbers and encourage people to study and make the most of their talents. >> my right honorable friend will remember reading my amazing tenure old constituent archie hill in january who has a
devastating condition. archie has campaigned tirelessly to get access through the nhs doing the drug that would help them at about 50 other children. in scotland recently the drug has been prescribed. can my right honorable friend assure me that in england these children will receive this drug, and archie's fantastic campaign has not been in vain? >> well, i well remember beating arch and his incredible spirit and the way in which his campaign. the decision will be made on friday but what we need to do as well as make sure these decisions are made by clinicians rather than politicians is also talk to the drug companies about time to get the cost of some of these drugs down. the specific drug and others like it can cost over 400,000 pounds per patient per year and that is what the cancer drugs fund has been helping to do is try to reduce the cost
that these companies charge, and we need that in other areas, too. >> many years disabled people in fleet would have enjoyed free access to a local transit service to connect the town. they are free travel has now been withdrawn due to funding cuts. will be prime minister consider extending the national concession travel scheme to include not just buses but trends which are also easie eacf for all the people and disabled travelers to use? >> i look carefully at the point the honorable lady races because we are very proud of the fact we've kept all of our promises to pensioners, not least the triple lock promise with which such low inflation figures that yesterday less than 0%. there will be vital in giving our pensioners a better standard of living. i suspect it is a council decision by the county council rather than a decision by me. >> mr. speaker, the brutal
murder of a 15 adulatory serious case review which was published today. the review makes clear that there was a link by numerous agencies including social services, schools and probation service. we can see from the report that the horrific death need not have happened. will be prime minister join me in offering heartfelt condolences to the parents and also in asking all those agencies involved to ensure that they learn from this tragic case of? >> i think my auto prevent is absolutely right to raise this. let me send my condolences to the family for the appalling loss and tragedy that they have suffered. there is going to be, this report as she said and i think what matters that is the police and other agencies studied this report and learn the lessons of these mistakes are not may begin in the future. >> at the moment trade union
members across the country including schoolbooks, shop workers cannot cast a vote in a trade union election either at their place of work or electronically. is the trade union bill is passed can be prime minister tony will they be able to do so? >> i think first of all what matters is that we have proper balance where we don't have strikes unless there's a proper percentage of people supporting them. and i noticed that the mccloskey is now supporting opposition. the problem with the issue of electronic voting which i could the speakers commission look into is that it isn't yet clear you can guarantee a very safe and secure balance. and, frankly, i don't think it is too much to ask people were about to go potentially go on strike developed a ballot paper.
>> thank you, mr. speaker. recently i received a letter from transport for london and for me in the last year they spent over 1.4 million pounds of supplies, which is fantastic news for local economy. would my right honorable friend agree with me that by investing in britain's infrastructure discovered has reenergized manufacturing and engineering safeguarding security? >> i think the honorable lady makes an important point which is big infrastructure decisions, whatever there may, can benefit every part of the country in terms of jobs in manufacturing. the last five years london has seen this huge investment because of crossrail from the biggest infrastructure project anywhere in europe but i think we'll see frankly a better balance in the coming years not least with a massive collective vacation and other programs going on around the country. so it's about important but you
can't have infrastructure investment without a secure and strong economy which we will be delivering. >> thank you, mr. speaker. recently i've been contacted by a number of constituents who are facing real hardship as a consequence of the current payment of child support. if it's found a pair doesn't make -- there are no penalties and no requirements to make back payments. what actio actual the prime minr take to close these loopholes which have a very detrimental effect on vulnerable families and -- >> questions and answers really do in future need to be somewhat briefer. we are making much slower progress than in the last parliament. much slower. the prime minister. >> the honorable lady races something which we've all seen in our constituency. the problems with the system, we
know from the old child support agency system that that had many imperfections as well. we try to introduce more voluntary arrangements to encourage parents to seek ways of actually making sure that their payments are made what i look very closely at the question she asked a press i can write to her about it. >> thank you. order. point of order. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. the investigatory powers tribunal ruled in a case brought by myself and baroness jones at the wilson doctrine no legal judgment a parent to contradict with a primer should told the house just last month, can you advisors please, mr. speaker, the best way of ensuring that the prime minister comes to the cells that he makes the statement about what he knew and the recently he brings forward legislation to ensure that the communications of mps when there undertaken the parliamentary duties are not spied upon without independent
judicial approval? >> i must say to the honorable lady whom i'm grateful to be given the advanced notice both of her intention to raise a point of order and that the substance. but i fear she flatters meeting and somewhat decries herself get it is not for the cheer to proper advice on this matter but i will attend in terms to the specifics of the matter that she is just raise. i am aware, of course i am conscious that the tribunal today released its judgment in the case brought by the honorable lady, and others on the wilson doctrine. she will understand and appreciate that at this point i have not read it, but in any case i do not believe that it falls to me as speaker -- the right honorable gentleman will patiently await may apply -- replied -- or to provide a
commentary upon it. i mean, of course i'm also conscious of the concerns of legislatures which have been conveyed to me by colleagues from the chair of those bodies but i don't think they would be right for me to comment on the floor of the house from his chair on these matters. and when the honorable lady asks how can she seek advance or clarification on the matter, the honorable lady bulks regularly from her place on those benches in seeking to question ministers and even the most senior, and i will be looking out for her and others. point of order, mr. alex salmond. >> we will leave the british house of commons as members move onto other business. you have been watching prime minister's question time aired live wednesdays when parliament is in session. a quick reminder you can see this week's session again sunday night at nine eastern and pacific on c-span. for more information go to
c-span.org and click on series to give every program we've aired from the british house of commons since october 1989 amplified or comments about prime minister's questions via twitter using the hashtag pmq. >> this monday on c-span's new series "landmark cases," by 1830 the mississippi river around new orleans had become a breeding ground for cholera and yellow fever partly due to the slaughterhouse is dumping their byproducts into the river. to address this problem louisiana allowed only one government run slaughterhouse, crescent city, to operate in the said district and the others to into court to follow the slaughterhouse cases of 1873 that were joined by former solicitor general and constitutional law attorney and michael ross to help tell the history of the time period in the south, the personal stories
of the butchers and a state of things in new orleans as well as the attorneys and supreme court justices involved in this close decision. be sure to join the conversation every taker calls, tweets and facebook a comment using the hashtag landmark cases. life monday on c-span, c-span3 and c-span were a tear. for background on each case while you watch order your copy of landmark cases companion book. it is available for $8.95 plus shipping at c-span.org/landmarkcases. >> now remarks and presidential candidate and former maryland governor martin o'malley. he also served as baltimore's mayor and his book at the no labels conference in manchester, new hampshire. >> thank you. we have governor o'malley already to go there keys in las vegas so i have this spectacular talk that it wanted to provide
for about 90 seconds of the love. i'm going to cut that short i do think these goals are important, and i would single out that 25 million jobs in 10 years because i see a lot of these young people in these green t-shirt walking around. they are going to need those jobs. our country need those jobs and we want problem solvers. we have problem solvers to help get those jobs. governor mel and i have a couple things in common. we were both governors in big states beginning with him. although in this -- michigan this year it is that one this week. we headed governors associations of our respective armies. where both catholic and he's running for president, i'm not come that's where we part ways. but since he is ready to go at once that it is remarks to take some questions, so get ready because i will be coming to you for some questions from our
first candidate for president who is appearing in front of this historic no labels convention, ladies and gentlemen, governor martin o'malley from the great state of maryland. governor o'malley. [applause] >> thank you very much. hey, thank you your governor engler, thanks very, very much. one little correction by way of problem-solving as you can see from the backdrop behind me i'm not yet in las vegas but it will be going out to las vegas. i'm talking to you from baltimore, maryland, land of the free and home of the brave you it's a great honor to be able to talk with all of you, at least in this way, and i'm looking forward to the democratic party finally join this gave been having a debate about how we solve our nation's problems. it's a wonderful idea, isn't it? both parties having debates.
so look, i want to thank senator lieberman. i want to thank governor huntsman but also want to thank governor engler and i special want to acknowledge nancy jacobson who i've known for many, many years and is the founder of the no labels movement. i thought i would share a few ideas with you before we go to question and answer. aas often as and when giving a talk on the chair in new hampshire, by golly, if you have answers, make sure you raised your hand first to what we're we doing in the context of his presidential campaign is not only selecting a person to lead us forward, but also we are on a search for answers. that sort of deeper understanding that we must achieve as a people that actually precedes the better actions we need to take as a country, for better actions that will make our country stronger so we can give our children a future with more opportunity rather than less. let me do a couple things in the next few minutes before we open it up.
i want to share with you first of all my take on what i believe the theory of our case is as a nation right now, and want to share with you a bit of my experience which is the experience of solving problems. then i want to talk about something i see in our country today which is not only a yearning for new leadership but the emerging of a new way of governing, which i see coming up and emanating out of our cities and towns, and also coming up from the attitudes and perspectives of the next generation. so let's begin. you and i are part of a living self-triage ministry called the united states of america. the promise that is at the heart of that mystery is a very real and concrete promise. it's a covenant among us and between us that says where ever you start in our country you start, but for your own hard work, your own talent you should be able to get ahead.
call it an economy that works for all of us, call it the american dream. it is the action that solves problems and address challenges in every generation so that we can include more of our people more fully in the economic success of our country. that's what it means to be an american. for truth, the hard truth of our times that we must acknowledge his of this, while we have come a long way since the wall street crash in 2008, our country still faces big challenges and big problems. thanks to president obama's leadership we are now creating jobs again as a country and, of course, we're the only species on the planet without full employment, so there is no progress without jobs. to our country is doing better but the hard truth of our times is that 70% of us are in the same or less today than we were 12 years ago.
that's not how our economy is supposed to work. that's not how our country is supposed to work. there is a growing injustice in the country today, and is growing injustice is leading to income inequality like we haven't seen for 100 years and declining opportunities for our kids. this problem will not solve itself. we need to solve it. we are americans. our economy is not money. it is people. it is all of our people. so we have to invite one another, democrats, independents and republicans to return to the table of democracy and solve these problems. not with words but with actions. my experience is not the experience so much of a legislator but my experience as a mayor and governor is the experience of an executive, a person was forged new consensus after new consensus in order to get things done. what sort of things?
i'm talking about tackling the worst violent crime problem of any city in america and achieving record reductions of violent crime even as we achieved record reductions in our incarceration rate. talking about making our public schools number one in america. i'm talking about making college more affordable for more people by going four years in a row into recession without a penny's increase in college tuition. passing a living wage, raising the minimum wage, passing marriage equality and the dream act, and passing the most comprehensive gun safety legislation of any state in america after the slaughter of the innocent in newtown. none of those things were easy. they were all difficult, and we didn't get them done by running two are labeled corners. no. instead we invite one another to come with ideas, to help us solve these problems.
and that is a new way of leadership that i believe the people of our country are demanding of all of their elected leaders. one of the happy thing i came home with after traveling around the country for a year before i was, before i made the decision to run for president was the realization that most people feel a lot better about how their cities are run today than they did 10 or 15 years ago. why is that? it's not because their cities are necessary role in cash. we haven't had a federal program and a federal action for cities and decades. the reason why people are feeling better about how their cities are governed is because of the entrepreneurial men and women who take on the title of mayor and actually go to work every day to get things done. they are not afraid of the information age. they know everybody can see and know things at the same time they do so they don't obsess
with trying to maintain a time advantage that they know things before the public knows them. the simo perez i once heard him speak and he said people are now smart families and in no more than their leaders. so what does this mean for us as states and as a country? i believe we need to embrace new technology, the internet, geographic information systems to make our state and federal governments performance measured so that all of us as citizens controlling this enterprise can see what we're doing any better this week than we were last week. mostar governments have the right under the tyranny of last year's budget. lots of department heads can say what sort of budget they want for next year very few today specifically at least at the state and federal levels by the we are doing a this week that we were last week. but in cities they can.
increasingly more and more. the nature of leadership has changed as i see it. this is especially i want to talk to young people who are there in the room. in the time that you have come of age there's been a big shift in leadership. i'm going to hold something up and show it to you. it used to be, it used to be that leadership was this triangle, this hierarchy, this pyramid of command and control, where the leader need to be at the top and have all the information and things got done on the basis of because i said so, or worse, on the basis of ideology. but the nature of leadership has changed in the information age, and to place for the leader to be now is in the center of that emerging truth. in a circle of collaboration and cooperation. and yes, dialogue and
communication around problem-solving, asking one another every day, are the things we're doing working to achieve a better result or not? if they are we should do more of it. if it's not we should stop doing it and do less of it. so that's the way that i have always governed, and i think part of what has allowed me to do that is i am of a different generation than some of my older baby boomer brothers and sisters or parents. i don't ask if an idea is from the left or from the right or whether it's democratic or republican. i asked whether it works. and if it works we do it. that's how we've been able to achieve some pretty nation leading results and actually get things done before any political pollster will tell you it was popular. so what does that mean for our country today. i believe that it means we need to take actions that have the
guts to show people that the things we're doing are actually working. we are a great people. we still have another 204 years of great service ahead of us and that is why i have laid out 15 strategic goal to rebuild the truth of the american dream so that every family can get ahead so that wages go up again with productivity and not down, so that a college degree this actually i did with a life of opportunity, not a trap door to a lifetime of debt. and to square our shoulders to the great challenge of our time climate change and actually great a 100% clean electric energy grid by 2050 and create 5 million jobs along the way. let's be honest with one another. it's not about words. it's about action. each of the goals that i put forward, things like national service to cut youth unemployment in half in the next three years, things like cutting the debts that the death of gun
violence in half over the next 10 years. all of these have dates attached to them. why? because of the difference between a dream and a goal is a deadline. these problems will not solve themselves. we need to solve them come and i thank you, no labels, for having me with you this morning in this way. i look forward to your questions, and more poorly i look forward to your answers. and i need your help. thanks a lot. [applause] >> thank you very much, governor. if you're here you would be right in the center of that knowledge, right in this stage, it's around all sides. the first question is coming from a later -- the lady. so let's start with you. >> i'm jessica from manchester, new hampshire. i want to thank you for being
with us. my question is rather specific. what would you energy policy look like alice president, and do you think we should utilize our natural resources to create jobs and grow the economy while also working on solar and wind power? >> well, sure. let me say this. i have put forward, i am the only candidate in my party, or i should say, i can safely say i'm the only candidate in either party to put forward a plan to move us to a 100% clean electric energy grid by 2050. we did not land a man on the moon with all of the above strategy. we landed a man on the moon because we faced up to a huge engineering challenge. we were intentional about the choices that we make. so this is what, and i commend you, please go on my website.
it jon huntsman.com. just kidding. i wanted to see fewer away. it's actually martin o'malley.com. we have put a pretty specific proposal out there among some of the leading actions in order to move us to the clean electric energy grid. i believe we need to stop subsidizing fossil fuel extraction and instead enact -- [applause] -- and instead, enact long-term investor credits for solar and for wind. i believe that we need to embrace clean technology and energy conservation technology. we need more affordable housing, the advent of a new type of housing that is not sealed in its energy use that can bring forward a whole new era of clean
design and clean architecture in terms of our built environment. and i believe we need to make the investments into clean energy grid that will enable us to move the natural resources, renewable resources that we have, from places where wind is abundant to places where energy is heavily used. what does that mean? instead of drilling for oil off the chesapeake bay and the east coast of the united states, we should be letting the vertebrae and the power lines so that we can create wind off the east coast for so many of our people live. and in the heart of american cities where unemployment is actually higher now in many, many cities and it was eight years ago, we need to throw ourselves into a hole program of training, workforce training, and retrofitting of old buildings in order to reduce energy consumption. if we do all of these things and
if we invest more rather than less in developing baseload cleaner, greener technologies like the next generation of safer nuclear, we can get to 100% clean electric grid by 2050 but it's not going to happen by itself and its that could happen by embracing nostalgia. every job is important. we need to be intentional about those that might have to transition but we're not going to get there without solving this problem and moving forward in conventional ways and that's why intended as president. >> very good. [applause] >> governor, you conceived we of all these green shirt, all this problem solvers that are here under him a we have a superhero whose going to ask the next question. he is problem solver man. he is ready to go. problem solver man, go ahead. >> how are you doing? can you do me? spent problem solver man, do you have a theme song speak with i
don't but i'm in spandex but i don't know if you can see that. i have some advice for you, you're going to las vegas tonight, right speak with ongoing in about an hour. >> okay, cool. i'm just going to do some advice if my grandma gave me when i wanted one when and what did they give. don't gamble. that's my main advice. just be careful. but i guess my question for you is, you talk a lot about how you would be bipartisan president. within your first 100 days of office which bipartisan restaurant would you take john boehner to? or, you know, whoever? >> i did not the restaurants were partisan. [laughter] by the food and alcohol in fact were decidedly nonpartisan. [applause] problem solver man -- >> there's a question in there
somewhere. >> i think let the answer the call of the questions that's in there somewhere. this is what i've learned as a mayor and as a governor. you have to call the legislature all the time. you have to make sure that you relate and talk to people like people. in other words, i think it was the talk though -- de tocqueville who said anything about america's the strength of our, our ability to hold different political opinions and views but still be able to relate to one another as human beings. one of the sad byproduct if we're not careful of it of this information age is that we can program our phones, we can program our tvs, we can program the stream of news we receive so we only talk to people who think most exactly like us. there's a danger in that.
some of the things we get an american we only got done with republican votes. i believe part of the reason that happened was because we were very intentional about having, about having nonpartisan, bipartisan pizza night at the governor's mansion, and making sure that we broke bread, treated people decently and invited people to a holiday open house and all sorts of other things, regardless of party label. so were it not for some republican votes i would not have been able to repeal the death penalty, something that took us three tries ever only able to do with some republican votes. i would not have been able to pass marriage equality, again something that took us three tries ever only able to do because of some republican votes. [applause] as we went back and researched the priority bills that i put in
as governor, i was happy to see that 75% of the governors bills come and we only do about a dozen every session, 75% of them received bipartisan support in one house or the other, a rather majority republican support in one house or the other. i think we have to stay focused on the goals that unite us and the principles that unite us. our police and the dignity of every person, i believe that own responsibility to advance the common good we share. thank you, problem solver man spent so essentially more pizza parties in congress. >> it's not that simple. it's not that simple, but sometimes it does come down to just treating people like human beings and picking up the phone and calling members and asking them their perspective, knowing what their wives names are, knowing what they do, knowing who their kids ours.
we have to treat people like people. [applause] spent let's see if we can get another question in. spent let's do lightning round, governor? how about if the questioner does a 32nd, i will be 30 seconds. >> very good. first one spent i hope this takes you more than 30 seconds. i'm a resident of new hampshire. i made the mistake of going on youtube and look at the 1992 presidential debates. what i saw was the exact same issues that are being brought up this year. it tells me that nothing effective has happened in more than 20 years in washington. you are a person of great influence. i think that's great. what i'm asking you to date is what will you do to unlock that gridlock, regardless of whether you're the elected president or not?
[applause] >> a i believe that all of us have a responsibility to stay at the table, not to check out, not to assume that big money has taken over our politics, not to assume that the outcomes determined before we have the conversation. so that's what i intend to do and that's what i've done all my life. there is no easy solution to the gridlock that we see now. i would push back on you a little bit i think it's actually a lot worse now than it was in 1992. and certainly we suffered a huge setback when our country was nearly plunged into a second great depression. but this is what i believe though, in talking to young people in our country i rarely find among people under 30 young americans that do not climate change israel or think that we
should come together to do something about it. i rarely find young americans who want to bash immigrants applaud back -- [applause] i rarely find young people who want to deny rights to gay couples. [applause] i'm going to continue to speak to the place and the call forward to the energy of our next generation. >> we want to wish you like is our lightning round has result in a lightning bolt take me off this stage and making for the next battle but we want to thank you for baltimore, maryland, today for your willingness to be herehere comes another one. you are the first but will not be the last. thank you for taking some questions and for your candor. so thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen, governor martin o'malley, thank you. [applause] >> lieutenant governor of virginia joined a discussion of birth control, family planning and public policy.
we will do from reform welfare policy advisor in the bush administration. live coverage from the bookings institution pashtun brookings institution. >> next provide serve as presidential candidate bernie sanders talk about social security, wages and health care. he spoke to the bipartisan conference hosted by the group no labels. ♪ ♪ >> good afternoon, everyone. that's my fellow q. does the cuban-american, gloria estefan.
i want to do a conga line but next time i will have that and will have a great time. how many of you here are from vermont? well, let me to you something. growing up in cuba there's only one state in the union i knew and that's because my mom learned to make great pancakes. and so i had this little bottle that said vermont maple syrup and i've got to do, it's the once did i get and the wednesday i loved, and so glad to introduce the senator from the great state of mind. national vice chair of the no labels, joined by some great colleagues, and you've heard from senator lieberman and some governor huntsman and from mike mccarty and lisa before. you hear from a colleague at charlie black. we are very proud to put this together. we need more no labels problem solvers in america. men and women from both political parties and
independents committed to get things done. we're very proud of 140 college chapters in this country. thank you, problem solvers. [cheers and applause] >> and hundreds of thousands of activists around the country. here's a message will i want to send to those candidates pledging to blow things up. we've already done that and it doesn't work. america wants to move on and here's what we expect i hope of our presidential candidates. one, campaigned on your vision for america. two, tell us how you're going to get the job done. disagree without being disagreeable. think big, be bold, agree to embrace the goals of creating 25 million new jobs in 10 years, and fixing soul sister, medicare for the next 75 years, alice the budget in the next 15 years and make america energy strong and independent. today in politics, unlike in
sports, there are no referees and no penalties, though rules against bad behavior. but fortunately you in this room and the millions of americans out there are the enforcers with your boat. in sports we shake hands, embrace our adversaries. and in politics today that's deemed a weakness. it is criticized. and i say what's with that? that's not the american spirit. [applause] well, i'm here to introduce to you a presidential candidate with whom i politically disagree. you know, i'm the former chairman of the american conservative union, and i'm introducing a senator of the united states, bernie sanders to see, it's not hard to get along, and i'm proud to actually be introducing senator sanders. and there's something about to tell you the he asserted generate a lot of enthusiasm.
and by the way, have you seen senator sanders political rallies? it's like going to a mick jagger concert. they are about the same age. [laughter] but instead of feeling the lives of brown sugar, it's about feeling not trying to come and really what happened. [applause] he's learned to work with his colleagues and despite of our divergent views last your senator sanders and senator mccain hammered home a difficult cover ms. to reform the va health system. as a ladies and gentlemen, let's give it up for the land of maple syrup, let's deal for the bern, senator bernie sanders. -- feel the bern. [applause]
>> al, thank you very much for that generous introduction. i will make certain to get you all of the maple syrup you need. let me begin by thanking the no labels conference for inviting me, and for the important work they are doing. and i think the essence of what they're trying to do, what you all are trying to do is to get beyond the ugliness of contemporary politics, the third bidder, personal attacks that we see every single day, and let sit down and analyze what the most important problems are that we face as a country and figure out together how we go forward. and as i am a dedicated and there will be big disagreements. let's treat each other civilly, let's treat each other respectfully and let's try not
to demonize people who have disagreements with us. [applause] in my mind there is no question but that our country faces some very, very series of challenges in fact. the challenges that we face today, if you include climate change, may be greater than at any time since the great depression. and asked the no labels conference points out, what we need are answers to the problem, not just campaign rhetoric. let me start by saying that the bad news, and it is very bad news and it's an issue we've got to deal with, is that as a result of the citizens united supreme court decision, we now have a campaign system which, and i use the word advisedly come is corrupt and is
undermining american democracy. i've got to lay that might have on the table. i do not think that there's anything democratic about the fact that millionaires and billionaires can now spend as much money as they want, and we'll get one family spending $900 million in this campaign cycle in order to elect candidates who represent their interests and not the best interests of the american people. so let me start this discussion right off at the top by saying it would really want to create a vigorous vibrant democracy where all people, conservatives, progressives, moderates can get actively involved and run for the office, in my view, we've got to overturn citizen guided, and in my view, move the public funding of elections. when we talk about the economy, and i think the no labels conference for focusing on this
issue, let us be clear. real unemployment is not what you read in the newspapers once a month. that's the official unemployment rate which is to around 5% the real unemployment, including those people have given up looking for work and those people who are working part-time, is about 10%. and let me touch on something that very few people are talking about a to help the no labels people will talk about, and that is youth unemployment. a study recently came out looking at youth unemployment for high school graduates between 17 and 20 years of age. and what they found is that for white young people real unemployment was 31%. for hispanic kids it was 36%. and for african-american kids it was 51%.
this is a crisis situation. and if we are more interested in making sure our kids are in school and have jobs, we should be investing in our young people and not simply in jails and incarceration. so real unemployment and i'm glad you raised the issue but unemployment and it's an issue that has to be talked about. it is much higher than i think people assume it is and it is a crisis proportions for young people. and again the united states of america and i hope you all agree with me, should not be having more people in jail, to point you million people, than any other country on earth. we should be investing in jobs and education, not just jails and incarceration -- 2.2 million. >> when we talk about how we create some 25 million jobs over the next 10 years, the are in my view, several things that we've got to do.
first we've got to understand everything there is widespread bipartisan agreement on this. we've got to understand that our infrastructure, our roads, bridges, water systems, wastewater plants, airports, rail system, our levees and dams in many parts of this country we have not invested sufficiently in our infrastructure. and according to the american society of civil engineers, we need trillions of dollars of investment. because in many ways our infrastructure is crumbling, falling further and further behind many other countries. and that is why i have proposed a $1 trillion investment over a five year period in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. and that is itself would create up to 13 million decent paying jobs, and at the same time,
because we're improving our infrastructure, make our country more efficient, more productive and, in fact, safer. so i believe we should have a massive federal jobs program rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. we can create just by doing that some 13 million decent paying jobs. when we talk about job creation, it is also important to be talking about not just how we create new jobs, but how we prevent the loss of millions of jobs. here's the simple truth. as a result of our disasters trade policies, policies like nafta and cafta and permanent normal relations with china could we've lost millions of decent paying jobs because what corporations have done is simply shut down in america, move to low-wage countries abroad, hired
people there and then brought their products back into this country. since 2001 in america we have lost about 60,000 factories, not all of that can be attributed to trade but a lot of it can be. so if we are serious about creating jobs, we need trade policies which create jobs in america, not just china or vietnam. and that is why i not only have voted against nafta, trevor, permanent normal trade relations with china, i strongly oppose the trans-pacific partnership. furthermore, if we're going to talk about how we create millions of jobs we all agree that we need to create, we need a financial system which makes affordable loans to small and medium-sized businesses.
i think we all understand that the economic engine of america is not large corporations which by and large have been downsizing and moving to other countries, a small and medium-sized businesses. i have very deep concerns about our current financial system in which you have a handful of banks on wall street. your six large initial institutions which have assess the quality of a 60% of the gdp of the united states of america. these financial institutions on wall street are not terribly concerned, in my view, about creating jobs on main street or in small towns all over america. i think they're created, the recklessness, there irresponsibility is known to all. they cause of the financial collapse of 2008. so i think what we have to do is put greater emphasis and support
for community banks, credit unions, financial institutions who are part of the committees they serve who know the people in the communities, who know the people who want to buy homes, another people who are running small and medium-size business. and let me be very honest with you. i think when you have today three out of the four largest financial institutions, much larger today than we were when we build them out because they're too big to fail, do you know what? i think it is time to reinstate glass-steagall legislation and also to break them up. [applause] you know, if teddy roosevelt were a live today, he was a good republican, if teddy roosevelt were alive today i think what he would be saying is when you have a small number of huge financial institutions who have so much
economic power, so much political power, they are doing a real disservice to our economy, and they think he would say we should break them up, and i agree with him. [applause] when we talk about jobs, what we've also got to appreciate is that while it is obsolete inherited that we create millions of decent paying jobs, it is also equally important that those jobs pay people a living wage. all over the country right now, in vermont and in new hampshire you have folks who are working two or three jobs, working 50, 60 hours a week trying to provide for their families, trying to cobble together some health care. and in my view, when we have today a federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, we've just got to recognize that that minimum wage
is totally inadequate. we've got to raise that minimum wage to a living wage, and i believe that over the next several years in cities like los angeles and seattle have begun to become we've got to raise the minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour because i think if somebody works 40 hours per week, that person should not be living in poverty. [applause] now, you also have raised a very important issue of social security and medicare. and let me briefly touch on them. first, despite some of the rhetoric you may have heard from many politicians, social security is not going program on every day on television someone thinks so sister is going broke. we've got to cut social security, raise the retirement age.
that is simply not accurate. the truth of the matter is, according to the social security administration, i don't think anyone can test this, social security has about $2.8 trillion in its trust fund and can pay of every benefit of to every eligible american for the next 19 years. now, that tells us that we don't have a major crisis but, frankly, 19 years is still too short a period of time and we've got to figure out how we can extend the life of social security a lot longer than that to make sure that our kids under grandchildren no social security will be there for them. in my view, the fairest way to extend the life of social security for the next 50 years is to make sure that the wealthiest people in this country, many of whom are doing phenomenally well, start paying the same percentage of their
income into the social security system as the middle-class and working families of our country currently pay. right now as you know somebody who's making hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars a year pays the same amount of money into the social security trust fund as somebody who makes $118,500 a year. in my view, that is wrong. what i would do everything to reduce legislation to do this, what i would do is apply the payroll tax on all income starting at $280,000 a year, and i would use his revenue not just to extend the life of social security and my proposal extends the life of social security to the year 2061, but i would also expand social security benefits.
and here's the truth. in my state of vermont, i mean, i've talked to too many seniors in vermont and seniors all over this country, there are seniors and people with disabilities who are trying to get by on horrifically low incomes. you know, you talk to people are trying to make it on 10, 11, $12,000 a year, and the truth is you really can't survive on that level of income. and that means not buying their prescription drugs you need, not heating your home in the winter, not buying the food that you adequately need. and, in fact, we should be cognizant of the fact that the average souls us could benefit today is just $1328 a month. so my view is that we should extend social security. we should expand social security and we do that by lifting the cap on taxable incomes.
now can get past the good questions about medicare so let's talk about medicare. when we talk about medicare we have to broaden the discussion a little bit to talk about health care in america. here are the simple facts. the united states today spends far more per capita, per person on health care than do the people of any other country. that's just the facts. and despite the gains of the affordable care act were some 15 million more americans now have health insurance, we still have 29 million people in this country who have zero health insurance, and many people are underinsured with high deductibles and high copayments. and sometimes they just don't get to the doctor because they can't afford to pay for their deductibles. in my view, and i know not everybody agrees, but in my view, the united states of america has got to join every other major industrialized country on earth and guarantee
health care to all people as albright, not a privilege. now those of us who live in hampshire, those of us who live in vermont, we border on candidate and candid has managed to provide health care to every man, woman and child in the country in a much more cost-effective way and we do. germany has a different system. denmark has a different system. uk, france, they all have different systems of the commonality of their systems is everybody has health care as a right, and all of those systems like health care to the people in a more cost-effective way. and by the way, to health care outcomes for many of those systems is better than ours in terms of longevity, life expectancy, infant mortality rates, et cetera. last point, you asked how do we
balance the budget by the year 2030? that's clearly an important issue. and the good news is that since the president obama was elected we have made some pretty significant progress. when president bush left office, as most of you know we're running up a record breaking $1.4 trillion federal deficit. today, while too high, the federal deficit is down to $426 billion. so that is making some progress, but obviously it is still at large deficit and we have a national debt of over $18 trillion, and that is a serious problem. let me put the issue if i might add debt and deficit into a broader context, and touch on some issues i think are not widely discussed.
when we talk about the deficit and the debt, i hope that everybody remembers that when we went to war in afghanistan and iraq, unfortunately those wars were not paid for her they were put on the credit card, and those wars will end up costing us somewhere between four and $6 trillion. and i got to tell you, i have a hard time understanding how some members of congress say we have to cut social good, medicare, medicaid and education and nutrition programs for hungry kids as we have a deficit, but when it comes to war, not a problem, not a problem, we are just going to put on the credit card. ..
has seen its share of our nation's wealth more than double while middle class has lost trillions of dollars in wealth. when we talk about deficit reduction, we talk about government in general, that fundamental reality has got to be understood. the middle class is shrinking. the very rich are becoming much richer. corporations in many ways, many of them are enjoying record-breaking profits. today the top .1 of 1% owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90%. is that the kind of economy we
think america and the middle class deserves today? despite people working incredibly long hours. 58% of all new incomes is going to the top 1%. so in my view, when we talk about investments that have to be made in our country in terms of education, in terms of infrastructure, that reality has always got to be middle class shrinking, wealthiest people doing phenomenally well. so, in order to make progress in reducing our deficit and our national debt we obviously need to make certain that our government is running as efficiently as possible and all of you know, whether you're conservatives or progressives that is not the case. a lot of inefficiency and a lot of waste. all that i would add to that general thought is we also have to take a look at the department
of defense. sometimes people say, government is terrible, it is inefficient. let's throw money at department of defense. that is wrong. when we talk about running efficient government, that has got to include the department of defense. it also means in my view, that we need to move aggressive toward real tax reform so that those individuals and corporations who have the best ability to pay in fact do so. and let me just give you a few ideas on that subject. at a time when we are losing $100 billion a year in revenue because corporations are stashing their profits in the cayman islands and other offshore tax havens, we have got to eliminate this legalized tax fraud. it is just wrong. it doesn't make any sense that your profitable corporations making billions of dollars a year in profits, in some cases
not paying one nickel in federal income tax. at a time when the 15 wealthiest people in country increase their wealth by $170 billion in the last two years, i would significantly increase the tax, the estate tax on inherited wealth of more than $3.5 million. furthermore, as warren buffett often remind us, we have a tax system which enables some of the wealthiest people in this country to have an effective, real tax rate which is lower than truck drivers or nurses and that makes no sense to me nor do i think it makes sense to the american people. so bottom line is, wealthiest people becoming much wealthier. large corporations in many cases enjoying luge profits. middle class in many ways
disappearing. if we're going to deal with the deficit and the debt we have got to have a tax system which asks those people on top who are doing extraordinarily well to start paying their fair share of taxes. very last point. [applause] you raise an important question about making the united states energy secure by 2024. i agree with you, i want to see that happen as well but in all due respect, and i say this respectfully, when we talk about energy, there is in fact an even more important issue than just energy independence. i sit on both the senate environmental committee and the senate energy committee and what i can tell you without the slightest hesitation that the scientific community is virtually unanimous. climate change is real. climate change is caused by
human activity. climate change is already causing devastating problems in our country and around the world. and what the scientists tell us is if we do not get our act together now, and transform our information system away from fossil fuel, to energy efficiency and sustainable energy, the planet that we are going to be leaving our children is a planet that will be in a lot worse shape than the planet we enjoy today and that is morally unacceptable. it is unacceptable to say, well we don't care about the planet we're leaving our kids, go on, same old, same old, more and more fossil fuel. i want to see us move towards energy independence. the way you do that is aggressively move forward toward energy efficiency, toward a transportation system which is not just dependent on automobiles and invest
aggressively in wind, solar, geothermal and other sustainable energies. so, let me conclude by thanking the no labels conference for the good work they do. for trying to get serious discussion on serious issues. to try to minimize the politics we see, the personal attacks that we see. i thank you very much for what you're doing and i look forward to working with you in future. thank you all very much. [applause] ♪ >> lieutenant governor of virginia joins a discussion on birth control, family planning and public policy. we'll also hear from a former welfare policy advisor in the bush administration. live coverage start this is morning from the brookings institution at 9:00 eastern on c-span2. senator and presidential candidate marco rubio takes questions at a town hall
meeting. the republican will be lynch in derry, new hampshire and and we have it live on 12:30 eastern on c-span. more from the no labels panel. they discuss bipartisanship. ♪ >> hello, problem solvers, and hello, new hampshire, thank you for being here. we have the privilege today of focusing now up on state and local government and how problems are solved. by setting big goals and working across party lines. we have a very distinguished bipartisan panel of state legislators and local government officials and they all support no labels and you will have a
great time hearing from them. i will introduce them now. state senator capri cafaro of ohio. councilman chris clark from california. state senator jeff daniel son from iowa. mayor chip johnson of mississippi. senator frank rose of ohio. mayor blair mylo of indiana. councilman trey roder from oklahoma. and state representative warrick saying ben of arkansas. -- saben. welcome, everybody. we have focused, we have focused a lot today on getting the next president to commit to the national stratagenda and work with congress to solve our problems and reach our goals at the federal level. you know what?
they might learn a lot from state and local government officials. we'll have them tell you how they solve their problems at that level of government. >> well, thank you. it is wonderful to be in this room with all of energy and with people committed to trying to solve this country's problems. for so long many of us worked in a partisan way but then we expect whether an election is over that our elected officials come together and do the right thing for the people. that is what these elected officials, these local and state and city elected officials have done. i think you will learn a lot from them. you know what? they know the how, how does that happen and what we have asked them to do is give you an example of something that they have done where they worked with the opposition to make things happen. let's sit down, let's take, take
the weight off, and i think that all of you know that a lot of times these local elected officials are people that live right next door to their constituents. so if they don't work to get a problem solved, somebody calls them in the middle of night and says, why isn't my trash picked up? they have to make things work. and we'd like to get their examples so that we can bubble it up to the federal level and say this is the way you do it. so let's get started. senator, i would like to ask you if you would give us a good example. one final thing, i would like to know if you set the goal before you worked on the solution or did the goal kind of come together with that solution? >> [inaudible] >> that would be you, senator. >> there are a few senators up here. good afternoon, i'm state senator capri cafar from the state of ohio. i've been in office representing
community i grew up in for almost nine years. i spent three years in the state senate between 2009 and 2012 as senate minority leader. i'm a democrat. i'm proud to be here with my republican colleague frank la rose in northern eastern ohio. when i was minority leader of ohio senate, one of the first things i decided was necessary in order to identify true consensus building was to come together and have duly sponsored bills. that may sound either super nerdy and might be scratching your head, why weren't you already doing that? so i always give the example at federal level you have mccain-feingold, hypenated bill names of democrat and republican sponsor. often times we heard this morning from our congressional panel really big issues get done at a bipartisan manner. so when i came in 2009 at the barely ripe old age of 30, 31
almost, i guess, i went and approached president bill harris, republican and i respectfully asked him, i said, mr. president, we need to have this model in the ohio senate. it is unbelievable that we can not come together and sponsor bills as dual lead sponsors across the aisle. we did not have that before i was minority leader and we still have it today. that i think is incredibly important tool for us to be able to get things done. i will give you one brief example of hard ideas. my area of expertise is health care policy. we worked very arduously to get medicaid reform done in ohio, particularly in the context of expanding medicaid to a new population after the implementation of the affordable care act. but we wanted to do it in prudent manner that would be cost effective that would improve health outcomes and control costs and so i worked together. i am also a licensed social worker. i worked together with senator
dave burke, a republican pharmacist from marriesville to author medicaid reform in ohio. it was year long process and worth it and we wouldn't be able to get it done with balanced product and not able to do it without being dual sponsors. we need solution or remember ended focus and i'm excited no labels is focusing on that today. >> thank you. frank would you like -- [applause] >> i sincerely believe one of the biggest barriers to good government the is way districts lines are drawn followed only by way we raise money for campaign. redistricting reform and campaign finance reform are two things sorely needed for us to improve the quality of our institutions and the way they work. [applause] well, something as impactful as, as important as redistricting reform can often devolve into partisanship.
i was really proud of the fact last year in ohio we passed a bipartisan redistricting reform proposal. took us until 4:30 in the morning. your mom says nothing good happens after midnight. in ohio senate something good happened after midnight. we passed bipartisan redistricting reform at 4:30 in the morning. it is before voters in state of ohio to put forward a more balanced way, whoever is in control the numbers gets to draw the maps however they want. we're getting rid of that hopefully this november and ohio will have better way drawing districts lines when we do that in 2021. [applause] >> who else would like to give us your example? >> that is an excellent segue into iowa. i'm state senator jeff danielson from iowa. give a shoutout to the crew in new hampshire, first in the caucus state, in support of the
first-in-the-nation primary state in new hampshire. [applause] excellent segue. iowa is the only state in the country can not gerrymander by law. republicans and democrats do not draw the lines. we have a bipartisan neutral third party staff draws the maps. get up-or-down vote. then another up-or-down vote and goes to the supreme court. only state in the country does it that way. we could adopt it in the country the way ohio has led. [applause] so i think iowa was no labels before no labels was no labels if you will. the same political makeup, democrats controlled the senate, republicans control the house and then our executive is different. republican but president obama is democrat. so the same political makeup as the national congress and executive branch. over last five years we've had slow and steady job growth. we would like to do more. our entitlement program, basically our large pension system, we have reformed that together. medicaid is very similar to medicare at the federal level.
very similar exercise. we expanded medicaid under affordable care act in iowa with divided government. we also tripled solar tax credit. we're world's leader in wind generation. if you look at energy diversity and national strategic agenda of no labels we accomplished that. we did it all with a balanced budget, record surpluses and largest property tax cut in iowa history. so don't tell iowans that what is going on in congress, in d.c. is the only way it has to happen. we know that we've been able to work together across party lines and accomplish those things. [applause] >> thank you. how about a mayor? i'll defer to my colleague. >> well, i am chip johnson, the mayor of hernando, mississippi. if you're wonder what a mississippian is doing in new hampshire, i'm with you. it was pretty interesting. i was sitting over here this
morning, i got a phone call from someone that seemed like an emergency and stepped out to take it. a lady i know very well had a cat fallen down between the wall. had to send my firemen out there to help her retrieve the cat. she did not ask me if my firemen were democrats or republicans. she just wanted the cat saved. that is how we do things on local level. there is not partisan way to pave roads and pick up trash. there just isn't. there are thousands of ways to do that i want to tell you a little bit mississippi and how we get things done in our state. if you look at our population of three million, we're less than 1:00ers of the national population, less than 1%. so senator roger wicker of the mississippi is chairman of the national senatorial committee right now. two or three materials ago we had senate majority leader of
the mississippi. ray maybe business is our ex-governor. chairman of the appropriations in the united states senate is senator thad cochran. y'all hearing this? congressman thompson is ranking member in the house on homeland security. for my fellow veterans over here, one of the most important pieces of veteran legislation ever was montgomery g.i. bill sponsored by senator montgomery from mississippi. how bus a state with less than 1% of the population have all that power? because we understand relationships which i what i think no labels is all b when somebody from mississippi meets you, they will ask you two questions, where are you from, and who is your family. within five minutes i will know somebody that you know. we don't call it networking. we call it relationship building in mississippi. if the whole country adopts and adapts to that way of thinking being friends with people regardless of party that is how we will move this entire nation
forward. [applause] >> thank you, mayor. mayor blair. >> i'm blair milo, mayor of laporte of, indiana. known as hub of awesome. visit us anytime. we're able to do to build on themes you heard from my colleagues and mayor chip just talked about by building relationships. we have projects have been very proud of our team worked towards. i started my administration, before i took office i welcome entire council at christmas at my house. only time prior to us taking office we could get together and just socialize with one another, get to know each other as people before we would have to be making decisions and have talk specifics about various different things. and since then we've really had a very productive relationship that it's not about trying to have republican or democratic wins among folks on the council. it is about getting things done
and we've been able to work through even some of the tougher pieces in local government, as i said, it is less about partisanship and sometimes can be more challenging with the different levels of government you have to work with to be able to get different projects done. when i started in the city of laporte i had a gentleman went to my church, he wasn't able to get to social security office which is in neighboring city, michigan city, 30 minutes away because there was no public transportation for him to be able to get there. would rely on volunteers from our church to take him to the social security office in michigan city. so that was a big piece of what prompt us to work on putting together public transport available from city of la porte to indiana campus. we worked with republican and democrats and city officials and
county officials and education administrators as well to put together a bus route that provides service for citizens in michigan city, laporte county, have access to education and reach two different community colleges on that route. it just started in february of that year and numbers are continuing to grow. that is an example where we're not only working across party lines but we're working across justdy,al lines because we need to solve problems for citizen that goes to my church but students that need access to regional campuses. we're creating more opportunity to have relationships we build just as mayor chip talked about. >> this is problem solving is what she just described. i would like to identify senator trey roder identifying him from oklahoma. he is from ohio. there is a big difference. does the ohio housework across
party lines like we see the ohio senate does? >> well, i'm actually in the city council, shaker heights, ohio. >> well, that is even better. >> the answer is yes either way though. we are, i'm an independent and we truly in our ballot have no labels. when you run for city council in our town, a lot of municipal elections, your name is on there and that's it. so, yes, for me this is about not necessarily working with the other party, it is about working with people in general. it is about how to get things done. this is issue i studied professionally almost 15 years. in 2001 i start ad professional services firm. our focus helping organizations figure out how to get things done. in the years that have followed we worked with many organizations including some of the world's largest employers and we helped them deliver results one thing that i have learned in this work, in order
to get things done people don't always need to agree with you. in fact it is unusual that they always do agree with you. to illustrate this point i will share with you a quick story from when i running for office in shaker heights. i'm relatively new to this deal here. i ran two years ago. i thought, i would like to hear what other people feel about our city. so i knocked on doors and went to block parties and had house parties where we talk to people. that is the new hampshire way. you ask questions and talk. that is the way we do it in shaker heights also. i was in a house party one night, party hadn't even started yet. woman came up to me and said, tres, you have ideas. i have seen your ideas and, i'm not sure i like them. [laughing] i thought this could be a long night here. so, we went through and i laid out my logical arguments and tried to make my points. in the end she came back up to
me, i thought very won her over with my rational argument why my ideas, my past to solve the city problems are best. she came up to me and said, yeah, i still don't like your ideas. but then she said, but i think i'm going to vote for you. the reason why i'm going to vote for you, she explained is because it is unlikely i will agree with the ideas of any politician. how often do you find any two people that agree on everything all the time? she said, i'm likely to vote for you because you listen, you pay attention to what is going on. you analyze the information. then you make decisions. that is what we need our elected leaders to do. here is someone who didn't even necessarily agree with my viewpoint. she was asking for what i believe people here in the room are asking for, many americans are asking for, that is expectation that our political leaders have the skill set to be
problem solvers. >> thank you. [applause] let's turn to councilman chris clark. councilman and former mayor in silicon valley, california. california is different place than what we've been talking about. how do you do things out there. >> i am in different position. i hold non-partisan office. it is nice to have colleagues defined by party label. we have different stances on various issues. we're the home of google, linkedin, a lot of others growing by leaps and bounds. they want to grow. we need to find sustainable way which to grow and to be able to deal with things like traffic congestion and everything else. if we don't deal with things and i hear about it at grocery store from my constituents and get phone calls from google and others who want to make things happen. not getting things done is not an option but i think one thing we've lost, talked about earlier
today is the art compromise. when i was mayor last year we were putting together all these growth and development plans and you know there was something i really wanted, it was about 10% of the plan, but at the end of the day i wasn't able to sway my colleagues and i can count. so i know when i have a majority and when i don't. so one of the things about, one of the things that think is lacking is the leadership quality in which you're willing to give up that little piece that you really wanted in order to move forward the greater goal because for us, getting those things passed, wasn't an option. it had to move forward in one form or another. if that meant we had to pull out one thing or another and address those at later time with a new council, then that is what, that's what we did. i think that is really what is lacking especially at the national level right now. just that willingness to, you know, cobble together a
majority, regardless of party labels instead of just only moving things forward if it is only popular within your party. and i think if we can, if we can find especially a speaker of the house who would be willing to put together a 218 votes regardless of party, i think we could get things going very, very quickly. but, unfortunately right now it is all up in air. we should try to influence that, the folks here, i can assure you folks at either end of the party spectrum are trying to influence the speakership vote. i would hope folks here would be trying to put oomph trying to find a candidate in the middle who would be willing to cobble together 218 votes to get these things moving because we can't continue like this. it is hurting us not just at the national level but hurting us at the local level, because we do a lot of things at local level,
having to get very creative at the local level which makes it tough. >> thank you, chris. most of the things passed in congress end up having majority of republicans and majority of democrats due to compromise. there are always wings in the each party oppose. so what? that is the way you get things done. representative warrick saben arkansas, very competitive two party state, didn't used to be. >> arkansas is lot like man man. little rock is like manchester. share ideas with iowa and mississippi as well. very a long tradition of pragmatic governance and getting things done and working across partisan aisles and one of the things that most concerns me as relatively new legislator, a lot of trends impacting governance in washington, d.c. seem to be slowly seeping down to arkansas and i'm very concerned about that. and one of the main things we'll
overcome recently, story i will tell, two years ago when arkansas was looking to, whether or not to expand medicaid under the affordable care act. and at the time we had a democratic governor and newly installed republican majority in the legislature and a lot of those republicans were elected, were elected on a pledge to oppose anything having to do with obamacare, but, once we got into the session and we started looking at it, the impact of not expanding medicare, that it would have on budget, we do have to balance the budget at state and local level which is something we all have in common, would have been tremendous. we're also looking at potential impact of closing rural hospitals. arkansas is a rural state. that is a lot of people going without access to health care and local communities going without access to major employer and major institution in the community. and so what ended up happening, and i'm summarizing because it was a long, involved process as you all can ine