tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 14, 2016 8:30pm-12:01am EST
>> good evening. for why did great turnout for such a great topic for go thanks rejoining us here in washington ndc for this important conversation of the election aftermath with the up politics of trade also every bit as of the light streaming across the country watching none c. spend even as yours in canada watching tonight. we're glad you're here because we know that if
there is one big issue in this election it was trade in any policy issue of that people run this country and around the world are watching to see what happens next. we have convened some top policy experts to help lessen packwood just happened and we will do this in three parts per conversed , we will ask if the anti-trade sentiment was merely a temporary device of frederick or did we just witnessed the fundamental realignment of u.s. politics we will talk to republican and accredit strategist fresh from the campaign trail in the battleground states ina a conversation about the future of trade policy on capitol hill and
then our outstanding trade reporter will have a conversation with the u.s. trade representative followed by cocktails' the new board terms. stick around but before we get started i would like to thank our wonderful sponsor fedex for their support of this event. now we would like to welcome to the podium fedex president and ceo. [applause] >> thanks to "politico" for hosting this event. it is aptly titled aftermath . and i take we just experienced an extraordinary election. wouldn't you agree? and as with the aftermath of any election, it will take some time to sort out the implications of u.s. policy
programs like trade but i hope we can agree for the united states, trading with the world isn't just an option but a necessity. i know this is a well-worn phrase but the effect of center outside of the borders so we do need to find ways to reduce barriers to u.s. goods and services to reach to consumers, grow our domestic economy and supporting international trade policy is the lead we are passionate about because we live that every day. trade is our business time and again we see small and mid-sized customers that tend to grow even faster to create more jobs than similar businesses.
recently fedex released a small business index that is a national survey of over 1,000 business leaders and the results show that at 70 percent of small businesses see increasing global trade as a way to also help the economy as a whole. interestingly enough 70 percent of small businesses said they were more likely to support trade if the u.s. provided effective training. business has a real role to play in half to work together to ensure the displaced workers are retained and can transition to good jobs and careers. with the election behind us us, this time the trade policy is replaced with a
sound trade policy. to raise the tariffs on the import blood grow every economy but greater support is to adopt a comprehensive and agenda to make the u.s. the most competitive economy in the world. domestic policies that build american jobs to energize the economy will go long way to build support for initiatives. expanding trade opportunities for americans in the bipartisan pursuit since the country started that is why we at fedex are pleased to sponsor this program to hear from congressional leaders of both sides of the aisle that are hoping to shape the debate and forge a path of weekend invest trade with
the american competitiveness moving forward. bill i will leave it to use. [applause] >> before we get started tweet your questions the moderator will have the right to track them onstage. now to introduce our moderator is my colleague phil is a senior political correspondent. you may not known him from his successful coverage on "politico" but also with this broadcast word he interviews newsmakers including president obama. what we were thinking about with the politics of trade i thought of the events that he hosted with us about the future of the republican party and the democratic
party and i see this conversation part and parcel of what he started at the convention so we look forward to hearing from you and your wonderful panel. [applause] >> good evening. also thinks to fedex to sponsoring. first-ever like to introduce the panel. sitting to my immediate right is the vice president for international economic affairs by the way this is completely on of order. [laughter] facial recognition software. so next to her is jon ash braque founding partner and a very familiar face on capitol hill. next to him is a principal,
home to in those former ones that worked at politics. but on the end is hell of the great recession transformed and european politics. i will start by talking about a conversation at the warehouse before i went out on the trail in february february 2016. right before the primaries and a the caucuses. i was sitting with a senior administration official never'' them on the record. [laughter] which i will not do now. [laughter] i said president obama has clearly done well in the last two years, objectively
by asserting executive power after a rocky first two years after reelected. so give me that of top piraeus as he winds down the administration. this person says tpp comity pp comity pp. things turned out differently. [laughter] so to start off the conversation how big of a deal in is trade in data collection and what in general can you clean going forward? how will that play out politically over the next couple of years? >> thank you for having me. if it was the really big deal, if you look at the polls that say people were worried about the economy they usually don't include
trade with those issues. if you look at ohio, and michigan, wisconsin it is about 52 or 30 but then if you look at that 52 percent is 6030. so you have to remember that is an issue it is much more likely somebody will vote who is worried inverses somebody who thinks it is okay especially the midwestern states. is an enormous issue of course, the trump advantage is from the very beginning of the campaign he made it a major issue. in august 2015 in new
hampshire i expected more of the conventional republicans celebrity hear he was railing against nabisco for taking the factory at the chicago into mexico or the assembly plant out of the united states leaving workers out in the call the same metaphor of trade and a trade treaty and nafta sucking jobs out of the united states. so while the most incendiary aspects got covered a lot better if you would go to the rallies and listen 34 somewhat trump had to say was about bad trade deals and things like that. so i'm not saying that is all of it but that is a big
part of the appeal. >> totally agree. i am from michigan and trade is a big issue those are fighting words like announce -- nafta it outsourcing but those recent presidential elections not as much so talk about the primary in the general alexian. it was a fulcrum it was about anchor and him connecting with people who no longer could expect to have a solid middle-class way of life they're worried about their pensions and a dollar not buying as much as used to so while a lot thought there was the golan get along crowd in then you were okay with reword if things would be the same anywhere they hillary clinton voter if you were angry and worried and in
michigan that was 25% 25%, 70 percent voted for donald trump. it is an emotional issue and you saw higher turnout in rural areas and lower turnout in a blue areas and those reagan democrats could go up as well that led to a narrow defeat with the secretary clinton. >> the final tally wet. >> starting today it is 11 and 12,000 votes they are still counting today and tomorrow. >> talking to them on election night that it had to do with turnout in detroit. so mr. ashe wrote you just came off a very successful cycle. you worked he could finesse
the trade issue in a way that they could not. >> and i could just echo what i saw very closely as an emotional issue for a lot of voters out there. there was a statistic earlier that some many of the voters out there think of trade as something that sends jobs overseas but 40 percent of the ohio voters think trade sense the jobs overseas they do not have a positive association with the topic. but among those same 40%, important got 75 percent he beat strickland by 75 points of the electorate. he did it because he talked directly to people on their
level about how trade is a people issue and we talk about it as a jobs issue by really how people think it affects their lives in a powerful way. said he talks about defending them from china and other bad actors there is a testimonial from a local cincinnati steel company that has 90 employees and portman fought for them to protect the company statewide it was written up in very powerful spot to demonstrate to people the issue of trade that somebody is looking out for them first. >> so tell me obviously you
have a pinnacle perspective but they talk about that generalized economic anxiety disorder? but you are concerned about specific policies so from your purview, how does this affect? >> first dyewoods day that with elections rehab the incoming administration that is talking very differently on trade. we have some lessons learned that people are seeing some of us negatives but not the other side. so with that substantial transformation in the united states more than ever before i don't think most of those reporters understand that.
but also at the same time many to recognize we do face the challenges overseas and elsewhere. as we like that policy going forward we agreed we all need to do a better job to work with the administration going forward to address the barriers in china and elsewhere but take a setback to look at the value that trade has in the manufacturing sector 6 million men and women today have their jobs and a cousin exports. we get trillions of dollars of foreign direct investment in manufacturing because people want to be here. so we can broaden that out
and address those challenges that is what we're looking for with the new head ministrations. >> so to put you on the spot , it would mean we're in philadelphia, hello clinton her biggest flip-flop was tpp then she read the fine print and it was fool's gold. but in terms of the presidential candidates do you think he would've gotten a better shake from clinton then trump? laugh laugh. >> economy are non-partisan he take our democracy seriously and will work with either one. is hard to say when secretary clinton was in the senate she voted for some trade deals and voted against others. that was not a clear record as secretary of state she strongly supported some of the trade agreements that
president bush at negotiated an abominates of modifications to move across the finish line and she supported that. is hard to look backwards. >> i will slice that another way. this is the larger question question, do you feel at this point given that the president-elect has backtracked that he is somebody they can communicate with quick. >> absolutely. what we have seen and then in contact with uh transition teams meno number of folks who were:these teams, rnc year levels and we will sit down to talk about these issues to try to
get to a resolution because at the end of the day we mont the same solution to make america the best place the best manufacturer in the world, globally competitive on manufacturing if we can agree a then we have to figure out those policies. now that has to do with the other issues to drag on that competitiveness those are issues where people are expecting to see. >> we will take some questions at the and if you are ready. from the historical perspective one of the striking components if you go to the bernie sanders rally what is the difference between the two with the left and the right? >> that particular issue
there is very little difference. both of them could be seen as a revolt against a globalization. i guess here is how i would make the difference but with donald trump capital mobility is a key feature corporations can move for ever they want the trade deals have as much to do making it easy as they do with the exchange of goods. the labor mobility in the grants can go wherever they want but that was not an issue that both of those half to do with wages to split america more educated working with high-value service in the other 70%
with only some college or high school. but if you look at a map where we lost manufacturing jobs the two key states are michigan and north carolina. look at that map where clinton lost and a trump one, it is the same type of thing so over time we have to figure out the 30 and 70% and how we can recreate the middle-class and that is a lot of what donald trump was about senate the democrats owned this issue with uh notion that mitch mcconnell to be at the head of the party in the senate that is now locked stock and barrel against free trade is
amazing turnabout. how do they reclaim this issue? obama said they have to get out to places they have not been before. >> i think it has to be almost simplified again to where people in the are at an emotional level. there was a thoughtful plan how to deal with the economy and to give a speech to put the details out. people could not hear it because the democrats were not feeling their pain so they have to get back out and articulate what we are about and we need to see those that have been affected get the help in the support that they need not
just the advocacy that people can make their way with the new economy. >> we know that it came from a husband now she feels the pain. so isn't this just the matter of the up politician to have that capacity? >> i think that alli played out, are tied to someone's character. if more people were aware of donald trump's actions whether suits in mexico or ties in china or using chinese deal but i don't know that that was the gross rating points. people baby had a real issue with him. >> would bernie sanders has been in the general election
[laughter] >> would he have done a better messenger? >> no. because i don't think he was credible in the sense that people did what answers did real-world solutions he that he could channel the anchor but hillary clinton and she won on experience and to get things done. so that what have been trouble for bernie sanders for the election. >> these are not one size fits all i remember speaking to what trump person they said is because the trade issue doesn't cut the same as in ohio. >> we have 2018 how it says dates.
>> we also consulted with arizona and that conversation is different from the conversation about trade in ohio. also the race from indiana is different just in terms of the intensity it is much at the forefront of every conversation in and you mentioned the 2018 map with the campaigning that never stops. if you look at the state's that our up democrats are defending 25 cs plus the two independents republicans are defending the eight of those 25 seats ohio, indiana and michigan pennsylvania wisconsin some of the same states where trump did so well and i think a lot of the candidates you are
thinking about challenging these democratic incumbents or they themselves are watching very closely this cycle to see how the issue is litigated in a real way with the campaign and senator brown has a very good working relationship and i am confident that senator brown was watching very closely to what senator portended in his campaign and i would not be shocked if he comes from the same tactics. >> care is the trillion dollar question he talks about opposing european stuff hire you so free-trade? break it into bite sized portions. >> you have to rebuild uh discussion and certainly we
can do a better job with manufacturing. what are the positives we have seen from the past trade agreements? what to be produced that dentist's chair the security devices in the airport that is made in the united states people don't see and they don't recognize it as such but we have to be more clear headed with these foreign trade practices overseas in the best ways to do that. there is a lot of tpp that would have bad practices and the property would urge the other tools we can do that this incoming president talked about bilateral deals this was the cause of that end we have to take each as
it comes the we have to focus on the market's most growth is outside the united states and certainly we cannot hire more workers we have to have greater access to the markets overseas we will prioritize those markets and those barriers and work with the congress and the invitation -- administration. . .
to 60% of their share of the market. we were able to grow again and take over and when the sales and increase. we had a lot of grace manufacturing in the country. as i said, the people don't see in our companies want to get overseas and we see more trade and we have big agreements that nobody wants to talk to that's going to make it easier for our companies to be able to sell. the other big thing is e-commerce. for small business owners, being able to get on the internet and their storefront just like in their hometown, they are selling more than ever.
we are hoping to see a revival in economic growth and more of those exports. >> let'would squeeze one more question in. this gentleman here. >> i jus >> i just had a question about nafta if you could talk about renegotiating that's what that could mean. there's a lot of linkages for the implications and how it is benefiting other states if you could give us some insight on the times. >> the campaign officials of donald trump have said that canadian mexican officials talked about renegotiating nafta based on the rhetoric if anybody wants to address that. >> there have been spending a lot of specifics of what is wrong with nafta but as we know,
there was a view with nafta and it's been a substantial transition in the states of manufacturing sectors. whether that is the result of nafta, automation, china, other factors we all need to figure out what the right diagnosis is of these issues and people sit dowwe will sitdown with the newn and congress. what do they want to see change. there's over two manufacturing jobs and countries that are dependent on the trade relationship with canada and mexico so as we go forward we certainly don't want to put those jobs in jeopardy. but are there ways to improve our relationship with canada and mexico i think it is uncertain at this point.
next is a senior fellow at the council of foreign relations and of him at the state department working under secretary clinton and has been the architect of the secretary's economic statecraft agenda. it's what can still be done and i know that everyone is very ready to hear what the chairman has to say on what's going to be happening. as has been a party to a large extent. how do you reconcile this question that that position with
the trade policies that the president elect has announced so far and as you look at the next congress finish up business from this congress, what will the priorities be. and this is as a lot of people here an issue that will fade into the background. >> thank you for the assessment of everything. very encouraging. i'm a champion of free trade and so are republicans for a couple of key reasons. donald trump was elected to get this country moving again and balancing regulation and finding new customers for the american goods and services are a big part of our economic growth and trade is what provides that opportunity. we have some challenges obviously, but i look at mr. trump and a small case for
enforcement in trade policies which congress has given this president and the new president the strongest enforcement tools ever to pursue that and take up that he allows us to make the case that to grow our economy it isn't enough to buy america. of these trade agreementthese te right and strictly enforced level the playing field and allow us to create a number of jobs here so i'm not as down beat as others are. i think it is early to be sort of assuming where the new administration is going to be. i am hoping that we get a case as the president lays out the economic policy to make the case for keeping what's good about the trade and including
accessing the customers and then improving areas in the public that needs addressing. your district in texas is probably very connected to nafta in many ways. how do you see that being renegotiated and what can be reflected that would reflect donald trump's vision for trade and what it should be? >> i haven't spoken to him or the team exactly where they would want to improve and he talks about these issues and talks about not so much withdrawing that negotiating the table to make it a bigger win for the united states.
these relationships helped us frankly moved through some worldwide recessions more than other three countries as well. i would encourage the president to take a look at nafta that look right in the 1990s. to be bold about reducing the tariffs in all directions and give us more economic freedom to sell what we are making and consumers want to buy them as well. so if it is going to take in nafta or tpp is to go bold and over in the market to the american goods and services, then i think that would be
welcome. >> can you provide a specific? >> my advice was that is a critical market for us that would hold them in the planet by "-begin-double-quote we want to be there. and if we abandon the field completely, we lose and china wins in a major way. so my advice would continue to be to not withdraw, but renegotiated and take the areas of the challenge and make it better and then let's stay on a training field in that region i think it is critically importa important. how do you see that revisited in the future he has made that a
very strong point of his speeches. what would be a way that he could provide a better deal and still appeal to the base? >> running on trade he needs to set those priorities. but we know within congress today that the outstanding areas correctly are for making sure we have adequate intellectual property protections for biologics, making sure the financial services are not discriminated against and making sure there are implementation plans so we know how the countries are going to implement those key areas we are so interested in. there are a number of areas you can begin with immediately. these are the areas that the white house is continuing to work since the agreement was
signed but they were not yet completed. the agreement is on hold until the president h president presiy out a priority going forward. but he can start there for example. >> this is maybe getting more specific. but tpp was meant to tackle some of these 21st century issues and the annual trade is a big issue, and that was going to be the platform in the countries to prohibit the prohibition on the data flow into the requirements. with tpp maybe even dead at this point, what forums are there that you could be addressed and is there something that you all can do in congress that the
republicans in congress will do to push these business priorities forward? >> just as the wto level and it around if you can't find agreement in larger groups than try to find it through the coalition of the willing. they go further on trade areas and especially in the cross flows of data in other areas it is really critical because the trade their ears today are not just limited to the old hears the barriers at the border. it's more sophisticated than that and one of the things i liked about the transpacific partnership is that it went beyond the borders and created a process where in the past countries tend to sort of put an american plug into the european socket they are designed not to
correct. tpp was the first agreement that connected the markets on the regulatory side and the digital side and a number of those areas that allow our companies to connect with those markets and compete on a level playing field. so i am hopeful that continues. but if that agreement is not to peak and then we ought to be looking for other vehicles to tackle the same issues. >> jennifer, a lot of focus was placed on the shifting tpp through the election. but as someone that worked closely with her i want to focus on whether you see the vision for the economic statecraft having any place in this administration. how do you see the incoming administration approaching its relationship with china do you think it will be more a transactional type of relationship or will there be as
we've had under this administration the picture to look at the geostrategic implications involved in that region? >> donald trump said a lot of things on his campaign and my guess is probably not going how much of that will come to pass. so, it may be just to think a bit too but i would hope to see under any administration. having traded in its proper context i think a lot of the problem right now is that americans generally an advocaten particular have the pursue his agenda but we are pretty clear on and we support large companies without going after the tax havens like allowing
ourselves to invest in new solar without going to put one out of business and i think there's a story to be told there was how it's been constructed. these deals are hard, but i do think that people are skeptical about whether or not their interest in the interests of middle-class families are being put at the center as a litmus test of trade good or bad. these deals haven't come to pass as we expected.
until we have our arms around how to model the trade, the predicted impact is better than we would follow the course which is meant to be the model. i don't blame anybody right now. >> when it comes to china, this administration has taken a pretty hard stance on the trade cases and trying to get china to address the issues like the overcapacity. do you think this relationship is going to suffer in the next administration that there will be even more acrimony that is the case not just the cases but what has been promised in terms of terrorists and things like that that will just make the relationship unproductive or do you hope for an attemp prefer as it in the overcapacity for things that have dogged the relationship. >> i don't think that they've
passed the cases that they could be bringing by and large the problem is we don't have the tools to get to the abuses that we are seeing today. and so, point number one should be dismissed was legislation and i hope that we are pushing on an open door and rewriting section 301 to keep up with this sort of shape shifting policy. we take away the sovereign immunity from a lot of these things. if they can show the state one day i'm pretty sure that even the most nimble trade won't get ahead of that. so that's not just a matter of bringing the new cases and using the rules that we have. we need more rules, point number one. and i suspect the administration may not be patient enough to allow the tools to be conceived around the legislation. it may be in the situation terrorist look like the more
preferable choice and i'm not sure that i would go down that road at least across-the-board way that he's been suggesting. but i do want to remind everybody that the united states hold the rank of adjustment and i think that we should begin to think a little creatively about how we use that leverage. it should look a whole lot different than japan in the 80s where there was some kind of an agreement that was it the most basic level about a desire for them to repatriate the investment and we said okay but it's going to take the sector. >> we have time for maybe one or two more questions but before we get to that, i want to ask a
quick question of the chairman. with this focus on enforcement by the president elect, do you foresee any kind of work with him and the administration on the treated for such legislation and any type of new ideas that are floating around? >> both parties agree on the enforcement. mr. trump ran on the strongest enforcement and i think most people agree that was a convincing part of that of his support nationwide. so, i think that given the opportunity to assess the tools we gave this president less than ten months ago because he may find that the tools are there that he didn't know. second, put them in place and make sure for example the wto is where the trade rules stand and where they are enforced so he had the opportunity i think to
assess and pursue china's behavior. i will tell you also one of my suggestions is working very diligently and i still think that if we are serious about going after china and intellectual property and protections that we ought to be aggressively pursuing and concluding a bilateral investment treaty i would go straight towards the issue rather than play it on the sid sides. but his one offense and i would take a second one. >> we will take a question from the audience.
>> now that the tpp is on hold for the future, we don't know how long. the obama administration still has some trade initiatives that they are negotiating or trying to finish by the end of this year. maybe you could comment on where you see those going and also do they need congressional approval? they are closer to the finish line and china still has a step forward in a major way to make sure that we are addressing the goods of today and not of 20 years ago so i'm hopeful that
makes progress. it depends whether they are changing the u.s. law and that proceswall in thatprocess and wo be submitted or not. the agreement is important for trade, competition, lower cost. i think some of the positions that europe has made acquiring each country to approve it i think they are creating roadblocks and making it difficult to move an agreement forwarded that should be i think agree to anagreed to in a majort has so much globally. so i'm hopeful that progress can be made and again i think that the administration has worked very hard to continue those agreements in placagreements ane concluded. >> i think we've run out of time and the chairman has to get
along to that vote. thank you so much for joining us tonight and i'm going to hand it over to my colleague. [applause] [inaudible conversations] hello, everyone. thank you for coming on behalf of politico into the sponsor here i think it's fair to say that when we booked this event a couple months ago we expected a different discussion to be focused primarily on the possibility of congress passing
the transpacific part worship. but the election of donald trump throws off the table and i do want to ask if you agree with that. now we are looking at a potential new era of the trade wars with some of the biggest trading partners such as china and new mexico. as the u.s. trade representative, he's traveled all around the world negotiating trade deals and i had the pleasure to go a lon along on mf the trips including the one time we went all the way to columbia maryland for talks on the south korea agreement. that was one of the finest i've ever been. the real reason i mention that t if they tried to hang the credit or the blame for the agreement on hillary clinton and i just want to say for the record i was there the whole week and i never saw hillary clinton one time that i did see ron kirk and the chief u.s. negotiator and
michael who was obviously running the whole show on behalf of his friend president obama who he me met when they were boh back at harvard law school back in the 20th century. [laughter] my favorite fun fact is that he got his start in international affairs by helping resolve albanian flu which we don't have time to get into today that i would be curious how they compare to the washington blood feud. anyway, i am going to shut up and give him an opportunity to talk but first i have to ask the question that is on everybody's mind. the obama administration talked on the transpacific part of ship in march of 2010.
there were 19 rounds of negotiations and after that, another 15 senior official meetings until an agreement was finally reached on october 5, 2015 in atlanta georgia. after all that work, after all that trouble and after all that time when you were away from your wife and two children and other negotiators were away from their families, is the tpp agreement really dead? >> i was going to say thank you for having me. [laughter] i may revise that forever. first of all, thank you for having me back. i think the work that has been done on the tpp in terms of opening new markets and raising standards so we can create more good jobs in well-paying jobs i think it's a very strong agreement and as the president said, we haven't been fully successful yet in the concerns
it raised that we are fully committed to the region and it is critical to the strategic and economic interests and we believe that's the kind of high standards that we were able to negotiate does exactly what the american people want which is leveling the playing field. it's certainly one of the things coming out of this election is people's concerns that we face an unfair playing field and that is the main motivation was behind us when we went in to make sure we did open these markets disproportionately and other countries have a big barrier and we raised standards in the country so labor standards, environmental standards, intellectual property rights standards in terms of how the state of enterprise enterprd operate so they don't compete, standards on the economy those
are all things that it accomplishes so i'm i am hopefl over time as people look into it and see what's at stake and does the rest of the world moves on and pursues their own trade agenda and we see what the implications for that are, we would be able to see that work move into effect. >> so, not completely dead but. >> i heard someone use the word purgatory. i think i preferred prefer thed purgatory. i think that there is a lot in there and other countries are certainly not going to stay still. they are going to move forward and when they move forward by taking tpp forward without agreeing with us or move forward on their own bilateral or chai latter will agreement the rest of the world isn't going to stand still and that means we are going to be left on the sidelines seeing not only the opportunities represented by the
existing market share eroded by other countries getting access and that i don't think it's in our interest. >> one thing today i noticed you and the secretary met today with the state agricultural secretaries at the white house. >> i wondered is there some crazy possibility that president obama could still slip that it's too congress. >> we stand ready to move forward on this on outstanding issues and the producers had issues and they are now fully supported. gary farber's had some issues and now they are fully supportive of the agreement. the financial service sector had issues and now they are fully supportive. even o when the major outstandig issue of biologic at and
intellectual property rights, your publications as well as others reported that we've are closwe wereclose to an agreemene run-up to the election, so we stand ready to move forward but this is fundamentally a legislative process and it is up to the leadership when and where it will be taken up. >> was going to happen when president obama meets with the other leaders at the summit this week? will they make some sort of a statement to try to move the process forward or is there something they can do to memorialize the agreement so it's there if they want to take it up in the future? >> they are already far down the line in their own approval process. others are moving forward with their own ratification processes. so this meeting that we will
have among the leaders will be an important thing to show the leaders the perspective on where they are domestically and i'm sure they will want to hear from the president and his perspective where it goes from here. >> last week i was at an event and at the cato institute joked trump institute could wait and rebrand the partnership. if you see something like that happening? >> we never thought of selling the naming rights. i think i will leave that to the cato institute to suggest. >> i want to ask about nafta. donald trump says he's going to withdraw from nafta unless mexico and canada agree to renegotiate it. if the president obama say he was going to renegotiate that and did you get around to that? >> he said back in 2008 when he was running that he wanted to renegotiate nafta and he was clear about what he meant because the labor and
environmental issues were dealt with in the side agreements that were not fully enforceable and he made the point if we are going to have trade agreements we have to treat the labor and environmental issues as serious as any of the other issues in the agreement and that's what we did with tpp because expo and canada agreed to finding these provisions that was a renegotiation. there's other parts, too. we get more access than we did in the care h that. tree access to mexico in certain areas where they performed such as the energy sector so it is in fact a renegotiation and in that area like so many other areas if it doesn't move forward or until it does, the games are not to be seen. so if you care about raising the labor standards in mexico that is good in and of itself in thet helps level the playing field for workers and it's important to move forward.
that's exactly what it does. >> nafta seems negative with the voters. did they ever suggest hillary clinton she tried to sell it as a renegotiation of nafta >> we certainly described the benefits of tpp and talked about how it is to renegotiation of nafta and it's the most epic and expansion of workers rights i think in history. it's 500 million around the world that would rather have these binding and enforceable labor rights. that's not only good in terms of the dignity of work that levels the playing field for the workers. one of the mai main complaint ie live in a world with low-wage labor and that's the reality.
that genie is out of the bottle. the question is what are you going to do about it. if you could get other countries to allow the right to bargain that would've leveled the playing field for the workers and that is what is at stake moving forward. for the critics are the or the s i think the question is by defeating tpp or delaying tpp, how were they improving the workers rights around the world parks how were they leveling the playing field and in the meantime when we could be raising the workers rights, why are we imposing a continuing level playing field? >> a theory about i know you heard of you think that it's in purgatory but do you have a theory of who put it in
purgatory? [laughter] if you're asking about divine intervention here, i think what we have seen is a a rise of populism in the right and left and politics that didn't always permit a full debate based on facts and i think that combination has made it difficult for us to look at the message for just what is at stake. >> [inaudible] punic i think i was probably at work. that was a few days after we completed the tpp negotiation and got to washington to
immediately go to the hill and consoled and we were in the process of doing so. >> do you remember how you felt? [laughter] >> i won't comment on any candidates past or present, but i think that this process has underscored that a lot of people feel left behind whether it's because of the graphics of globalization. you don't duplicate vote on globalization. trade agreements become the scapegoat for quite legitimate concerns people have about income inequality and the stagnation of wages and feeling
left behind. i hear there are republicans and democrats on the campaign trail and how we need to do more with displaced workers whether it comes from technology or globalization. i would hope that coming out of this campaign we don't all the wrong lessons. 14 million americans owe their jobs to exports. we over 2 trillion for goods and services the year cutting us off from the global economy isn't the answer to the concerns as legitimate as the artist dealing with these other issues about
dislocation and transition in a way that goes beyond what we've done before. >> one thing that trump campaign suggested as the measures to keep out reports from china. is there more the administration could have done? >> we have been committed to the trade enforcement and the use of the trade remedy laws. there are now more trade remedies being imposed by the commerce department if we got 23 cases more than any other in the world and 14 have been brought to china. we have won every case brought to conclusion that we are continuing to work on those cases. so we believe the enforcement is important and is an issue that has been on are scored by the
campaign and that will be imparted iimported in the futur. >> you had one or two more cases that you were going to roll out during the debate. >> we work on them on an ongoing basis to bring the cases when we are caught and they are ready to go. >> could we see more between now and a the end of the administration? >> i don't want to ruin the surprise. [laughter] >> while they declared china and administration before it leaves office? >> they recognized the determination of the status that falls under each of our statutes for each country's statute and we have criteria about what constitutes a market economy. china can apply at any time like the last time it did so was in
2004. based on those criteria that haven't achieved the status of their focused now is the end of the year when the protocols for the wto expire how that will affect the application in the future and that is something they were continuing to work through. do you think the environmental goods agreement could come together and would there be the conclusion of the bilateral message or he? >> the underscored the importance of getting the agreement done this year. we have been working to follow up that commitment and made some progress and we still have a way
to go its could be critical as it was in the agreement that china played. they are one of the greatest beneficiaries that produce environmental goods and desperatelthedesperately needs o deal with the serious environmental problems but it's going to be important that they put on the table that kind of access the rest are willing to offer if we are going to reach that agreement. i think it's important that it would be a high standards agreement that performs and opens up and creates real disciplines to address the kind of problems that our companies have had. we've made progress but we are not there yet.
>> you said you spent five years negotiating the agreement and it's not going to go anywhere in the foreseeable future that must be disappointing but you also have a president that the campaign trail talked about how stupid the negotiators worked. do you think they will be able to work for this administration? >> it's a great institution and in a number of parts of the government there is no finer group of career civil servants than ustr they are incredibly dedicated and incredibly hard-working for making sure they are fully enforced and i have every confidence as they have with every previous i was reminded when we came in in 20 of eight and 2009 they had a number of concerns about
previous trade policies and renegotiating at all alike. i have every confidence they will be able to negotiate on the priority. >> after january 20, and will have a lot of time. you have any traveif you have ar what will you be doing next? >> i'm going to be finding a hammock on a beach to sleep. that's the only plan i've made so far. >> you seem to have an interest in the wildlife conservation. do you think you might be doing something in that area? >> it's an interesting area and something i learned about in my previous job working on development issues and a into tk between development, trade, national security and wildlife
is one of the areas we focused on and got the countries to agree to the wildlife trafficking something in africa and rwanda and so forth is something i would stay focused on going forward. >> i see that we are out of time but i did want to get your thoughts on this one question. there is a confusing situation right now where the polls show that democrats would trademark and you would expect that the parties vote in the opposite way and congress. how do you see that shaping out over the next couple of years? >> i have seen those and i think that it is interesting that young democrats and african-americans, hispanics, asians are all more pro- trade at an average. there's a certain coworker of
republicans are not as pro- trade and we will have to do more and i mean the collective we, government business, agriculture to continue to educate people about what is at stake and we take for granted when we pick up the phone and download an app or take for granted the ecosystem that allows that to happen tha but we know that other countries are eager to create national clouds and digital products. we take for granted the amounts of farm income but when that disappears as other countries have been the market share, we will find the same people who have been concerned and are going to find themselves facing more challenges. that's why it's important to get the story out and get the facts out.
i would hope going forward we could have a more fact-based discussion about the benefits of trade but also what we need to do as a society to deal with those who are impacted by change wherever it comes from. >> thank you, ambassador, on behalf of politico and everyone here for spending time with us and i would like to thank fedex and everybody also the political team worked hard to bring this together. thank you for joining us here in the room and those watching the live stream. a quick reminder for those of you in the room, please join us for cocktails and conversation in the back of the room to give him a great evening and please thank the ambassador again. [applause]
the architect of the u.s. capitol speaks tuesday about the restoration of the u.s. capitol dome. we'll hear livwe will here liven c-span. republican donald trump is elected as the next president of the united states and everyone e he lacks the house and senate. although the transition of government on c-span. we will take you to the events as they have bee happen without interruption. watch on c-span, on demand at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. remarks by the homeland security secretary process for the agency. the without an event by bloomberg government focused on the nation's infrastructure.
this is 30 minutes. >> good afternoon. sorry to break up the conversation. i'm ahead of bloomberg government and on behalf of my colleagues whether it is bloomberg news, or us here at bloomberg government i would like to welcome you to the kickoff. these events will b be hosted ad talked a lot about in the future of work and technology, innovation, the law and government. and we couldn't pick a better time to talk about any of those
topics given the fact we have a new administration and congress coming to town in just a matter of the. for those of you that don't know us, bloomberg government is all about providing the tools and information they need to be successful in their work. with infrastructure expected to be one of the very first things in the new administration and congress to take a look at, we couldn't pick a better topic to kick off the next series. once the administration and congress come to town, we will be tracking all of it whether it is the bills moving through congress, the rules and the agencies, the lobbying dollars were the contract is moving through all the different agencies. so, for today we have an exciting lineup of panelists and i want to say a word of thanks to the speakers and moderators of panelists for taking time out to join us today and i've also take a moment to acknowledge the
partner building america's future and in particular my friend and neighbor. they had been great partners to us. [applause] as well as setting about 5 feet away from where i sit. i want to introduce the first session today. it is my pleasure to welcome to bloomberg and bloomberg government the secretary of homeland security jay johnson. he will be having a conversation with my colleague from bloomberg news. obviously with infrastructure being such a big topic, security of infrastructure is something we have to be thinking about, and i can't think of anybody better to have that conversation did the secretary. so mr. secretary, it's all yours. welcome. [applause]
>> good afternoon. >> thank you, secretary, for joining us today. we are excited to have you here at bloomberg. let me start off with a question and then we will open up to the audience. i wanted to ask, there were a lot of concerns around cybersecurity. i know that dhs was in touch with a lot of states and i just want to know what you saw that dave was there any intrusions or any kind of report that you can give us after the concerns leading up to that time? >> was the begin addressing the elephant in the room and being non- responsive to the question at least initially being the
transition that we are in. this is my third that i've been through. i've been part of the outgoing team in 2000 and now part of the outgoing team again in 2016 i can say with high confidence that this will be my last transition. i very much believe in the citizen public servant model and i look forward to returning to public life in 67 days and there are two things i would like to point out. one, anytime there's a there isa transition, there's lots of uncertainty and anxiety and questions about the direction the new administration will take the government. will they go to the extreme left or the extreme right and try to steer the middle course, who
will lead him to be part of the transition, who will be part of the cabinet, and there are two thoughts. one, our government is and has been, and this is true since the day the constitution was issued to come our government is a system of checks and balances. we are not a monarchy or even a parliament harry form of government where the prime minister is part of the legislative branch. we have three coequal branches of government that served as a check on one another so that when a new administration comes in if they have an edge in to take policy to an extreme left or an extreme right, there's other institutions of government to serve as a check of going too fast, too far in any one direction.
so the new administration in the branch must inevitably operate within certain parameters called compromise, checks and balances. that's number one. number two, it's important to remember that something in excess of probably 90% of the day-to-day work of the government proceeds unaffected by who the president is and who the administration is. the work goes on and as the gs 13 level, certainly within our military community, the men and women protecting the ports. men and women to fight overseas, if people in homeland security, 26,000, only a fraction of 1%
are political appointees. the rest of the government goes on from day to day. one of the things that i hope and expect will be pretty much accepted that such doctrine by the next administration whoever forms this next administration will be the importance of infrastructure investments in infrastructure security. we've heard a lot from the president elect about investments in infrastructure but the security of infrastructure is something i hope and expect will be accepted in the new administration and the interrelated us with infrastructure protection and cybersecurity because there is
an increasing interrelated as between physical infrastructure and cyberspace, cybersecurity. it's critical that the two are to be seen. now to get to your question, election infrastructure. in the run-up beginning in august, i made a very public and private appeal to lots of state and local election systems to seek our help not because we have some real concerns about the infrastructure but because very little of it actually exists on the internet and we wanted to make sure that all the systems command has some 9,000 across the country that are involved in the national elections we are thinking about this and giving the basic things they should do to protect
>> >> and we attribute that to to the hacking that was going on but we knew we could say with confidence about the hacking of the various political institutions for cecile lunch action infrastructure itself and we expected then and continue to express confidence around the election infrastructure but they always do what they can't. >> dc we could see a
response from the administration to russia by january? >> >> so with these elections and infrastructure i have heard you over the years speak about critical infrastructure and now want to see where that discussion is and how that would happen >> said last summer we would not designate or determine that election infrastructure was part of critical infrastructure with the states some officials in the process. and that is my view.
because without the distraction so to come forward to seek our assistance and we did. and it is something i will continue to discuss with secretaries of state out there and will reach with the assessment but not with uh confrontation. >> so now more of what your role is with up process as you pass on to your successor? but then to show up at the department of who wins security with the existing
problems pretty much like i did eight years ago when i showed up at the pentagon as part of the department of defense in then to take it interesting turn but to make assessments of policy direction to be with the component leaders to sit down with the transition team to brief them on everything that i see with the recommendations to wait for word here is what i need to focus on. and the leadership team will do the same thing.
and i have given this considerable thought, what i say to the incoming transition team is in respective of a new one the election. here is what we have achieved and as a worker can progress i am proud of the fact that we have done a lot in the last three years to improve basically as a department does business for manager reform to improve the acquisition process and the budget making process with a joint requirements council to raise morale which is a big project of mine it wasn't easy we have the largest increase of the
levels of route all -- morale. so we are leaving the department better than as we found it i will point those out to the team added it is important we do this in a way that the men and women for a the american public i told my peoplehood wish should be transparent and collegial with the direction that the president wants us to go. >> if i could add one more point with richard vice for the transition team? one of my models for management style is make no
significant decision without consulting all of the of relevant players don't make decisions in a vacuum. in that you encourage people to express those points and led you that is how the policy decision making should ocher. so the next secretary of homeland's security encourages a collaborative confinement of which they make decisions. >> are there concerns of the transition to pass the baton and then those many differences and how does that smooth out?
>> there is a lot of criticism and by his predecessor and his predecessor. and then president obama and a first lady with the dedication of the african-american museum some of the rhetoric was pretty sharp so i take the long view and believe that i tend to see the best in everybody and because they're interested with those
countries. and i believe that the administration relies upon the advice to make the best and healthiest decisions for the country and by a large how government works. >> talk about critical infrastructure what should the next initiation focus on that you did not get to our right to consider you to see that make a priority? >> first i will read you ace summary from the national terror advisory yes.
i am making news. [laughter] so we go to a new system in december of the alerts in the bulletin's in the current one expires tomorrow. is the same as the previous. and this is to focus on. new with the global threat environment with the home grown violent extremist. and then to reinforce this with the public vigilance
and continue to be of utmost importance. this was a critical component to the swift response to the terrorist attack or that acts referring to the attacks that the other point i would make the diluted to earlier that it is critical to be more closely aligned with the protection of critical of restructure that they themselves have to be more closely aligned with the authority to reorganize the national program director to
with that critical infrastructure comment they seem more interested having the department with the potential targets like that. what do think is the appropriate role for d.h. us with the state of local government. >> as a general matter of a global threat environment and that the federal level needs to work more closely through the grant making programs.
and the security starts here. this is this something that the assistant secretary in deserts with hometown security in the current environment we say we have to be vigilant with public events not meant to refer exclusively with those major metropolitan areas but also places like orlando or chattanooga. that makes for a more
complicated from town security environment. i am a big proponent of active shooter exercises, grants and to focus on the type of infrastructure and then on this particular trend to the exclusion of others. what we often want and need to focus our efforts with of large ones to focus on the multi jurisdictional multi discipline responses with
the private sector as well. and we have been working more closely with private security experts to share information private infrastructure but not to use the exclusion of anyone and community or segment of infrastructure. >> i want to ask during the course of this administration to .5-ton million - - million documents -- immigrants have been documented what is your advice about how much that effort to deport as many people would use your vice
quick. >> that president trump city report 3 million people? >> person call when you talk about the deportation force the enforcement and removal and talk about deporting the criminals is the current priorities of public safety and border security be moving those that are apprehended at the border. and we have focused on public safety of border security to of those
priorities that i issued a november 2014. with that work force focuses on the criminal indifference to public safety. but a higher percentage of those and that is good for public safety and to focus on the best of public safety also to change their pay scale with the law-enforcement pace scale that is hell something and help the next initiation but in general focused on threats to public safety.
when we say we will deport 3 billion people that is the equivalent of the population of the city of chicago. anything that you do is they've magnitude you have to get money from congress to go along. and have been for the last two years. >> this scaling up of these operation. >> we are currently budgeted to focus want a public safety. that is where it needs to continue for the safety of the american people.
security. and that there are redundancies and built into any system. but with that election infrastructure that there are redundancies to the election night reporting for example. if the e-mail system fails pickup the telephone but there are numerous redundancies builds into election night and that is the best practice.
>> and what about after january 20 quick. >> i cannot say publicly but i look forward to being a private citizen again, an anonymous private citizen will share one anecdote with the people that i greatly admire and public service was secretary of state. and one day i was riding the subway with the rail safety specialist i love the rails. i have read in every single line except the franklin avenue shuttle. i looked over in a beaten up
on many minnesota send me hope to do that. and then move like the audience to get into. of these people who know a lot about the subject obviously the discussion is to go forward with the context of the election and that we had last week both candidates talk about improving infrastructure and it has also talked about it. so i think our challenges to find common ground they can provide some common ground and we will do our best and hopefully come up with some
great ideas. we need to figure out in our priorities and what role technology will play and where we will find the money. on a side note the governor has lost his voice almost completely that this symbolic of something that i am not quite sure what but trust me once in is voice comes back he will be very vocal because ever since he was mayor of philadelphia we will have him back for another program as some point. so with that would like to introduce our panel but is
also of president of the u.s. conference of mayors that is near and dear to my heart. most of your constituents are your constituents in the executive director for the transportation and infrastructure u.s. chamber of commerce. to have a very good bipartisan split to have a real conversation this will be a big issue. can you talk to us about the conference priorities going forward? what do you care most about
and what has worked? >> not only the nation's highways or what the citizens to live alone but the of water infrastructure infrastructure, the bridges that need significant repair . rather than going into those predictable things that mayors say i will give you an anecdote or to to understand the problem that is out there. we have three in negative heart of oklahoma city california to north carolina and as it goes through oklahoma city was designed as the elevated highway over four 1/2 miles it was a bridge going through the downtown portion of the city. and the department of transportation realize that
was a design flaw as they try to figure out what to do about that situation has some major artery it was not as stable as it needed to be so they come up with the idea to relocate the interstate highway a few blocks to the south and replacing that corridor so the city gains as st. so i was a city hall television reporter covering the meeting as the council determined but then fast for word 2012 i cut the ribbon for the four and a half mile stretch that was finally located and now that is under construction in defy run for a fifth term
somebody else will do that. but in 2007 and but how we pay for improvements and build police stations and other needs. we estimated by 2014 we would all they knew bond issue soon after that the state legislature pass a law that the increase of property prices and then we hold that bond issue with maintenance then this city in than services are upset about it and for them to
take care of the of projects so those looking for federal government to invest in r&d and to get more for less occasionally we get more with some advancement to find public-private partnerships with that tax exempt status but you want to remove that. with every dollar that we can. >> budget in those greatest gains and forecasted is
simple the most important infrastructure that project and with at bat region for the district so we win grow out 100,000 people those that were 4 million. and then we will have of metro system with tender loving care with any serious thoughts from the safety and reliability and then to be a partner in that change we
carry the federal workforce and all over washington d.c. all across the region said to work with a new administration to be involved to pay their fair share not even talking about the millions of people from around the country and around the world to make sure you have a world-class metro system there has to be a common ground with us knew a administration. >> that was such a spectacular way to get around town. >> now i did it talk specifically so when people
come to the city and how we accommodate bid -- and we are very focused that we are conservative we link that to the two critical investments and to make sure and that continues to be the focus. so long the horizon is with the infrastructure to keep up with the growth so the signal for the new congress
just completed data analysis of the infrastructure needs we know what we need for maintenance and what we need the federal government to do what we can do with the public-private partnership. i know people are looking for some good deals we would be ready to have that conversation in the district >> but that is what is so important that as a country we probably need the 10 year plan been with the vision what do we need across the country with water and energy greeted and technology? if we stop and think about if we allow the mayors to come up with some of list of what could happen we could start to envision how we
would get there. so of that point let me turn to the chamber that they are prominent members of an organization that many of us have started that is of coalition of the chamber to build america's future as manufacturers and other organizations we don't agree on everything but we agree we need to improve our infrastructure so the chamber is a very important part if you could talk about the priorities of the chamber. >> that is a great opportunity to be here. even though we're a separate
parts of the stage this this along time commitment we start a coalition back in 2000 and all panelist here this this 15 years of effort to get to the point of two presidential candidates talking about infrastructure it did not just cannot of the woodwork we're not just here because somebody was talking about it was a sustained campaign over years we tech advantage of that so this is not new but we're very excited about this opportunity with president-elect trump to take some ideas from the campaign we heard of the $1 trillion infrastructure deal to make that into a reality we cannot let the opportunity go to west when negative '02 race so we are
partnering to try to educate because everybody asks the question what is the big infrastructure build? what we would like to see is increased investment and financing options. before the campaign they talked about private investment but particularly with the highway trust fund to make sure that is meant the second goal is fredonia to create a lot of new programs but tax sector investment the infrastructure banc we already have a program that is very effective so we can enhance that as it has enhanced the ability for state and local government
to go to the agency to look at private participation for investment that is another option we need to continue to build up trust with government and if you look at the last two major federal transportation bills starting with 110 programs that were federal mandates it is now down at 12 so we have seen the federal government understands we need to have more flexibility and options for state and local government to provide a tool kit of options for government to say what is that best tool kit of options and our committee? so again once-in-a-lifetime opportunity we are very excited when we heard from the president-elect this is
an issue in to work very closely to make is substantive we don't want to repeat what hap pened in 2009 lot of the infrastructure was not the amount needed and that investment went to short-term projects we will work hard for to make sure free to have the infrastructure package it will change the system for the better not just a onetime and function of money but long-term sustainable investment for our economy. >> [inaudible] >> good question it was only 3-1/2 years late in the past the act last year but that bill increased funding for highways by 10 percent that
is only about half of what the american society of civil engineers says we need to invest. we're doing a lot of band-aids and not systemically changing the system and that is a great example that was started as state-of-the-art but it is not sexy all the time to put money into maintenance when you don't maintain your asset kennedy terris to such a point the cost is exponentially more than if you maintained the asset over the lifetime. i know it is a challenge we have to lawmakers here who made that decision and may not take place while they are in office without this the of leadership that we need. dwight eisenhower was not an office but we need leadership to show long-term plan that it is the right thing to do for the public we are committed to support those lawmakers to make those long-term decisions.
>> so talk to us about the goals of trying to get something done to take advantage of this opportunity and how do we finance this what is the scope can let you a bite to see done? >> first what we really see in this panel is the usual convergence of opinion people on the different side of that partisan divide. lot of what i would want to say that my colleagues have already said but i will repeat as the nature of washington we need to understand the scale american society of civil engineers with the
infrastructure deficit is 3.$2 trillion. that order of magnitude that is larger but that's is not the full story is up maintaining interstate highway system but technology moves on. and to simply maintain the inheritance so the real target number for infrastructure is in excess of 3.$2 trillion. it is important, we understand it is absolutely a critical to think about the transportation with the
full range of public goods faddist is critical to be in the 21st century. if that is the scale then to understand the time line the assets that we need to construct whether repairer and maintenance for the construction of the power transmission lines to place their it is demand, these are assets that take a longtime some to think about at financing and as has then alluded to by the prior speakers come in many respects this is not very hard.
in the tax-exempt bond market the lowest cost sources of capital in the world there are people who are prepared to lend us the money to build the system at extraordinarily low rates. in those that provide enough of flexibility to get the job done. the ags somehow there is a financial problem is incorrect and intact that idea is dangerous. in with those infrastructure needs so the of model to basically go out to find
those two are willing to invest capital that demand high rates of return, not of the user fees that we've talked about a lot that is that the center of the paper of the trump campaign that does not work we can argue if you think the assets should be privately held or if somebody needs the treasury but the fundamental fact that there is no way to have the user fee on the highway system if we said that is what we are going to do then we do nothing. and we cannot afford to do nothing. and as you heard from my friend in the chamber the
question is the political vision and the leadership so now i will close with i had to say that this is really in area for potential for healing across the of labor business divide there is need for infrastructure enroll america and broadband there is enormous potential but i have no idea would have to say this to this event, there is the prior question that has to be answered otherwise he can
have a meaningful conversation. yesterday i have to say this , yesterday i went to church in suburban maryland maryland, episcopal church where somebody had sprayed on the walls of the church trump nation, white snow only. the episcopal bishop of washington in this church service asked of president elect specifically denounced the people that did that. we cannot have this type of conversation is long as that question is on answered. >> okay. obviously we are very empathetic to at and under steven that as the country needs to come together and working on issues to find common ground is the first
place that we should go. so perhaps the be across the board that could be helpful. so before we go to questions the process and the money is out there but how do we get there? do you believe that tax reform is repatriation to jump-start the issue? >> i think it is very unclear about the natural way we are going i think there's a lot of ideas that have been thrown out to be transition team tax reform is something that he has talked about and also paul ryan. with the challenge is that
people that are for tax reform it gets more challenging the other challenge from the infrastructure standpoint is repatriation there is 14 different ways to repatriate we dulce that as a long-term sustainable funding source we don't think that is we need right now we need a long-term sustainable solution so the mayors and governors know what they will get from their federal partner for a good period of time so they can make decisions locally to make the proper investment we don't just need a couple hundred million dollars to say go added that make a plan to make a major investment as the backbone to the economy with the economic recovery plan has to have major infrastructure investment.
>> over $200 million of state and local referendums had passed so if you tell a city or county what you want to build almost 70 percent passer reelection your thoughts is that the of wave in of the future. >> i am heartened to see that especially since we need most major systems like ours to be a dedicated funding source people are willing to make investment to make their lives easier and that is why we saw around the country we are different that our system is supported by the jurisdiction so we need to come up with a regional way
to make that investment i don't have to tell you that it has men said that the deferred maintenance will cost us many times more than it would have then if we had that dedicated funding source i think that it is heartening but also people letters march. they see that gridlock on our street where people are flocking to cities and if we maintain the growth to take it planted church that is public transportation i like to use the example that is emblematic of what the federal government has failed to do it belongs to the federal government and
we're fighting over who will fix of bridge and it belongs to the national park service apparently they have a lot of bridges across the country that are in similar disrepair so i cannot agree with my friend more oddities are about leadership so i had this discussion recently i want to ask my a colleagues to vote and they will have to ask their voters to do something that we may not be around for. in the bill comes due it will be five 1/6 years from now but it is coming to. even though i may or may not be here and ask the tough questions for the additional revenue so i want to be that
of mayor to fix it once and for all. so all of the members of the congress that we don't have to senators as you know, laugh laugh just saying. [laughter] so we talk to their senators but everybody across of a country in scrapping for that same page reconstruction divided do that for my infrastructure in the district certainly we could expect that of the federal agencies these are the priorities that have to get done starting with the national park service is not the way to get there.
but in addition to transportation and energy i would like to think of us as affordable housing as part of the infrastructure as well. as that crumbles they just change uh character of the city is the federal government has been a partner less so recently and even to be less involved for the affordable housing that they like to approach a way to keep affordable. >> you mention the voters a willingness to pay for infrastructure. barrett is some other evolutions. we are realizing that affects health more than we
previously realized when we redesign the downtown streets now be redesigned around people so we have rebuilt the entire downtown grant and to break ground on the street car system that there was no debt to create the citizens are willing to invest but if you want to increase taxes you have to have that compelling argument in without a funded opponents you are wasting your time. >> i try to expand the of list of infrastructure with the affordable housing for a long time with the investment trust in the
point about this in spot on n the park service is pardon of the up portfolio as our colleagues said and educational institutions are part of the landscape but the financing challenge there is a couple of tricky things. but right now there is a push from companies to use that infrastructure challenge as a way to get a huge tax break that is what the repatriation on language says there were ways to do that that would be fair to those that create jobs in america to pay the full tax
rate and day are working things out but we have to be careful there was a clear mandate for public policy that did not incentivize the movement of jobs offshore. there are ideas that they will weaken the united states that strikes me is something nobody voted for. but the challenge is with political leadership to support financing at the state and local level but also the federal level with more flexibility. . .
do you think about the future of urban urbanization. >> not a lot of people live in washington, d.c.. [laughter] the divide is real and it's been well chronicle chronicled and pn the state legislatures frequently but i'm not seeing a disconnect whether you are talking water or roads or streets i think it's universal so there's reasons to be for and against things but i don't think it's going to play out on infrastructure. i should add that the advent of the autonomous vehicle will have more to do with change and the environment more than anything our lifetimes it is more around the corner as well.
>> my name is stephanie at nrdc. one of the opportunities presented in the infrastructure bill is an opportunity to reimagine local empowerment. we understand that president elect trump isn't necessarily looking at the fed to be the leaders on this there might be a good opportunity for state and local. so 36 governors are going to be up in 2018. as the mayor was talking about, the relationships that are required and he talks about the opportunity to create in the common ground. how do we have a conversation around the regional investments that can happen that support the kind of smalltime communities in the larger cities and some of these then where is the
opportunity for innovation and the shared economy as we think about some of the flexible dollars that we had that could create some species for u spaceo do more? >> one of the things your question raises is the role of state and local government in planning the built environment and been essentially helping to shape national policy in the local and regional plans. this is something that we in the labor movement very strongly believe is necessary as a way of trying to bridge the divide is deep in washington and maybe less deep and federal washington
and more reflective of ways that people kind of live together and come together and the areas we live in. i would just suggest that in addition to this, we have to think as we are doing this and the impact of infrastructure investment on the communities that we have a lot of people in this country that have been left out of the economic growth in the last 30 years in a lot of different ways. in the inner cities, people indicted the industrialized parts of the country the critical question whether or not infrastructure investment will reach them because it's not they cannot participate in the global economy. and it isn't going to happen by accident. it's also a visit is deeply related to how the workforce policy relates to infrastructu infrastructure. what kind of jobs are we going
to create, who will be available to. so in the labor perspective, and this is critical akin to building a common ground. from the labor movement perspective it is absolutely essential that they have the labor protections and provisions for training and inclusiveness that will result in all the good things i just mentioned happening. it will not happen by accident. if there is the belief that somehow the public goods will respond and somehow we will create public goods in the same way that we create software or chewing gum what will happen is not public goods and we've been doing that for 30 years and it's not an attainable thing to do.
>> if you go to any community transportation is one of the top three. when businesses decide, they want to know that there is viable options. when we talk about the divide there's a lot of places around the country and this isn't a partisan ratio and for the communities to succeed, they need to have transportation as one of the core tactics. they also know a lot of support was in the rural areas. this is a place we can bring everyone together to provide a toolkit option to have the ability to succeed that maybe didn't have that ability six years ago.
we are now like ten minutes over so i think you can read that there are a lot of questions about this and we would be happy to do something like this again. i didn't even get to my favorite subject of high-speed rail. we hope that he will give us the feedback and we hope that we can do this again. i would like you to help me thank the panel for being here today. [applause]
we are asking students to participate in this competition by telling us what is the most urgent issue for the next president donald trump in the incoming congress to address in 2017. the competition is open to all middle school and high school students grades six through 12. students can work alone or a group of a three to produce a five to seven minute documentary on the issue selected. a grand prize of $5,000 will go to the student or team the best
overall entry. $100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded between 150 students in 53 teachers. this year's deadline is january 20, 2017. that's inauguration day. this is 30 minutes. let me quickly introduce the panel here. we have jason miller from the white house joining us and lonnie ingram from verizon.
we've got the virginia secretary of transportation and mike johnson from parsons infrastructure. with this panel we have a good opportunity to have discussions among the public and private sector about the infrastructure investment here in the united states. we had a big election last week and one of the consensus ideas that you are hearing discussed is interested in doing something across both sides of the aisle for the great place to start coming and we heard of this idea about the rural and urban divide in the last panel but what is the role of the government in infrastructure spending we will just go down the panel that broad idea. >> a couple of things the previous panel mentioned, which
i think are well for the context of the role of the federal government. everybody agrees that we have a funding problem no matter which way you cut it investment in infrastructure has been far below what it needs. somebody mentioned this in the previous panel, but i want to emphasize this point. the current funding levels if we maintain than our walking in the deterioration in the infrastructure system. so to maintain much less be that competitive economy that we need, we need significant increases in investment. now, in addition to just maintaining the systems as a whole set of new challenges that we are confronting, one is the demographic reality of the population of the growing economy with a constrained amount of space so that means congestion for people getting to and from work or what they want to do that day.
that creates a strain on the system. today our estimate is there's over $150 billion lost in the economic value every year just from congestion alone. so it's not just that we are under investing that we are creating costs today. the second thing is how are we going to bring new technologies and systems across the board where there's transportation, energy, communications. but as a whole set of technologies that create the opportunities and challenges. he spent a lot of time this year working on the connected vehicles to transform how we think about service transportation systems and that the fundamental question we need to tackle. third is addressing the need for me changing clinic. the transportation sector is an enormous consumer of energy and
carbon emissions and it's not just about changing the vehicle technology standards. there is another natural interaction between the choices people and businesses are able to make t the drive down emissis over time. you have to give people more choices than just getting into a vehicle that burns oil if we are going to confront some of these challenges. so it needs to address the challenges that we have been chasing. in terms of the role for the federal government, i will put two of them out there. the federal government needs to maintain the key role in providing funding for a set of public infrastructure. i think it is fair to evaluate some of the challenges of the water infrastructure and what should be the role of providing funding.
the federal share of infrastructure has been declining and the federal investment in infrastructure, the share of gdp isn't a almost historical low and that is something that we need to address an increase. the second is in setting standards. the federal government plays a role whether it be new technologies or how federal funding is used. if we had a three stage setting up its own policies for how the automated vehicles work and you couldn't cross the border, which in this region would be a particularly complex challenge. you couldn't cross the border with the new technolog a new teu have in the car so the federal government plays a key role in establishing the standards by which we obligate our infrastructure. as an employee in the private sector what do you look to the federal government for?
>> the whole idea around infrastructure is something that not only crosses lines between parties but also between federal government, state government and the local government all the way down to the citizens. the partnership that has to happen for this to work needs to be seamless across all of those areas. i think that it is incredibly important around the communiti communities. the ability to have regulations as i was just mentioned starting at the state level and federal level is incredibly important that one of the main areas is providing incentives and some of those initial pushes to incentivize and encourage cities and communities to jump into this look at what the u.s. dot had recently done with the challenge that they had put out
although columbus is the winner and they've done some amazing things all of the others that participated in this learned a tremendous amount not only about what was available to them but also the tremendous amount of support coming from the public and private sectors to make those activities have been so i've been doing more of those types of initiatives is incredibly important for the federal government. not only does it cross the line between the various broken site loads but also within the cities there's a lot of silos that happen and technologies can't be done within those. they may not have one with the energy department and in the future we can't afford to have the duplicate infrastructure across all of these various groups to just have solutions that don't talk with one
another. if we are going to do something about autonomous vehicles for around autonomous vehicles for example that's going to require partnerships with what's happening in the automobile autd policies about how this is going to be governed so there is a tremendous amount of synergies that need to occur across the departments in order to be able to afford these solutions and ensure they are all working together for the common goals. >> it would be great to hear what are you looking to the federal government for besides funding and how do you see these silos just mentioned >> probably of all the panelists that had the direct responsibilitdirect responsibile secretary of transportation, 60,000 miles of road so obviously something we think about daily and what i hear that is the same rhetoric. we all know that the federal
government has to be a key player but it's also the responsibility of the states that use transportation dollars to prove that they are using them efficiently, and we make the case for having more money. now, we've done that in virginia a couple different ways. number one, we instituted the smart scales where we rank all the transportation projects across the commonwealth based on six factors, environmental, safety, and land-use, economic development and from that a relative understanding of what the needs are but also what we are leaving on the table. so an outfit based form of measurement it is and how much money you get up how much projects you are delivering.
you wouldn't complete half a hotel so why would you allocate money for half the road. that is one of things we've done ithe things we'vedone is that te allocated through construction, fiscally constrained. we talk about what we are leaving on the table. here's what we are not funding and what you're missing out. another important piece of this is obviously public-private partnerships. we did some things pretty well and something h some things we e done better. so we reform that process because it's not a default procurement. private dollars to take the place of public. they enhance them. we did a major project here in this area.
we said this is where we are negotiating so now not only are we not putting up the state subsidy, we are getting $500 million at closing for the project that we can use to enhance others in the region. i certainly agree that the federal partners have to be there. i believe infrastructure is a core component whether state or federal. but it's also incumbent taxpayers are using it wisely and we can make a realistic case of what we are leaving on the table and i will be the missing piece along with technology because technology can drive costs down. it should be in the confines of what the policies are. we can talk about autonomous vehicles and a very big part of
where we are headed, drowns. but they need to get in the policy that you are trying to deliver. not just putting in the technology to say you did it and that is the key technology will drive where we are going is if you have the right policy setting it up and i know we will get into details but it is the overview of how we attack this problem. >> this idea of technology in mind what is the potential for the government to drive innovation in this infrastructure bill that seems to be potentially looming out there and again still would love to hear from you anything that you are looking for from the government. >> i want the federal government to set the bar high and we have to deliver projects to move the needle if we go back and look at whether it is the stimulus act or others using i had a quick
discussion there wasn't enough ready on the shelves to get things built. if we look across the river here that wasn't a formal design builder partnership but the feds invest in a program that that lo the development of the national harbor sort of alien .5 in an 3 billion back in the private development so we have to look at projects that are one plus one equals three. that's what we are looking for and the role of the government in terms of setting the bar high making this a priority if you look at the bridges and transit system they are older than the population. the bridges are fast baby boomers. they are 70-years-old, 80-years-old an in the trainingd assistance approaching 100-years-old. there's a lot of work to be done to put people back and.
it's time to come together and drive this it can be driven from the top or the bottom as well. >> everybody has mentioned autonomous vehicles and they talk about them coming rapidly but what are the main problems the federal government were local problem has to solve to really facilitate some of these innovations like autonomous vehicles and we'll start with you. >> one of the things is to look at the infrastructure as a whole. this isn't a problem that can be solved by going to one particular company. it will take an ecosystem and different technologies and players both private and public to make this happen. we were talking about this earlier lets just say the power
of driving the lighting solutions and autonomous vehicles at the same time wherever there are mobiles the street lights in the same manner. can we build infrastructure into that particular that not only saves energy that provides solutions and traffic flows and management that's allowing for that autonomous vehicle to take place in a more efficient manner this is the only way we will be able to afford these solutions as well as leverage the infrastructure in a way that isn't created massive disruption when we have to go in for a different solution so that's one of the things that i think are important and the other thing i want to tack on it says go bold and they raise the standards high and push the rest of the players in this area to kind of shoot for the moon.
i think that we are ready for that as an industry. there has been a lot of conversation and a lot of work going on and a lot of solution developed. in order for us to do something and the areas around the community we need to do it at scale. if we don't do it at scale peoplpeople get this energy leve truly need to make it affordable and rollout in a manner that is going to impact all communities and not just one particular neighborhood so those are some of the initial thoughts. >> maybe share some thoughts on president obama's administration on the autonomous vehicles. is it something that needs a lot of funding or is it more about the standards? >> this summer they released the automated policies sharing his views.
if we take this from the body that has regulatory authority over vehicles. that is enormous and something when we think that the automated vehicles we think it's going to bbe often that i can sit in the car and do whatever i want to do and worry about from point a to point b. but the prospect of saving tens of billions every year has huge implications and that is first and foremost in the regular services to technology that has the ability to dramatically change the trajectory on safety. there is a lot of people that
are skeptical and so part of the role of the federal government and outlining policy guidance and potentially regulations is establishing a path by which you can deploy the vehicles. for the voluntary letters from automakers laying out ways in which 15 different dimensions they are testing and managing the safety of the paper they are on the road. second is making sure there is a consistency between what the federal government is doing and what the states are doing.
it's who is in charge of what. the third thing here, that is going to be a lot of learning that happens and a lot of data that is captured. if that is done in a hundred different ways with 100 teams of different people, we are losing a huge opportunity. it needs to be done in a way that there is a strong sharing of data and learning so that in these early stages when we are testing and learning it can then be deployed in scaled. you can't move to scale right away and the federal government can play a key role in enabling and supporting the testing and learning that it has t but it he with states and communities and the private sector if it is going to work well. >> we were talking about the divide of someone living in the shenandoah valley and someone here in the dc area. how do you think about this from
that rural and urban divide prospective? .. >> not necessarily more vehicles. autonomous vehicles can work well in to that, particularly if you're trying to introduce them in a rural area versus an urban area where there may be more acceptance of him in that regard. from our perspective i'm quite sure that when they're out there things will be different than
what we contemplate today. that is why we have set up test around the commonwealth. we have a thomas vehicles that merge and, how the chordate not only vehicle to vehicle but some of the smart things in the road. it does get back to education. 50% of the driving public are scared to death. they do not do not want them because they don't think they are safe. that's what we are trying to is use real-world applications. virginia tech we have a roadway where we put them on. and it's to see how do we best merge those. i think think it will be quicker in the urban areas. quite frankly if you look at the state objectives of uber and left and some of them they get rid a personal car ownership. we see that was smart car in all of the things happening. it will be a difference as we introduce them into the rural areas. that goes into how we use the technology instead of forcing it
on people, let it take itself naturally. i would suggest it will be a different approach in the roe versus urban. >> i think this would be great for you to jump in and talk about what do you see outside the u.s. innovation doesn't mean just autonomous vehicles. people are talking about things like hyper loop, how are you seeing the global perspective looking at innovation and infrastructure and transportation? >> starting in the middle east is a good example. to look at who it is to invest what makes the middle east an attractive market is a political role. their money, they have the political role to get projects done. you see that in southeast asia any see it in europe. at the hallmark of what is making those projects really progressed forward faster than here is our ability to share and
manage risk. i think it will start as the backbone of cyber security. if you you take a step back and think of the data that your agency has come if you take new jersey transit or vre, think think about the data they have about you and about your credit card information, the fact that you have easy pass, easy pass if i recall is the third largest holder of financial data in the united states. you talk about banks being secure, that's where public-private partnerships,, we know that's working in other parts of the world such as in europe, what are we learning from that part of the world to help us here? >> i want to build off your idea of the theme at which your scene may be other regions or other countries tackle infrastructure. what do you think is required of the federal government to have that same type of speed and
approach? you mention it was more than money. what is the criteria? >> it's political will. you have you have to have the political will, we just had a product project in the southeast part of virginia that we funded, transportation project but if you ask the public, many times they have to pay for it they always say no. they want infrastructure but they don't want to pay for it. i think political will is part of it. i think the federal government can lead the way by setting examples of how to use the money, i like their fast lane grant program, we we just received $165 million where we competed for against, around the country but brought in private money, brought a new technology in both rail and vehicular traffic on 95. to open up a congested area.
so when you get down to it we can set all the standards, we can set the other parameters, but if we do not have the political will to provide the funding necessary to do these things then we are still back to the same loop we have been in for the last several decades. >> jason may be of perspectives on the political realities of finding ways to seek funding. what is the easiest lift here? you have probably studied it and seen it is hard to may be raise gasoline tax or do anything that it's traditionally provides transportation funding. what are the the sources available in your mind? >> when the administration steps and office there's not but did he threw the recovery get a temporary boost in funding. in some places there's projects ready to go in other places it
they will scramble to identify projects. that was not a long-term solution. in december of last year president signed the fast act. that was a big improvement over where we had been. it was a big improvement because congress was doing short-term puns which created enormous uncertainty. in many parts of the company that don't have the pipeline that's develop. you need the long-term certainty if you're going to have the entire country evaluating projects from an outcome orientation. in 2012 we laid out and approach an approach that i think still works. it is the combination of business tax reform using the transition revenues, from moving from our current business tax system to a new business tax system to fund infrastructure and a large white.
that proposal would have created enough increase in investment for five or six years. five or six years is a meaningful. of. of time but not the long-term solution we need. at the beginning of the sheer the president laid out a proposal for a fee on oil. that would be one way that you could fund over a long time. decades from now you may need another approach. part of the questions that you need to grapple with is what is the problem we are trying to solve. are we trying to provide a temporary boost of funding to address the fact that we've been under a dressing and things like maintenance of that we have structurally deficient bridges around the country and we want to prevent rich collapses? are we going to try and actually provide a long-term solution that allows us to evaluate the kind of projects we need to transition the country's infrastructure systems forward into what we need ten, or 20, or
30 years from now. those are some of the questions people will need to grapple with. i think we need to do both that's why at the beginning of this year we laid out what we think is a long-term solution that also provides a boost to deliver on the short-term. people are going are going to need to grapple with that. >> real quickly, are you seeing examples of states and municipalities that are getting that equation right, finding the funding at being innovated? innovated? >> i can definitely talk about that. to tie into the last conversation, i think one of the key things for us to make this successful is to break the fact that this just seems like an infrastructure, physical object, technology play. by doing that we forget about
the human aspect. were talking about people's ability to get from one place to another, the security aspect, the freedom people can have that don't have the same mobility capabilities as those of us who can jump in the car and drive. to do that feels like we need to move into a four team model versus a three-tiered model. it's not just public and private, but public, private, and people. we need to figure out how to get the citizens involved in the solution creation, not just feel like we're creating solutions on their behalf and then wondering why they're not getting adopted as fast as they should. people know the issues are. they understand very well how solutions should be done in their own community. we need to figure out how to tap into that as part of the model. so may be a 14 model is a way to go in this area a now thinking about different cities that are getting it right and are looking
at overall solutions, i think washington d.c. is doing quite a bit in the area when it comes to looking at traffic solutions. boston is doing a tremendous amount. what i love from boston is there's starting from the overall communications, you can have any of these technologies work if everything doesn't talk with one another. they're starting from that base. if you're looking at what their driving and solutions such as vision zero in the amount of data they get and integrating them together in a safe and secure platform is powerful. that's another good example of where we are seen solution starting to arise. >> thank you. the panel will be around afterwards if you have questions, where hoping to have more time.
we want to be respectful of the end time here. please join me in thanking the panel. [applause] i will turn it over to josh for some closing remarks. >> thank you. and and thank you to the panel, another great conversation. we've had great conversations this morning and some guess who gave us insight. thank you to the panelists and moderators. if you enjoyed today it was a kickoff of events for this week. go to bloomberg next on for the schedule for the week. hopefully we will see you across the week. i also want to say word of thanks to our partners at building america's future, particularly to marsha we enjoyed the partnership today. thank you for joining us in look forward to seeing you at another event soon.
[applause] [inaudible] >> coming up on c-span2, program remember journalist gwen ifill. and then tresa mae speaks at the banquet in london. later a panel on the consumer credit in the u.s. >> c-span's washington journal, live everyday with every day with new some policy issues that impact you. this week were on tuesday morning will discuss donald trump is the next president what that means for the republican party. we'll also weigh in on
key issues ahead of the lame duck session. new york democratic congressman will talk about his reaction to the presidential election, including the fbi's decision's decision to release information about hillary clinton's e-mails in the weeks before the election. watches c-span's washington journal, live at 7:0y morning. join the discussion. >> the architect of the u.s. capitol speaks to stay about the restoration of the u.s. capital bill. we'll hear from stephen ayres by about at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> with donald trump elected as the next u.s. president, milani a trump becomes our nation second born first lady sense adams. learn more about the influence of presidential spices from c-span's book, first ladies. a look into the personal lives and influence into every presidential spouse in american history.
it is a companion to sylphs c-span's biography series and features interviews with 54 of the nations historians. first ladies, published by public affairs is available wherever you buy books. now available in paperback. >> journalist, gwen ifill died of cancer. she spoke with students in washington d.c. about her career in journalism. this is one hour. [applause] >> of morning. my name is is jim
gordon with the public affairs department with comcast. we are pleased to join with c-span on the students a leader's project. it's been a a busy month. i know it's busy for you as you get ready for what is called summer coming up. this morning the short role i have is to introduce someone you know. i actually have something to tell you might not know. your assistant principal, brandon eatmon who has been here a few months, casey didn't know is going to summer school this year, and sorry to you that he has got to go back and spend time, he's been good this year but he's working on his phd which is great in educationalnd leadership which ties into what were talking about today, s students and leaders, so after spending ten years in the d.c.hi educational system he will go o.
to do more things. i was reading an article by michael -- was called michael dell is the founder of the dell computer company. he said the one thing he looks for and leaders within his company's curiosity., clearly your assistant principal demonstrates curiosity to go a above and beyond to deliver a quality education. it is with great pleasure that i introduce brandon.g. [applause] >> good morning. >> good morning. >> the capitol hill clusterly school is per prize per comprised of -- middle campus.or our schools is named after alexander tate stewart who stood serve the city of washington d.c. for 54 years as a teacher, supervising principle, director of intermediate instruction and
superintendent of schools. he has a unique museum program, the school has a partnership with the smithsonian and uses the museum as a learning and enrichment tool. this morning our distinguished guest is the moderator and managing editor of washington week. she is also the senior correspondent for the newshour with jim, please give a warm welcome to miss gwen ifill.hank [applause] thank you. thank you mr. ethan. i like that thing you had goingm hello everybody i am happy to be here. i get a chance to take a break from worrying about thee details of iraq and all the names of countries of i can'ttcr pronounce and tell you about my
career. the favorite part is taking questions from you. one thing you need to understand about journalists as we think it's important to take questions. i would pretend that this is a press conference and you would take notes and then be prepared test me questions even though i've been told you've done advance research.o i have to tell you that i wanted to be a journalist, specifically a newspaper reporter since i was your age. i always wanted to) my problem is i wanted to wanted to write and i wrote stories and i wrote little fiction and reports, but i do not have discipline to finish it on time. i needed a deadline. in my house growing up we always had newspapers every day and wee would read the newspaper and myy father was very involved with civil-rights activity so he wase engaged in the civil rights movement in the 1960s. he was marching in protest, he
brought current events home. from a young age i recognize things that had happened in washington in government might have an effect on me. i can make the connection of people who wrote about it or talked about on television by reading the newspaper. my first admission is i never i never wanted to be on television. did not like tv or tv journalism that much. i grew up wanting too be a newspaper, i like i like the smell of newsprint to newspapering. i like the feel of the newsroom, i like the romance of newspaper reiting. when i got to college first all the way through high school i knew i wanted to be a newspaper reporter, never had a doubt. to college in boston which is a small women's college. i figured a women's college -- but then i thought at least it was in a city where there are
other colleges and places to go. i was sure i could survive that and i did it was a wonderful situation for me to be at where young woman could learn to speak up and run things, that we were in charge and there's not competition when we could do the social thing at other campuses. when i decided to be a newspaper journalist in college it was a helpful because we had internships. we are allowed to go to different places and try out what we wanted to do for living. i did internships at newspapers, and public relations and i did and internship at a local television station and i didn't like it. television seemed shallow for me. i pursued my desire to be a newspaper reporter i left college and got my first job at the boston herald american which at the time was the number two i newspaper and still is inecond boston. the boston herald was a second newspaper and they gave me a chance to have a job.el
i worked there my summer my junior year in college. so the next or is going to graduateni start looking for a job.i was at the time there were not a lot of jobs in journalism. i figured i was different and would get the job i need it. i was working in the photo department at the boston herald at the time, in the photo department and the entire newspaper there's nobody there who looked like me. college educated black young woman that never been exposed to anything like this. they did not know how to treatment. when it became clear he didn't bite and i did the job and i was pleasant about it and i was good at it, which is not really difficult mostly involve getting coffee and running errands they thought she was okay and she cao stay. at the very end of my time ime w discovered my workspace and i saw a note those directed to me
but i did not know what it was. it said nigbor go home. you have to understand something about me, when i first looked at that i thought it was some for somebody else. i went to my boss i said look at this, what you think this is my boss was horrified his bossesin boss was horrified. at some point it dawned on me that this was bad stuff and they knew who had done it but it was an older man who could lose his job. so everyone apologized to me and give me of the things. if you ever needed need a job when you get out of college you can come and i thought why would i want to work with these races i'll just get out of here to pursue my life somewhere else. there were no jobs anywhere else. so i found myself going back and said did you say you had a job
for me and they provided it. it was an entry-level job, i guess i got my first job out of guilt. if i but it gave me a chance to prove myself. if i got in the door i knew they will be happy to have gotten me. i worked there for three years. i started as a go for which means you go for this and you go for that. i became a copy eight. i worked my first writing job work in the food section of the boston herald american because it was the first writing job that opened up. except i couldn't cook. i know idea how to cook, never done it, i knew how to make macaroni and cheese from a box on a good day. they came and said you can be a food writer and i said sure i can do that because i'm smart and i can learn what i do not know. so i did. on the job learn what i don't know. there was a was a how to like this turkey, and i k didn't know so i would make it up. i would make up the temperature, the seasoning, my
reasoning was if they didn't call back there either-or, itne was fine. so i learn something about common sense which is sometimes common sense needs to be applied to your work. you don't always make it up but in that situation i learned a lot about the subject i knew nothing about before which still applies today. so every every lesson you learned early on pays off. when i left the boston herald american i moved to baltimore. my second job was at the baltimore evening sun whichca taught me a lot about journalism because i was going in as a working reporter i was not starting as a gofer, i was goin to be allowed to cover city hall, politics politics and urvernment. that was my first exposure.ayor. i loved it. i cover campaigns with people who are running forl mayor.
a covered city council and people who were going to jail for accepting illegal money. i went to the statehouse in annapolis and covered the legislative session. i got to meet a lot of people who chose public service and they did it for the right reasons. it's one of these reasons until today like politics and politicians because i met somebody early on who were doing it for the right reason.. not the ones who care about who are doing to rip you off or cut corners. i met people people who are committed to public service. that and pressed upon me the ser importance of public service and public servants who could be doing other things but decided it's important to represent. i worked in baltimore for three years that i left and came to washington. my first job was with washington post i work for the post for seven years. went from covering once again i started covering prince george county, politics and government. the interesting thing about this region is that everything is always changing. everything was on the verge of
changing. the county was about 50/50 black and white. that means there is conflict and i was good for the news chi business. if it chicken walks across the street that's what expected that's not news. but if it picks up and flies that's news because it's was unusual.in that was my thought about what was happening early on in the county school. and as i stayed at the post i covered montgomery county,y, covered the district in the first administration a marion barry which was interesting time and i did that until i first
several years at the post and that i went to the national staff and covered my first presidential campaign. this is the 1988 presidential campaign and none of you are probably bored, so depressing. it was exciting. if you remember at that point in 1988 nobody was running for the presidency. the president was leaving, that's a meticulous a meticulous place of their eight democrats running. i spent all my time chasing after them all and trying to figure out who is going to be serious. i covered gephardt who is running again the share, covered bob dole who ran a get a 1996 but this was his first race, al gore who ran last time and last, and i ran his campaign. i got to meet a lot of national politicians. travel to most of the states in the union, notta stay there long because he would bounce in, talk to people, listen to candidate some belts out again.sm i spent a year traveling in
planes with candidates over the country. it was a remarkable experience. i got a chance to see the country and i also got a chancee to talk to people. i spent time covering jesse jackson's campaign. this was a second time he ran for president. the first time in 1984. everywhere he went it even e though he is the most disorganized candidate people showed up by the thousands. there was show up up in the middle of the night in palm show springs, california. the least peoply space you place you find him.d compe he does have people there who were excited. e he always gave an amazing speech.ov even though we're tired we often did not know we are going to sleep at night or when we would see another meal. when he walked into the room where there were thousand young people saying i am somebody that kind of woke you up. it was an amazing experience. he.ta
he ended up staying in the racey all the way through theime i convention. because first time i covered a national convention even i grew up watching on television. it was exciting. there is nothing that says american politics like the floor of a national convention. that you're michael dukakis was the person who won the nomination. he went on to run a terrible campaign and was defeated. by george bush. in the end, he really ran a fascinating close-up way of watching a campaign. i covered my first campaign for the washington post and then i left that to cover housing and urban affairs.ng at the time jack kemp was the secretary in the bushon. administration. it turned out for years and years previous administrations people have been ripping thehe government off. it was only now surfacing to the extent it was happening.
i spent time covering what was usually called the hud scandal. uncovering misdeeds that had gone on years before and people went to jail. the other interesting thing about covering housing and urban development is that it taught mi once again something i had suspected which is whatever you bring from your background to time iob will always inform you. i lived in buffalo new york in short time in public housing growing up. in living in the projects was not an enjoyable experience but years later when i was covering people who were living in publis housing or trying to make and send me i got who they were, i understood what the situationth was in the way that other reporters didn't get. every every experience i had in my life informed me by the time it got to journalism. i worked at the washington post