tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 10, 2016 12:58pm-2:59pm EDT
areas of the country where there was a lot of house price speculation, house price depreciation and then decline. the final point is that these loans were incredibly likely to default. this again is based on neil's work. let me talk you through it. it's a little bit complicated. this is based on tabulations of the number of borrowers who went into default any given period. so the first column tells you of all loans that went to default during that time period, 17% went to investors. you can see that stayed pretty constant. for the first four bars, all about 17%. this is a time when house prices were rising and when defaults were no. 2007 the picture change the house prices are falling dramatically, defaults are rising dramatically. the number of loans in default is rising dramatically. the sheer of those going to investors is rising dramatically.
so you can see are loans that went to default during those periods at a time of very high delinquency rates can post a link which is also disproportionally going to these investors. on going to talk briefly about the policy be sponsored. one reason why the narrative of what happened during the financial crisis is important is also dictates the policy response. a lot of our policy response has been focused on the owner occupied market. so, for example, we have a ability to repay a qualified mortgage regulation in place that have a lot of protections to verify that some of income is correct, their deaths are correct, that sort of thing. relatively speaking this owner occupancy fraud has not receive nearly as much attention. ..
>> but in terms of the overall emphasis of where we have looked as a regulatory community there is less here looking at the investors. i am going to summarize with one slide and i hope if you take nothing else away from this talk you really focus on this slide. this is the same data i showed you before just a different combination. these are dollars not numbers. this is the most recent time period and note. what i want you to look at first is what i will call circles. the right-hand set of bars and those are the closed to investors. you can see at the beginning of
the period, from 1991-2001 there was 230 billion in new mortgage inflows to these investors and that rose. by 2005-2007 there was almost a trillion in new credit going to investors. all types of mortgage lending is off the clip afterwards. it is now down back to the same level it was pre-crisis depending on when you measure it. i want to contrast that with the first set of bars. this is first-time homeowners with low credit scores. you hear the narrative like the financial crisis was people becoming homeowners who should not have been homeowners and as much as this is a proxy for that. low credit scores and were not homeowners before. they started the period with higher lows.
370 billion compared to the 230 billion for the investors. like all types of mortgage debt it did rise over the period. so by the peak in 2005-2007 and these are dollars, not households, it has gone up to 530 billion. so it has risen but nowhere need the speed of investor flows. then the collapses. you can see it as 190 billion and that is roughly half the level with was pre-crisis. these are two groups that started roughly at the same place and had different experiences during the crisis and i hope the slide hammers home my takeaway that the investor part of the narrative is important and not to undersell the other things that happened in the crisis.
the increase in lending was broadba broad based but i think this would be important and should receive more dialogue. thank you and i will be happy to take any questions you have. [applause] >> my question is the occupation of these investors. do you have any information of that? they could work in financial services going out on their own and calling themselves individual investors but have the knowledge of a corporation. i am curious about that. >> yeah, i think that is the next research frontier and bill told me one of my jobs here is to setup for research that still needs to get done. i don't think we know about who
the investors are. the credit bureau data doesn't have a lot of information on the individuals. you know the age, the zip code in which they reside but we don't know a lot. it is hard on the other data sets to identify them because they don't identify themselves as owner-occupiers or i mean they do identify as owner occupiers. the million dollar question is who are these households and causes them to come in at the peak and exit like that. >> so one takeaway, the urban institute has been looking at this issue of whether we were running into trouble because of the borrowers or the products. and you are highlighting the
subprime new home buyer portion but the urban institute is saying we are using credit restrictions that look even more stringent than pre-boom when you seem to show pre-bubble housing seemed to be fairly stable. so are we perhaps overdoing it as an overreaction to this perception that it was caused by loose lending standards and not focusing on the right thing? and i will just leave this as provocative because i know you cannot answer. but your math, we have regional banks, of course, and it looks like regional banks must not have been paying attention. some regional banks are probably
crowing after looking at your map but i guess some look like they should have egg on their face. if you want to answer that but if you could respond to the first question. is it potentially the case that this narrative we have been operating under is perhaps meaningless to some policies that are not helpful because if we could get borrowing standards back to pre-bubble the urban institute measures, we would have a lot more home sales which would be good for construction, construction workers and jobs that have stalled out recently. >> you are asking a very important question that the economic profession has been debating for close to a decade. i will give you an answer that will be uncomplete and unsat --
incomplete and unsatisfied. you are right, there is a correlation between data and default. a 228 mortgage or option arm is likely to default more so. the unanswered question is is it the product or the person. if the person had not been in that type of loan would they not have defaulted? my idea is people selected into the products and the people who took out option arms is probably the investors, the people who didn't want to document their income. to me the thing is all of the product to me is a little bit too strong because i think there is this selection into it. i think it is also true, absolutely what you are saying, the mortgage credit is very tight and that is one of the things neal draws out in the paper is the strong collapse in lending to these lower credit
score households seem to be a c contraction in credit applied and not as much a demand story. i think you are right on that point. it is a good question for people to continue to wrestle with and that is if we are at the appropriate level of credit tightness or not. >> did most of the investor loans end up in private label securities? do you have any idea what share was gse security versus private label securities? >> i don't. i think putting the number again after speaking about the new york fed fly so that stuff is private label securities ended up in -- makes me think it has to disporportion but the credit
data don't distinguish that. >> i am thinking about the slide you showed earlier about the banks advertisement about solicit loans and i agree there is a lot of time the narratives with in the descriptives. can one interpret this is a story about supplier induced demand and the banks created this class of investors who were trying to, i guess, flip houses really quick? >> i think it is hard to come up with a narrative of the financial crisis in which anyone looks particular good honestly. i mean, you know, people were making -- a lot of different people were making a lot of different money. obviously there were a lot of lenders especially non
depositories who make money ouf starting loans and fees. but there were a lot of homeowners who saw people flipping houses and make a lot of money and that was a strong inducement to go in also. i think in my personal narrative of what happened, again, if you ask a hundred mortgage economists you will get 200 different answers, house energy and commerce subcommittee -- house prices were going up and caused markets discipline to fail because so many people were making money for so long it became easy to get sloppier. if you pulled my colleagues in the room, though, you would get differences in opinion.
>> i know the housing market was really heating up and there were more students going to school just taking classes and i was curious as the relationship between this bubble and university enrollment if you have any. >> yeah, that is a really good question. there is a lot of things going on so i am having trouble mentally running the regression and controlling for everything. i mean i think obviously when the economy is doing well more people tend to go -- when house prices were doing well the economy was doing well and vice versa which makes it hard to answer your question. we knew when house prices fell off a cliff and the economy was not doing well there were a lot
of students who entered school because finding a job was so hard. i think we know, part of the reason, maybe only a small part, that student loans went up so much at the time was the increase in the number of people going to school and the fact their families lost other forms of wealth that helped them pay for that. so i think there is a relationship. i am not sure it is the main -- it is hard to know how the wealth effect from having more housing would outweigh the economy doing well and working being more profitable. i don't know how to weigh those two. but to bill spriggs' point i think it is well worth researching. i want to doclosing remarks and say thank you for being here. this has been a great honor and
privilege at the fed to have you here. we are excited about the collaborations and further ways to partner with you. we welcome your ideas. please don't leave without getting the contract information from a couple of us in the room. i am liking at beth kaiser, michael, lou shoemaker, debby forest. we considering this to be the beening. we are acutely aware of how much we miss by having a limited perspective on the economy and staff coming from a limited group of backgrounds. we are dedicated to changing that and welcome the opportunity to partner with you further so thank you so much. [applause] [inaudible conversation]
[inaudible conversation] >> we will be back live this afternoon with a look at societal inequality including the impact of incarceration on the community. that will start at 2 p.m. eastern and the conference wraps up at 4:00. all of these will be available on c-span.org. former education commissioner in florida talks about his career and education policy in the u.s. and that will be at 7 p.m. eastern on c-span2.
and at 8 p.m., booktv in prime time with books about the criminal justice system including one by a former inmate. throughout the month we are showing booktv programs in prime time. in case you are not familiar with our weekend events, we focus on the latest non-fiction book releases through discussions. in depth, a live three-hour look at one author's work. it airs the first sunday of every month an noon eastern. after wards is a one-on-one conversation between the author and interviewer who is a journalist, public policy maker or journalist. it airs at 10 p.m. eastern on saturday.
booktv is the only national network devoted exclusively to non-fiction books. booktv on c-span2, television for serious readers. booktv on c-span2, 48 hours of non-fiction books and authors every weekend. here is featured programs for this coming weekend. at 7 p.m. on saturday, the supreme court of warren burger is the topic of the book we investigate. and then at 10 p.m. after wards with dana lash who argues the united states is switching into the coastal america and fly over america in her book fly over nati nation. she is interviewed by guy benison. fox news contribute and town
hall editor. >> it seems people, not so much in the flyover, but you have the right and left pulling them in in one direction and it goes back to showing up to a certain way to vote or supporting particular issues but that divide is scary because now politics is affecting whether or not we will be able to equally defend ourselves against a major threat. >> on sunday, monique morris looks at how schools are having a negative impact on the black female lives of students. she argues schools and other institutions that are supposed to help are the places criminalizing black girls. go to booktv.org for the complete schedule. a segment from today's washington journal on donald trump's tax reform plan he unveiled yesterday.
>> joining us from new york is david malpath. he is a senior economic advisor for the trump presidential campaign and he is the president of an economic research and consulting firm. good morning. >> good morning. glad to be here. >> could you specifically talk about your role in advising mr. trump on economic issues? >> i have done a lot of economic issues over my career. what the campaign wants to do is have a broad economic program and have the details put out. so that is what we have been working on. in the speech on monday, he described parts of the plans which are the reforms of taxes, trade, regulatory policy and energy policy and they will be follow-up and more parts of the program coming out. as you may know, i was in washington in 1984-1991.
had to think about that a little bit. a long time ago. but i worked on issues such as the tax reform act of 1986 and also some of the trade legislation and quite a bit of the way that the government interacts with each other. so the department of agriculture works with the department of commerce. it is a giant -- a lot of which i think is excessive. >> mr. malpass, we have a bit of the speech looking at taxes and we will hear that and then ask you questions on that. >> that sounds good. >> my plan will reduce the current number of brackets from 7 to 3 and dramatically streamline the process. [applause] >> we will work with house republicans on this using the same brackets they have
proposed. 25% and 33%. for many american workers their tax rate will be 0. >> mr. malpass, can you flesh out why three tax brackets and some of the analysis from the papers so wouldn't those tax brackets automatically favor those who make more? >> the three tax brackets are part of simplifying the code. and no, it doesn't mean that people will pay more. for one, there is a large standard deduction which will take a lot of people off the tax rolls and reduce the taxes for others. what you will end up is a reduction in income taxes for most americans and i think that will be stimulative. a lot of job and wage growth comes from small businesses so one of the major thoughts of this program is to get small businesses operating better and
that creates a rising middle class income. the real median income, the 50th percentile has been going down, in this recovery which is unprecedented. so a primary goal of the economic program is to get people's incomes going up. in contrast, and one of the worries i have if hillary clinton were to become president, she said she will raise the income tax rates on individuals. on upper income individuals but that also hits small businesses. a lot of small businesses. that is going to hurt jobs and she is going to lose a lot of jobs with that program. >> one of the pieces in "usa today" saying mr. trump would struggle to get large tax breaks through even a republican congress because they are bent on slashing the deficit without compromise.
do you think that is a reality and trump has a battle on his hands if he tries to push this plan through? >> it is a lot of hard work. i started in 1984 with the staff of the senior budget committee as the senior tax analyst and moved to the treasury department in 1986 as the tax reform bill went forward in congress. every day people across the administration put people in congress to work out the details and cut a deal. i have to say, trump has been a dealmaker in his career, so one of the things that people should realize is in order to get things done in washington you have to find a way to get people to work together. i think he will do a better job at that than hillary clinton could. >> and he is modeling his current approach to taxes to the house republican's approach. what are the differences? >> modeling is maybe going a little too far.
he chose the tax rates that were in kevin brady's bill that were in the ways and means committee. and in other areas there are differences. but look, this is a process that is going to go on for a long time. both in the campaign but then also if you were to elect a president then you would have a long process of combining different concepts. one of the concepts that has to be worked on is how do you work internationally? one of the big failures of the current economy and the current tax system is that corporations have a very high tax rate. that stops them from hiring, from having jobs in the united states, and they create jobs abroad and they keep the cash abroad because there is not a tax efficient way to bring it home. so one of the key points of the program is a 10% rate for
corporations to bring the cash/capital back into the u.s. and that creates jobs here. this is a big growth program that needs to be done because the growth rate has been so slow. >> david malpass, senior ec economist for donald trump's campaign. if you want to ask questions he is here to answer them. you can tweet us comments as well. at c-spanwj. one of the op-eds that came out from "the new york times" is they talked about the proposal and what it would do for revenue as well. they say the problem with mr. trump's ideas is that it would leave a multi trillion deficit with no benefits and the gain are more modest because
businesses wouldn't qualify unless demand is growing. so the idea of revenue that is going to be lost by this tax proposal, how does mr. trump propose to make that up? >> gues >> guest: one thing you can ask when you read studies is what economic growth rate do they assume. that is is important. if i think there is a big tax reform program you will get folks like the reagan administration and even like george w. bush did in 2004-2005. after the tax cut was put in place, growth surged. so that is usually not in those revenue loss estimates. the second key thing, one of the studies done by moodies that showed a loss from this kind of
a plan, had the assumption that the federal reserve would raise interest rates to 4% next year to over 6% in 2018. then there would be a recession. one of the things clinton has been campaigning on is the idea that trump would cause a recession but that comes directly from the idea that the fed would put interest rates to 6%. that doesn't make sense and the reality is a grade of the economy and the job growth would be much faster under a trump economic program than under a clinton economic program. one thing you mentioned in that new york times article was you said was demand growth. there is demand growth no and
people are not participating. participation rate is lower in many decades. that is nearly a recession and so the economic program has to change massively in order to get us out of it. >> host: you mention the unemployment rate and mr. trump says as he he sees the unemployment rate it is a hoax. do you agree? >> they are reporting 4.9% but that is not telling you how many people are assumed not to be in the labor force. it turns out 94 million people over the age of 16 are excluded from the labor force. i think there are millions, probably tens of millions, well excuse me, i will stick with
millions but maybe 10 million people, who would like to work if they had an opportunity for a good job. they are simply not counted in the unemployment rate unless they are actively looking. and a lot of people unfortunately don't have the skills or they have been beaten down so much. it has been years and years of very slow growth right now. so my view is that we can unleash the growth of the economy. we have no idea right now, today, how many of those people would like to work and would rush back into the workforce if there were good jobs. that can be achieved. >> david malpass joining us. question, first one is from ralph in battle creak, michigan, democrats line. >> caller: i would like to correct the comment about the tax cuts under reagan.
even though there was large growth under reagan it was still not enough to erase the deficits. there were deficit spending every single year under ronald reagan. at the end of ronald reagan's term the national debt had more than doubled. so this idea of trickle down economics under ronald reagan solving the deficit problem is exactly incorrect. it will exacerbate the problem. i had a question about mr. trump's tax returns. does this advisor know how much mr. trump -- he is a billionaire, correct? a wealthy, super successful billionaire and i wonder how much he pays in taxes. i am worried he is paying less than 15% or maybe what mitt romney would pay? >> i have an aunt from battle creak. so hello to ralph.
as far as the deficit, i didn't address that and agree about the reagan administration and the national debt went up too much. that was at the time of the cold war and you were recovering from a very high inflation rate under jimmy carter. but i agree with the thrust of the caller and there needs to be cost control on the federal government and aggressive steps taken to bring down the fiscal deficit. one worry we have to have is cbo's projections are under current policy, and i presume that would be similar under hillary clinton's policy, the deficit is going to average 1 trillion per year over the next ten years. so the national debt right now is destined to go up by 10 trillion. we need massive policy changing in order to begin to stop that and i think there is ample ground on cost-cutting for the federal government. it is out of control and overgrown.
as far as the tax returns, mr. trump explained he is under audit and i don't have any more to add to that. thanks for the call. >> host: and mr. malpass, under audit, isn't it possible to release tax returns? isn't it possible to release tax returns even if you are under audit? >> i don't know the rules or the history of that issue. >> host: fayetteville, georgia, republican line, david you are on with our guest. >> caller: at first, i am a black male and i live outside of atlanta in fayetteville. and i am supporting at this moment donald trump because i looked at what he is offering. but i am just concerned. looking at this plan, it looks as if he is going hundred percent revenue and hundred percent pro-growth which is a good way to approach it but how is he going to accomplish some of these goals?
he has alienated himself from so many republicans in the house and in the senate and if we are going to go through a stalemate period when nothing gets accomplished because he alienated mimself from so many things especially when the republican house wants to cut parts of social security and realize deficit spending is coming from social security and we are spending a lot on social security and it is going broke. if his goal is pro-growth and raise revenue and their goal is to cut entitlements where is the balance coming in? if he has alienated himself we are going to go through another four years of not accomplishing anything in leadership. >> host: david, thanks. >> guest: what a great question because it gets at the core of the issue. this voter is one of the ones
that trump wants to win and is designing programs specifically that will benefit people that are wondering about all of these questions. so, let me make key points. one is that social security is off the table for trump and there is no plans cut for reductions in what elderly are receiving. that is critical. number two point is as far as reducing the sense of divide, it was a very hard-fought primary. a lot of the opponents of trump were from congress. so that created kind of a wedge. so now there is a lot of work being done to pull that back together, to unify the party. that was one of the goals of the detroit speech and also one of the goals of mr. trump endorsing paul ryan who won last night and he is a friend and i am very glad to see he won and others
that are moving forward in their house and senate races he's reached out to. that work is going to go on and on meaning every week there will be outreach to congress, not to water down what trump is saying, he is calling for upheaval in the way washington does business. there are going to be people with their nose bent out of shape but as you go forward you will be able to pull more and more in to understand this is the way to get growth going for people in atlanta, people in kentucky, and in particularly people in pennsylvania, ohio, michigan. states where they have been left out. there was a caller from illinois, i think it was, where he pointed out 17% unemployment rate in this community. that specifically is the kind of economic malaise we need to break out of.
>> host: from ohio, don in cleveland, republican line, you are on with david malpass. -- dawn. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. i love obama. let me say i love that obama is leaving. my score on hillary is she has not been telling the truth and the common people know this. getting back to mr. trump's tax ideas and his procedure to get this country straight i just feel it is fair. i think individuals, especially the middle class, will be able to start getting back a little bit more in their pockets and the small businesses who have been really devastated in this along with mid and large corporations. the corporations obviously have moved overseas because of the
high tax rate and the enormous regulations that obama is putting out as we speak today. it is tying up too many small businesses who are trying to thrive each day and find the red tape almost insurmountable. i do wish that mr. trump get his point out more clearly for the average individual. i have a little tax background so i understand it but if he can clarify it a little better especially to the middle class. >> host: with that in mind we will let your guest respond. mr. malpass? >> guest: one benefit for the middle class is rates will be lower. there will be some tax savings. but the much bigger benefit for the middle class, and this
should be aware, too, a lot of the moms who have children who are not getting jobs right now, a giant focus of this program is to bring younger people and minorities in the labor force and then into employment. right now there are huge percentages that are simply not included in the way the economy is operating today. that has to get fixed. the caller was from cleveland and one of the notable things going on in the middle part of the country is that governors -- states that are governored by republicans are going a lot better. the earlier caller was from illinois with a 17% rate but ohio, indiana, michigan, and wisconsin, the republican governors have done a very effective job and the caller
talked about the regulatory overhang and red tape coming out of washington and who better than donald trump to cut through and make that stop? he said on monday that he would issue a moratorium on the regulations coming out and review the regulations. regulations should be adding to the growth. many of them slow down the economy. there is another 2,000 regulations that are in the hopper and coming forward maybe before he leaves office. and many of those need to stop. >> host: will certain
regulations still exist or will he be more fierce when it comes to putting regulations in place? >> guest: the way i praise it is we need effective deregulation. you have not seen that word. what has to be done is canceling bad regulations and what you need to do is put in effective regulations. and that applies to all parts of the business community, you know? so you want to regulate in a way that allows job creation. we said there will be a moratorium on new regulations and he could instruct the cabinet to review regulations and some of the cabinet officers have giant businesses they are running.
the commerce department and review the regulations, find the ones that are not working and ways to cancel them or undo them. another part of this is working with congress on that. they work closely with thex executive branch to guide the regulators and so something has to change so there is not as much red tape and tied up. we have projects all over the country and jobs that should be created and projects that cannot go forward because of the reg laze stopping them. >> host: from oregon, douglas, welcome. >> caller: good morning. thank you, c-span. i am intrigued by mr. trump's proposal i heard a couple weeks ago about the infrastructure bonds. it seems it is a better way for
the one percent to buy into america and for average people, like the war bonds in world war ii, to help rebuild america without borrowing from china. would you elaborate on that, please. >> guest: great point. i think creative financing should be done at many levels of primarily the private sector but even the federal government one of things i wrote about and why is the treasury not issuing more of the bonds and looking in the federal reserves and buying them back in and canceling them out. it proposes the taxpayer to risk so there is a change that could be played there.
with regard to infrastructure bonds and what i think can and will happen is if regulations are made more effective you will find there is more private sector infrastructure projects. and a lot of that has been financed with bonds. the u.s. has the biggest, most robust municipal bond market and can create financing to get infrastructure going. my thoughts is the federal government is in the way of a lot of that. it kinds of wants to get a piece of the action and control the infrastructu infrastructure and they have to
have regulatory reform to do it. >> ross is on. >> caller: good morning. you stated about social security and i am reading an article in the "washington post" this morning about the social security head says that with the budget cut proposed they would be unable to deliver service on time to many social security recipients. secondly, according to the labor departme department, looking at reagan through obama, the republican administration created 16 million something jobs. the clinton and obama administrati administration. and anyone creating jobs should rely on the republicans not the
democrats to create jobs. on the taxes you are speaking about, according to cato institute, which is not a left-wing institute, clinton had the highest tax rate of any of those of any administration i mentioned. yet, he created more jobs and people under that than many of the others. >> host: thanks, russ. >> guest: yeah, thanks. that is a good question and well-framed. reagan took office after malaise.
so the growth in that came out of a different condition than what bill clinton inherited when he came in. i want to get full credit to clinton and to newt gingrich. you know the house republicans were instrumental in the growth of the '90s along with bill clinton. so, what we are dealing with now is hillary clinton where the proposal, the economic program, would be different from the bill clinton program. i think it would simply not work as well. i come back again to the governor's around the country. if you look at which states are doing well and which aren't there is a clear dividing line between red states and blue states. the red states are attracting people and creating jobs for young people, they are dynamic and changing and governored boy republicans. in the blue states, they are unhealthy, they have -- this is
not every single one but there is a clear pattern of und under-performance in terms of jobs and the fiscal debt being piled on. new york state is being a case. with the exception of the southern tip of the state most has been left out of economic recovery. and let me take a moment -- we have not talked about why not vote for hillary clinton. she was a senator in new york and here at a time when upstate new york was crying out for jobs, for small businesses and above all for relief from the regulatory sprawl of government. she simply wasn't able to make change in new york state. you end up with a divided state.
>> host: mobile, alabama, darryl is up next. >> david malpass is here as our guest. go ahead. >> caller: thanks for taking my call. you are the best. so. orthodoxy to knock down. i will focus on three issues. first the corporate tax rates. among the lowest effective tax rates is the united states. two, the labor participation rate. it is funny he brings up the labor participation rate which happens to coinside with the large amount of baby boomers retiring. that is something that hasn't been taken a look at.
and thirdly, foreign corporations, why should the corporation get the benefit of being u.s. bait and get out of the responsibility of paying their taxes and taking care of their responsibilities? >> host: go ahead, mr. malpass. >> guest: thanks, darryl. as far as the effective tax rate. they face a statutory rate of 35%. that is the highest in the world and it would be brought down to 15% in trump's proposal and that would make the u.s. competitive. a lot of foreign countries have lower rates on corporations. corporations are double taxed meaning when they earn money they pay a tax and then when they pay it to the owners -- and
they have to pay another tax on the proceeds. the caller pointed out many companies do things to avoid taxes. in the legal way you get the effective tax rate down. and that is true. but in order to do that they hire a bunch of lawyers and have lobbyist on the pay roll probably and are part of a rigged system that works for the bigger companies but not the smaller ones who can not afford that kind of management. i don't think it is good argument to say just because the effective rate on corporations order to unleash the growth potential of big and small companies a. key part is to bring down the tax rate on smaller companies. the caller mentioned the labor
rate and the older people don't want to come back in the labor force and get a job. i think some people, and maybe millions of people, are maybe 62-65 or 68 would take a job and look and think of themselves as retired. if there was a strong economy that needed them they might take the jobs. as far as the corporations going abroad, that is one of trump's plan and that is to stop the companies from moving abroad and avoiding taxes here.
one thing we have done is pushing companies abroad and i think those can be changed. keep the companies home and even and i think this is possible. give foreign companies to want to be moving into the u.s. because there is a better business climate. we have a talented workforce and some don't know it. they haven't had the chance or opportunity. >> host: from decatur, georgia, republican line. hello? are you there? >> caller: yes, i have a question. am i on the air in?
i am wondering who is going to pay for the stimulus? and as far as the tax break is concerned for people under 150,000 who is going to pay for that? my social security, because due to retire, i am dependent to live on my social security for the rest of my life. who is going to see if my new tax break is going to be zero and i am not going to be paying any tax how am i going to be paying into my social security program? >> host: we will let you get a response. >> guest: in social security, in
the first measure, there is a so-called trust fund. but in reality i call it a virtual trust fund meaning it is invested just in the u.s. the reality of this is social security benefits will be paid by there country. that is a promise to pay those benefits. so people often fear mongering and saying the republicans are going to take away your social security. but that is not the case. all of the economic might is aimed at paying the social security benefits. i neglected the earlier caller about whether budget cuts would delay the social security checks. i believe that won't happen. but that question can be addressed to the obama
administration and as you go into the is a new administration the resources need to be available to make sure there is no interruption in the benefits. coming to the caller's first point, which was good, who pays for this. and i need to be a little philosophic philosophical, when the government taxes money from people the government gets the money. and people are grateful they have been given some of the money. but the reality was the money came from the people to start with. in order to have stimulus, you have to more small business growth. that is what is going to be able to pay for and also provide the stimulus. so by lowering the tax rates, you get more small businesses and that is the stimulus and then that makes the government more fiscally strong and stable. the one reason that our debt has
gone up so much is because the economy has been so weak. if you are only growing 2% per year as the u.s. has been now for 7-8 years. this is the weakest recovery since the great depression. it is a really poorly managed economy. the result of that is that debt has gone to nearly 20 trillion. the way to solve that is to have faster growth and a more effectively run government. trump is a business manager and intends to have the government work more like a business and that is critical in getting this thing turned around. ... trump on economics, but i want to ask about your thoughts from yesterday statement about the second amendment and what your take away was from the reaction. guest: you had a lot of reactions from callers ahead of time. i listened to the whole tape. it is clear that what he was talking about is the ability of voters to decide their futures.
both the november elections, but then as supreme court nominees -- it is a is process that involves the involves the u.s. senate for nominations and for confirmation of those nominees. he was talking about people misread it and blew into a big issue. but the key thing here is that the transformation of the country to make it faster growing and better, i had to come back to you. e-mails were released yesterday that hillary clinton had sentndt the out.st i worked at the state department and i had a very high security clearance and i'm deeply troubled by the way hillary clinton managed those e-mails. that was wrong and e-mails are still coming out of the dialogue that was going on between top government officials and their
donors. this just cannot be happening in our u.s. government. i don't see why people want to consider voting for that kind of behavior. again, the secret information that was going around on a personal server is just unacceptable and i've been appalled at that. i haven't really ever had an opportunity to say that wha butt wanted to share with the group because it's troubling. what we've got to do is get they country back on track, toha transform, make it better than it has been, make a great. i think we can do that with d better policies. >> host: david malpass talking to us about plans another thing. thanks for your time. >> guest: thank you. spent part of a row to the white house covered we ha have this fm the "detroit free press" when democrat bill clinton brings her presidential campaign to michigan shall deliver jobs and economy speech.
the company will serve as the backdrop for hillary clinton's 1:15 p.m. speech thursday followed on the heels of donald trump's message on the economy to the detroit economic club monday. the event is not open to the public. hillary clinton's jobs plan rely solely on investing in the nation's infrastructure and imparted manufacturing communities like detroit. >> the debate over the presidential debates is now on. anne gearan is joining us from miami where she's coming to have a clinton campaign. thanks for being with us. >> guest: happy to be here. >> host: update us o on were things to the clinton campaign is saying yes to the commission on presidential debates and all encompassing not so fast. >> guest: the clinton campaign issued a statement from the campaign chairman john podesta that confirmed really what they
had been saying for some time. in other contexts which is she will agree, she's already agreed to participate in all three of the presidential debates as outlined a long time ago by the independent commission on debates. the reason that they put this date out, stated we did was to sort of chide trump for his recent comment, criticizing the debate schedule and sort of make it plain that hey, she said she has always to chill purchase it. she was to participate, and kind of putting trump, the elbow in his ribs to say that he shouldn't say that. >> host: two of the debates conflict with the nfl schedule. and he tells "time" magazine he once to know who the moderators will be. >> guest: yeah, i mean, he has a point to a degree about the
nfl schedule. that is, the fact two of the three debates conflict with nfl games means that the viewership might be produced or he's incorrect to suggest this is some part of a conspiracy on the part of the commission on debates and the clinton campaign, that debate schedule is actually set long before the nfl schedule was set your the two things are not quite, he is essentially talking about, talking past the truth in that instance. as far as the moderators, that would be a new request. so far as i know it isn't beyond the pale as far as the commission on presidential debates but it would be up to the. >> host: your call because the column online. y. donald trump might not debate hillary clinton.
he's not very good at the debates and second of all, he can be baited into the clinton is good at that. can you elaborate? >> guest: certainly the clinton campaign feels that she has an overwhelming advantage in a one on one debate. clinton's supporters will say that it's true that trump tended to dominate and profit by the republican debates but they caution that those debates were in group settings, in some cases up to 10 candidates at a time. u.s. able to use those settings to his advantage to get in a senior here or there and he was under the same kind of pressure to perform about policy and sort of look even keel and presidential that would presumably be the case and won the debate. clinton feels she has the advantage going in to a one on
one. but i really also would say that the clinton people have, we have seen before that they've underestimated the ability to adapt to the situation at hand. i don't know what we would actually be facing when you get to a one on one host to the dates and venues announced last september by the commission on presidential debates. the format each debate 90 minutes in length. the first will take place september 26 at hofstra university. are also to debates and one vice presidential debate in october. let me ask you about the commission which once again has become a lightning rods. donald trump criticizing the format, the organization is saying the system is rigged by this commission. can you elaborate? >> guest: the whole idea of creating this commission was to try to take some politics out of the equation. you can be the judge as to
whether that's worked. it's been a lightning rod ever since. one thing they commission does provide is a bit of insulation between the networks that broadcast the debates and the campaigns, and there are varying opinions about whether that's been useful but it definitely is a layer of insulation. >> host: the ball is now in donald trump scored. what happens next? >> guest: i think trump will be on the spot a bit to say now that he's raised the possibility of not participating, he's on the spot to say what he will do next. he's wrapped the possibly of not participating in a larger complaint, that the system is rigged by the election is rigged. i think one of the things that we will be watching very closely is to see how far and how he will carry that argument
forward, if at all. he's planted the seeds for that to be a continuing theme, and is putting the debates in that category. and i think one of the main news source will be what does he do next? post more details on by the washingtonpost.com. anne gearan joining us from miami. thank you very much for your time. we appreciate it. >> guest: you are certainly welcome. we have more from today's "washington journal" on covering of any issues and campaign 2016. >> host: now yasmeen alamiri with the website where come a senior political reporter for the website. good morning. to start how would you describe where two of the people? >> guest: so rare is a caucus meeting group own website. we are interesting in the way that all of our information is online.
whereas some other propositions of broadcasts for most of the adoptive for all my but everything is created with an online audience in mind and we have quite a robust audience and millennials and people that are interested in the news but in a different take.we have in we've been following the campaigns quite closely and we have entire team that works on that. and present our information for our online audience. >> host: what's been the most interested to follow your site and consumer news? were the interested in most intd specifically? >> guest: what's so interesting especially the online format is they want toat know who these people are, what they stand for and how they differ from one another. i think there's increasing skepticism when it comes to of all politicians are cut from the same cloth. this is a very divisive campaign, a very divisive election season and what we are finding increasingly is thesed two candidates, hillary clinton donald trump, have been working
to set himself apart and they'rd doing it with an online presence. both of them have taken to twitter and facebook respectively to attack each other, to kind of make themselves known and the personalities known. our audience has been responded to that because that's the same format in which we live. we all live in this digital space. it's been interesting to be part of that was sometimes you feel you're cohabitating with the candidates in this on myspace. >> host: when it comes to hillary clinton, he is under how house utah pushing that idea set herself apart transferred i think for her, this is a way for me as i've covered other campaigns before, it's been interesting because it's verydou reactive.mp our trump is a very loud voice, however you think about his politics he's not a wilting flower. for hillary clinton it's been a lot of responding to them. i think her whole message of love, trump state, with the democrats have come together has
been in reaction to donald trump. i think that's been one thing for her is to ensure that her voice also stands out. she's trying to be a unified, 20 say the democratic party is unified in love instead of against different groups that of maybe minorities or people thaty are different. >> host: how to think she's the most millennials? compare that to husband years ago as far as he attracted the young vote. >> guest: it's been very interesting. the millennial relationship with hillary clinton has been recent. before there was a very strong following of millennials withde bernie sanders. up until the day of the democratic national convention, we didn't really see i can see from bernie sanders. the recent courtship between hillary clinton and the millennials has been very, very new. i think that poll numbers come out and show that they are of the options that they have, they are more with hillary clinton than they are with donald trump
but there are also third partyo candidates that are increasingly winning the votes or the support of these millennials. it's new and we have to keep watching it.o >> host: d. get a sense of them en masse going over those millennials who supported bernie sanders to hillary clinton or are they still skeptical? >> guest: skeptical. i think poll numbers show they are increasingly with hillary clinton but i know from speaking to millennials a lot of them either be grudgingly going to support hillary because they feel the other alternative which is told from the something they cannot stand behind. then there's the other ticket they have, she has to win the trust of both. bernie sanders has come out and even came out on the first of the dnc and called for his supporters to back hillary clinton saying we cannot be divided and potentially boost to donald trump. there's a courtship happening iu think a lot of people i very w much waiting to be won over.
>> host: the website is a rare, a news information site targeted t to millennials as a guest discovered she is senior political reporter yasmeen alamiri joining us to talk aboud campaign 2016. between 30 and 50, (202)-748-8001. over 50, (202)-748-8002. tommy agee became a seniorme political reporter, tells about how you came into his career. >> guest: i have been covering foreign policy and national security in politics for over a decade.. i've been quite lucky where right after school i entered into the field of washington's political reporting quite early, became a white house report at 22. it's been an upbringing in this
field and i've worked mostly for broadcast organizations. this opportunity was very interesting because increasingly digital media is not new or innovative meet where we all live now. this has been an interesting opportunity for me. it's an extension of what i've been doing. i've seen a couple of presidential campaigns go through and have been lucky enough to cover them. out just o >> host: are just got her bachelor's degree at james madison university. her masters at american university, started reporting under the bush administration and an iraqi american. tell us about your experience yes to both my parents are from iraq and i was on in the middle east but raised them lived in the middle east and europe when i was younger but raised in virginia. i am a very proud virginian and so it's been interesting. that's the reason why i went to national security reporting was because when i graduated the list at the height of the iraq war. when the search was happening. i really felt that there was a
story that needed to be told, not just a method to the perspective but from a human perspective. i want to be able to tell those stories. it's been interesting, so it hasn't been the whole iraqi and american narrative, arab-american, muslim-american narrative has been somethingca that unfortunately for some more negative reason than positive reasons has been part of the vernacular in american reporting. >> host: robert we will hear from first in maryland on our life for those who are over 50. you on with our guest. go ahead. >> caller: good morning, pedro. how are you doing? look, i'm a vietnam veteran annie duke a lot about what happens in our country. do two things that i see in our current political debate is i think mr. trump is excellent as far as content of a blackink mr. american, excellent as far as
economics. i think mrs. clinton is excellent as far social things. the division, i remember the same policy, proclaiming themselves to be wise, became fools pashtun speaking about the roman empire. if these two people decided or if our country would quit dividing each other over thesean economic and social issues, rather than start the fighting, start talking to each other, i think we could accomplish determined amount because they both have something toot contribute to the social unrest that exist in our country. this has got to be a mandate we've got to start talking to to begin. i'm sure it would eliminate the social unrest that is dividing each other. lincoln said a nation divided against itself cannot stand. but both of these people something to content and the need to start talking to each
other to bridge the gaps. we can then be a country that is socially stable and everybody quit fighting each other. >> host: thank you. >> guest: thank you for the question and also thank you for your service. i appreciater it. i completely agree with you. i think this is a very divisive time in our countries history.ih i think the antagonism between the white house and congress has been disappointing for a lot ofe people, to both be a part of, to the residual a facts or in my instance, to report on. i think we basically end up reporting more on the tug-of-war between congress and the administration rather than the policies that can be born out of some kind of bipartisan effort. one thing that everybody can agree on, especially in this election season, is that things are not working. things are not okay. the on a plan that levels need to be alleviated.
people that go back to work and they did have a sense that when they go to school and study, ano help affinity network lined up for the afterwards, and that when you're in work you have the ability to make it. the sense of anxiety a lot of americans have where they are all living paycheck to paycheck no matter how much they invested in both the career growth or their education, that just is not acceptable. i think a lot of people would come no matter what their partisanship, will agree of that. you're right, in theory that would be lovely if we could have the two parts together and become one great antedate, but here we are. >> host: maryland, 18-29 year olds, hello. >> caller: yes. i to question for your guest about young people's previous involvement in politics and their willingness to support hillary clinton. because i've voted in every primary and every election i could since i was 19, and i'm a
very ardent supporter of hillary clinton and i know what she stands force was wondering if you had some sort of metric or that something to look into? thanks. >> guest: we look at the numbers quite a bit but i also think it's quite fluid. usually polls undertaken a measure against two candidates. so now we were asking before when bernie sanders was in ther race, there was abnormally high numbers of people supporting bernie sanders with him linda h. cooper now that he's out of the race people are recalibrating. i have some numbers if i can find them because of to them because of to be simple and i found quite interesting. clinton is leading among voters under 30 which i think is your age group, with 41% followed by gary johnson at 20% and jill w stein the green party candidate at 16% and 12 at 9%. as we're discussing, this is a matter of millennia voters are
very much interested, a misconception been that interested cannot interest in politics. i don't find that to be the case.d this is their future and they find they're usually in school and get on with no template edim just want to make sure that there's some job security. they are very much interested in it personal and professional level in politics. i think right now, and this is the point of election season, what they're looking for is ath candidate that they can trust, a candidate they feel like will fight for them and have the best interests at heart. for some people that's hillary clinton assumptive with bernie sanders and they wonder whether hillary clinton or donald trump are made one of these third party candidates is the candidate for them. >> host: jamaica new york thomas, you're up. >> caller: thanks for taking my call. i just want to say these democrats are taking our money. they're proposing these huge tax hikes that will ruin my family.
i make $80,000 a year and they want to take money away from my family. i'm being taxed and heavily. can't afford it. to eventually i would be making the same as a landscape and i may ar well just be a landscaper. these people want to provide services. i don't want universal health care. i think $15 an hour minimum wage would be terrible because it's good but more people out of work. they want to solve problems but is not fixing the issue. >> guest: i think your concern something i've heard echoed. that's not my area of expertise but all i can speak to is the fact i spent a lot of people on the campaign trail and had a similar sense of anxiety, that within the politics of this election cycle are very real. it reflects in the paychecks of what the families are able to have or not have.
on their daily lives. >> host: was mulling abode and talking hillary clinton, we should consider what happened in benghazi, e-mail servers. do those resonate much among younger voters treasury i think trust anybody to treasurer candidate is a big thing was mulling a voters. they are waiting to be won over. not only in the policies that this is somebody they can rely t on, somebody who has compared w policies that will not change from day-to-day and i think they're being told it's really a reflection of the authentic policy standpoint of the candidate. i think that's reason what someone like bernie sanders appeal to a lot of young voters is because he's had the same message some would argue foras decades but certainly throughout the campaign cycle. from the beginning started job equality and income inequality issues and also student loan
thing which for young people was very, very much and an issue they need to do with. i think for them they level of appreciated that level of consistency. with them i think what hillary clinton also felt that there was a certain issue, along withna donald trump but they just want to know that once made the controversy is made that it would walked back. i think something that can speak to the dnc issue because i was there when we're on the ground covering the dnc when the e-mails leak happened day beforehand. a lot of people felt like the system was rigged and it was rigged against may be potentially the candidate and the want to know maybe when they cast a vote that the vote would be reflective of the will of the people and not the will of an institution that wanted their voices to be heard more than actual voters to i think that sends a certain cloud like this trust around the dnc and the
whole process. i think that needs, that anxiety of untrustworthiness needs to be quelled. >> host: from texas, this is care and. you on with yasmeen alamiri. hello. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. i had more of the comet an observation than a question. thf i've noticed that a lot of common sense has been lost in the area of voting impacting people. i at one time did support hillary clinton. the first time she ran for president. i even voted in her campaign and i live below poverty level. i am disabled and embracing to disable grandchildren. and i thought she could help. then when she didn't get the nominee, i went and voted for obama. obama didn't do anything he said he would do.
i did not vote in the second time around.ll i will not vote for hillary. i don't have to. she lost all that e-mail. she got our boys our people killed in benghazi. if i had a son in in the mility right now i would be scared to death for him if she won the election. simply because all she carest about is filling their pockets. too many people have turned upg. unavailable after speaking against her. i don't trust her. >> guest: i think that speaks excited to we're discussing where people just feel like this system is baby not reflective o their voices. i i think that is a real issueue that needs to be overcomena because there is an institutional candidate, and that's what hillary clinton is and then there's the whole
entire antiestablishment movement which bernie sanders and donald trump are a part of. >> host: one of the stories the "new york times" talks with donald trump about republican women stepping away from the nominee. we've seen other republicans step back. how much of this is a problem for the trump campaign?? >> guest: i think it is the problem right now. people who supported the supportive throughout. i think he has quite a good fan base. a lot of the people that we spoke to at the rnc in cleveland said that they supported him from day one.. they are really excited and a lot of those people were historically democratic voters. that was interesting for me that they were not people that were tied to the conservative party. they were people that were really believed in him and his message and his way of truth talking in the field of politics. i think it's presented a new way of thinking about the political structure.the people that are my the people that are mostly a
fight with the conservative party are not, in fact, as big on trump. i think a lot of people are trying but maybe it's not sitting well with them. what thk ca i think what the trump campaign has not done well is allowed for people to be neutral and then they went in over. i think it's been aggressive with the help of the rnc in trying to win people over that early maybe ted cruz supports to win the loyalty for the cup campaign. the rnc did not help host the statements about mr. khan, about the secon second amendment. can the trump campaign get over this in your reporting and talk to the campaign, can they get over these issues transferring they continue to make statements like this and they continue to recover, somehow. i don't know if it into will prevent people from showing up at the polls and voting for them. that i don't know but the trump campaign has shown me something that i'm surprised that ii continue to be surprised that we
always watch this happen, whether it's a tweet or statement made at a campaign event and just okay, this is the end of it. this will end of the campaign and to find a way to recover, whether it's walking back apologizing. he has a good communication staff and i think that really comes down to the people that was a donald trump the supportive throughout and they understand maybe he's like truth telling or brash in the way he speaks and it is this the comments as that. some people really truly believe in the same way that he believes, and they don't mind that the comments he's making. the second anyone is a big one. that's what a lot of people had to take pause and the trump campaign's response was to blame it on the media. instead of saying this is something we take it on ourselves and maybe it was mischaracterized the wording. they always find a way. >> host: here is robert in virginia. our line for those who are over 50. go ahead.
>> caller: that morning and thanks for taking the call. i would like to say, the happy hour club keeps calling.weaponsf what happened to weapons of mass destruction? i can't understand these people got hooked up on e-mails andnd benghazi, ridiculous. young lady, what's going on in these elections, what's been going on now has been going on for hundreds of years. this is always been going on. those two parties have been becoming. it was a time when the youth group on capitol hill with weapons so it's nothing new. but the last guy that was on was talking about, all the republicans come on, they talk loud. the last guy said donald trump would bring -- donald trump belongs in a straitjacket. >> host: we will move on to march in her most beach california. go ahead.
.. thank you for everything you do, you guys are great and your guest is very intelligent but i wanted to mention to people, in the past the big stories were i knew john kennedy and today it is elevated to this massive level, and i remember the jimmy carter campaign, and as much debt as we are in, and i can't
enumerate the problems in this country that we have. and what i deal with here, we are distracted by the most unbelievable things, is donald trump a dangerous guy, i never met him, and insanity, these are my two choices, we are this distracted. >> of all the people, it is implausible these are the only candidates.
and in the latter part of this election season the rise of third-party candidates like jill stein. in another world it wouldn't be as likely we are eyeing a third party run, and many people are disappointed but the reason there is such a circus and mudslinging as it is an election season, we have an election season where people are inundated with information. not only are candidates appearing in person, but tweeting nonstop, taking aim at each other, hillary clinton supporters and donald trump supporters, we are being inundated with information and that is the reason it can seem overwhelming for a lot of people. good information is coming from everywhere and we live in a 24
hour news cycle which is nonstop. it is a lot of good information. that is the best part of our democracy and the worst part of humanity. >> host: the website rare, a senior political reporter, information, one of the things you are focused on this week is the topic of heroin. >> we rolled outta starting this week on the heroin crisis in the united states and this includes the national introduction to it, early on in the campaign season where new hampshire, all the republican candidates talked about opioid addiction, it was ravaged by the ordeal, we looked at the crisis in new hampshire, the new wave of cities that are
dealing or states that are dealing with the crisis. and they are struggling to keep up with it, and we trusted that with baltimore which is dealing with apps with hair when crisis and an institutional problem and the way we looked at it was something the obama administration has taken is something they look at. they released a good amount of money to address the heroin crisis in a multifaceted approach. it is interesting for us because of something that is in the cultural context of this country, the way society look that prescription, overprescription of opioids and how we respond to crisis. it is an interesting series, rolling out one story a day for the next weekend very enlightening and great to see
people or families that are hit hard by this. >> host: you can find that rare.us. >> thank you for taking my call. one of the main reasons i want to mention i want to comment on the media and want everybody to know, the outlets are left-leaning liberal outlets and that is why they give a 1-sided view and always attacking donald trump just like the comment about the second amendment, that is the biggest joke, he was not making a reference to violence. as far as heroin, that is why we need the border protected at the southern border and i feel like
this is our only opportunity. we will never get a chance like this again, to have someone like donald trump who is a businessman and outsider, if he were not elected we would be faced with going back to these politicians who don't do anything for us like the situation we have been in for years. this is the only opportunity to straighten this country out. >> those two points are good points, the one thing i was saying earlier, people who believe in donald trump as a messenger for the voice of the people, some people interpret him as speaking the truth no matter how harsh the truth might be for some people and the others point which is the point about heroin being a border control issue a lot of people say that was i heard that overwhelmingly in new hampshire, and the us border with mexico were to be closed off, opioids
into the united states and heroin would close up going a lot along the campaign trail. >> host: talk about bias, is there a political point of view? >> the commentary team speaks with a certain point of view but we have a new steam that makes up the newsroom and a team of reporters report on the news and keep us busy. >> host: how many are involved in this campaign? >> myself and a couple of the reporters but we have an entire team that report on the news so that is everybody doing everything, on any day the entire newsroom is involved in the political report. >> host: what stories, what
angles are you looking for and how do you separate yourself from everyone else doing the same thing? >> when the rnc and dnc, delegates in different franchises do that very well. we spoke to a couple people at the rnc that were ted cruz supporters who wanted to voice their vote and what they were looking for, and dealing with the trump campaign, and what was interesting is there was intimidation coming from the rnc vote telling them it is time to abandon their candidates and we looked at real voices in this election cycle and we do that quite well. and all the reporting. and -- >> will you be covering both
campaigns -- this is collin, hello. >> caller: thanks for taking my call. and last month, took a whole bunch of money, $60 million or more. wondering where that might be going. they have spent $0 on ads nationally and in states as well. interested in your thoughts, thanks so much. >> interesting point, speak to the rise of social media. the trump campaign has spent negligible amounts of money, and they take so much press from tweets from social media appearances, and the fact that we are following a presidential
candidate nominee from instagram is unreal to me but that speaks to the space in which we live and now report and the presidential season is different from other ones because candidates are able to reach people in the palm of their hand. voters feel personally attached to these candidates because they feel it is one on one interaction with their candidates. it has been interesting and a cost-saving measure. >> host: illinois, hi there. >> caller: i am continuously concerned about the knowledge of millennial's because in the 2014 election there is a small minority that voted at all and i watch c-span a lot, the committee meetings, the senate
and the house and you have to know that all these people who make up those bodies have influence more so than the president at times. if millennials would realize that in illinois where only 12% voted and now there's a republican governor that can't do anything they would understand our system of government. i am concerned about that. i haven't looked at your website yet but do you address that they need to come out and vote even on half year elections and the president's exact power considering the house and senate? >> that is really good point. the whole premise of being on online only publication, we are meeting people where they receive their news and for a lot of millennials, their facebook
newsfeed, twitter feed, social media in general because that is how we interact and how we disseminate our news. the point is the functionality of a news organization is to have people and readers feel engaged and interact with the news and in this cycle it is about the campaign. and millennial's are uninterested in the world, i understand that, social media has an interesting phrasing, social but a lot of people are not of the millennial age or think it is very social because it is not social in the traditional sense, you and i looking at each other, but it is social in the way it shrinks the world, we are able to interact with somebody across the globe with one facebook message, and grows the functionality and how
we interact with each other and learn and share information and get information and that is the beauty of it all. i don't agree millennial's are out of touch or don't care but i agree the greatest threat to millennial's and others showing up is there a vote won't count or something. that has as much to do with the media showing them they can have a voice as much of it as a candidate and institutions of the democratic party and republican party saying if you vote we will not override it. it institutional dogma. >> host: are you aware of an effort to reach out to millennial voters? >> they are reaching out to people where they live. that is why we can't understate how they are reaching out on twitter and trying to reach readers or voters where they are but that is something they are doing. they are trying to win over
bernie sanders supporters, the bernie or bust people, trying to break open the bust portion of that. how they are doing that -- >> president obama has been in office eight years. where are millennial's with their support, support is the right word, a lot of them vote him in. where are they now? >> a lot of these millennials carry the president into his administration in the first term and really made an effort, a change people needed to see at the time. a lot of people, this happens, a lot of promises made in the beginning and that is what election season is about but you
deal with congress and realities of what it means to hold the highest office in the land, people lose -- there was a heavy drop off of diehard obama people who are no longer like that. people are already feeling a sense of nostalgia for this administration and whatever they criticized on foreign policy and drone strike policy. >> i see some new faces. i'm chief economist at the afl-cio, once again, we are happy to have you in the house of labor, the afl-cio -- as we
are the movement of all workers. the bosses cannot tell us who to organize so we are the voice of all workers. i am happy to introduce one of the constitutional officers, there are three constitutional officers, we have an executive, the person who makes the place run. as economists we know the secretary-treasurer, you control the purse strings as we view it. and she welcomed us last year, just to remind you what the labor market looks like, some of you think the movement looks one way but it is a diverse movement
and union members in the strict sense of the union card. the majority are women and that is reflected in our leadership, just to be clear to you, secretary-treasurer sure comes from a real union. she is originally a member of i aew, the international electrical workers, which means she is a skilled tradesperson so whatever made you have of tradespeople it has to include her. she is a dynamic leader in the philippines constantly going to all of our new groups for young people, encouraging them to rise through the ranks and bring vitality to the movement, this
is not a dinosaur, not getting ready to die. and this is a young and vibrant movement, and vibrant energetic leaders and i mentioned it last time, the nice thing, the agreement with dealing with the faculty members i don't do what i don't want to do, i want people to be dedicated to making lives better for everyone, speak honestly on behalf of working people, liz does that every single day tirelessly, constantly on the road. it was not like one or the other. she is doing both. the energy level she has, and
the work that it is. >> quite an introduction to live up to and not sure i will be able to. you have been out and about the city for the last several days. welcome to the house of labor, we are happy to have you back and i am the secretary-treasurer and chief financial officer but i wear many hats, i want to thank bill because bill has allowed the afl-cio to get into spaces and been a voice for us in these conversations and places we have never been before so i want to thank bill for his leadership and also, i don't know if you knew, bill is a rock star in the blogohsphere, don't
know if you're familiar with net roots, containing a progressive blogger, they have -- a pundits cup, they rank the so-called pundits or presenters throughout convening hundreds of presenters and bill came in second out of hundreds, and an amazing economist. a rock star. he is very unassuming, you would not notice this about him. thank you so much and we are excited to have the american society of hispanic economists and national economic association back in the house of labor. i am so glad derek is with us again. he recently are dissipated in one of our roundtables. i can't see you here and i want
to thank you on wages and worker voice of an important topic and thank you for perspectives to collaborate with you. the president of ash, i saw you sneak into the room and wanted to thank you for being willing to share your perspectives around the issue of trade, we had a better trade conference recently that you participated in and invited you back. we have some spirited conversations and we want to thank you have better viewpoints. past president alberto, and on the crisis in puerto rico was
talked about, the afl-cio, because of its impact on workers, we one to make sure the working people of puerto rico thinking about not hedge funds, we feel strongly about alberto and his work and you will be talking more about that. we are watching the presidential election closely, you are not here to talk about politics but it intersects with a lot of work, the economic speech donald trump gave, and he released also -- those of you on twitter, we tweeted out our thoughts on the
list of advisors, it was 0 women, and actually economists, retweet if you are interested. the plan he laid out in detroit, it was more of the same, a set of advisors and it is same old same old, tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, trickle down 2.0. we know we have tried that before and it still doesn't work. we are still recovering from the worst economic crisis since the great depression, any quality is through the roof, wages are flat. we need new voices, new voices in this debate, new ideas, new
direction. that is why we are so excited to have you here because this is a big group of brains and a lot of brainpower here and we are working people, not just the afl-cio but working people are committed to building an economy of shared prosperity. we can't buy tinkering around the edges and doubling down on a failed approach. we have to be aggressive, we have to be bold, and counting the minimum wage and living wages, it often doesn't get talked about. while we are talking about wages we need to give working women equal pay as part of the wage equation. and things like scheduling and paid time off.
and make collective-bargaining available to all workers so they have a more powerful voice in the economy and pastime to address the issue of affordable accessible quality child care. anyone here grappling with that? this is a topic that comes up constantly. and the skyrocketing cost of college, a group of young people in the labor movement everyone is grappling with student debt. we need to invest in all kinds of pathways to good careers and everyone, we want everyone to go to college and also want to open up opportunities to access career and technical information and apprenticeship programs the we can train people for the highly skilled jobs of the future and often say the apprenticeship is the best-kept secret, a model you can earn
when you learn, and the kind of debt people are graduating with these days. we need to end the epidemic of mass incarceration and mass deportation and it is time to expand social security and protect pensions, and seniors can retire with dignity. we tend in the labor movement, every issue that affects working people is an issue we care about but the good news, you already have a lot of issues on your radar, and you do great work on this and the conference is taking a closer look at these challenges and there is a growing consensus in research that bad policies are what held down wages and made our society less equal. any quality is not only morally
unacceptable, it also hurts our growth as a country. it hampers our ability to be truly prosperous. it is all of our issue. all of our problem. we talk a lot about issues on the domestic front but we are also very active globally. i wanted to point out one issue we highlighted recently, around policies that hurt women's participation in the economy. along with the international department of the afl-cio and solidarity center put out a report recently titled transforming women's work policies for an inclusive economic agenda and you can find it on our website, but it is essentially a group of feminist economists that came together and said we needed gender lens
on economic issues so i hope you will look at this. and lisa cook, and put together the report, i thank her for that and a woman officer here, paying close attention to women's issues in the economy and i'm glad you are too because i have seen it throughout your agenda. we are thrilled to have you here today. thank you for shining a light on the important issues we all care about, your fight is our fight and look forward to continuing to struggle together. [applause]