tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN November 13, 2015 8:00pm-12:01am EST
you did was so glamorous and the life was so glamorous and all of those jobs were parties and meeting people. i have to tell you, you, i never worked harder in my life. >> nancy reagan served as longtime political partner, ferocious protector and ultimately as caretaker for ronald reagan. it involved first lady. she was active with key staff decisions, policymaking and campaigning. she made drug use her signature initiative with her just say no initiative. nancy reagan this sunday night at eight eastern on c-span's original series first ladies. examining the public and private lives of the women who filled the position of first ladies and their influence he on the presidency.
>> tonight on c-span2, energy secretary talks about the upcoming un conference. then part of the federalist society conference with a discussion on civil rights and criminal justice. later a look at the political engagement of young people around the world energy secretary talks about the upcoming un climate change conference and the obama administration policy of promoting clean energy technology. his remarks at the carnegie endowment for international peace include questions from the comments. audience. this is an hour. >> good afternoon and welcome. i am the president of the carnegie endowment for international peace. it is truly an honor and privilege to welcome the sec. of
energy to carnegie. those who have had the good fortune are familiar with his mit smarts and some of you have had the misfortune of negotiating with him are familiar with his toughness. all of you i suspect our familiar with his viral late night tv appearances. i've learned a lot from him over the years ernie is not only one of our nations most remarkable mines, he is also a remarkable colleague and public servant. i'm very pleased that he has joined us to preview the climate conference which begins later this month. joining him is my friend and
senior fellow and founder of the american strategy program. steve is a d.c. institution. someone who has followed and shaped the most significant policy debates of our time. i cannot think of a more consequential debate than the one on climate policy and diplomacy. there is no question that among the overarching challenges facing the united states and the world, climate change ranks at the very top. the facts are as clear as they are compelling. one of the ten hottest years in history have occurred in the 21st century. in the past three decades alone, the ice has lost three quarters of its volume. this presents a real and present danger to have the world population that lives on or near a coastline. these dramatic trends conclude that climate change poses immediate threat to u.s. national security. in addition to the risk it poses to our environment coastline, it's a threat multiplier that makes nearly all other global challenges from poverty to
pandemics more severe and more intractable. secretary carey and their colleagues across the u.s. government have spent the past several years building it international coalition to combat climate change. in paris they will look to put that coalition to work and secure concrete action that will slow and reverse the trend lines. we are very fortunate that he has made a pit stop in carnegie on the eve before the meeting and paris. please join me in welcoming them. thank you. >> mr. secretary. thank you steve, let me make a few remarks. let me think you who is just a fabulous colleague in many
administrations on a number of issues including our favorite shared issue on the rand negotiation. i have to say just last weekend i was in the middle east and it's always, phil burns slept here in every hotel we go to. it's really fun to work with him. thank you for the opportunity to come here today and actually with this discussion we are releasing a report that i will come back to called revolution now but let me just say a few words about our pathway. it's it's especially the department of energy role that i will focus on today going into paris. i'm going to discuss the very farias issues bill talked about in terms of climate risk and talk about the solutions and our approach, which is not surprising from the department of energy will be very technology focus. we are advancing the theme that
energy and technology innovation and the cost reductions are ultimately key to meeting our challenges in climate change first, lower-cost clean-air solutions enable policy to move forward more quickly. in the context of paris, we are at a pretty remarkable place compared to a year ago. i think the joint announcement in beijing last year changed change the conversation globally. the fact that both countries have moved forward with important national steps of commitment to their targets, the united states with a clean power plant, for example and china
with its cap trade announcement has really helped move commitments now by over 160 countries, commitments that are taken together and are quite reasonably ambitious. commitments that when executed, would really move the needle on our approach to climate change. we also know that nevertheless, these are not 2°c when taken collectively. maybe it's closer to three, however here is where the integration comes in. with continued cost reduction, what we would see is that enabling increasing inhibition as time goes on. that notion has certainly been confirmed by many of our
international partners. third, in terms of why this agenda is so important, if we anticipate, going forward -- by the way i'm not only talking 2025, i'm talking 2050, we are 2050, we are going to have to keep pushing down emissions. we will have to bring everyone along including the least developed countries who have many challenges in providing citizens. we are going to need this cost-reduction to continue. so again, this is a central theme that we will be advocating , and i should say, that will be two stops in paris. as bill mentioned, next week i will have the pleasure of sharing the biannual energy
report and then of course that will be followed a week and a half later by the top 21 meanings in paris including december 8, a day that day that the french host have labeled innovation day to continue the theme. we will be advocating this in effect continuously from now until the end of the meetings and then of course next year we get down to the real job of implementing that agenda. i would like to use steve and the rest of our time at the appropriate point to discuss the revolution now report and also talk about some of the technologies we will showcase over there. with your permission, let me show one graph.
>> one graph. >> they are cool graphs actually. we won't dwell on this right now but this is the first draft out of the revolution now report and what it shows is as you can see, the indexed cost reductions over the last six or so years in five technologies, land-based wind, utility scale, distributed, battery cost for electric vehicles and led lights. what you can see is minus 40%, minus 50%, minus 60%, minus 70% and -90% as cost reduction in just a half-dozen years and this technology this technology. it's a remarkable story not well enough known. that's why we are trying to highlight it with this and the kind of story that we need to continue, not only for these five technologies but all of the
others as well. >> let me ask you the obvious question with this drop in price reduction. if we in the aggregate have been able to achieve such dramatic scale and drop in price without pricing carbon, then why do we need to price carbon? >> first of all if there were a carbon price, and i said if there were, were, i didn't say that was our policy, but if there were it would clearly have the advantage of an economy wide approach in terms of the least cost approach probably through the market mechanisms for achieving low carbon. that is still necessary in my view but again, these kinds of cost reductions make that or another policy mechanism going forward easier. some of this is clearly
happening in a dramatic way. leds, let's say as the most impressive of those cost reductions, we have gone from very small deployments a half-dozen years ago when even though the lifecycle costs was in your favor, it was kind of a big barrier to put down 20 bucks for a light fixture. now it has come down to literally months of payback. and we have 80 million deployed. >> you were telling me the other night that india was about to go gangbusters on led. if i didn't get that wrong. >> india is making mass purchases of led. they have a current order for a
few hundred million, over three years, and with that they have driven the cost down for them to 1 dollar. amazing. of course their goal, they don't want to use that to distribute to their rural population where introducing lighting at this time is a game changer, literally a life changer for families and of course the idea is that with leds requiring roughly one sixth of the power it dramatically reduces what they need to pay to get the source of electricity for the lighting. >> many people in the environment energy world see the transition that you are talking about here as big cost to the u.s. economy. they think that will lead to decreased competitiveness. this came up in the gop debate when marco rubio said we just can't go down that path, the costs are too high. without being specific to rubio,
is this a response to those critics who think the retrofitting of the u.s. economy around these next generation technologies is not what they would argue a big part of it. >> it is certainly a big part of it and i do want to emphasize that certainly any of the reliable economic models of the economy suggest that going to low carbon has a very, very small impact on the gdp. so it's kind of a macroeconomic impact that's very smart. however there are distributional effects and that's where i think one gets into the politics, economics, et cetera because clearly any change in a society has some dislocations that
society has to adjust to. that's where the administration, we are sensitive to the idea of needing to provide assistance to certain kinds of communities in area where the distributional impact may be felt. certainly the idea that this is a drain on the overall economy is just incorrect. >> isn't there an issue, not that i want --dash i want to recognize the predecessor here. most of the panelists were talking about whether iran and the nuclear deal and syria and then jessica said we have to focus on climate. it was a very compelling thing and i raised a question about was this climate issue seen as a wishy issue by other more muscular or could it hold its own as a topic?
i'm asking a question on urgency and whether you feel this issue that we are preparing for in paris hangs with the other security issues of the day. >> you should always listen to jessica. >> the answer is yes. if we take 2 degrees, we are pretty much halfway there, however we have cooked in a lot more because it takes quite a while for the atmosphere and the oceans to come into equilibrium. having said that, what are the consequences? well a very simple one is in fact rising sea levels. there we can easily see, putting aside for the moment the drivers of extreme weather, put that aside for a moment, you see the
amplification of the impact because of higher sea level. that is one example. secondly, let's not put aside the extreme weather drivers. again we cannot associate individual events, but we know the amplification effect on extreme weather. we know that the patterns of extreme drought and rainfall are exactly what was predicted decades ago, quite literally. we know that in turn leads to issues like extreme wildfire. we know that leads to disease factors specifically, i will talk about my beloved western forests. we are seeing the impact and other countries are seeing the impact. we know we have already cooked in additional impact. the the minimization of those impacts is absolutely critical.
that is why we cannot afford to sit back and expect the characteristics 50 year timeframe for historical major changes in the energy system. you just can't do it. we don't have the time. by the way, when president obama put out his action plan in june of 2013, he started off by saying look, we would love to work with congress on a legislative approach. something that could have an economy wide impact of the type we discussed earlier, have a market-based optimization, but then he also added we don't have time to wait. in the meantime we are going forward with using whatever administrative authorities we already have for an aggressive program. this is inherently a sector by
sector approach using authority rather than the economy wide approach we could have if we can work with congress on an appropriate legislative solution. >> what is the mathematical equation look like overtime when we have such a dependence today on fossil fuel sources of energy and we were with the leaders of that energy the other night but even with this you are not to reach the scale that displaces the overwhelming dependence on fossil fuel for many decades. how do you deal with that as this dirt of the whole portfolio? what is the equation equipment can go faster because of this or is it simply an incorrect assertion that wind, solar and other cannot achieve a greater scale than predicted question it. >> first of all, by the way on the technology side clearly for solar and wind in particular,
the scale, even much more dramatically than we have now does require other solutions whether it's a combination of grid storage, smart grid, all of these possibilities. let me go back a step. as you know some like the expression and some don't, i personally never tire of it, the all above approach. there are too many people who like the some of the above approach and some mean my favorite technology as the silver bullet. that's not going to work. there is not going to be a single low carbon solution for the world. there won't be a single solution for the united states. we will have a dramatic regional differences. we say all of the above but let me make very clear, all of the above starts out with a commitment to low carbon.
now the statement is that we need a certain department of energy responsibility to advance the research and development demonstration for all fuels for a low carbon world. so for coal, for example, it's very clear. that means advancing and engaging in the same kind of cost reduction or carbon capture utilization sequestration. what about natural gas. it is natural gas part of the problem or part of the solution? the answer is yes. [laughter] right now it is clearly part of the solution. it has a major role in co2 reduction through its market-driven substitution for coal in many places. however, not in this decade or the next decade perhaps, but as we go to a trajectory of ever lower carbon emissions, then
natural gas will be to carbon heavy and go to sequestration. in terms of fossil fuels, what we need to think about is that if you look at solutions to climate change, typically what you find is number one, and again i'm not talking short-term like ten or 15 years, i'm talking going out many, many decades, that the demand side of energy efficiency conservation always have to be a big part of the solution. i don't believe we can supply side our way out of the challenge over the long-term. supply is still important. what is the next sector, if you like, where you will cd
urbanization? where you will see decarbonization? many industrial processes are very, very well tuned, or have processes that are amenable to carbon capture. you have an ethanol plant or a natural gas plant, they tend to have, getting slight in slightly technical, co2 that is slightly cheaper to capture. the transportation sector is likely more challenging. for one thing, you have smaller mobile sources rather than large point sources and the reality is
there is no higher energy density per cubic foot than a petroleum-based fuel. that's just a fact of life. that is obviously very convenient for transportation vehicles. nevertheless, we have a three-pronged strategy to address that. one is efficiency of vehicles. part of that are café standards but a lot of it is standards of efficiency. >> biofuel and electric vehicles. there you go. >> tell us what it was like for you when you heard about the volkswagen scandal. in the end to the epa has to investigate. >> obviously, given the apparent
evasion of some of these measurements, it's something we can't tolerate and we won't. i think the epa is correctly moving. >> how many do you think are out there? >> i hope none, but obviously the epa will move toward mobile testing to do the measurement in real world drive cycles in use. we are driven to that. hell volkswagen resolve that issue with the regulators here --dash but it did take you off? >> well it was not nice. >> i did read a report which i hope folks will pick up and i understand that, i want to go to the audience real quick, but the doe role in this is you know you're working on vehicles and truck efficiencies and there is
a fascinating array of things. it's always interesting when i meet people like you, i know you know the things in the energy field that were not talking about that we don't even know about. you know what the moon shots are that are cool. i like that part of the report that flirted with some of the things that were coming on in the future. can you share with us a little bit about what's not in the report and what's a little further on. >> next week in paris, i mentioned technology showcase, these are technologies, but let me go quickly, how about flying wind turbines. >> i didn't know he was going to do this. >> about a 50-megawatt nuclear reactor that can be built in the factory and just taken over the highways to a site? how about a great efficient
outside fuel shell? how about a great driver. how about, i was looking at the audience, approximately a quarter of you, you should remember this is the 50th anniversary of the shelby core. this is. >> well i'll take you for a ride. >> our laboratory and companies, but this displays a 3d printed car. >> this is an electric vehicle but the point is, things like new manufacturing processes are highly efficient and that's going to part of the light waiting whether it's applied in
a cold plant or a nuclear plant, and many thermal plant dramatically increase the efficiency of the plant. this is a hybrid solar thermal technology. it is an novel thing. those are examples. >> how did you know i was going to ask that question. >> thank you. actually those are going to physically be in paris next week so that we can display to the ministers who are there why ambition is a good thing in addressing climate change and this will be part of the solution. >> that's an amazing thing so when you sort of look at all of that, what is the doe, how does it actually work how does the
r&d system function? i do know your role in the nuclear arena. it's very well described but not very well understood. >> first of all it is highly varied and let me give you a different example to highlight that. let me start by saying this is by no means our full research effort but certainly, we have 17 national laboratories and they play an essential role from everything from energy to nuclear science and our security responsibilities. in terms of how it works it is quite varied. if i start at the very basic research and, we have currently a net worth of 32 energy frontier research centers. this is use inspired basic science.
first we bring the community together. 1500 scientists defined the course science challenges that would underpin future technology breakthroughs. each one of these centers is addressing one of those problems and doing it effectively. our three was created in 2009. rpe was created for higher risk investments. for example that hybrid solar things was one of the rpe projects. i might say we believe that program is underfunded by a factor of three in terms of innovation and american capacity to innovate. let me take other examples. sequestration, we have a set of
demonstration projects. they are risky but a a couple of them that are already working and we will have a cold plant turning on in 2017 with carbon capture, we have an industrial plants and we either use the co2 for enhanced oil production or we put it into a very deep formation. finally one of those technologies that we had at the beginning with the cost reduction was utility scale solar. that fell by 60% in cost over that time period. 2009, this country had zero utility scale meaning greater than a hundred megawatts. now, another mechanism our loan
program which has issued over $30 billion in loans and loan guarantees provided debt financing or backed debt financing for the first five utility scale projects all successes and that's all were doing. that's all we need to do because now there are 21 additional projects with peer lee private financials. you have to get over the hump to show that these projects can get out there and work. that they are finance a bowl and etc. it's everything from basic science to high risk technology and low programs. i'll throw in one more in the solar arena. >> it sounded so much cooler than i thought it was. >> i've already emphasized the technology developments. you know, costs have now fallen so much for modules that the
dominant costs are not the modules anymore. it's really the other stuff you have to do, particularly if you want to put a pv system on your rooftop. labor, material, another very different thing we did is something called, son shot. it's about getting solar costs down to certain targets by 2020. in that program, besides technology it has a program that just works with cities and towns in terms of how do you streamline permitting. how do you get a permit down from a month to a day? it's technical assistance to do
that. >> let me ask you a couple quick questions and then i want to go to the audience. >> how does this play out politically question what you are in a political position. has anybody drove across kansas recently? you get to that wet side of kansas and there are windmills forever. there must be 70 miles of windmills. i had no idea. that is a red state. i happen to be born there. >> you don't have this graph here but that's the coolest graph. i wish i could show it's all view but maybe you should describe it. the point is when you lay that out over there, i was very was very surprised to see such an investment by someone over a vast expanse of land in western kansas. how did that happen? and does kansas know it? first of all the united states
has a fabulous wind belt that runs up the middle of the country from texas to the upper great plains. this is a wind. there may be just a coincidence that at least a large part of that has a rather low population density because it's pretty windy but its enormous wind resource and clearly the major load centers tend to be far away. building up high-voltage transmission is absolutely critical. we are talking about that again. texas has pretty much an isolated grid and they have an enormous wind resource and of course big load centers. if you get from oklahoma up through north dakota, then a big part of the job is moving the winter market.
for those of you who can't see it, there are a number number of graphs in this one that i'm showing just demonstrating a staggering decrease in the wind capacity taking off. it's something i find fascinating. of essentially the same figure is there for all of the technologies. we live in washington which thus far has not proven able to untie the political not that we are in and direction is hard to find. we been working a lot with cities and states and nonfederal players. recently the atlantic can do something called city lab when you bring in mayors from all over the world. they all have their climate plan do you interact at all with this nonfederal level and help give guidance, support and look at him innovation with what similar cities are doing?
>> absolutely. just recently i was with mayor garcetti in los angeles. i was helping dedicate a novel solar system being installed in fire stations. it's emergency power for them but it's also emergency power for the neighborhood. you have to get yourself on charged up. if things are down for a while, the cities are doing a lot of creative things. the mayor's conference, a couple years ago, the former basketball player, they are just innovating tremendously. i cannot underestimate how important that is. not just to the united states, but globally. our mayors are are being very active in partnering with other mayors across the globe. but the globe is going to be 70% urbanized.
why do you rob banks which mark that's where the money is. if you want to address these issues you better go where the people are. that requires a big urban focus over the next several decades. part of that, especially in the united states, were not going to be building a new major metropolitan area. we may be enhancing the ones we have, but in other parts of the world, they are going to be starting closer to scratch. what i hope there is that we also think about it genuinely new solution of how you design an urban environment. i'll just give one example i've always kind of liked. if you think about, imagine a city that is roughly speaking pretty much all electric, the vehicles are electric vehicles,
and you say, quite correctly, no tailpipe pollution. but what then we don't say is zero by the way, very different noise levels. i have very different noise levels and maybe i i don't need this in my buildings. this can actually open up new businesses for integrating our water our water and infrastructure in ways that are good for the environment but also provide a better quality of life. >> what are the oddest moments in the democratic debate was when hillary clinton talked about how she heard the chinese were in the parking lot and then they were over here and there was a scramble to find india and china at the last minute. to think paris will have any fun like that?
>> first of all, despite the nature of the copenhagen conference, i want to say that i believe the copenhagen conference will go down as an important turning point as establishing important principles for the future negotiations. in paris, it's well known that the inverse approaches being taken, that is the leaders will be there at the beginning at the conference charging the conference and their negotiating teams and the rest will be left the negotiating teams. >> let me open it up to the floor. it's been fun. wow, so many, is jim hsu told here?
>> about to this gentleman right here. i will bring you the microphone. there are millions of people watching. tell us who you are and make it short. >> i'm a reporter and during the climate negotiations, how do you leverage future innovations? how do you bring into affect future solutions for current problems and get other countries on board and what should we expect this week? >> in terms of the negotiations, several things, one is we will be looking to make strong commitments in innovation among a set of countries. that will include the opportunity to do more collaborative work. i'll give you one example of a natural, take india, india clearly has a tremendous need toward distributed generation as do we have a tremendous interest
in distributed generation. we have more than we can do this. i think the ind c, the targets are pretty much that for this first round. we can talk about how we can work together on innovation to get more ambition so that when it comes time to revise those targets. that to me is how i am thinking about that. next week it will be about getting the innovation set up to roll just a week and a half later. >> just a quick 32nd follow-up on your question, will other countries bring these ideas themselves #other things other countries are doing that we can learn from or anything you have seen that would be a shocker? >> absolutely. there is is a lot of innovation going on. >> what's the coolest thing you have seen? >> there is a lot of interesting
work going on in the electrical vehicle space in other countries. there are also other alternative fuel vehicles. that is one area that there is quite a bit. we also could have said in our international activities, a lot of country have an interest in our consultations with building an innovative system. there is a lot going on elsewhere but we are viewed as being in the forefront of that. we've done a lot of work in trying to understand what works in our country and a lot of that, research institutions and laboratory networks, we are trying new things.
>> why would we give that knowledge to someone else? >> because we have a big global problem to solve. >> i'm an mit grad and a aaa fellow. my questions dems from what you were just saying as far as consultation. you also said earlier that we need cost-reduction to bring everyone along the i was wondering if you could speak to challenges around intellectual property and technology transfer , especially in regard to developing countries. you also mention so many interesting technologies and i was wondering if you had any thoughts on trans atomic power for nuclear fuel for additional energy. >> trans atomic power, blah blah blah. >> i thought that was a
transatlantic pipeline, but anyway, the most, what was the first question? >> intellectual property. >> that's right, we have worked out some very suitable ip arrangements in our collaborations. for example china, we have significant program and a specific threat of that was working out ip arrangements which worked quite well. we are doing experiments at berkeley. this is a spin in approach in which our laboratory provides essentially investor and inventor opportunities.
third, in terms of the trans atomic power, i have been briefed on that at mit but i won't go into any specific technology, but i will say this thought, a very interesting thing has happened. i show that nuclear reactor scale, but there is something like 50 companies in the united states with private capital looking at innovative nuclear fission and nuclear fusion technologies. we don't need more than one to work. two would be great. it's amazing, it's a new way of innovation looking at nuclear because of its carbon free characteristics. >> the president put out a statement about the importance of nuclear. >> right. there was a nuclear power
workshop particularly because of the president's interest in that we have 1 billion people who are hungry in the world, many small farmers and many in africa who live on marginal lands. how do we get a fraction of them to adopt next generation biofuel crops to put it into the transportation network? >> that's probably, to be honest, a question a question that some of my colleagues in agriculture might be able to answer better. clearly what we are doing, as you know, we are doing the research and development for many different kinds of biomass feedstock and we are looking at, as you said, biomass on marginal
lands, salt tolerant because of salt water invasions, etc. cetera in certain areas, we are doing that research. we have outreach with our renewable laboratory, but i'll be honest, i think the biggest outreach on that happens through other agencies more effectively. we are trying to provide the tools. >> everybody is knotting me and i i will not write back. >> will go between here right here in the front. just make it brief. >> i wish i could. >> it's gotta be brief. >> i know. the issue here first of all, the economist magazine is ruining the closing of nuclear plants. that was interested in that. the recent article is suggesting there are places where if you
buy an electric car your actually increasing co2 emissions. can you discuss that. >> bill gates talked about places we can invest in renewable vehicles but in the process you are actually increasing carbon. >> i think that depends very much, in this transitional phase, it depends very much on what the mix is of fuels. so, for example, this is simpleminded but let's say an electric vehicle in the northwest versus one in the upper midwest is going to have a more positive carbon impact because it's drawing upon hydropower, for example, whereas the marginal benefit, and i'm not arguing against these being deployed everywhere, but the marginal benefit of an efficiency investment will be
higher in the upper midwest than in the northwest. it really depends how the technology and fuels are matched to what's going on regionally. now course, i argue that the electricity sector in particular is going to be pretty much, in my view, the carbonized by the time we get to mid century and some of those geographical affects will not apply. >> in the beginning of your talk you mentioned china. as i observed, when there is a state meeting between the u.s. and china, they have a topic called climate change. people call it, what is it now compared to a few years ago and how have you worked with your chinese counterpart before the
paris meeting to ensure the substantial result from the meeting question. >> first of all, again i have already said the joint announcement last november, about a year ago, was clearly a major turning point and that has now been followed up in just about every meeting with president obama with additional progress here in september. the two presidents basically announced, more or less, the targets for paris at the same time and we are working together on that. at the same time, the announcement last november, if what looks at the background papers points to a significantly
expanded role for the department of energy collaboration with china on energy technology, it also added it both enhanced the scope of what we were already doing in some areas like carbon capture and buildings, etc., but it also added a completely new line of activity in terms of the energy water nexus as a focus area. i might also add even in the areas we were already working together in, like carbon capture, even there we added new focal points, for example, the big utilization right now of captured carbon dioxide, as i said earlier, is to enhance oil efficiency. in the united states we are producing about 300 barrels of oil per day from co2 flooding of mature reservoirs. now what we added, and it's in
the document from last november and moving forward, is enhanced water recovery using co2. the idea is there are lots of uses of water and we are in the middle of selecting a site for our first enhanced water recovery project. >> that is something with china. >> it's kind of an antiquated group, is in a? it sort of leaves china out and other big energy players out. is that a problem that you are going to hang out with the folks that aren't the problem? how does china build in in the weekend coming up question that. >> we are going to hang out with chinese as well because they will be present. so the iea membership by its construction in the 1970s, in
response to the oil shocks, however the world looks different today than the 1970s. the iea is a number of of dimensions looking to do some modernization. that clearly includes, among other things, the idea of welcoming dialogues with the big economies in the big energy companies. we expect china there and india and indonesia, quite a few countries that are not two-day members. and our friends from brazil. >> regarding hydro-policy efficiency act of 2013, what has been done and what is the next
status and what comes next? how will that affect the next five, ten or 20 years? >> in the united states? >> yes. >> that's a hard one to answer, to be honest. i don't see that we are going to build any big maggot dams in the united states. there is a lot of interest in small hydro. this also has a lot about, if i remember, i'll get it wrong, i think this may be incorrect, i think there think there is an order of 100 megawatts of opportunity for powering small unpowered dams. for example a lot of that is with the corps of engineers and those kinds of projects so we can research in some of the novel hydro and also hydrokinetic technologies.
>> this gentleman here. >> with the reduction in the cost of production producing these technologies, our government subsidies still necessary even with consumer demand? >> good idea. what if we took away all subsidies for all energy requirements? what would that look like? we believe that because of necessity of dramatically accelerating low carbon transition, we still think some of these well-placed renewable investment tax credits should continue. now forever? probably not.
would that be helped if we had in stead something that internalizes the price of carbon emissions? yes, but where we are today, today, we think a need those and be there is an issue of continuing major credits in the fossil area which are little bit more difficult to defend. just in closing, i just learned learned recently that you are an avid soccer player. what position do you play and you have any games lined up? >> avid should not confused with good. i play anywhere. our season is over. >> you have anything lined up in paris? >> no. >> ladies and gentlemen, thank you.
[applause]. >> on the next washington journal, melissa yeager looks at a recent recent report detailing the growth of online campaign ads and why campaign online spending is difficult to track. then charlie savage discusses president obama's executive action to close gun trauma bay. and then they discuss the high school dropout rate. the program begins live at seven am with your phone call and reaction to the terrace attack. "washington journal" live on c-span.
>> is 41 years old and yet to win a race. he had a sense of destiny. >> saturday night at ten pm eastern on c-span to book tv. the conversation between pulitzer prize winner and former pres. george w. bush about the life of the president's father, george herbert walker bush. also on saturday it's the louisiana book festival with nonfiction author presentation including the book run, don't walk. they also talk about black life in old new orleans. sunday night at nine on afterwards, former congressman patrick kennedy shares his personal journey with mental illness and substance abuse. >> i was really convinced, no one could pick up on the fact that i was sweaty palms and
perspiring and moving around in an agitated way. i totally thought no one knew. >> he is interviewed by jim mcdermott from washington state. book tv, television for serious readers. >> c-span has your coverage for the road to the white house 2016 where you will find the candidates, the speeches, debates and most importantly your questions. this year, we are taking a road to the white house coverage into classrooms across the country with our student cam contest. giving students the opportunity to discuss what important issues they want to hear the most from the candidates. follow c-span student cam contest and rode to the white house coverage 2016 on tv, on, on the radio and online at cspan.org.
they discussed civil rights law. they talk about needed reform in the criminal justice system by local law enforcement. this is two hours. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. my name is gail herriot and i'm the chairman of the civil rights practice group. welcome to our outbreak session. we intend to provide you with a safe space. [laughter] safe place for a serious, no holds barred discussion of an important policy question.
today's session is entitled ferguson, ferguson, baltimore and criminal justice reform. we have great panelists will be introduced by our moderator. allow me to simply introduce that moderator. the honorable david's trash, associate justice justice of the supreme court of minnesota. you might think this former lawyer and former law professor looks a little young to be a five year veteran of the minnesota supreme court. well ladies and gentlemen, that's because he was sworn in at the ripe old age of 35. so, with that, justice strasse [applause].
- thank you for that kind introduction. good afternoon. welcome to the panel entitled ferguson, baltimore and criminal justice reform. as you heard, my name is david strasse. i'm currently a member of the minnesota supreme court. i taught classes on criminal law to first year law students. this is a long-term interest of mine as well. i have been asked to moderate the panel which is very timely in light of recent developments. the current administration is actively engaged in pushing a reform agenda that includes among many other things, greater cooperation among law enforcement agencies, reform related to drug and substance abuse, and changes in community policing as a result of the
and whether the threat of personal liability is the best way to promote good law-enforcement practices. now, without further ado we begin with david who is a leading expert on the need for evaluating the effectiveness of federal social programs in the heritage foundation center for data analysis. he testifies before congress on the efficiency and of federal programs and its work on community oriented policing services is noteworthy for many reasons, including its it's nicely with the topic of this panel. in 2001 he published a cops program to be a waste of taxpayer dollars. his research illustrate that cops neither on the street nor had reduced violent crime. he interestingly served as the manager on a juvenile correctional facility in baltimore. please welcome [applause].
>> i would like to thank you for the kind remarks. i wrote think the federal society for the opportunity to speak today. what i will talk about today is a research technical the bail the veil of darkness. it gives us insight into whether or not the police are discriminatory in traffic stops. the question is, are cops racist? did it raise influence the police officer's decision for a traffic stop. you have to control for neighborhood characteristics and also what is going on in the officer's mind. why does he or she believe they need to pull over the individual for a stop? one of the things studies do
that is very questionable is compare the racial composition of those stops to the racial composition to the neighborhood where the individual a stop. that does not account for individual driving patterns, it is an inadequate benchmark and researchers realize that comparing the percentage of those stopped by police to community demographics is a flawed approach. so, the the veil of darkness, it is basically a term to describe a national experiment where we exploit changes in daylight to assess whether or not police are treating different groups unfairly, or fairly. so it works under the assumption that police are less likely to identify the race of a driver at nighttime but more likely to
identify the the race of a driver during the daytime. if you can take advantage of an experiment with shifts between daylight and night, you would assume please are unfairly targeting minorities and stops during the day when the race of the driver is more easily identified would be higher than the stops at night. one of the things that several studies i will go through tonight that taking advantage of daylight savings time, as you all know we recently had a change in our clocks, we gained an extra hour of sleep and by looking at this the bigger control of patterns of driver, if you leave work at 530 in the evening, evening, it is pitch black, dark, night. it is very hard to tell the race of the people you are commuting home with. before that change it was light out, you could easily identified the drivers race.
so by doing this, by controlling the time of day and that shift of times we can look for driver patterns, driver behaviors, and police deployment assuming the difference between daylight savings time and its effect on whether it is night or day should not affect least behavior police deployment. this research methodology is superior to using community demographics as a benchmark. there are five studies in this area. we examined for cities were examined the first was oakland, i will concentrate on the ridgeway 2006 study because the results are the same as the word 2004 but it will be brief and cincinnati, syracuse, and
minneapolis. in three or four of the city's three shirts shows there is no difference, no racial disparity going on. the one exception is minneapolis. if you look at oakland, we looked at the inter- twilight. , that is five-9:00 p.m. it is when the sun set and it is completely dark. they looked at please stops from june to december 2003. they had over 1100 traffic stops. they controlled for the time of day and the police patrol area. that's it controls from the neighborhood, if the neighborhood has a higher crime and higher police presence you should actually control for that and it may factor the results of who a stop. what they found was officers were less likely to stop minorities during the day can paired to the day and that's
opposite of what you think. what they did was they compared and looked at minority drivers and the% that was stopped during the day compared to the night. and they controlled for the time of day and the police patrol areas, minorities minorities were less likely to be stopped during the day. when they were more easily identified. the next study, and cincinnati, it was more competence of study. study. it was over six years. it exploited not only the difference during the inter-twilight. but 30 days 30 days before and after daylight savings time. it looked at over 3700 traffic cases and control for time of day, day of week, and neighborhood. they found police officers were no more less likely to stop blacks during the day compared to the night. in syracuse, another well done
studied they looked at four years of data. they looked at 3030 days before and after daylight savings time. they also analyze stops by regular traffic control and crime reduction team. the crime reduction team was a division of police officers that were targeting high crime areas and trying to do things to reduce crime. so if they are going to have racial profiling and some bias you would find it among the crime reduction team. in the study controlled for the day, week and the police patrol area. in over four years they found that blacks were no more or less likely to be stopped. except for in 2008, that single year they found that blacks were 54% more likely to be stopped during the day. that was significant.
they offered caution in interpreting that result because it was a difference from the other years and it does not hold when it was analyzed together. they cannot identify any change in pleas in policy or behavior that could account for that for single year. they're cautious in interpreting that is unfair treatment. then they looked at the data by traffic patrol and crime reduction team and found there was no effect, no disparity at all. thirdly, the study done in minneapolis was one year of data, in 2002 it worked at the inter- twilight. between 5-9:00 p.m. and it looked at 29000 stops.
it only control for time of day, it did not control for a day of the week or police beat or neighborhood which i think is an important limitation. from the inter- twilight findings they found that blacks were 70% less likely to be stopped at night than during the day, or and hispanics. >> now when they just do daylight savings time and it that abrupt shift between day and night, compared to whites and blacks they were no more or less likely to be stopped and blacks were less likely to be stopped. however, white hispanics were more likely to be stopped. the percentage do not go into details they just say we did this analysis that is sort of
unfortunate just to conclude, as a natural experience not what i did was when i went to read up on this topic and what i wanted to present to you tonight, i did not pick studies that would have a particular findings. i pick studies studies that would have the strongest methodologies to determine if there is a disparity. by doing that only one of them finds a disparity i also want a word of caution in this area. these results do not generalize beyond other cities. i am only talking about these cities and studies. it is very hard to generalize what is going on in dallas and washington, d.c. also, this research the message
i want to say is these studies seem to be superior to other studies they tend to find their note disparities in traffic stops. [applause]. thank you our next panelist, and we have a wide variety of panelist. our next one is arthur roby who graduate from the university of law school in 1963, he has been a member been a member of the illinois bar for many years. he resumed practicing law on a full-time basis in 1997, he is a
lawyer who has litigated a variety of civil rights claims including those arising under, please welcome him. >> [applause]. >> thank you judge and thank you for including me in this panel. i will be but my resume just site me if i may because i think it is important for participants to have an understanding of where i am coming from in my remarks. our our firm does almost exclusively civil rights work. stated under section 1983. we sue individual police officers, we sue departments, generally on claims of excessive
force we have exonerated people, we have sued for malicious prosecution of departments and for wrongful convictions. i can say we have had a great deal of success over the last ten or 12 years, part of that success is indicated by the fact that many of our cases, if not most of our cases come from defense attorneys, people we have litigated against frequently police officers whose family members have had problems of their own. also let me say generally, and i say this respectfully to my panel members, based on my experience police work, police officers and what they do, are
among the most difficult people in the most difficult area to analyze. please officers obviously are given a responsibility in our domestic society that is not given to any other. they have their arm, they have the right to use force including deadly force against other citizens. with that also comes an extraordinary sense of responsibility. a lot of litigation and issues that judges indicated will be discussed today have very much to do with police officers and police departments. in my judgment, you cannot really talk about criminal justice in the united states without an understanding of how
police departments work and with how police officers work. obviously there is a range among all of us and who we are and how a well educated we are or not, what our political philosophy is in our social philosophy is, how well we adjust to the jobs we're doing. there are certain occurrence that can be generalized. i would like to address some of them today. it might appear somewhat contrary but i do strongly believe the things i'm going to talk about are not factors that are easily determined on the basis of studies, but can only be determined somewhat anecdotally. i am going to express some of those anecdotes to you in my comments. first of all, i would suggest
throughout this country small departments, large departments, urban departments, rule departments, departments that deal with very serious crime, departments that for the most part deal with less serious crimes, the one thing that runs consistently through police departments is there inherent, or maybe learned behavior not to discipline their own. discipline within police departments is, i don't want to say laughable, that is disrespectful, but the, but the fact is that it is sorely inadequate. let me give you a few examples. in almost every department in the country that we have had experience with the discipline
of an officer, if he is accused of wrongdoing, and if he is accused of the wrongdoing and nothing happens as a result of it, and his own department chooses not to exercise discipline, that charge does not become a part of his personnel file. so if the police officer is accused of sexual assault on monday and it is not sisyphus things, using the language of the department and he is accused by another individual on wednesday, when discipline is being considered in most departments they are not going to look at what happened on monday. if if he is charged again the following week they do not say maybe there is a pattern that is existing here. it is not how police departments discipline. as a result of that, police
officers can engage in conduct that is detrimental to their departments, detrimental to the citizens they serve. the way in which citizen complaints are processed within police departments, almost universally, is an adequate and is set up in such a manner as to have the person making the charge in a position of not being successful. now, all of us know that at a traffic stop or even criminal activity the first reaction might be the cop did it or he pulled me over for the wrong reason. he search me for the wrong reason. and police to be sure suffer a lot from charges that are unfounded that cannot be substantiated and sometimes just
to protect the person be in charge. that does not negate the fact that in police departments all over this country the strong assumption is the citizen is wrong, the police officer is right, there is rarely, in any department that i have experience with and that includes most of them, that is not fair, many of them in my country i've not seen a process that really works the way it is intended. just a quick example we are litigating the case with someone who is wrongfully convicted, slow witted man who was living on the street the time he was convicted of a vicious rate for many factors the conviction was
overturned and under section 1983 we are suing on his behalf. now at the time it happened it was almost 20 years later, as a result of our discovery we find that letters from a policeman, very unusual and we know their other policeman because it came through departmental mail, they saw the subject beaten, they saw the subject being given information about the rape which he was accused and after being beaten for a while the fellow said, i will sign anything, anything you want me to. this to. this was internal. it went to internal affairs, they did not turn it over to the prosecutor, did not turn it over to other investigators. that is an extreme example but
anyone who is familiar with the internal affairs department of most big-city department i don't think would be surprised. there is another area to that is difficult but in order, and my judgment to understand the criminal justice system, you have to understand police. sometimes we call it the thin blue line, sometimes sometimes we call it police protecting other police, but it is what happens. in hundreds of cases that we have had that have involved excessive force, one policeman has never testified against another. recently we had a case of a young man, i'm out of time are ready, i'm i'm sorry, i will finish the story. a young man was beaten in the
street, on. of civilian witnesses including some clergymen saw that it happened. he he was accompanied by four other police officers. the policeman denied the bad conduct, the other four police officers were under oath, people who had it testified at other people criminal trials, people that testify and can put you in jail, one of them said g at the time of the beating he had to type both of his shoes so he walk several feet away and that's where he was. the the second person said, i heard somebody yelling in the crowd so i left the scene and went there. the third person said, you know, i i thought i forgot some keys back in the car and that police
officer left the scene to go back. the fourth fourth person said i saw my partner leaving the scene so i thought i would join him. that is how police testify against one another. it is denial, and, or it is i couldn't see couldn't see it because i was doing something else. i do not say anything of this is criticism obviously of the men and women who put their lives in danger and that men and women who serve their communities well. i will go back to the point which i began, and that is for an understanding of the criminal justice system it takes more than statistics, it takes an understanding of police men, their departments, and the reality of how they operate. thank you very much.
[applause]. >> thank you arthur. our next speaker is michael who is a former philadelphia police officer, corporate executive, and now a journalist and writer. he was an editor and investigative journalist for the philadelphia bulletin, he has written for the philadelphia daily news, pittsburgh philadelphia daily news, pittsburgh tribune review, inside magazine and the washington times. he is the author of a novel, sense of duty drive from his experiences on the police force. in 2008 he started a wrestling club to help the minority and inner-city youth become competitive with suburban athletes. i now welcome you. [applause].
>> good afternoon, i want to tell you a bit about myself and what i have done and what i can contribute to this conversation. before i do i'm going to read to you an account, newspaper account, testimony given at of a trial of a police officer accused of murder after shooting where three to five suspects were killed. the testimony of one suspect. one. one of the officers said through up your hands, three suspects put up their hand and the fourth said he had no gun. at the same instance the officers opened fire. you might want to take a guess it what that incident was? the newspaper was the tombstone daily nugget, it was october 1881, the incident was known as the gunfire of the okay corral. the testimony was a horse the in the officer on trial was wyatt earp. so the hands up don't shoot did
start and ferguson in 2014 but it might have started 133 years earlier tombstone, arizona. the difference, his testimony was discredited by a mutual witnesses much as during johnson's was in ferguson, missouri. herb like darrell wilson was exonerated a grand jury investigation and herb was exonerated by trial. the difference between ferguson and the gunfight at the okay corral was back in 1881, people pretty much knew the biases of the newspapers on like today where journalists try to pretend to be unbiased and knowledgeable. that is what i want to talk about today the media and law-enforcement. it occurred to him at the right down here that i do not have the report and skills of the other panelists and i don't have their training. i am at a disadvantage here. i am playing rocky balboa with
the apollo creed. i was married in the same church as rocky balboa. here think i i can contribute to the symposium. first where i come from. ethnically and religiously diverse neighborhood. i lived in diversity of the most college professors, lawyers and journalists have not lived. the second thing i can bring is i believe i believe i am the only one on this panel that has a master degree in criminal justice but i have also been a white police officer in a black neighborhood. so unlike the other panelists i would like to talk about antidotes i can give you a few. i know what it's like to look down the barrel of a 12 gauge shotgun, looks about that big. i know what it's like to go to a
rape in progress and arrive at the scene to recognize it is a domestic dispute and then to try to arrest the guy who is twice my size only to have the wife hanging all over me because she does not want me to hit her husband. i also know what it is like to get a call at the man with a gun inside a house. and nearly shoot a little kid. that is one of the reasons i'm here today. the third thing i can bring are the facts. as john adams once said, the facts are stubborn in the face. he said that as he was defending british soldiers using excessive use of force. the media passes moral judgments on days and weeks on police actions that are made in nanoseconds. unfortunately, the perception of racism will drive law-enforcement policy.
tactics like stop and frisk are discontinued and leads to increase crime in the minority communities. i know bob will touch on this, this occurs because the media only reports those incidents which follow the template of the trained police, if you don't who he is he was the alabama public safety director who is responsible for arranging to have fire hoses unleashed on african americans who were trying to get their civil rights. i like to do an expert in it. i will read off names and i want you to raise your hand if you're familiar with them. walter scott. michael brown. eric warner. latonya hegarty. dylan taylor. gil coller, bobby dean.
>> nearly everybody knew the first three only one other person in the other five. the first three were black suspect shot and killed killed by white police officers. the next five that only one person knew, they will are armed suspects shot and killed by black or hispanic's but you never heard about them and the national media. latonya latonya hegarty was an honor black the mush on killed by a black female chicago police officer after pursuit. the incident did not make national news or set of rioting. dylan taylor was a white 20-year-old in salt lake city. he was on arm. he was shot and killed about the same time as ferguson incident. and never got the nor variety he was shot and killed by a hispanic police officer. gilbert
was the late 18-year-old university south alabama student who was shot and killed by black university police officer. he was naked so there's no chance that he was reaching for something. [laughter] the national media did not report it. now what do you think would have been a storyline if the officer were white and the man killed black? do you think there would be at least one reference? bobby dean was a 17 old white man shot and killed during a traffic stop by a black south carolina deputy sheriff. there is a video of this, it did not make national news like the walter scott. did. anthony was a white man shot and killed by a black georgia police officer. members of the local african-american community rallied around because he was considered a pillar of the community. while the victim was a career criminal. this was an interesting point. people in minority communities
are tired of living in fear of criminals. so the media about please student shootings are racially. the ferguson was an example of this but not the only example. i will read you a list list of exertions of law enforcement actions or policies by prominent media from both sides of the continuum. these assertions were later proven to be untrue. there's an article in the st. louis newspaper that set on our blacks are shot every 28 hours. this was reap ported by cnn, and elsewhere but it was not true. an organization issued a report that said killing by police blacks and whites were 21 - one.
the report was criticized and even if criminologists put in the article by the name of david klinger said in an interview that the public needs to be shut down. another leaving criminologist said it was substantially wrong. the crime prevention research center said the reporters were pro-public and to and to not understand the data they are using. yet despite the contributions entrée controversy they reported it. articles in in the wall street journal, washington times, weekly standard and others all contained allegations, and you can't make this stuff up, that consumer product safety commission had a swat team. and the fish and wildlife service had a swat team. it was not true. as far as i know only the wall street journal has printed a retraction. probably one of the more egregious reporting has to do with amnesty international usa
and the aclu. amnesty international usa in 2004 report the human rights report said with a city bombing in 1995, timothy mcveigh was able to play while they look for arab terrorists. they also claimed in letter sent to congress urging them to vote in ending racial profile act. oh my time is up. i will i will have some other articles to talk to and other statistics and we can do a roundtable. let me conclude since this is the federalist society, let me leave you with the quote by john jay. among the many objects of a wise and pre-people find it necessary to direct their attention to that of providing for the safety but seems to be the first. i look forward to a stimulating conversation. thanks. [applause].
will have some time during the question-and-answer to have the panelists ask questions of each other and discuss some of these things in greater detail. our next panelist is tim lynch who is the director of the kale institute on criminal justice. he has become a leading voice in the bill of rights and civil liberties. his research interests include the war on terror, over criminalization, drug war, militarization, militarization of police tactics and gun control. he blogs at the national police misconduct reporting project and has written very interesting articles on militarization of police forces around the country. please welcome mr. lynch. [applause]. >> thank you, good afternoon everybody.
i also want to thank the federalist society for hosting this discussion and for inviting me to participate. this has been an extraordinary year of debate and discussion of police practices and criminal justice reform proposals. according to the associated press there have been more than 50 measures that have been introduced and enacted around the country, pieces of legislation that deal with how the police interact with citizens. my thesis is is that some of these proposals actually are constructed. what i'm going to do is briefly touch on some of the policy changes i think are worth highlighting. let's start with baltimore. the baltimore sun ran a series of articles about how that city handles civil lawsuits that alleged illegal conduct by the baltimore police.
since 2011 millions of dollars have been paid out by the city in court judgments and settle since pursuits involving false arrest and access of force. if you want to include millions of more dollars that have to be paid to the lawyers to handle these suits that are brought. the freddie gray case was settled in september for $6.4 million. some of the incidents that are involved are caught on tape such as the security footage that are founded grocery grocery stores and that sort of thing. sometimes the conduct is so bad, so blatant that reporters will take the footage to police commanders and say what you make of this? even the police commanders are shocked. they have no explanation for that because when you have officers who are kicking people in the head, it is inconsistent with their training so they have
no response to it. these are some of the suits that are brought. what was really interesting and came out was the baltimore sun found something that was very peculiar about how the city was handling these misconduct claims. the attorney for the city would settle matters, they would sit down for negotiation and would say we will settle this case for $200,000. but there is a clause in the settlement papers so when you signed it and to receive the money from the city there is a clause that said you cannot speak publicly about what had happened to you. not just you cannot talk about the settlement amount, we see we see that from time to time, but the people who agreed to settle their police brutality lawsuit they are not allowed to talk about the underlying conduct. so what we're talking about before, if you are a victim of police misconduct and you see on
tv the next or the officer that was out of line in your case, you you cannot speak to a reporter about it. you cannot go to a rally and talk about what had happened to you. you cannot talk to civilian oversight authorities what had happened to your case if you sign on the dotted line. this policy which had been a place for years shielded the scope and impact of misconduct from the public. once it was exposed by the baltimore sun, the bureaucracy and they cannot come for two dependent very, very well, i am happy to report those clauses in the settlement negotiations are now a thing of the past. it is one positive thing that has come out from baltimore and that media coverage on it. another item from baltimore, last march at mayor stephanie rollings went to the state capital in an annapolis to ask for legislative changes that
would allow her police chief more leeway to discipline and get officers who are convicted of crimes to get them off the government payroll. convicted of crimes areas under current laws officers who have been convicted in criminal court of misdemeanor crimes like perjury, assault, they remain on the payroll for many months while they appeal the department disciplinary procedures to arbitrators. in jurisdictions around the country police chiefs will tell you they already have a good idea of who the problem officers are on their staff. the disciplinary process for holding these officers accountable is broken. in many jurisdictions the police chiefs will save the disciplinary process is a joke. i don't have to explain to this audience the many ways in which teacher unions have put in place
obstacles of getting lousy teachers fired and out of our schools. well, we are seeing some of the same problems in this area but it is with the police unions. now to his credit, ohio governor, john case it tried to curtail including police unions in his statement he was unsuccessful. this is a difficult thing to turn around. the death of freddie gray has also wrought attention to the fact that we do not have data, we are talking about data earlier. we do not have data about the number of people who die each year in police custody. we do not have that number. policing in the united states is decentralized, we have plenty of good departments that make this information transparent. we have many other departments around the country that will not make such information available.
governor scott walker in wisconsin, to his credit sign legislation about one year ago after an incident in that state wherever your now there will be an official tally of anybody killed in the custody of police. that will be tallied at the end of the year along with an explanation of what happened and that information will be available to the public. each state should have such a procedure in place. let me now turn to ferguson. police shootings is another area where we do not have solid and accurate information. this is totally unacceptable. it is absurd that we do not have an accurate tally on the number of people who are killed by the police each year. i know many of them, most of them are justifiable, self-effacing cases, but still but still we should have an accurate tally.
several media organizations have been tracking shootings this year, the wall wall street journal, washington post, and other media outlets have been tracking things closely so i expect next month, the end of year and in january we'll see lengthy articles about what their findings are during the year 2015. we can then start to compare and see whether the numbers are going up, down, or holding steady. again, we are talking about action at the state level last night at the governor of texas assigned landmark legislation in that state. all shooting deaths in the state of texas are to be reported to the attorney general within 30 days. along with an explanation and there will be an annual tally, an annual report put out by the state attorney general in texas, again with the tally and explanation will be available to the public. this is texas, this is america starting model legislation. this is the. this is the type of thing we should have in place.
if we don't get more action at the state level there will be pressure to get the federal government more involved. we do not need federal intervention. the state should be taking the lead, these are their police agencies. we should see more actions by governors and state attorney generals along the lines of what governor abbott has done. california enacted a law that said police departments must identify officers involved in shootings. we have seen bills introduce a new jersey that's a special prosecutors will investigate police shootings instead of having the county and instigated itself. these are just a few of the best practices in place and some local jurisdictions that are now being taken statewide. these are constructive policy changes in my view and we need to see more. the media scrutiny, we have seen some bad things from the media that mike was talking about. the media scrutiny n-uppercase-letter also brought about municipal court reform.
the city and county governments in the ferguson area were using citations as a way of generating revenue for the government. the courts were not impersonally administrating injustice, they had come to view themselves as kind of an arm of the treasury where their job was to help budget goals by levying fines on people on the community. i was at a conference last week where they're talking about this, they call it taxation by citation. he said ferguson had turned their police into revenue agents and stirred up community resentment. he said it is imperative we have municipal court reform around the country for community relations. he was reminded of the audience for those stories back in the bible where the most contested people where the tax collectors. we have to get the police out from b in revenue people .. into investigating violent crimes have been seen as protectors of the community. this is not just happening in missouri. i live in northern virginia and
for last month there was a washington post article that ran with the headline, fairfax police ticket cars for needing inception. while they are in line waiting for inspection. it is hard to believe. these are people who are trying to come into compliance with the government rules and they are getting slammed. when these bureaucratic abuses are exposed we do see the left and right come together to put a stop to it. there is more work that needs to be done. i am almost out of time, let me touch of briefly. these are the laws that allow the police to seize property from people have not been convicted of a crime, not indicted, not arrested. these abuses under these civil portraiture laws have been reported over and over again by
newspapers. over the summer there's a story of a young man who is traveling from his home in michigan to los angeles where he was going to start a career. he had been saving his money for three years. he had cash and was heading to l.a. his mother gave him a few thousand dollars kiss that's what mothers do to help them get started on his career. he didn't get far. at the was going from michigan to california. about halfway along his trip police officers came on board, they are going through the cars and searched his belongings and he said sure. they found a lot of cash and they took hiys ne away. they said he was traveling to a drug hotspot. los angeles. he said if you take all my money, i won't have any way to get home. i don't know anybody in this area. they just shrugged and said that is not our problem.
these stories ripple out. two relatives, friends, neighbors. it is one of these reasons why there's growing resentment and communities against what some police departments are doing. george will has made the point that when civil asset forfeiture we are treating people worse than criminals because with criminals we take their stuff away after they have been convicted in court. again, back to the action at the state level. new mexico abolished the forfeiture this year. other states are trying to reform the laws but are running into lots of opposition in the legislator. the institute for justice has been doing great work on this. they issued a report a few days ago where they do a report card on state laws around the country. one state got an a, there were a few bees, most of the states run the country get c's and d's.
so more work needs to be done in this area. there is more to be said about police body cameras, militarized police units, we do a lot of work at that, bill reform measures, governor chris christie put together an interesting coalition in new jersey on bail reform. i see i have run out of time let me stop here so we'll have more time for questions and answer. thank you. [applause]. >> thank you mr. lynch. our final panelist is that bob who is the founder and president of the center for neighborhood enterprise. he has been instrumental for resident management and ownership of public housing, brought brought together task force of grassroots groups to the congress. the pennsylvania legislation on welfare reform and help violence free zones.
he is the only person ever to receive the prestigious awards on both liberal and conservative side, the macarthur genius fellowship in the bradley foundation prize as well as the presidential citizens medal. welcome mr. wilson. >> [applause]. >> well i'm the only nine communists to get the macarthur roared [applause]. thank you so much. i want to use my time to talk to you from the perspective of the people in low income neighborhoods, particularly low-income black neighborhoods. also part of my resume is that these issues are personal with me because over the course of the last 25 years i have lost
three family members to violence, predatory violence. two nephews have been put into intensive care coming home from work. they were not assaulted and killed by white police officers, they were killed by other blacks. so i think that what i find troubling about the testimonial statements i have heard today, there is a drumbeat to vilify the police departments around this country. i believe that police unions, correction officer unions have too much power and they are not being held accountable. i i believe please, because they are representative of the state have an increased responsibility and obligation to be just in the execution of their duties.
but, i represent an organization that has 3000 grassroots and 39 states. most of them most of them are living in those high crime neighborhoods. i am wondering what their response would be to some of the things i have heard today. we are talking about race in it always seems to be the issue that intrudes itself. the problem of always looking at the police through the prism of race means that we discount that black lives matter only when it is taken by a week, white police officer. it means that when the perpetrators are black we look the other way. geraldo rivera for instance, had a two hour special on the rape on women in prison in this country. for to ours. in each case, the case, the victim was a
black woman and the victimizer was a black correctional officer. because the victim and the perpetrators were black it did not generate any large-scale discussion or debate. because we first have to note the race of the victim and the victimizer before we can become animated to take action. it means that if the perpetrator wears a black face and evil reese escapes responsibility. so i really think and just to personalize it, for the past five years we have had children like this. a five-year-old girl, layla. person, layla. person who is sitting on her grandfathers lap in milwaukee, wisconsin and she was shot through the head. we have had 25 black children
under the age of five killed, not by police officers but by other blacks. the black community suffers a 911 every six months. there are 3000 blacks killed by other blacks every six months. so we have a 911 every six every six months. most of the people in those neighborhoods suffer as a consequence of the vilification of the police. thirteen years ago in cincinnati, ohio when a white police officer shot a young black man who turned, he thought he had a gun, so civil rights leader came and organized a boycott of cincinnati, they also vilified the police so what the police said after that was since we are going to be accused of racism we will not be as aggressive in those high crime black neighborhoods. as a result the murder rate went
all of these encounters over the years, the never with threatened violence, only demonstrators who came in and wanted to chastise them for supporting community-based efforts. my point is that solutions to the violence and the black community, but we have done over the past ten years is, we go into the community , identify indigenous grassroots leaders that have the moral authority to command change from within the community and they are the ones who become empowered. fifty-three murders in a five square block area 18 years ago. the police were afraid to intervene. we organized local, grassroots leaders that have the same cultural and geographic zip code as those experiencing the problem, many of which were ex-
offenders whose lives have been transformed every deemed, and the witnesses to their peers the transformation as possible and redemption is available. so rather than spending money on detectors we spent money on these young leaders to pay them full-time with the consequence that terrorists went from 53 murders in two years down to zero gang deaths in 12 years. rather than the system investing in other indigenous efforts that have the consequence of transforming the attitudes and behaviors, we have taken the solution from milwaukee, about 60 young adults are employed full-time as moral mentors and character jet to a character coaches by investing in interventions
that are indigenous to this committee rather than vilifying, they need the cooperation and support of the police. what we are experiencing now is police nullification. as long as we come the forms like this has become of militarization of the police talking about the vilification of police, they will do what they are doing now, they will not be aggressive in those communities because of the fear of being called racist. people who attend conferences like this suffer the consequences. grassroots lowconsequences. grassroots low income mothers and fathers such as the parents of this young lady who will suffer the consequence. i think we need to be a little careful and spend some time talking about how we can reduce the violence within these communities and not spend all of our time
vilifying the police who are trying to work with low income parents to bring about change. thank you. [applause] [applause] [applause] >> i know mr. lonely wanted to respond. i will open it up to others. >> let me make some general observations. for people that care about what is going on in this country, there is no one that i heard on this panel
that has vilified police. to hold please responsible, to ask that they be held responsible for what happens in every community come our sons, grandsons, daughters, granddaughters does not mean that they are being vilified. big difference between being held responsible and vilification. i feel strongly about that because these are issues that we have dealt with, both me and my family and our law firm deals with all of the time. to criticize is not to vilified. task of things can be done better by police officers and by police departments, that part of our world can be done, and it can be
accomplished. it cannot be accomplished if every time that a police officer engages in an unlawful or a wrongful act that he is automatically and without thinking told that he is right when he has done the wrong thing. policemen and departments make mistakes, too. our job as citizens is to do much of what has been spoken of, but ourof, but our job also is to see the policeman and police departments operate in such a manner as to be responsible to the communities and citizens who may serve. >> can i respond? a couple of things, and i did not get a chance to read of the statement i have prepared. i started to talk about amnesty international. worldwide, they are considered the gold standard command ii started to talk
about an oklahoma after the oklahoma city bombing command this was nine years later in a human rights report. they talked about timothy mcveigh being allowed to flee. aclu said the same thing. what they did was repeated media claims, newspaper reports. they were not facts. the facts were an fbi profiler immediately had profiled the bomber as aa white male with military experience, probably a militia member. within 24 hours the fbi had identified mcveigh. forty-eight hours, he was in custody, taken into custody on a minor traffic violation , driving down the road without a license. he was stopped on a minor traffic violation. the officer noticed he had a glock and suicide vest.
his one thatas one that has a big flap and is called such because military reach over and open it and draw you will get call five killed. he had already been taken into custody. the fbi and 48 hours had arranged an airbase in oklahoma, but nine years later the aclu and amnesty international, the premier civil liberties organizations or repeating false assertions. so the idea that police are vilified, well, and the sense just by putting out false data. i no people who insisted even after darren wilson have been exonerated, grand juries are sympathetic to police, how do you know this? i could just as easily say that the reason why cities get sued and there are high dollar judgments because you find jurors who are sympathetic to plaintiffs.
they call it the bronx jury effect. plaintiffs lawyers are trial lawyers go out and find a sympathetic jury. so i could just as easily say that is someone could say the grand juries are sympathetic to police. i work with people who are indicted, so i know better than anyone how bad police officers can be. google the name stevie reaching or grover glenn whitty and you will see guys who i worked with who wound up going to jail. in fact, my cousin made the case against one of. what do you think of him? is a nice guy. okay. i just want to get an idea. and he told me. now, for all those who don't know, number writer is a bookie who takes bets on lotteries.
i know there is an effort. no one wants about officer. they are brutal. nobody in my family like them. nobody wants them. they are bad, bad for us, but for the police. no one likes them. i'll be the 1st one to help you doing that. but i believe people are interested in criminal justice reform and trial lawyers start suing rapists on behalf of rape victims which is not seem to happen. i will be happy when they are websites about parole that release violent criminals, murderers even because 9 percent of all
people on death row have a prior homicide conviction. 9 percent have a prior homicide conviction. you get to murderers. when people start having websites say, let's take a look at how many violent felons, murderers who have been paroled to kill again, that is what i believe there is criminal justice reform. you get sick and tired of locking up the same people over and over again. my wife does not have the philadelphia accident. if you misunderstand me, asked me to repeat myself because i have a heavy accent. when i get emotional it happens. but that is when i will believe that people are interested in reform. they start doing those types of things.
>> just a quick comment. what bothers me, i guess, i guess, in terms of the outrage and the lawsuits, very selective, the very fact that newark has been under justice department supervision for the last five years for police misconduct, but we talk about ferguson in the '90s under eric holder when he was a us attorney we had more police officers shooting citizens in washington than any other city in the country, but no lawsuits, no public condemnation. evil has. evil has to where a white face before it finds his challenge, and that is detrimental to the people that we serve. that is mythat is my point. always has to be our racial dimension. >> can i just comment? i understand what you're saying. we all no about the crime going on there.
but the statistics are sometimes very surprising. because in the black community the same level has been going on for many years. the really big difference in my generation used to be an african-american child was murdered in chicago, killed by gunfire, you are lucky if you get two lines on the 20th page. what has happened, and it is a better thing, is that african-americans getting killed is now newsworthy. i grew up in an era where it was not, or to the extent that it was it was just a blurb. now at least there is public attention being called to it solutions are complex. i admire what you are doing in terms of trying to get the solution.
there is publicity given. >> let me give you some statistics. numerous studies dating back 40 years of determined the best predictor of use of force is the attitude of the suspect. in general if the suspect is acting nastily he will be treated nastily. a study by robert brown at the university of cincinnati , likely to arrest suspects them black officers, black suspects were likely to be taken. statistics, 76 and 98, young black males murdered police
officers ata rate almost six times higher than white males. according to fbi data there were 40%40 percent of the known killers during 2004 to 2013. according to the congressionally mandated report, there was the later convicted. excuse me. and said that nearly 2/3 of two thirds of police shootings in 1980 and until 20 adr interracial. black officer black suspect, white officer white suspect. justifiable homicide by civilians are also interracial. a white person defending himself. a criminal. so then this is another
interesting statistic. if you are a social scientist you are used to that report. 12.8% of americans don't think police officers should defend themselves even when being assaulted. think about that. this figure has increased dramatically. for 200864 percent of justifiable homicides and all the officer being assaulted. those involving citizens 41 percent. and another report which is congressionally mandated think is back to the '90s, the bureau of justice statistics said the deaths from 2,003 to 2,009, six and ten were classified as homicide by law enforcement personnel.
60.9% of60.9 percent of whites and 61.3 percent of blacks were killed by being arrested. state and local law enforcement. three out of every 100,000 arrests result in someone being killed by police. you have a four times greater chance of being electrocuted than being killed by police. now, one final thing, despite all the negative media the bureau of justice statistics determine 93 percent of persons requesting police assistance of the officers acted properly. no statistical difference between the percentage of hispanics, blacks, whites. so going back, the average person does not believe the misinformation campaign. it is important to note that benefits a certain narrative
, that is what you're getting. you're not getting all of the information. you can debated, refuted, debated, refuted, do anything that you want with it. you can argue it, say what i am saying is incorrect or incomplete, but the fact is it is not known. and there is too much misinformation, and i would suggest in some cases this information that is out there about police work. >> i want to turn to specifics. one i was her slanted conference for state supreme court justices. we saw program on the use of body. infrared technology the
proliferation. >> well, it is not a panacea. it will be a big improvement in police work. they are the ones who will be able to show the stop was legitimate, the detention was legitimate, and the use of force the maybe necessary was legitimate. it will be the enemy to the bad officers were abusing power. we just published a study on police body cameras, identifying best practices because what we are hearing the past few months is spending money, but the issues get more complicated about what you will do with the footage was the police department is holding the information, disclose in all
circumstances, some, and it can be expensive if you blurt out the faces of certain witnesses who may have been in public near the person getting arrested. these are the complicating issues, but the politics are all over the. it is there 1st go to reform, spend money on body cameras. they want to move all of the discussion. we're moving into an era where people have their cell phones at the ready. catching more and more police interactions with the public, and this is a big difference from a generation ago. in the past we don't know
what to make of it. now that more and more footage is becoming available we can reach our own conclusions. this is kind of like the new thing that is going on, and is not going to stop. police wearing body cameras. >> just a quick note. itis not a single perspective on this. they occur because people talked to the police and report to the police officer something embarrassing. provide evidence that allows them to make an arrest.
they are not going to want to cooperate. i think we need to balance the accountability issue against law enforcement effectiveness and closing homicides and crime. >> i agree, iti agree, it is a complicated issue that is more nuanced than people are knowledge and. >> but we need to discuss it on both sides of it. it's always how can we prevent bad people from doing bad things? that is the message that keeps coming across. >> to the filter of attention just media that is really only out to crucify a police officer, it generates controversy, they sell papers, whatever the motivations are, that is the
other thing you have to look at. this may be the only thing tonight. police cameras are good, but if it is going to intimidate people, be used by a change in just media or scholars only to justify what they want to present, which is a racist white killer cop, it will not be any good. i alluded to an arrest are made of a guy that was twice my size who is basically trying to pound his wife's head into the sidewalk. i guy came out. i realized it was just a domestica domestic dispute and not a rape. i had to dislodge this guy. i try to push them, and that didn't work. i got my nightstick and put it under his chin command we both went out and fell back and recovered.
i'm ready to hit them with my stick and the wife grabs my nightstick. supposing in that arrest i would have crushed his larynx or something, suppose i would have killed him, did not intend to, but do you think the wife who probably would probably contact somebody like mr. loewe and sue for millions and millions of dollars, do you think she could say she was in danger? no. she did not even want me to hit him after our rescued her from having multiple concussions or contusions. that is the type of thing that goes on. and what exits will you see on the news? anything that led to this? what motivated my actions to get this guy and do what i did to try to dislodge? i don't think so sometimes.
they can be helpful. and share the opinion that it has to be used at the discretion of those who want when the cameras came in its anecdotal, to be sure. nine out of ten accusations that we felt where the violence took place the camera. that would be broken in the back of the station. happened to not be able to fix it and will probably be the same reality. >> you are not vilifying. >> if you believe that, i
have some oceanfront property in omaha, nebraska to sell you had a really cheap price. >> body cameras need to be done i would urge caution in adopting nationwide. we want to give you an example. a mandatory arrest for domestic violence. for years in a police officer would show up at a household where is domestic violence, you let it be a family affair. they did research in minneapolis the found that we instituted mandatory arrest. what you found was the individual who was arrested was less likely to engage in domestic violence in the future. i was a positive effect. all across the country, cities and towns instituted
mandatory harassment policies. back in omaha, nebraska and charlotte, north carolina we found that after the individual is arrested the person was more likely to assault his partner. he knew he was going to go to jail once the call was made. he decided to beat his spouse or girlfriend even more even though he was going to spend the night in jail now matter what. these changes in policing, you mentioned an experiment that we have going on. i was you tell me that. they should not rush to judgment and adopt body
cameras and all police departments because i don't think that it will happen, but we need to look at it and empirically join with the assesses. and whether a change in policy or program is actually having a result as well as the research, emerging caution because sometimes policies backfire and cause more harm than good. >> thank you. i feel a bit like a referee. >> no one is throwing any chairs yet. >> yet. >> but i want to ask the audience members. make sure they have an opportunity as well. >> yes. the cato institute. your brief against vilification of the police misidentifies the issue. he and his colleague you are
calling for prosecution of criminals and the communities in which you work. this is exactly what these other people are calling for , prosecution of police criminals.criminals. that is not the same thing as vilification. offered a comment that 90 percent of the police cameras mounted on the car suddenly weren't working, what is that? >> a statement ofa statement of fact, as i understand it. >> that is vilification. that is an example of what i'm talking about. >> but it's true. >> wait a minute. you are implying that this is done purposefully.
the cato institute row that it remains to be seen whether officer wilson will be held accountable at some future date. accountable for what? talk about vilification. why? >> is right beside you. >> that is what i want to find out. >> and thefrom the justice department report was issued immediately update all of our stories. >> november 2014 after he was exonerated by the grand jury that the man, in your opinion, was still guilty. >> don't attribute that to me. >> you talk about vilification, that's why. >> let him answer. >> mike is from philadelphia. again, his chief john timothy, he and his book wrote that when he took over the philadelphia police department he said, the disciplinary process. >> the disciplinary process in place in the philadelphia
police department was a joke that is in his memoir. he is not vilifying police but identifying problems in the police department up their standards. >> i'm saying, talk about criticism of police department procedures is not vilification. >> you were saying this man was still guilty after he was exonerated. >> no, when he was exonerated by the department of justice would probably -- >> by the grand jury. you are the distraction. you don't want to answer the question. >> let's move on to the fellow right here. >> i hesitate to jump in. >> me, too. >> my apologies.
>> the point i want to make is that the most important thing from the standpoint of my work,work, policing free people is a challenging job, but it is important that people have faith in the integrity of that effort. and i have been a working constitutional lawyer for 15 years and what i found surprising is the massive and inexplicable double standard between what other practitioners -- i swear i can be sued. the only location in this country where is virtually impossible to sue as law enforcement. prosecutors of absolute immunity and it makes it difficult to sue them. there is an article that came out last year, 99.98 percent of all damage awards that are found are actually paid for by taxpayers, nottaxpayers, not even the police officers. i have a concrete policy proposal. what if we had police do what every other vocation does, self-insure against lawsuits so that the cost is
internalized. as you work with police officers who are constantly causing damage judgments to come in your premium will be higher and there will be a natural tendency to self-correcting control. that money will come out of your pocket instead of the taxpayer'staxpayers pocket. the bad police officers will be forced off of the job, and the good ones will continue to get the respect they are entitled to. >> i have a better idea. if you get a bad cop from put him put him in jail. that is all there is to it. this idea of suing people and letting the insurance companies been the brunt is not touch anybody. if you have someone who is bad, you put him in jail. >> the double standard were law enforcement is the only location. >> ceos escape free. the stockholder has to pay for lawsuits. beside happen in 2,007/eight.
they were not held accountable. >> i have a feeling he will want to respond. >> by the way, i thought the idea advanced from the floor is a good one. but what mike says is,is, really what identifies the problem, i think, has clearly as anyone could, he says if it is a bad police officer put them in jail. there are all kinds of bad unconstitutional conduct that police officers or others can engage in, do engage in that is short of criminal conduct, but nevertheless, for the benefit of the citizenry they need to be corrected. that is what civil law does, that is what they indicated. most police departments reach exactly that conclusion.
either it's something so criminal you go to jail, otherwise your off the hook. therehook. there is a huge middleground that needs to be addressed in order to make policemen and police departments more responsible. >> and i hopei hope everyone saw the front-page "washington post" story about two weeks ago were local prosecutors indicted in officer for murder, and his attorneys went to court and said, well, he was part of a federal task force, and his status as a federal officer made them immune, legally immune from state homicide statutes. the prosecutor said that they will appeal the ruling, so that is one to watch. it is not as easy as saying you broke the law. there are legal barriers in place, some of which are dubious and unjustified. >> can they be changed?
>> is go to the back of the room for another question. >> i am always struck and conversations like this. i would like to imagine they are taking place in the late 20s around the time of prohibition. we are all talking about the practices. focusing too much. too much discussion as to how many barrels to destroy. and his dead, the problem was prohibition. so i don't know if it is beyond the scope of the conversation, but we are in this classic situation where will we have done is in creating this enormous pocket, we have cultivated a scenario where police are naturally going to be in terrible situations they engage in bad behavior.
and right down to the argument right in front of us on the panel. talking about smaller activity here and there is important to be sure, but it would seem to me that the far bigger problem is the drug war itself that i have not heard mentioned. >> we have a question. anyone want to respond? >> well, i agree that it is the root of many problems but beyond the scope of this particular panel discussion. >> all right. >> i would like to thank you for your diverse perspectives but especially the german's spoke about vilification of the police. i understand there are recent articles not only in the cities you mentioned, but throughout the country trying to sign up.
i want to think about it possible, people think of a possible reform that i have not heard mentioned today, which is better police training and things like some of the deaths that occurred due to please not recognizing medical issues. perhaps we need better training recognizing when someone is in medical distress. i also have a friend on the police force who says the police need better training in martial arts. so that is a possible reform that it seems that could be very helpful and everyone could agree to. i also want to ask you about the people behind these anti- police demonstrations and the total lawlessness of this.
policemen have been killed. it is really unbelievable. i have been involved in organizing protests on other matters in new york city. you have to get permits, work with the police, restricted to certain areas. however, the anti- police protest were just lawless, running through the streets, closing downstreets, closing down traffic, people cannot go anywhere for hours. obviously the baltimore situation was worse than it was, and who was behind this? it seems like some of these lawless protests were well-organized. ferguson and so on, and there were other groups involved. we noticed anti- semitic posters in these protests.
to anyprotests. to any of you have an idea of who is behind financing and inciting some of these protests which have been completely lawless and resulted in violence and property damage and so on? >> let's take the negligent training. >> just a quick reform that we have been advocating. a lot of police officers are promoted if they make a felony arrest which a lot of times these violent encounters, but there are police officers who prevent violence by positive interactions. somehow that person, that should count for promotion and elevation as well. >> if i can makei can make a brief comment. i agree, of course, about training. we are litigating a case now in which a 97 -year-old world war ii veteran in a nursing home had a knife in
his hand and was shot and killed by the police when they arrived. what really needs to be done was the police needed better training on how to disengage , talk someone down. obviously no policemen should not be able to protect himself when he or she is in danger, but there is a skill that in our judgment should have been used to talk down the 97 -year-old man that was in a nursing home in his kitchen and when there are other mental health people on the premises. so training is a factor. most police departments realize that there is a lot that could be done. >> it is very difficult to establish a training regiment that would cover
just about every situation. i hear martial arts a lot. i have studied brazilian jujitsu. used to coach wrestling. even if i would have applied some of those techniques it would have caused an injury to the person i was trying to apprehend. itis no one silver bullet that would solve every situation, especially when you are dealing with the mentally ill command it is difficult to do. i just don't know what the answer is there. >> maybe beyond the scope of the panel, what ipanel, what i want to give you a chance to respond. protests occurring. does anyone want to respond? >> black lives matters has been one of the most destructive forces.
it has no purpose but to protest. we had goals. what is the solution? again, black lives seems to only matter when the white person is taking a black life and not when a little girl a shot through the head sitting on her grandfather's lap. when they can rise up in protest when that occurs, then i will join them. >> is go to the back of the room. >> i know that you have been talking about how it feels like the police have together facts. i'm wondering to what extent the judiciary have the policeman's back. to what extent do we end up shielding municipal entities and counties that should have made some really good
decisions on the front-end from continuing to make bad decisions because we're basically shielding them from liability. >> the judicial process at play, questions about policing. >> well, in some ways as one of the speakers pointed out, policeman have immunity from being sued. it is a qualified immunity. prosecutors, judges have an absolute immunity. they can never be sued. part of the problem is municipalities andensure themselves. part of the problem is, the municipalities can pay a judgment even for an errant police officer when they know they have done wrong, criminal conduct, even when they have engage in criminal conduct, what happens is, they pay the compensatory
damages. a policeman can be sued punitively. they can't engage in the same kind of conduct. they can punish them for bad acts. and i am speaking anecdotally. every time we get punitive damage against a police officer, the department puts pressure on the municipality to say, as part of the settlement, the person you are suing, you can get all that money as long as you don't collected directly from the police. it is very unusual in civil litigation for a policeman ever to pay anything out of his own pocket. what happens is the municipality steps up.
quite often it is a supervisory personnel in the department that are really responsible by the instructions they have given. everybody falls on the sword butbut in most of the litigation the patrolman takes responsibility for the sergeant for the sergeant forsergeant for lieutenant, lieutenant for the captain, and the and from the chief, knowing that the end of the day they will never really be hurt by it. i hope that answers the question. >> i'm going to take the moderators prerogative and ask a question that i hope was going to be asked but has not been asked yet. there are different views about the need for reform, but, but i want to ask a more fundamental federalist question. where is the reform need to come from if reform is
necessary? the federal government, government, state government, local government, all of the above? >> i would say all of the above. >> i think that policing is inherently a state and local issue that must be governed by the jurisdictions responsible for providing the services. the federal government is more likely to impose a one system fits all solution that may not work across this land that we live in. and so i would stress that we need a outdated but being at this is federalism means that there are certain responsibilities are entirely reserved for state and local government. i see this as a local issue. in terms of the federal government, they play very little role, if any.
i agree and think that we should look for reforms. camden, new jersey used to have a most corrupt. it has made major reforms are police officers are living in the community they are surveying and there has just been positive community interaction. violence is down, police relationships, franklin township in new jersey. there is an incident involving a police, the call does not go to new york to demonstrators but to some local leaders who are able to convene and explained to citizens what happened. happened. so there are positive models of reform, but we ought to have somebody spend some of the time, particularly some research institutes on what works in terms of community police reform. where are the studies of
successful police community interaction? >> in your opinion do you feel that because of the nature of the politics between city and state that sometimes you do need the federal government? >> i think it should be extremely rare occasions. >> there are some cases the broadly speaking the federal government should not play a major role in. and i think that for those of you who are interested in looking at what the available research says about topics in policing, i am not affiliated with this organization, but the center for evidence-based policing evidence -based policing at george mason university does excellent research that i highly recommend looking at what works in policing. >> i'm sorry. >> with our existing federal law and law as section 1983
and the way that it has been interpreted by the supreme court, without those laws they're would be virtually -- let me put it differently. it would be extremely difficult for a citizen, an individual citizen to get regress from police misconduct. the very viable remedy that is available to them is available under federal law. without federal law citizens would be dependent upon state court remedies and historically they have been inadequate. so the federal government does have a role to play. section 1983, 1988 on the books for a long time, and i think that they have provided an effective watchdog, effective oversight on police misconduct. >> in the weeks after the
death of freddy gray when baltimore was all over the news, pressure began to build to bring in the department of justice and eventually the mayor of baltimore did invite loretta lynch and the department of justice to come in and investigate the city police department. and so that investigation is now ongoing, and i expect in a few weeks, it could be two weeks, it might be three more months, but the department of justice, i expect, will issue a report saying there's a pattern and saying there is a pattern and practice of problems in the baltimore police department. it is not going to be any surprise, but asurprise, but a lot of people are surprised when i say that was a mistake to bring in the department of justice. justice. when there was all that national attention there was no better time for her to make the corrections that a lot of people thought were necessary in that city police department. the environment will never be better than it was back
then when there was so much attention and scrutiny on the department. the department will issue a report in a couple of months , and i'm sure the mayor will hold a pressa press conference with the police chief and pledge cooperation and follow through with reform command we will see what happens. sometimes local officials shift off responsibility for cleaning out their own police department by inviting the department of justice and and saying let them handle it and make the tough decisions. it should be done by the mayor and chief of police. >> thank you. let's go back to the front of the room for another question. >> adjunct professor of law. thethe question has been raised by the panel with the police misconduct sparks distrust of the police and that that distrust law enforcement. the question whether the police and other major public institutions enjoy the public trust has actually been pulled by
gallup polls. in the most recent poll last month, poll of 15 institutions. the leading to where the military and small business. number three where the police with 52 percent trust by contrast, the president enjoyed 32 percent trust. the supreme court 31, mtv news 21. in otherin other words, the principal organizations that you hear calling for police reform enjoy about half of the trust of the police themselves. the reason that they enjoy that level of trust is that they have largely adopted what has been the model of the anti- police movement. hands up, don't shoot. it is no longer news that hands of don't shoot is false. his hands were not up and he
was not trying to surrender. what is news is that the media, and, and anti- police organizations continue to adopt what they know is a false motto as the anthem of the movement, and a movement that takes root in a knowing falsehood deserves all the amount of trust that we would give, for example, to something like if you like your insurance you can keep your insurance. [applause] [laughter] ..
in high crime communities there is an intense distrust in the police because the police in high crime communities do the stop and frisk, their issue is not only to reduce crime, it is to make and this is what is really going on, it is to make a social statement, much like a social statement that the last paper just may. you have to respect me, you have to respect authority, you have to be in a position that if a policeman tells you to do someone, tells you to do something, can exercise even a constitutional right, you, the police are someone who has to be listened to.
law-abiding, decent people in high crime communities will not talk to the police. it is not because they're being intimidated by gang members and other bad people. it is because the police and those community have not been trade very well if they have the exact same kind of attitude some have represented we can do it we want because we represent justice and the citizens do not. that is what is going on. >> the data doesn't bear that. there is a 2011 study where the majority of people of people doing their jobs and there is no difference between hispanics and whites. there is other surveys as well.
>> it should not be a majority should be 99%. >> it was 93%. >> the point is, people in those high crime communities want increased police. if you if you look at any study of those community they want increase. they wanted and it's just not true what you're saying. the survey of people in the high crime areas more of them desire increased police presence because that is what the demand is. >> from the chiefs of police to the officers on the street, their biggest complaint and trying to solve crime is people are not coming forward to help us. >> let me finish that was the same issue a hundred years ago. >> now look, there's no doubt in
my mind there is more interaction with police on use of force either nonfatal or fatal use of force by police in the african-american community. there's no doubt about it. the question is why? the people who are interested in true criminal justice reform need to answer that question. if i say to you, what ethnic group if i say to the term organized crime and what ethnic group would you associate if you say anything under i tally and, i'm a telling, the question is why were they so involved in organized crime? no one answers that question. these need to be answered and you cannot have reform until you have some kind of idea of what you want to reform and why and what causes things. to have anecdotal information, blackstone talk to the cops
because they're free to please that's your experience that's not mine as a police officer, and guess that it's not bob's and guess what bob is african-american. >> we need to wrap it up. >> you spoke over me. what i said was please complain regularly to the chief and the guy on the street that communities, high crime communities do not have sufficient cooperation from the citizens in those communities. what i was was about to say was we can disagree about the reasons. one of those reasons, not the only reason, one of those reasons is the fact that police in many high crime communities have abused their power. you can deny that takes place but it is an element. i believe that very truly. >> i'm told that we need to wrap
up. i apologize for those standing at the microphone that we do not have time for your question. please give a nice ride of of applause to these very passionate panelists. [applause]. [inaudible conversation] >> next on c-span two, a look at the political engagement of young people around the world. energy secretary ernest talks about the upcoming un climate conference. from the federalist society legal conference a discussion about about civil rights and criminal justice system. >> all persons have in business before the honorable the supreme court of the united states would have your attention. >> my fellow americans, tonight
is the possibility that at midnight tonight the steel industry will be shut down therefore i am taking two actions tonight, first, i am directing the secretary of commerce to take possession of the steel mills and keep them operating. >> in 1952 the united states was involved in a military conflict with north korea. at home a dispute between this deal industry and the union came to a head. >> the korean korean war was a hot war. they needed steel for ammunition, tanks, for jeeps, for all of those things that you needed in the second world war as well. if the steel industry went on a strike it would be a real problem it was basic to the things in army and navy and air force needs to fight a war.
>> to avoided disruption crucial to the military president harry truman seize control of the mill. as a result the pending strike was called off and fuel production continue. however the steel companies, led by the tube company in ohio disagreed with the action and took the lawsuit to the supreme court. we'll examine how the court ruled in the case and the impact on presidential powers. joining our discussion, michael gerhart, professor of university of north carolina law school and author of power president and the forgotten president. william howell, political science professor at the university of professor and author of the wartime president, power without persuasion. congressional checks on
presidential war powers. that is coming up on the next landmark cases, live monday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. c-span three, and c-span radio. for background on each case while you watch order your copy of the landmark cases companion book, it is cases companion book, it is available for $8.95 plus shipping at c-span.org/landmark cases. >> c-span has your coverage of the road to the white house 2016 where you will find the candidates, the speeches, the debate, and most importantly your questions. this year we're taking the coverage into classrooms across the country with our student cam contest. giving students the opportunity to discuss what important issues they want to hear most from candidates. follow the contest and wrote to the white house coverage on tv, radio, and online at c-span.org.
>> now, a discussion discussion about engaging young people in politics run the world. activism politicians from britain, canada, and italy talk about what they're doing to get millennial voters involved in the political process. from the center from american progress in washington, this is one and a half hours. >> hello everyone, thank you for being here today. my name my name is and johnson, i am the executive director we are excited about the conversation starting today about young people in civic engagement and social change in here in the u.s. and around the world. generation progress as an organization that works with the millennial generation here in the u.s. the millennial's are defined as people born between 1980 and
2000. although it depends on who is to find it. the millennial generation generation is the largest generation in our history. there are in the year 2020 millennial's will make up 20% 20% of the voting age population in the u.s. there is conversation about what is going on with young people in the united states and their political participation. as an organization we focus on engaging young people around the issues that matter to them. so we talk about economy count and other topics important to them. we've had an opportunity over the past years to meet young people around the world who are doing similar work and engaging young people in social change in their country. what we have learned is a lot of the issues are very similar. the issues that are important to young people.
if you think about jobs in the economy that makes sense. young people are unemployed and underemployed at higher rates than other people. so there's a big big question about jobs and the economy. there are issues around access to high-quality, affordable education for young people. in the united states going to debt is a huge issue, access to to higher education is an issue around the world. there are issues related to violence, gun violence in the united states one of the things i have found is when i talk about our problem with gun violence in the united states, it is absolutely shocking to young people in other parts of the world. how bad this issue is in the u.s. there are issues we are dealing with, with police violence and police killings of young people which is something other people around the world are dealing with violence what the states
itself. there are also important things about the role of government that young people are struggling with in the u.s. and around the world. one thing that was surprising to me as i was having conversation was young people in other parts of the world would say, there is a corruption problem with the way our political system works. it is corrupt. in the united states young people talk about being frustrated by money and politics. when you really boil it down it is the same issue. it's about influence that goes to the very rich and powerful and it takes away from people at large. i think think their similarities in that issue as well. issues are similar that young people are dealing with. i think some of the structural challenges are somewhat similar. their progressive institutions here and around the world that are trying to figure out how to engage the millennial generation into the progressive
institution. whether that is labor union, advocacy organization, or political parties, or think tanks. organizations are trying to figure out how to engage this generation to make them a part of the fabric of the progressive movement in that country. obviously political participation is an issue, so actually voting. young people are not voting in the numbers of previous generations. they are not exercising the power in that way. that is something here and around the world political parties and candidates are trying to figure out. we're talking about this earlier, there is also earl lot of social movements that are happening around the world that are trying to figure out young people leading the social movements are trying to figure out how to move that social movement of organizing activism into political power.
if you think about the occupy movement in the united states it was powerful around income equality but i think a lot of folks and occupy movement would actually say moving into institutional power was a challenge. other organizing efforts around the world are experiencing similar powers. after the protest, what is the next step? how do you institutionalize your power to create long-term change? that is something people are thinking about. with this global conversation we want to start, we want to address the issues and say what is the research that we need to do on this? we are excited to have our friends here from the foundation for european progressive studies to talk about the millennial dialogue project they have kicked off around the world. so what does the research tell us and what do we know about young people in the united states and around the world? what are some of the issues that are engaging young people here and what our young issues
engaging young people in other countries? what can we learn from those? what is working here, for example that is working in other parts of the world? those are the kind of things we want to talk about with issue organizing campaigns. we want to talk about what is working in an electrical engagement. what are models and successes we can share with each other to make electoral politics more welcoming to young people around the world? what good public policy are actually passing? what policies are impacting young people and how are they getting through the legislative bodies that young people are engaged in? so, what's working, how, how are we electing good candidates, how are we getting young people to run for office, and how are we
building social movements that move into institutionalize powers. these are the questions we want to ask over the course of the next hour and a half and over the course of the next months and years as what as we build this millennial conversation. we want to connect young organizers and activists around the world together. as as we move forward together these relationships being built and best practices being shared will impact ten or 20, or 30 years out when these people are running their government. with that, i will turn it over to ernst, if you want to come up we are thrilled to be working with the foundation for european progressive studies on this research project. it is a very busy meeting with d.c. this week. thank you for joining us and tell us about the work. >> thank you so much for giving
me the opportunity to address this conference and before stopping i would like to say a big thank you that it was possible to build up the kind of common dialogue for the centers of making progress and all of the related institutions. i think what we discussed today is not only a timely discussion but very important issue of our times and the challenges we are living and the millennial's are facing. not least important for today's debate is the issue of some up worn-out story of younger generation that you mention. it features disenchanted, or disengage young people who have turned their back on the political system. this is at least what we can say from the european level. people are saying in your political appeals they distance themselves from political campaigns and they failed to
appear at belt boxes. however, their absence their absence within the framework of institutionalize political conversation make them a target of political -- that is why we have lunch together a generation progress at global initiative and i mention that already, called the millennial dialogue. it seeks to shed light on this growing phenomena of u.s. withdrawal. it is is crucial that we as progressives take assertive step to understand the youth and a very good indicator of what the future will look like and how progressives will proceed by this generation. in addition, and most importantly, we should enable ourselves to analyze what are the real challenges for the upcoming years. to reconnect with with this generation and what are possible solutions that would bring progressives out.
i am firmly convinced that the millennial dialogue project is a steady step in this direction. this is a project that aims to give an extract and include in the progressive priorities. with that respect, we have a project, being positive, being participatory, and being progressive. it is to be positive because it is it to change the terms of the current debate. it is to be participatory because it is a gift of the youth and it is to be progressive because it is to support the progressive and social democratic family and acquiring a new connection with the younger generation. what has been done so far, we have conducted so far, until this month more than ten countries report with a number
of indications on what the younger generation is expecting for from its politics and political system. the approach has been welcomed and recognized as an innovative one and entrusting more partners within the european union and beyond. it has allowed us to cover the majority of the european states and indeed go global. we have so far conducted research in the united states, canada, european union and nearly all european countries, we have now contracted with some countries in latin america like chile and brazil. we have some of the service in africa, especially south africa, inc. kenya, and others, we haven't debate in indian partners to work with younger
generations in india. it really is a global conversation and global initiative is going on. it is very needed that politicians in politics are looking at this. with that, i would like to conclude with four core questions which i think david lewis from our agency who is doing this research will explain a bit more to you in detail than what has come out so far. the first question question we have to tackle is, how to prove that progressives understand the approach of the millennial's. while responding with the physical program and organize the economy to a political rule and make politics remain in society. the second question we need to tackle is how to create a political project that will appeal to young people's idealistic belief that it
another world is possible. the third question how to reestablish the link between politics, political culture and culture itself. the fourth question, how to renew the movement so that it presents itself as a real, serious alternative and not a part of a system of the mainstream political consensus. if we work on these on such a positive, progressive, participatory debate i'm convinced the progressive movement, especially in europe can convince again a large part of that younger millennial generation to participate more actively more engaged to its politics. thank thank you very much for your attention. i'd like to introduce david lewis, a london based opinion poll station and they have
worked with tremendous results already on the table. they will continue also working together on that issue. thank you very much. [applause]. think very much my name is david , and the founder of research company which until recently had a background in music and political research has come about because technology we use to engage with people in the music entertainment industry resonate well with young people. so we start with statistical measurements of thousands of people to on my consumer panels which are managed by networking and we have a global reach of consumers. i'm just explaining that we have this global reach. there's an segmentation and
identify core groups to speak with. in the case of politics we have gone out to 1000 people in each country other than the u.s., that was 1600 people, and conducted research of 13-34 -year-olds. we are able to bring in on my community represented of the key segments. people who are actively politically engaged in one segment, the the disengaged millennial and another segment, and another people in the middle in the mainstream. we were able to establish a 247 dialogue. 224-seven. to start up a three country project in germany and poland. another project was built from
there. so much so that the technology that we use for record companies in technology, sports, all of those industries that resonates with politics and we now have a political research department headed up by david kitchen. i just after use of doing research in the music entertainment it is the most fastening project because it is applying technology to really make a difference in people's lives. so you can see on the screen how it works. it is hard for me, i will walk around. we have rigorous research methodology combined with connected technology to engage communities for 24/seven insights.
we are actually building up a database of millennial's because soon we'll completed up to 20 countries in all continents. will break that down into granular detail. what is most significant finding is that is it interesting cluster of countries were commonality between hungry on certain aspects and canada and germany. there are interesting clusters and interesting cultural differences but the most important, most exciting thing is the strength of commonality and talking to young people around the globe about politics and political engagement. because we have spoken to people in depth for an entire weekend doing questionnaires there is rich data of the survey. i will concentrate on the numbers of what has come out over the 12,000 people have
talked to. i will concentrate on the u.s. and how it compares and how it is similar different of different territories. we'll start by taking one quote from each of six countries to give you a flavor of the sort of things that is coming out of the study. i think the rich data is in the engagement. in germany, the internet the internet is gaining in popularity and recently with was watches instead of being used to inform young people we are playing apps like dub smash. in italy is been quite common area been without a job for three years and with that my dreams to buy house. i was living at home with my parents and i my partners not even working, at what age will we have children? never, we seem to be looking for work in order to start a family in a family in the years pass. in poland, one of my favorite quotes and poland were to explode in revolution would soon have lots of lights on facebook but no revolution is in the street. something that comes out every territory is this where people
will like or agree with it, and they feel like they have done something. young people are very self-effacing to recognize that that is not politically active. in bulgaria, politics is a dirty business. bulgaria politicians seek to fill their pockets to fill their own interest and don't care about society. census lines i can i'm member corrupt politicians to have arose and i see no difference in the future. people are not interested in politics because there is nothing that excite them. in hungary, i would like to take part in politics but i'd like to see it has an effect two. if by some wonder and average person gets into an influential person they will be driven away in no time. and from an american, but nicely sums up, don't mistake the force
of political system with lack of caring about public affairs. what you'll see as we go through the top findings and see how can system america on the same level with other territories and countries. young people are concerned about their future. there really engage with their future and their lives and have a serious interest in politics. they're not engaging with the political systems. political systems for young people across the research seem badly damaged if not completely broken. what is reassuring is that young people really serious about the light. the most impactful discussion i witnessed since we have been running this survey wasn't hungry where young people started to discuss in online communities, the ethics of having children.
there is a serious discussion in hungary about the problems they're having. is is it morally sensible to have children? that is a horribly bleak picture but it has been something they are starting to have a discussion. what will see as young people have an interest in their lives and making a difference, it's about how we change systems to reflect young people. it has been a huge cognitive shift amongst young people from the digital age away from the way of viewing the world in social media and social platform integration. i will go through the data, i am rushing because we have so much here and i'm conscious of the time. america, when we ask people what they're interested and they did not know to start the survey
that it was mainly about politics because i thought i was about life in your country and area. so we start talking about your interest. you can see here this picture in america from first to last is very similar across territories with music popping up in every country we researched and new technology coming up thereabouts and that broader social media and higher for people. another thing to look at is politics, that is the low-scoring interest, not just in the u.s. but in the research in its entirety. political engagement, political america we look at the segments in our discussion 16% of america millennial's say they're very interested in politics which is lower than 23% say they are not at all interested in politics. we consider those to be politically disengaged. as for other questions on trend
countries, looking at america in comparison it is alongside the u.k., just behind in germany, the politics and hungry was particularly pronounced as it was in bulgaria. let me ask, what is important in life? what are the important things in your life? being happy, being a good health, being free to do and say what i want, they are high up on the list. as you'll see the significant thing there taken an interest in politics is the least important factor in the research. throughout all of the territories we talked to taking an interest in politics was 16th or 17th. so very low. interestingly, in america it is the only country where we found a slight uplift among 15 -
17-year-olds who are very interested in politics. and the other countries we find the younger you go down the scale the less interest there is in politics. in italy of 1000 people we talked to we do not find one respondent of the 15 - 17-year-old said they were very interested in politics. in hungary there were only 20. this is an interesting question, we would have to choose one option. what would you rather be, in your life? in all countries but germany business owner or founder he came top of what people would like to be. entrepreneurial concerned with business, concerned with success, that was the top answer everywhere else except germany. in germany we found being a sportsman was number one aspiration. it was interesting in germany we found a greater sense of
stability going forward. german economy, german education system people were comfortable that and confident that they were going to have a nice life and maybe an entrepreneur may be. america is supposed to be the biggest laboratory country in the world where being a famous celebrity was coming in second. the interesting thing here is again only 4% of americans say they would like to be a politician, and all of the countries across europe and north america, chile, no one wants to be a politician or very few. happiness with life right now, lots of very serious conversation about and what i refer to and hungry, the
optimism of the youth. 89% of 15 - of 15-34-year-old millennial's in the state say they are happy. that compares favorably with other countries. hungary was at the bottom. another interesting finding and i found it particularly interesting because before i started this project i assumed that it would be a huge influence young people, constantly connecting with their peers. when you say seriously what the biggest influence of your day to day life, parents and every country has come out way ahead of friends, siblings, but in america, they're more influenced by family compared to the norm and other countries. let me look at data analysis, we
are picking out active interest, what you actively have an interest in. team sports, one third of people in that compares to taking part of political meetings and protester demonstrations. it is way down there. what factors will affect the quality of your life? the number one factor that america millennial's feel is the u.s. economic situation. what is interesting in the data is despite a lack of personal interest in politics and the political system, americans will use decisions made by politicians is a key thing of their life. they are aware of how influential and important politics will be in effect in their lives but they are not engaging in the system. one interesting thing of the data compared with countries is decisions made by politicians and the u.s. is high where u.s. international decisions is low.
again, optimism about the future, how, how optimistic are you about your future? this is something you find with young people, my might not be great but there's a determination and energy that life will be good. 8585% are optimistic about their future in the u.s. generation gap, did you you want to say something about the generation gap involvement in politics in their parents and grandparents be met yes will put some historical context on the historic gold generation gap. with regard to politics and culture, and the surveys we found there is a perception among millennial's that we do not have the same things to fight for that our parents or grandparents generation had. in germany, or pulling, there is
about communist legacy sub millennial parents were young with the berlin wall existed, those reasonable organization. there is movements around the vietnam war and a greater sense of need to mobilize around politics. there was not really satisfaction about the case that there are issues to fight for. there is a wide rate of alienation and polarization and were commonalities, their stark contrast in specific areas. we noticed a significant rise in jenna phobia and hungry for example. there is a link and how the economic so for example in
countries you think was a aaa credit rating there was some more interest in politics. there's very much evident hierarchy of need and how millennial's view politics and what is important for them. >> think we isolated the people who said they had no interest in voting, one of the key reasons for not wanting to vote, in the u.s., it was no interest in politics ahead of lack of trust in politicians. that was a difference across countries because they're tended to be a lack of politicians was the number one factor. key factors that might encourage u.s. millennial's to vote if my vote really made a difference, that contrast was out of the country.
a grin with these statements 60% of u.s. millennial thing politicians ignore the views of young people. 62% of young americans feel politicians are more concerned about older people than younger. over half feel politicians want to control and restrict young people. the fact contributing to voting decisions in the u.s., what was interesting here when you ask young people what you think would actually affect your decision of who to vote for if you're going to vote? it's it's traditional media, all the things you think about in the way the arguments for political campaigns had to pan out. we look at how young person will begin to engage with their peers it is a different picture, is about use of social media and connectivity. we'll see that in a moment.
one thing a trend that comes out that people are interested in issues that have a link to politics. this is in translation to political participation. there is a jaundiced view towards parties and institutions that seem to be inaccessible, they seem to be favorable to older generation it's more hierarchy. or single issue campaigns that have a direct linear relationship from start to finish and you can see the success that is achieved. there is a challenge in translating this, we have used two cultural change. , one is really mobilize using
the means that millennial's identified as something they would use the campaign. the other is the marriage equality campaign and which made use of everything from local organization and mobilization at community level through celebrity. then to make sure everyone knew about it so it would want others to go vote two. there some speculation as to what will attract more preservation with justin trudeau becoming prime minister in canada and younger charismatic leaders in leadership. president obama is an example of it. but among a lot of the respondents in our survey is not
specifically just these boxes that they want to have checked. it is a feeling and desire of authenticity in politics. it is not specifically the age of the leaders that matter. it is the projection of related ability of off the intensity. >> it is interesting in britain the two most popular politicians are young people, the two who could not be more politically apart but they have charisma and honesty that young people find they can engage with because they think they are who they say they are. it is fascinating that young people think that. young people in terms of political structures and system just want transparency. they went to a dialogue that is now possible through social media. >> so coming to that point what
things would be extremely useful to you, as young people for building your political campaign? they are not expecting that in electoral campaigns particularly, if they're are starting a political campaign social media would be up there alongside powerful media, tv, et cetera. and the quality of research we got young people building and what kind of messaging you would use. what we are finding in the research is the answers to engaging young people come from young people they need to write the script. we need to get politicians involved in listening in a two-way dialogue. that dialogue needs to involve young people in terms of calling people to political action.
we talk about high-priority spending in the u.s. was very consistent with the other countries in terms of actual things that come to the top, education, healthcare, there are central issues. did you central issues. did you want to say something about? >> this goes again to the focus of the quality of the economy and socialist in the country. it is reflective in our research , if there is a stable label market there are more issues than jobs. only one third of americans felt they could have their opinion heard if they wanted to. young young people generally don't feel empowered to be heard. next few if any politicians encourage young people to get
involved in politics. what should politicians work for an to what extent should they deliver what they're working for? in every country we found the number one thing from a young person's perspective a politician should be doing is ensuring the best possible future for young people. as you can see most of the other things the politicians are doing is perceived as to how well politicians are doing. the only place it was great where's germany where there is more praise of what politicians achieve. other countries we see this lack of ensuring of a future for young people be in the key thing. the only thing is building and maintaining strong military focus and that is what politicians seem to do better.
in terms of gender and sexual orientation without huge support for gender and sexual equality. norway was the highest, u.s. 80%. hungary was the lowest of the country. from from young person perspective that is an important issue. in the research we are building communication, how would young people begin to message the importance of racism. it's not a creative suggestion for campaign but an essential messaging that young people should hear. young people need to vote, as their future. this is what comes out at the top of the message. we also say, in america there is
definitely a call for more women in politics. the gender balance is important. finally, and i'm conscious of time, the fact fact that it would encourage more millennial's to vote. first about the ability to vote on my, i know there has been problems with online voting in holly, their things texted and shelved for security issues. there are debates about whether it is right for voting to bmi. from a young person's perspective and perspective and across the research is just a matter of when. it has to happen, if their problems they need to fix them because because we need to be able to vote online. what about the ability to vote more places, would that help? shopping malls, airports, train stations, and just be able to go to cast your vote more widely, young people are saying they'll
be irrelevant once we could vote on my because that's how we would vote. those eligible to vote who are you register, and the u.s. 70% have registered. the ability to vote in advance, what, what about if you could vote several weeks or months in a dance with that encourage more young people to vote? we found there is support other than in hungry for longer. to vote. will he talked about this in the research if we excluded the idea of months it would be higher. people think you should be up to vote for weeks but not months. should voting be be compulsory by law? definitely not that does not seem to fit with democracy. that was was widely rejected in all countries. should 16 and 17-year-olds be given the opportunity to vote. note was note was the answer and every country. you have 52% of people saying
they should not be able to vote they were concerned about whether they knew enough or were experienced enough to vote. in the u.k. we did research not long after we had a referendum where 16 and 17 -year-olds could vote. that got a lot of media attention. generally people feel that 16 and 17 is too young. that is the headlines of the research. i think where 1010 minutes behind schedule, thank you very much. [applause]. thank you so much i would like to introduce matt brown who is going to facilitate this panel discussion. matt is a senior fellow for the american progress and runs the global progress program which
works with institutions around the world on developing progressive governments and progressive. thank you matt for doing this. that has also been a thought partner in this process. i appreciate his guidance as we go through this, i will turn it over to. >> thank you for the passing presentation. i will quickly introduce the three new panelists that we have joining us, we have a member of parliament from the democratic party in italy, also we have hillary who is the lead for the volunteer mobilization and liberal party of canada. we have layla who is the
communication director at generation progress that leaves a variety of campaigns including a trip. this has been a hugely successful campaign that you correlated with the white house but it is not a political campaign. if you can explain to us what is the source of that success, will how do you run a campaign that involves high-level politicians yet transcends political divides? what is the secret to success. >> so thank you matt, i think we can all agree the issue of campus sexual assault is a tremendous problem. we have one in five women will be sexually assaulted by the time she graduates. one and 16 men, and
most of most of the time it is by someone they know. the scope of the problem is huge which is why the white house launched a passport to investigate the growing number of incidents on campus. one of the things the task force found was by standard intervention. training people to feel empowered to step in and do something if they saw something happening. we partnered with them and others to launch the campaign which is about that really. empowering people to think about campus sexual assault is something they have a responsibility to do something about. if you see something happening and you don't do something to stop at your are part of the problem as well. we want to make sure were giving you tools to be part of the solution. we are fortunate to work with the white house on this. is very much a cultural change campaign and not with legislative agenda.
again trying to reframe this idea of making it your responsibility to do something about campus sexual assault. >> i think we reach out to a lot of cultural influencers to first broadcast that message and so anyone from kerry washington to the president and vice president are supporters of the campaign. we have had millions of views on our psa's, to say the reach of the message has been huge. we also have an intense focus on making sure people are embracing the message and it is not just a psa campaign. it is something we want people to take in use and implement on their campus. to empower each other to step in and do something. working with these cultural
influencers has allowed us to spread the message far and wide. we put the toolkit online, we made the local downloadable, we gave the tools to the people we want to run the campaigns on their campus entrusted them with the tools. given that trust to the young people has empowered them to take the campaign and run with it. that is what made it successful. >> what is the definition of success for you? how do you measure success if it is a cultural change? >> to be honest, it is hard to measure the success of cultural change. we have great numbers in terms of how far the message has been reaching. at the end of the day the campaign is about stopping campus sexual assault. if nobody ever gets raped again that we have succeeded and it is great. to dial it back a bit, we like to normalize by standard and it
is something a given on college campuses. outside of college campuses as well. i think i think of the example of a designated driver. twenty or 30 years ago that was not really a thing that people thought about if you're going to go on have drinks and socialize you didn't think about having a designated driver. and out now through work and campaigning that is a given. if you're going to be drinking with your friends you have a designated driver. that is a similar parallel with what we're trying to do it by standard intervention and empowering people to read praying the issue of campus sexual assault. secondly working with people to continue the grassroots movement as they continue to have conversations on campuses and engage each other. making sure the schools are responding well and
institutionalizing that from a university level. i would say that would definitely be a success. >> thank you. looking at the campaigns towards the political campaigns, the research presented say the younger generation of millennial's are becoming much less affiliated with a political party. when when you're looking at this, i remember a poll that came out just before an election and they basically set up young people vote justin trudeau wins. those essentially the message. what technique did you use in canada with the liberal party to encourage people to come out and vote? >> a lot of what was done in the presentation is that we relied upon. it was more of the issues and
about identity. people were were coming to the liberal party because of the platform policies that laid out, that is what we use to connect with people. one of the things that is important to take away is that youth is not a special interest group. they are diverse groups. there's a youth with young families, youth and school, there is there is no secret sauce to mobilizing youth. it is based on real relationships, not not transactional relationships that only come around once an election. we started building prior campaign about a year and a half out and we really mobilized people around issues that matter to them. started by talking to people in finding out what they are interested in. what issues concern them, and then talking about how different policies could impact their lives. one of the things that made it,
they opened up special voting centers on college campuses to advance the polls for early voting. and made it easier for young people and mostly on university campuses and so that's a group that generally has a low participation in the pole. so not making making it about a liberal, conservative, democrat, so just talking about what you care about and using personal stories and giving people tools to mobilize their own community. >> can we dig deeper into that last point you made about the tools. the strategies, techniques, tactics or particular forms that allow people to organize better than others? or could you not generalize there either?
>> i think it's about doing the real work and having conversations with people being authentic and honest. being in places where young people are. prime minister trudeau did the talk and i think that was something that a lot of people were interested in. they went to that force for a lot of their news and their interests. i don't think you can generalize because it is a diverse audience and it is about making candidates making sure they are accessible and open and having conversations with people once before hand. >> from a candidates point, david mention is that a lot of people who are successful are the young charismatic leaders. yet obama and zero eight, you
you have trudeau now, do you think that is a factor and partly of your success? >> i think both. i think think people want to see themselves reflected in their leadership, that plays a part. if people are not the centric and people don't believe this person will do it they say or is not a real person, that trickles down to the candidates, the volunteers, the people who are doing the organizing. everyone has to find their own voice and reason for becoming involved in politics. that authenticity says what that person cares maybe i should care to. >> you are a real person a politician. at least you seem to be from where i'm sitting. what is a light from the inside? how? how does it feel to run? >> the kind of experience is a big difference from what you spoke until now. we were elected with a strong
mandate from all people to crash all politics. so we were not elected by young people i would say. when we compare, we have to be honest, when we comparing 2013 we are not so gray heads, young people did not vote like the democratic party. they went but we ended up with a very young parliament is the youngest parliament elected in italy since the beginning of the republic so since the end of the world war. we do have a mandate to respond to the quotes that we had.
let's say two and half million young people in italy do not work, do not not study, and are not in training. we were elected to change politics. i think this is our challenge. so more than complaining, i think we have to look at the work we do, to ace, on the one side what are the issues that move us? we come from different parties and we did a lot of work on unemployment. we strongly felt that was our mandate so we have a problem in italy certainly so as you see young people do not vote because of what government delivered. also they feel involved.
that is the second part of our mandate. it is more challenging i would say which is involving young people in politics which is what we're talking about. in a different way because one way of all people in politics the other issues how to get people involved in everyday politics and taking responsibility. i think it is my experience, first of all that you have to set an example. if you let people your age to vote you have to do the work so conversing in the streets. we opened up shop in the middle of my constituency. >>.