tv After Words Rep. John Delaney The Right Answer CSPAN June 24, 2018 9:01pm-10:11pm EDT
in 2020 offers his vision for america. he's interviewed by the former chair of the democratic national committee. "after words" is a weekly program with guest host is interviewing top nonfiction authors about their latest work is. how we can unify a divided nation. congressman, you wrote this book at a time in the country is very divided. what motivated you to spell off the challenges and solutions?
>> it's great to be here with you. the central question facing the country i'm sure we will get into a different policy idea but more than policy it's how do we take this fractured nation and bring it back together and that's important for two reasons it's consistent with who we are as a people if we are more unified we can take up opportunities and overcome our challenges but the same thing the last several decades, we stopped doing things and why we stopped, we never talked about any of these things we always talk about things we disagree with each other on and the problem if you don't kind of constantly update the institutions in society based on how it's changed the venue increasingly start leaving people behind so i think it's incredibly important that we try to come together on some of the things we agree on so we can start getting things done. so it's important for our character.
>> host: tell us a little bit about alberto. >> guest: he is a star in the book as i said in the acknowledgment when i was thinking everyone. he came here as a boy on a ship that had a couple thousand people and he came to the harbor like a lot of immigrants he came from england. three quarters irish, one quarter english. he came to the new york harbor and there were 15 ships that steam vent that they bring 15,000 immigrants. if you think about it is a scale he came with seven brothers and
sisters. they would look very quickly to see if you were okay and because we had a merit based system, this seven brothers and sisters are like him and he gets detained and the reason is because he had one arm and he lost his arm is a little boy in england when he was playing with a shell that had exploded and it exploded when he was playing with it, so he was detained and they got an appeal for him. there was a judge, hundreds of people speaking multiple languages and my grandfather would tell the story around the thanksgiving table when the judge walked in he was putting on his robe and my grandfather could see the judge only had one arm and he used to say that's when he knew he would be in american. i screamed a loice cream a lot k around the story of a.
a. this grandfather of wind came as a disabled person and barely got into the country this judge had one arm and he ended up in a pencil factory, new jersey he was a good citizen, got involved in peace town councils and raised his family, took care of the values and my dad was an electrician. i had these amazing opportunities and these are the stories of america and i wanted to use the framing of his life as a way of talking about what we need to do as a country to make sure everyone has an opportunity to live the american dream.
you decided to be a lawyer can you tell us a little about that. >> guest: my parents didn't go to college and in the town i grew up in it was a very blue-collar town and back then what you wanted for your kid if he wanted them to live a better life it was a very kind of successful prestigious profession particularly for that kind of striving immigrant culture if my child can get a good education and be a doctor that would be amazing. so they pushed me to do that and i thought that was fine. i ha have an uncle that was very successful who was kind of my mentor in many ways. my parents were not particularly well-educated but i would talk about these kind of things that attracted me that it changed when i got to columbia university before i went to college and i was studying to be a doctor and you do two things,
you are involved i were involves and you try to do some biomedical research and so during my sophomore year i was doing those two things, volunteering at hospitals working at the lab and it was clear to me that this wasn't funny. >> host: so you decided to take on another major and apply to law school. >> guest: i was living with some people that were going to law school and i never thought about going to law school that i said to myself if i told my parents i'm not going to medical school at the same time i could say that i'm going to go to law school i thought that would be a better conversation so that was really i hate to say one of the driving reasons because i felt like if i'm not going to pursue this profession and my parents had sacrificed so much to give me this opportunity, i had to tell them i wa what i was doingd this seemed like as good as anything. >> host: most first-year law students -- i know you went to
georgetown university law school, anlawschool, and that wg that most first-year students focus on their studies but you had another goal in mind. tell us about that first summer when you went back in new jersey and decided to try your hand at being a businessman. >> guest: between my graduates from college and going to law school and was working in the construction business because my dad was an electrician and he would give me jobs working in construction. i was with a friend of mine named dominic and we were working on a construction site in north jersey. i was a laborer and he was also getting a bulldozer and the company who was building the building that we were working on was a development company owned by a lawyer as someone with a background in construction so we were sitting there kind of sweating in the middle of the summer and said that's what we should do. we should go into business. i'm going to law school so i will be the lawyer and can be in
the construction is missed. let's do that. so i went to law school and i was doing my work and working at a law firm because i had to work while i was at school. so we came up with this plan to do a development of the north jersey. even though i was in law school i traveled and we convinced a bunch of homeowners to sell us their homes and we had a plan to build an apartment building and we got them to sell their homes upon us getting approval so we got five people to sell their homes on a contingency contract. we put together a plan to get an approval for the apartment building but we didn't know what we were doing. we figured if we could get approval to build this 24 unit apartment building, we would figure out how to make it work and so we kind of came up with this idea because these people
to sell their homes and drew up drove upa sketch and i filed an application to have the zoning changed. i talked to politicians and i thought i knew everything that i realized that this wasn't going well and ultimately got rejected for that was the end of the development career. >> host: but you didn't give up. you continued to pursue to become an entrepreneur. before you left law school, and i want to get to you becoming a politician of course, before you left law school and the unit an amazing person who you later married. tell us a little about april. >> guest: april who is now my wife of 29 years in best thing that ever happened to me was meeting her. it was my third year of law school. i've just come back from a summer working in new york at a law firm and it was april 2 here
and it was that first week back to school we all remember what the first week back to school was like come everybod everybodg out, nothing too serious yet, just kind of getting your classes. we met at a bar in dc. i was with a half-doze half dozy friends and she with her friend. we danced a little bit and nothing really happened. you know, we just kind of met each other and the next day i'm in law school and she is sitting picking out her classes. and you remember that the vote of people can't appreciate this but we used to have to go through those big books and read about our classes and fill it out on paper. so she's sitting there in the lobby at the georgetown law center going through the book of his picking out her classes. i met her before and i thought she was special. i went over and i sat down and i was a year ahead of her, so i acted like i kind of knew what hiwas doing because in law schol
or first-year classes everyone takes the same premise of the second year you start having choices comes of this was the first time she was picking different classes. i sit down and help her pick out her classes, we have a nice conversation spend about an hour together, and then she went to ththe registrar's office -- and again people can't appreciate is that you used to have to turn in a piece of paper to the registrar's office which was on the top floor of georgetown law school. i waited about an hour and then i went up to the registrar's office, and i already registered for all of my classes but i dropped pretty much all my classes and i reregistered for classes i helped her pick out so i would be in a bunch of her classes. [laughter] >> host: you were a man on a mission. >> guest: sometimes in life you just kind of know. >> host: so, you leave law school and you go and work at a firm and then you decide to get
back to being a business person. that was a very important transition in your life. tell us more about that. >> guest: i had i guess this epiphany that even though i went to law school not thinking i wanted to be a lawyer while i was in school i couldn't figure out what i wanted to do which was to be an entrepreneur and with that little kind of bug i think i got when i started thinking about being a real estate developer it got reinforced i started reading about entrepreneurs and i never thought about business before anof business before andby the w school, i knew that is what i wanted to do but i didn't have any money and i wasn't able to get a bunch of money from my parents to buy a business so i did what most people graduate do, i worked for a law firm, terrific one in dc and it was an amazing experience, but myself and a classmate of mine, we have
become good friends and he had the same entrepreneurial bug that the data so it could be true we were always talking like every day we were talking about business ideas and different things. one day we saw an ad in the "washington post" for a business that was for sale and would attract us to this business was the price because it was $15,000. it didn't matter what it was we had to figure out a way to come up with the money. it was a home health-care company sending nurses into people's homes based here in dc focused on the dc medicaid recipients mostly and it was a part of a company having problems and they were kind of selling off their local operations, so we scrounged together the $15,000 we bought the business. unfortunately at this point april just graduated law school and she had a job and i was able to take that risk.
we were partners from the beginning and all of this because i would never have been able to do that but for the fact that we could take a little bit of a risk if we could pay the bills. >> host: but the business wasn't initially successful because you have problems attracting new clients. >> guest: it was the worst by far we didn't know what we were doing. and home care is a very important part of the system now. back then it was kind of a niche in our home care system is the worst in the city there were a lot of bigger or successful ones, so we had to figure it out and it took about a year if we did something at the time that was progressive from the culture perspective we went to a big hmo called kaiser and pitched them on this idea we would take care of their patients for a fixed fee per month, so opposed to payinpaying every time we did something they gave us a capitated fee which is getting quite prominent now in
healthcare so that turned our little business around. we built it up and sold it but from that experience i learned something else. it was hard to get a bank to lend us money. once we got this contract and money started growing we needed money to finance our business and couldn't get a bank to lend us any money. we didn't have any net worth, the company just turned around. it was growing quickly. healthcare was kind of scary at the time because then first lady hillary clinton was thinking of making big changes to the healthcarhealthcare system and s were like we don't know how this is going to play out so we have to work with a kind of specialty lender and that is how we finance our business. after we sold that company we said this is a good opportunity to create a company to blend money to companies like ours because we knew the healthcare business, we knew it was a big
opportunity as a part of the economy and there were no lenders focused on lending. so we built the business to lend to those companies and it took off. >> host: how does it feel to be on wall street wants the next company took off -- >> guest: the first company we turned it around, we made it a little bit of money and learned a lot. the second company really took off because our timing was good. the theory we have for the business there was a need in the market we were right on about that and so that company took off in three years it was a good-sized business and we needed to raise more capital to grow the business even more so we decided to take it public. so we took it public in 1996 and i remember when i rang the bell for the exchange at th of the ti think i was the youngest e. o. in the history of the stock
exchange. we rang the bell in 97 so i was 34-years-old. >> host: ten years later the country is now embarked on one of the major financial crisis in the great depression and you survived that. tell me what skills do you draww upon to survive tumultuous history. >> guest: i am somewhat conservative when it comes to taking risks. it's important to as an entrepreneur but you should never bet the farm. i - by the time my company that was in the financial service business lending money to small to midsized companies, this is a capital source became a much bigger business. business. but first we took it public and then we sold it and i still have it inserted the second company and that was a bigger business. by the time the crisis that we
had 15 billion in assets, well over a thousand employees and i was financing small to midsized companies all over the country that depended upon us. we were there wondering if these were small to midsized businesses and i had over a thousand employees. warren buffett has a good saying which is you should always keep a margin of safety in your business. i took that to heart and i ran our business with the margin of safety. in other words i didn't try to leverage the business as much as possible which would have increased our returns but would have given us no cushion should something unexpected happened. we basically have a lot more capital. we had double the amount of capital on all of our competitors. we needed every nickel of that capital into financial crisis hit for the only reaso but the t through that crisis is because we ran the business more
conservatively. we left more money on the table because i was just, you know, i felt i had enormous responsibility to my employees and the people i financed and i always wanted to sleep at night knowing that no matter what happened, we could survive. >> host: said the entrepreneur field turns to politics and he walked into the political world and find out there are lots of divisions, hyper partisanship. you wrote a book about the concerns in a political party. >> guest: he was definitely right. george washington in his farewell he wrote these amazing farewell addresses. the first is when he stepped down as the general of the u.s. military and the second when he stepped down as president and what is remarkable is he could have stayed on and then the president for the rest of his life. there's never been a president or will they be as popular as
washington at the time. he was viewed as the founder of the country. he was almost granite like in his greatness when you think of what he did for the country. he decided he shouldn' we shoule kings and he stepped down. he wrote in his farewell address -- first that tells a lot about his character. and it tells a lot about what he thought about this new grand experiment of a country that he was then put into creating that what he said in his farewell address as he talked about partisan politics and it was amazingly kind of prissy and when you think about his work. he talked about the need for political parties. we inherently need a way of organizing ourselves, which i agree with. what he did talk about but i bet he was thinking his political parties serve a purpose around having a debate because the debates should actually unify us in many ways as opposed to dividing us that what he warned
about was political parties who put their own interests ahead of the country so he was probably the first person to criticize people for putting their party ahead of their country. he said it could lead to treasonous activities because back then at the beginning of this amazing country, people were very worried about this new government kind of treason of people who might want to influence how we unfold particularly what's going on in the world with these rivalries they could foresee or he could foresee a foreign country getting involved. so he warned about hyper partisan politics getting to the point where people put their political party ahead of their country even to the point of committing treason. when you think about it today, i agree because we do need to political parties ipolitical paf organizing a debate.
it should be a battle of ideas and it should unify us even if it gets kind of difficult it should ultimately unify us. >> host: how did you come to the conclusion that the problems that face this country shouldn't just come from one side or the other but that they could possibly be forged together? >> guest: i don't think that the country is wrong about everything they believe and if you listen to the parties these days but it's kind of what they say is the democratic party which i am a proud member of and i know that you are and you've been fighting for is longer than i have but sometimes when you listen to what comes out of their mouth, it's like everything a republican believes is wrong and they obviously do
the same thing but they know that i is in the way this county is. they have friends and people they work with and neighbors and people do go to church with and they respect them and like them and have good values and they think they are smart. one of the things i try to do in the public sector is think about best practices and ideas. you should always be thinking about okay what is the best idea, what is the best solution and practice for this opportunity or challenge. i was struck by how there is so little of that in politics. what makes you a democrat or republican is the orientation of how you see the government into the lean you towards one set of ideas as opposed to the other but that doesn't mean that you entirely focused on what one's s
wife is doing. >> host: so you've been a member since 2013. you've had an opportunity to introduce legislation and work with democrats and republicans but he also called for partisanship that addition. what do you mean by that? >> guest: to effectively represent everyone whether they voted for them or not. and they should always take a pledge never to divide us. that doesn't mean they should go out and vote for me over the other person or why my ideas are better than the other person's ideas or where the future is better than the other person's butt kicking it to this step where you were cultivating a spirit of decision is one of the things going on in this country right now which is insidious and
if you have the privilege of serving which i feel i do and in addition to swearing to defend the constitution, we should pledge to the american people that we are not going to say things to divide us, that we are going to go out of our way to trick to unify the country because we are stronger when we are unified but again that doesn't mean that we agree with everybody on everything. there is a respectful disagreement and actually engaging in peace divisive rhetoric politics. >> host: but you also identified because in reading the book what i found encouraging as you took on big issues from universal pre- k. to healthcare infrastructure and you wrote in the book we can solve some of these problems but some of the solutions you propose are still quite polarizing because it involves raising money and coming up with a dedicated revenue stream.
you came up with some good ideas. do you think some of these can pass through the next congress? >> guest: some are easier than others and right now congres the congress is in a tough spot. one of the things i talk about in the book someone running for president it would be amazing if a president says in the inauguration speech they represent every american and to provprove that they are only gog to do bipartisan legislation to first 100 days because you know there's a tremendous amount of bipartisan legislation in the congress. there's things members of congress whether it is the house or the senate have worked on for years with democrats and republicans and their support for these things. the problem is we haven't seen in a very long time a president want to promote some of these is the focus of their agenda.
they believe the federal government has a role in building on the infrastructure even if you pull the conservative republicans who think of it as a real very narrowly defined way they would say the first thing the federal government should do is protect us that after that, the second part should be to invest in our infrastructure so the fact that neither president obama nor president of trump made infrastructure a first priority was a huge missed opportunity because that is the kind of thing you can go out and say this is something we agree with each other on. on. >> host: don't you think that he attempted to do that?
he was dealt a particularly difficult hand. the economy was cratering the effects of the great financial crisis the amount of people losing their jobs every month is a stunning number. it was way beyond what any economists thought could happen so i think that he had a tough hand. i do think however that stimulus plan which i fully support would have been much better if it were all infrastructure. it's about ten to 15% of the stimulus dollars were infrastructure and i think the president could have done a $2 trillio2 trillion-dollar stis program if it was all infrastructure as opposed to a 900 billion-dollar program that is ten to 15% which again i think the american people want to have our country rebuild. they know our infrastructure is terrible they see it in their everyday lives when we have road
conditions were blamed on bridges are getting closed because they haven't been repaired, we got to the airport in flint michigan water is poisonethe water ispoisoned or l america and they don't have access to high-speed internet, they know we have an infrastructure issue and it could have been something that could have been done on a much bigger scale. >> host: when you think about the bill that passed without much support you argue in the book that you would have perhaps used some of the money that is offshore and brought it back to help rebuild the infrastructure. >> guest: our international tax system is broken and we effectively have a system that encouraged companies to keep their money overseas.
that was bad for the companies because they want the money back and it's bad for the economy because we would do better having that money back in the united states no matter what they do with it. i would prefer that they would invest in their employees and hire more people and open plans but even if they get each other shareholders is better than having it in a bank in london. the government wasn't getting any tax revenues, so it was a terrible system and i proposed a way of fixing the system would create a pathway to come back to the united states and it would have generated hundreds of billions of dollars of new revenues for the federal government. and what i said is we should take that money and invested in infrastructure because by pairing these things together we solve two problems. we fixed the international tax system and we create a trillion dollars of new infrastructure for money and there was huge bipartisan support around. buwhat the republicans did in their bill as they took my
proposal literally almost exactly, they just got rid of the infrastructure part so they fixed the international tax system and they took the several hundred billion dollars of money that it raised and used it to help pay for tax cuts and beth took a bipartisan idea and it was a huge missed opportunity. if they would have taken this ability could have done a lot of what they wanted in the bill but could you imagine if it would have had a trillion dollars of infrastructure spending? imagine if they said they did fix the tax and do things to the corporate tax rate to make it more competitive we want people to cut the top rate of the wealthier americans but what we are doing is having a trillion dollars of infrastructure. that would have been a whole different discussion. that would have been the start of a bipartisan discussion whether we could have gotten there or not remains to be seen if you could see how that would
have been the start because a lobecause ofother democrats a lot of democrats have been pushing for infrastructure for a long time. the trade unions who are supportive of the party who care deeply about infrastructure would have said you've got to pay attention to this because this is giving us an infrastructure program and it would have been the basis that you have to want to do things on a bipartisan basis. >> host: i want to come back to some of these other solutions you talk about in the book that i want to go to the democratic party now because some people believe the party is divided between progressives and so-called moderates. how do you fit into this equation and what will you do as a candidate running for president to unify the party? >> guest: i don't think we are debt divided. that divided. no disrespect to the media because i'm a huge supporter of the media and i'm a huge fan and i don't think that there is fake news out there but i do think that they tend to emphasize certain things because i it maks
it more intriguing to people and one of the things they've been emphasizing for a long time is that the democratic party is very divided into various no question there are some people in the democratic party with their own self-interest to want to kind of continued to cultivate the image that you are not between democrats that i served with about 190 democrats in the congress and every single one of us thinks every american should have healthcare. we have different ways of getting there. some are single pay, people have different ideas. every member of congress believebelieveclimate change isd human behavior is contributing to it. some people want a carbon tax, some people want cap and trade. every member of congress believes every child should have pre- k.. they look at the facts, the datd they know it is the best investments we make so when i look at the other side of the aisle my republican friends voted to take care of a from 20 million people. very few of them believe it is a problem in human behavior is
contributing. i helped found the solutions which is a bipartisan caucus and we have good republican participation but when i say good, a couple dozen of 230 members. relative to where the members are at this point becaus is if e polls of republican voters the majority of them believe climate change is happening but if you look at the congress, you don't see that so an interesting example we are only divided if we allow ourselves to be convinced we are. on the big issues of the day the kind of things in 20 or 30 years in the fullness of time when people look back and ask where the democratic party was in 2018 i don't think that they will see a divided party committee will see when i was trying to get universal healthcare and do things to get investment in communities behind, trying to do things to prepare people for the next century.
so i think him and i'm spending enough time in iowa and new hampshire and i don't hear people thinking -- they want to know how we are going to start winning again. they car care a lot more about t than they do about these kind of decisions that presumably exist. >> host: i want to go back to bipartisanship because in your book you talk about when you came to congress he wanted to invite to the retreat republicans, republican strategists, political operatives. why did you want to bring them into the party? >> guest: i always had this kind of concept that you should think about people who disagree with you and understand why they disagree with you because maybe they are right about something and maybe you have something to learn and you just talk with people that agree with you, you will never learn anything. i've been to a bunch of these meetings with the democratic
party. they basically just see th say e thing and leave. it's kind of like okay we just spent a lot of time convincing ourselves we were right about everything that we believe. so why don't we bring in a republican strategist. not everyone will do it. why don't we bring in someone from a think tank or an opinion writer from the "washington post" who has a more conservative view and why don't we listen to how they are thinking about the world and about politics maybe we will learn something. >> host: i've seen other individuals run for president and they have a listening tour. perhaps for the last couple of months you've been on a criticism tour. what is that about? you said you've visited you were
listening to people, trying to learn from them and i read he wanted to hear what they had to say, so i call it a criticism tour. one of the things i'm hearing is democrats want to know how we are going to win because they lost the white house, the house, the senate, two thirds of the governors and about a thousand members of the state legislature the last ten years so they are very concerned about that and i think that the democrats i talked ttalkto are not that diso republicans or independents because you know when you go to these early states particularly new hampshire or you talk to a lot of people who may not be democrat. they want to know how we are going to stop the fighting and actually come together and start getting things done so that we prioritize with daycare -- i was in iowa a little town outside of des moines called winterset.
it's a john wayne's birthplace is that it is time for. so there were about 15 people and i sat down and i'm talking to the head of the club who is a union electrician. we were getting along pretty well and the meeting started and he said listen we are all bernie sanders people here and he looked down the table and his colleagues and one young woman put up her hand and said i was with hillary. she said i didn't agree with all his policies. i didn't agree with the college. why do they have to b do for a s for free.
you like senator sanders. that was the platform. they said yeah that's true but that never would have happened. i felt like he was prioritized in things so the message of their as you know as a complement and i'compliment anda self-described moderate democrat, said he was a strong 30 sanders supporter and when
you are supporting for all the right reasons can he felt like senator sanders was talking to what he cared about the. i can criticize any of that is about as good a reason you can't support anyone. but the point is they just want solutions. they are focused on what they care about. it's not much w like we care ab. that's what the voters care about and what the voters mostly care about is things that will affect their job and pay and opportunity for their kids and we should never forget that. >> host: in the book you talk about one of those tha the billn up for democracy. >> guest: the first is to make it a holiday.
the right to vote is a sacred right of people that made sacrifice and unfortunately, right now in the people are trying to do things to make it harder. >> host: do you support same-day registration? >> guest: i think everyone should get registered to vote for the minute thethe minute ths license, the minute they are born. everyone should have the right to vote. if you think about it it's the bedrock of our country and our democracy. we were not always fair about it as we know and people engaged in amazing battles to get the right to vote and we should continue to make that a. nothing is more important than a holiday supporting our democracy, which strikes me as much as any other holiday. so that is the first thing.
the. it's been an insidious force in our democracy and what we have done is create all these one-sided districts and the problem with these is the estimate about 85% of the districts are safe meaning there is no chance of losing to the other party they can only lose to someone in their primary so people have an incentive to only talk to people in their party so they ignore about half the party. if you believe incentives matter that is the incentive and as we know now not enough people vote in the primaries and they tend to be the loudest voices so they tend to cater to those people. he said something the other day the american people are tired of
the extremes the parties holding the country hostage and that's what gerrymandering enables where they have loud voices in the primaries to basically take 85% of the members of congress. so i would get rid of that and do what places like ohio have which is independent commissions so it's not a political process its bore ithat bore in on the ll process. the other thing i would do docommand of these are either or. if you have independent crossing the district you need what i'm about to say which is open primaries banning everybody runs in the top two basically participating. >> host: >> guest: having them together
is great but you don't need both. >> host: you mentioned they should move out of watching me. do you have a suggestion on where the party should move? >> guest: it's more symbolic to work for the parties and members of congress and i think that it would be a symbolic gesture for the democratic party to do something like that. we are going to locate our headquarters out of washington. we could do our own little thing around the country for the democratic party headquarters. if i were to be 100 things i'm not sure that it would be on my list of the top 100 is sometimes symbolic gestures to matter and theoretically it shouldn't matter what the party's.
immigration, the deficit, tax reform, healthcare. there are so many things in this book. but the cochair of the congressional caucus tell us about that coming you wrote an op-ed calling for th a national strategy on artificial intelligence. please explain why we need it. >> guest: the world is changing rapidly and one of the responsibilities of the government has to think about where the world is going and cod update the institutions in society which doesn't mean make the government bigger or smaller. it just means constantly adjust education, health care, retirement, whatever it may be based on how the world has
changed. in part people are afraid because they don't have anyone leaving them in the future. we became a part of a global economy which is incredibly positive. when i was born 55 years ago, 20% was interconnected and a globathatglobal poverty rate wao the world was largely isolated. city about 85 to 90% is interconnected and the global poverty rate has fallen from 60%. the. they have the adequate economic mobility yet at the same time
last year he presented the professional capital was invested in 50 counties, there's 3,000 in the county for 1% of the counties, 85% of the startup money. that happened because we let it happen and why did we let it happen? because the world changed and we didn't do anything about it so let's think of the future what is going to changes and globalization anymore. technological innovation, and artificial intelligence. outside of the government and business in the nonprofit world and academia people are obsessed with this because they understand that it is changing everything. it's changing our demographics, it's changing the future of work and what jobs are going to be like. some jobs that exist now will be displaced and new jobs will be created, people won't have one job a their whole life anymore.
it's changing the security risks. the united states had a huge comparative military advantage on a conventional basis. if a rogue state or foreign power or able to get a technological advantage they could bring down our conventional advantage very quickly. we have all the weapons in the world. the most glaring example is in technology. think about the last election if i put one of my ads on television i have to say paid for by john delaney for president or congress whatever it may be. on radio the same thing but i put the same ad on social media,
i don't have to disclose the payment. payment. there's there is a reason that y decided social media not television. this is because they thought it was that much better but they didn't have to say who is paying for it and that is a simple example of failing to update the basic institutions of society for change. i founded the artificial intelligence caucus as a way of creating a kind of convening space within the congress for members to start getting up to speed on what this stuff was just hard so when facebook testified in the senate committee didn't get the sense that the senators could ask so i want to change that and i think we need a government that is more focused on where the world is coming. having an honest conversation about it that is what the state of the union should be.
the. you hear one set of facts and another and that makes it hard for the american people to actually think about the political system. it makes it hard for them to think about their democracy when they are dealing with different sets of facts so the only way this world that is to have the president has been open debate about the big issues of the day. three hours, nationally televised, once every three months. an hour and a half should be
whatever issue. they ought to be able to walk to the floor of the house of representatives, work with that remember and say in front of the american people we are going to have a debate. you have watched and probably prepped for presidential debates for a long time. they are in perfect, but they are by far the best part because you actually see them. >> host: through all the issues, trade. you talk about trade agreements. you are going to run in the democratic party. you also touch upon that issue. can you explain about your views on trade? >> guest: if you look back
becoming a part of the economy has improved the lives of citizens around the world. in general, it's been positive for the economy of the united states not just everyone. the united states has a role in the world economically and diplomatically to build alliances a stoneware of the world is going and it makes us more secure and prosperous. to address places that are going to get hurt that's where you get outcomes. everyone knows you need to do a trade agreement you give something up to get something. if you sign the agreement should be thinking i'm getting more than i'm giving. that's why we do these things. a big country with economies and reach. what you do is pair trade policy
with the domestic policies. we should have done these trade agreements as a part of an infrastructure plan so we are investing in communities at the same time. i've supported president obama in his effort efforts if it wasd for the united states economically and i thought it was very good for the united is from a geopolitical standpoint. as you know the transpacific partnership was and he was in nation trade talk the united states would have been basically the chair and it comprised 40% of the economy. the fastest growing region in the world, china is totally dominating and entering into bilateral agreements with all these countries where they are walking down the rights to rebuilding infrastructure and getting all these things. if we want to have a saying which goes on in asia, we need economic ties. it's a lot easier to put
pressure on china as it relates to north korea when you are competing as opposed to turning them over on a silver platter. i'm a strong believer in trade but you also have to be clear about what trade does and make sure you are pairing it with economic policy that affects the communities. >> host: there are so many people on the outskirts of hope and they are trying to find their way back to the opportunity. you address some of those opportunities and talk about the rise of income inequality. what is your fat or your plan to reduce poverty and provide more opportunity to those being left behind in this global economy? >> guest: you need a safety net as a tool and there's always going to be people in a capitalistic society which i support because i think it is the only way to have innovation and innovation is what drives progress. you have to acknowledge it is creative and destructive and you have an obligation while you are
enjoying the creativity part of it to also do stuff for people that were left behind by it and that includes preparing them for the world based on how that is changing and also acknowledging that not everyone world for whatever circumstances be able to succeed in not wanting to need a safety net so it starts with a safety net that but i tk we've largely underinvested and that the earned income tax credit is a safety net program that encourages people to work that gives them the ability to kind of have a boost in their wages. we should expand that and make changes because people are living longer and the program was designed for people who live as long as they do now so there are things we need to do in the safety net and then the second thing is we need to make sure we are investing in people so they can succeed in this world. what's happening i is to becomea country of birth right and not one of opportunity where you have to be in the right city,
the right school and the part of the right family. wright family. 70% live in the county where the jobs are being created and are worse than the jobs that they are replacing. it's hard to live the american dream if we have to support them or they need a better educational experience and a bunch of things to make them more successful so the way that i deal with this is by investing in people and the way you deal with people who inevitably will be left behind is by having a strong safety net. you have to pay for that which is why i believe in the progressive tax system. >> host: u. spell it out in the book i have to tell you. in the time we have left, you wrote about so many challenges we face and the solutions will provide the kind of bipartisanship support. there's a couple of topics you did not touch upon. mass incarceration, criminal
justice reform for example. what do you think of legalizing marijuana? and of course race and equality in the 21st century. i know that it's a lot. >> guest: i am a big supporter of the need to movement for all kinds of reasons including the fact that i have four daughters. seriously, i thin think that's t women have had to end over in the workplace and society is intolerable and if we are going to be a just society they should feel safe wherever they are. its grassroots. i'm a huge supporter of that. i think the black lives matter movement and criminal justice reform are interrelated but if you look at what we have done in terms of mass incarceration in this country i think we have 25% of the world kind of people who
are incarcerated than 5% of the population. it's stunning. one of three african-american males are incarcerated. it's a completely amoral system devastating to families. families. hollowing out huge generations, so we need to do two things, reform the system and there should be bipartisan support. everyone talks about that on a bipartisan basis. it's very minor. but i think there's another dimension which is we've all acknowledged this system for decades has been a fraud. a maximum sentence for nonviolent crimes approached criminal justice has ruined the lives of the huge percentage of the population. it's not just good enough to fix the system. you also have to think about okay we fixed the system and acknowledged that what we did is wrong. what about people that have their lives ruined, what do we do for them and make sure they
get their lives restored and support them in ways that allow them to overcome the missed opportunities they've had. if you're gettin you are gettint shot at a job when you are 50 because you wasted your whole prime years in prison, you are not going to get the same job. we basically need a whole strategy around lifting up these people who deserve something from us because we allow there to be a criminal justice system and a lot of bad stuff going on with private prison and state elected officials. ..
to the principal to tell the truth. tell us about that story. >> she gave me permission to tell the story she was on a local race team here in virginia. i loved it because i typically go with her to the races. we had a routine to go to the mountain she would race she was a good skier. this was a season championship. skating in the slalom course there were two heats. they break their time then they ski again. so summer was in second place after the first heat. in the second heat she was
skiing second from last. what the parents would do is obviously we would volunteer to help set up the course and also would be assigned to be the gatekeepers to make sure they made it through the gates. i was watching the last gate on the course and summer was the second from the last. but she misses my gait. then the next year comes down and the race is over i skied to the bottom she is there with a big smile on her face. she is eight years old and looking at the scoreboard she sees she is still in second place because people had not turned in the disqualifications yet. so she is jumping up and down and says i got the silver medal. i said i thank you missed gait
summer to act like it wasn't my gait. she said no i didn't i said i thank you did i made all the gates. i said you did this one and it was mine and i have to turn it in. and she skied off and she was crying but my wife and i always say when you raise kids you ease either take the hard path or that use path it is always better to take the hard path even though it is really hard at the time. a friend of mine said i hope you got it right. >> thank you for writing this book you are about to get on the road again.
so they were right and they knew back then that white voters in america would be willing to accept this ideology if the conditions were right. >> and then to start uniting all these people. >> he always wanted to but it was never really the right time. and then try to start his own thing. and well-known in 2012 and 2013 but starting the university and and then through the colleges.
but then to have the faculty advisor but they said no. you cannot be the faculty advisor. after that to form the political party that was proto- fascist and very repro union for workers and was very populist but to look at the movement to say we are to small and fractured to gain any semblance of power. so let's get something going in starting to reach out to other groups. and then in pennsylvania and
went to skinheads and went to the south. and then to recruit some of them and finally the leader of the national socialist movement with the pageantry and was also looking for more members. so it comes down to block recruiting. let's have 35 guys. so somehow to put that aside for the group for that one scene on the far right. and still to get together.