tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 23, 2016 2:00am-4:01am EST
coming up, a look at russia under vladimir putin. that's next on c-span3. then a conversation on the potential economic team in the trump administration. later, the ongoing protests of the dakota access pipeline project. after that, white house spokesman josh earnest is asked about the transition process with president-elect donald trump. c-span's "washington journal," live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning, an analysis of president-elect donald trump's infrastructure proposals. its challenges and the current
state of the u.s. infrastructure with the george mason university mercada center and brookings institution aaron klein. then washington examiner national security and defense reporter jamie mcintyre on president-elect trump's national security agenda and his decision to choose michael flynn as national security adviser. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern wednesday morning. join the discussion. now a conversation about russia under president vladimir putin and how public opinion can be manipulated in russia. we'll hear from a russian sociologist at this event hosted by the wilson center. >> well, good morning, everyone. welcome to the institute. i'm deputy director at the canon
institute. i'd like to welcome you both to the institute and to the wilson center for today's presentation on the 86% opinion polling in russia. i want to begin by thanking the co-sponsors for today's event, the snunt for european, russian and eurasian studies at george washington university. and i also want to welcome c-span to today's event. we look forward to watching the program going forward. this is a part of the kannan institute's speaker series. and today we're going to be talking about the question of polling in russia. despite the economic crisis and declining standard of living, mass support for president vladimir putin's leadership remains high. his popularity rating often referred to as the 86% in russia is a -- to western commentators
but we're delighted to have lev gudkov to come and talk about the nature of vladimir putin's popularity. dr. gudkov is speaking today in a private capacity. not as director of the lavata center. amongst his other titles he's editor in chief of the magazine "russian public opinion herald" as well as a lexerer at the higher school of economics. he has won numerous awards and published quite widely and, obviously, he is the director of one of the major sources of independent public opinion research in russia. so it is my great pleasure to introduce dr. lev gudkov today. he will be speaking in russian, so i ask for those who need translation to use your headsets. >> translator: thank you very much. a great honor for me to speak at
the kennan institute. and the very title of my presentation, we mention the % 86%. and i don't believe in your 86%. people are lying. people are not telling you the truth. how can you ever conduct a poll in an authoritarian -- in a country under an authoritarian regime. i should say that the doubts and suspicions and accusations for falseification for pressuring the public opinion come from all the -- all sides. from those who accuse us of being foreign agents and
undermine the system, as well as from opposition activists who question the reliability of our data. what i'm going to be talking about, kremlin propaganda but the opposition represents a serious challenge because this is a crisis of reality perception which is a very serious issue for russia since we've lost the idea of the future because the freedom of debate and free competition, the very idea of democratic transition is that today. and that created for russian opposition a very difficult challen challenge. there is the depth of the understanding of the means to understand what's going on. and in our research, i claim
that what is important is not the reliability of the data which we see and to the extent to which sociology is a science. this data -- correct. the problem is the interpretation of what's going on. and after this introduction, i'm going to move to describe the state of mind of the public opinion russia. everything that i'm going to show you are going to be result of the national russian representative researchers which are conducted systematically every month. and more frequently, sometimes less frequently in russia. first slide. this is the social sentiment index which shows -- which is
the popular opinion. it combines a number of indices. 12 which are merged into one index. the government assessment of the future of the situation in the country. in other words, this is a very complex index. it is very sensitive and allow us to preview the changes in the society in the public opinion several months before the changes take place. so if you would for the last 20 years, you can see a deep drop in 1990s. the first attempts to move -- to get out from the crisis. there is a new crisis which abruptly breaks with all the
expectations at arrival of an authoritarian leader. this -- no, i'm sorry. i'm referring to this. the growth of all the indexes when putin came to power after he said that we're going to kill all our enemies no matter where we find them after explosions and terroristic activities of the 1990s. suddenly dramatic growth of all the indexes, including the ones for the -- though nothing has been changed. and later with some vacillation,
dependent on these situation, crisis. for example, the disaster in december or the terrorist act in the theater or failure to conduct the pension reform in 2004-2005. however, we observed the growth of the positive assessment of the situation. real incomes were growing by about 6%, 8% a year. the situation is -- we can see that in the period during -- between 2000 and 2008, russia has never --
during this period which became the basis of support to the authoritarian. the crisis of 2008-2009 abruptly interrupted this mood, this sentiment. the putin regime can secure the stability and growth of the level. began to fade all the way to the end of 2013. we were observing the decrease of the general assessment of the situation. growth of tension, disappointment, particularly among the notion of the middle class of russia all the way
to -- and after that, one can say that the situation radically has -- has radically changed. how does it work with the putin regime? the infamous 86%. you can see how slowly his rating was growing, reaching its peak by the summer 2008 when there was the war. sentiments provoked by propaganda and national pride. and later we can see that the trust went down step by step.
and by the end of 2013, putin's rating went down to the low ees. his approval was only 60%. one can see this is a very high index, but even total control over media and later we're going to be talking about the components of this report. this is a very significant factor. in december 2013, january 2014, 40% said that they don't -- would not like to see the putin candidacy be nominated for the presidential elections, and they were sick and tired of -- so this was the lowest point. let me remind you that the period between the 2011, which
was the low eest period. this was a period of the demonstrations when the middle class came out to the street with anti-putin sentiments. criticism on internet, accusations of corruption. the decrease of the united russia ruling party popularity. there was the moment when -- criticism of the corruption and his slogans were supported by 45%, which was the highest point of the criticism. later, right after that's,
incredible, aggressive and entire ukrainian and entire western campaign was unchained. annexation of crimea which provoked a new wave of the military -- excitement and putin's rating, as you can see, jumps all the way to 88% which practically matches what was, in 2008, during the war with georgia. and later he stays more or less the same levels. slightly decreasing. at the same time, the crisis erupted in the country, in russia, which was quite severe and radically different from
what we have seen in '98 and 2008 because this crisis, unlike this crisis, unlike the current crisis, unlike the one of 2008 or 1998, which is a domestic crise, i a systematic crisis. not provoked by the international economic situation. it is not related to the drop of oil prices because the depression of the economy began in 2012 when the prices were higher than $100 a barrel and it meant the regime ran out of resources. official management and the growth of the government expenses. it would be sufficient to say that by the time putin came to power, the government was controlling about 26% of all the
finances. now it controls about 70% or 71%. the state sector, or the state area in the economy has been dramatically increased and the number of dependent of the government populations has been increased. not only retired people but also people who work for the state enterprises or enterprises for the government as a large share as well as law enforcement officers or the so-called teachers, physicians and so-called budget supported by national suggest people. the situation has been dramatically changed. the revenue -- the income with the drop of oil prices and depreciation of the incomes has a painful impact on the middle
class and the most -- the poorest segments of the population. first of all, rural and urban population. all the assessments of the trust of the government went -- nosedived. though one can say that the crisis in the real assessment of the drop of the real income was not that dramatic. 50%, according to the government official statistic. it was a little bit more but on a personal level, pursued a much more dramatic drop. however, the situation was not critical, and people manage d t change this.
all was transferred from putin to the lower level of the government. first of all, the government led by medvedev. you can see the blue lines as it goes down. this is particularly annoying and antipathy provoked the legislators, the deputies and the negativity is roughly 62% to 32%. the ratio 60% to 30%. but the most important what happened and what propaganda is using is are the entire western sentiments. and propaganda could be more exact. i'm not going to analyze it because we don't have enough
time, but directed not so much against ukraine but against the policy of integration. bringing integration with the west as models of democraerks liberalism and human rights which might inspire the revolution. and as the result, until ukrainian -- were directed against those who were against putin. specifically, in this situation, people were acting not simply like supporters of reform and democratization, but as the enemies of putin and as enemies -- and, therefore, enemies of russia. this is a very important factor
because it is directly related to the fear of kremlin toward this possibility of -- in russia. the aggressive policy was reinforced and enhanced in 2012 after mass -- in moscow and when the duma adopted the package of 40 laws which limit the activities of the civil society. reintroduced censorship, persecution of opposition activists and this is when the so-called legislation against the ngos and foreign agents was introduced by the propaganda was
against the opposition as hidden western agents who conduct -- who conduct pro-u.s. policy and are the channels of the import of the so-call ed revolutions. the attitude toward putin itself is not -- washington should not pursue this 86% as a result of charismatic character of putin. putin is not charismatic and there is nothing in his image of a charismatic leader, of a demagogue who will show the new path. if you look at -- and i believe this is what is an important chart. the sympathy with exception of
crimea, the people -- putin was liked mostly by slightly more than a third of the population. the negative approach to putin was also not very significant, but the indifference was the most important factor. apolitical approach. this element is the construction of the regimes. the ability to introduce -- the bring the society into the state of alienation toward politics, noninvolvement, one can assess the efficiency of the political technologies because this is the goal of the domestic policy of kremlin.
that's not -- that does not mean that recognition of putin as positive recognition of putin. after the report -- the reports were published, we started to have these questions. and you can see that putin was perceived to a certain extent as the head of a very corrupt system. but the population without having sufficient information about it, accepts it. very few believe that they share completely the provisions of the report that putin is one of the
members of the mafia-style government. by the time of crimea annexation of the share of the people decreases to the minimal level and then goes up again. an unsignificant share of the people who are absolutely -- absolutely reject charges against putin, the direct support for putin, but the main bulk says, well, maybe it is contribute. but i, myself, am not really aware of it at the corruption scandals which create a certain background and encourage that kind of approach. when everybody is --
that's the nature of the system. but for me, the more significant -- not as significant as the next entry. if it is true, what's the difference? if it is true or not, what is important is that the life in the country is getting better. this duplicity, this ambiguity is very important. it is one of the important key components of the indifferences. take into consideration the political experience going back to the soviet time. this is the experience of a person who has learn ed to the oppressive state. to leave the state and to be loyal to be able to display loyalty to this government.
and, in reality, is worried -- is concerned only about his own personal problems. in other words, the strategy of everyday attitude of people is the physical survival in the environment of the government. unlike many, people clearly have an idea what the regime is about. putin is supported by the so-called political police, bureaucrats, oligarchs, military. in the eyes of the population, he is not even a monarch, not so much a monarch as much as the incarnation of their -- therefore, the population better has idea about systematic nature of the regime system.
as i said before, it is very important here. western propaganda, not simply western propaganda but the situation was brought to the level of the eve of the great war. this is a very important component because propaganda, indeed, not only raised this way of national pride and self-assurance and as respondents say, they feel more self-confidence, we have shown that we are strong and everybody started to respect us. this is the idea of a bear who is showing his teeth. was very efficient for the popular mentality.
so during the crimean story, crimean episode, pride has jumped twice, by -- the conflicts of the loss of a great power which was extremely painful and deeply hidden, today was revealed in this aggressive self-assurance as the country -- as the great superpower and more aggressive is the attitude of the government to be more satisfied in the population of russia. and if we take a look at the components of the second -- protection of the national interest and the international
area and restoration of the russian with moral authority. this is very important because in all other areas, putin's activity is assessed in the best case scenario as modest and sometimes even as successful. he has not achieved successes in his fight against corruption. the situation is quite ambiguous and it goes down, which does not make him more popular. the situation is not stable, so the only symbolic area of his achievements is foreign policy. here it was very important that putin, words here in a
completely different environment, in historical myths of the millennial russia of the russian civilization against the rest of the world, and only this system, when it makes sense to assess it because the government and the local regional governments were assessed by purely pragmatic criterias. and the onus is on them for -- which is removed from putin for the state of things. the responsibility. meanwhile, i also like to stress that the western propaganda also raised the level of the soviet perceptions. and one can say the last two years, we are dealing with a dramatic manifestation of
dramatic civilization i would say, rebirth of many soviet ideas and perceptions. not only return to the old idea that the government control of a economy is better than the free market economy because it secures -- it secures a certain stability. stable salaries, free medicine, education and job -- secure jobs. but it also provides certain certainty in the future. people do not remember about [ inaudible ]. it can be used as some kind of guidelines. and the political system of the
soviet time seems to be -- remains to be quite appealing. the western democracy as a model -- as the -- is a very attractive. today is practically -- is not existent. and the current system, although it's starting to be assess ed after crimea is less attractive. there is no need to make some special comments, but it is very important that the united states is the enemy number one, specifically within the framework of this confrontation
of rhetorics and the struggle for the union-backed superpower status for russia, and the united states plays the role of -- all the perceptions of the cold war were brought back. the united states not simply oppose the united states in competition of two systems but also in a military rival. and here we can see that with the launch of the anti-ukraine propaganda and crimea, it's grown a lot with the negative sentiments toward ukraine. in general, the list of the unfriendly nations was always led by the former soviet republics which opted to -- for
integration with the west. latvia, lithuania and estonia. later it was georgia. and then came ukraine. the revolution of 2004 took place, and ukraine is, from time to time, becomes the unfriendly country or even an enemy. but lately within the context of the general anti-western propaganda there's growing antipathy toward germany which is very nonuncharacteristic because it was always a positive sentiment toward germany as well as toward poland and great britain. if we take 2008, we can see the list of the friendly nations and enemy nations. the attractiveness of china has dramatically raised as the
rhetorical -- of the west. but first of all, it's the fault of the united states. there is no doubt, but they carry the burden of the worsening of the situation. and russia was always represented as a victim of the foreign animosity, foreign aggression which allows to use in the domestic policy to preserve the domestic policy. the aggression comes from outside from the only defender, but what is also important is the rise of the anxieties and feelings of the pre-war state of mind because this enhancement of the sense of threat of a great
big war removes all the claims against the government but brings the consultation with the government and decrease the personal ambitions because since it is the war, we need to be patie patient. the most important matter here, we can endure everything as long as there is no war. this is the major -- this is the illustration of the idea that russia was always -- extremely important with -- after putin came to power, the environment of animosity of the surrounding world which allows to secure the domestic
consolidation with the people and the government. but this is specifically toward foreigns. however, confrontation with t a propaganda creates an impression that's russia counteracts against the western interest and plays a more significant role in the international area. and this is increasing influence brings respect from other nations. restoration of the great power status, this is what people expected from putin, and it is -- the most important element
is the march of 2014 annexation of crimea and anti-western confrontation. if in 1999, 65% felt that russia lost forever its status of a superpower and has turned -- has been turned into a regional power, and the moment of this militaristic propaganda, both in 2008 when there was the war against georgia or annexation of crimea, this feeling of the restoration of the great power status comes back. and this involvement dramatically decreases potential for the social protest both in economic and political -- on economic and political issues.
that does not change the attitude -- domestic attitude toward the government. the government remains a corrupt government but this is inside the country. not outside of it. my time is running out. that's why i'm going to stop here. >> thank you very much, lev. and there's much to think about and many interesting numbers to contemplate in your talk. i will ask the first question, and ma sure you're all -- >> okay. so my first question really goes to the nature of the opinions about the old soviet system.
and if you could address the question, when you talk about the rising number of support for the soviet system -- >> [ inaudible ]. >> and i was just curious if you could identify when you talk about the support for the soviet system, whether you can break that down by age groups. in other words, is support for the old soviet system those who lived through the old soviet system, or is the support for the soviet system equally spread amongst all layers of society, including young people?
>> translator: [ inaudible ]. in 1988-89, was a very dramatic sense that the country was on a dead end. at that moment, our research was given a very strange picture. the numbers of the responses like, were they worse than anybody else? we're a nation of slaves. nuclear weapons. how we should not -- we're an example of how not to do things. 7% to 54% for only two years. just in two years. it was an acute stage of collective frustration and the
entire system was pursued in a very negative fashion. after crisis of the mid-1990s, communists comeback began. and difficult economic situation which was a very difficult. we don't even need to discuss it, talk about it, brought a great deal of support in the western models and the growth of nostalgic feeling, sentiments sort of passed, and this card was skillfully played by putin. there was a perception that the reforms were inspired by the west and they were directed at the destruction of the soviet union, as you can see a dramatic index of the growing number of
enemies of russia and, on the other hand, growing nostalgic feelings of the soviets, which was huge by putin and he kept using this argument all the time. and the attitude toward the soviet past is not unilateral. 67% -- this number has not been changed for 25 years. but the attitude for the system is quite different in different social demographic groups, different environments, social layers and age groups. the most critical toward the system are the people of the age 45 toward 55 who have lived
through the end of the soviet system, and they do have experience of resistance towards the growing putin regime. the young people who were not familiar with how it was, ideal picture of the past provided by the media. they have some illusional idea of, first of all, related to the idea of the superpower, which we have lost. and this is very significant for them. the elderly people, particularly those who live in the remote provinces, provincial areas, they are nostalgic about the city system which secured a certain level of social
warranties. and the present day situation for them is quite frustrating and tense. therefore, the situation is like this. there is no -- >> i'm going to make a quick note whether you ask your question in english or russian, you need to ask it in the microphone so our interpreter can hear it and c-span can get the feed as well. please speak into the microphone clearly and slower than i am speaking right now. >> we'll start with sergei. >> translator: i believe this is very important in order to interpret all this data which is provide provided -- if you have some kind of tool,
some filters brought into this data, one can often [ inaudible ]. so they are ark trade. they try to be honest. try to give what they -- how do you protect yourself from this phenomena, and do you consider this a crucial problem? >> translator: mythological questions. i personally do not believe that this is a serious issue. they are not different. not radical and different from situations in other countries.
the incident that was described, in other words, joining the imagined majority opinion. all this exists and we should take this into account and it's the transitional sociological practice so there is nothing particular in our situation which would make us different. i believe that there is some kind of invented -- to justify an ability to understand our data. this is the fact that people do not take into account the elements of the leftovers of the syndrome. this is exactly like in the united states. in the first days after
elections, they started to say that people were shy to admit that they were going to vote for trump, which, to me, is the transpondence by some liberal journalist, ideas to the other categories of the population. people are not shy. people are not afraid to answer, to respond. although the element here in this society has been reason after mass protest. to which extent it has an impact on the response is not much because we have checked it many times in different ways. but there are differences. for example, it depends on the technique of the questioning. the telephone questions give you 10% more -- 5%, 10% more number
of loyal answers regarding putin than the face-to-face interview. the situation of a normal human contact, there is a more element of trust. there's a bigger element of trust, and people start to understand whatever is he or she asked about, in general, there are special check procedures which gives us -- which allows us to think that there was no desire to lie and to adjust the answer to pretend to be loyal. the people answering regarding putin, people are quite honest, quite open, however there is this level of the -- there is an opinion that the majority are afraid to answer
honestly. any time we ask, the majority of the people are sincere in responding to our questions. are they afraid or not? and 60-plus percent say the majority say yeah inside. there's a personal adjective which is quite different and therefore this is the problem -- this is the issue of analysis interpretation and not the way to receive data and i believe that there's no great deal of difference in such a collection gathering of information.
>> thank you. the american foreign policy council. i would like to ask a question looking a bit into the future. one of the big issues the russian government is facing is the need for reforl of the pension system which is very generous by sper national standards and extremely expensive and russian government finances. proposed some radical and significant restrictions on age and on benefits. some of these have already been introduced for government employees but the pension system is one of the most fundamental elements between the state and people in russia. and sit the primary means by which much of the older population survives. if between now and the next presidential election there were a significant operation in the
and even 16% it was about 4%. the real pension has been decreased dramatically and they continue to be cut because the garment is going to decrease the population and end of putin's regime as well. >> at the same time the pensions are very small and the average pension and average wage was 65 or 70%. today it was 39 to 32%. which is -- it is very hard to survive on pension money and
lonely retired people is one of the poorest of the population along with the females of many childr children. >> and the kennedy institute i want to follow up on a question, how about this for putin, how does this break down? 2012 to a protest and we were told mainly by middle class, professional class folks in moscow and st. petersburg and putin seems to claim the support of the working class what does your data say about what is supporting putin and beyond.
that 60% in 2011. that this was a slow number in the regime. my question about -- anonymity. they have shown there is more or hess maturity who support the regime and there is a quarter which is against a quarter that has no opinion. did i understand it correctly? my second question. it was also very interesting for me to delay it because some of this place and new trend.
the entire context should be changed. either people should be aaware that the foreign policy is the support of the regime and an official does not provide it and in fact does not bring back the status of the great followers and today's successors and gains will turn into more of at the feet and the reason to be ash e ashaled. this should be changed. this category of population which is socialized under circumstances of the new environment, it is worse i was by the ideology and support more
than anybody else. 20% of the youth support t lowest activity is in the age groups of 50 years old and also retired people because indeed the pensions decreasing. >> is this part of the retired peoples. >> if we will check the social segments moscow is the most putin's safety in russia until the latest date, the outage approval was developed 17 plus per cent. in moscow this support was about 20, 25, 28%.
and specifically the middle class russian middle class as the evolution and more impre impressive but after the failure of the mass protest the response is quite different. the growing immigration sentiments or joining the majority because the middle class there were many unhappy people and it got dropped by this and joined the putin followers. to date the ideological propaganda is the difference between different social groups in it's assessment of the policy and putin is not significant.
twice. this is a very significant reason and it's not a good idea for international law. and protect russia from genocide and therefore it's an ethical act because russia restores it's status and an e the thical -- ethical system of protection or defense. therefore despite the fact that official media say there were only volunteers there, people got perfectly avoided the
issue? how -- but. >> in view of the antiamerican propaganda being such a cornerstone of popularity is the notion that president putin -- president trump can make a deal to reset relations with russia, fanciful? >> last question in the back. okay. so just those two questions and then we're done. >> the entire electorate in russia was pro-trump so therefore when we were asking what result, what outcome is more positive for russia, 52%
financial issues and finally we're not going to apply registered agents that means we're going to be punished again and grow twice and then be banned officially so our forecast is very bad. i believe we still have about half a year. but we cannot stop all the activity because we have a lot of contract. >> just a fascinating conversation about what's going on inside in russia. >> i also want to thank our
co-sponsors. the institute for european studies and george washington university and for all of you for coming and a happy thanksgiving. thank you so much. >> prime minister teresa may takes questions from the house of commons. watch prime minister's questions live from london at 7:00 a.m. eastern on cspan 2. here are some of our featured programs thursday, thanksgiving day on cspan. nebraska senator on american
values, the founding fathers and the purpose of government. >> there's a huge civic mindedness in american history but it's not compelled by the government. >> followed at noon with tom harkin and the rise and childhood obesity in the u. s. >> with everything from monster thick burgers with 1420 calories and 107 grams of fat to 20 ounce cokes and pepsis, 12 to 15 teaspoons of sugar, feeding an epidemic of child obesity. >> then at 3:30 wicapedia founder talks about the evolution of the online encyclopedia and access to information. >> there's a small community there and there's 5 to 10 really active users. there's another 20 to 30 that they know a little bit and they start to think of themselves as community. >> a little after 7:00 eastern
an inside look at the yearlong effort to repair and restore the capital dome. at 8, she reflects on her life and career. >> then i did my senior thesis which is a great thing to have done it taught me an incredible amount but also what it was like to be a serious historian and to sit in archives all day every day and i realize it just wasn't for me. >> followed by justice clarence thomas at 9:00. >> seens you is not putting a $2 idea in a $20 sentence. it's putting a $20 idea in a $2 sentence without any loss of meaning. >> and just after 10:00 at an exclusive ceremony in the white house president obama will present the medal of freedom our nation's highest civilian award to 21 recipients including michael jordan, bruce springsteen and bill and melinda gates. watch on cspan and cspan.org or
listen on the free cspan radio app. >> breaking news washington columnist for lawyers, potential picks for treasury secretary and other economic posts in the trump administration. from washington journal this is 40 minutes. >> thank you very much for being here. appreciate it. so president elect donald trump posts a video last night laying out his first 100 days. it has a lot to do with his economic agenda for the country. i want to show our viewers again and let's pull out what he says about the u.s. economy and what he can do in the first few days of the administration. >> today i would like to provide the american people with an update on the white house transition and our policy plans
for the first 100 days. our transition team is working very smoothly, efficiency and effectively. truly great and talented men and women. patriots indeed are being brought in and many will soon be a part of our government helping us to make america great again. my agenda will be based on a simple core principle. putting america first. whether it's producing steel, building cars, or curing disease, i want the next generation of production and innovation to happen right here on our great homeland, america. creating wealth and jobs for american workers. as part of this plan i have asked my transition team to develop a list of executive actions we can take on day one to restore our laws and bring back our jobs. it's about time. these include the following on trade our issue to with draw
from the transpacific partnership and negotiate fair bilateral trade deals and on energy i'll cancel job killing restrictions on american energy including shell energy creating many millions of high paying jobs. that's what we want. that's what we have been waiting for. on regulation i will formulate a role that says that for every one new regulation two old regulations must be eliminated. so important. on national security i will ask the department of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff to develop a comprehensive plan to protect america's vital infrastructure from cyberattacks and all other form of attacks. on immigration i will direct the department of labor to investigate all abuses of visa programs that undercut the american worker. on ethics reform as part of our
plan to drain the swamp we will impose a five year ban on executive officials becoming lobby yiss after they leave the administrati administrati administration. >> i will provide more updates in the coming days as we work together to make america great again for everyone. and i mean everyone. >> how is he going to impact jobs and the economy in the first 100 day with that agenda. >> you heard him talk about the transpacific partnership which has been a running theme of his campai campaign. he said he would pull out of that agreement. it could also effect nafta as
well. >> what would that mean for bringing back jobs and how could he do that by resending the ttp as well as making changes to nafta. how does that immediately give americans jobs. >> that's going to be a question for him. he is making a lot of promises but some of the things he is talking about may never come back. some of the manufacturing jobs, a lot of that changed because of technology and automation and that's something that trade deals aren't going to fix. >> what do republicans and this president elect say? what is their argument for eliminating regulations and impact on the economy. >> they have been complaining about all the things put into place whether it is on energy
and environmental restrictions. wall street has had to go through a host of reforms because of the 2008 financial kai sis these are things he talked about. they are basically hand tied because of the regulations now there's a question of whether they will put them into the economy and this is part of their pitch to get the economy moving again. >> what is the -- what is it like to roll it back. she recovered her speech there. she doesn't see his promises on the coal industry actually coming to fruition. >> that's going to be a
question. there's a lot of things that president trump can do under executive mattress just like president trump has done. a lot of those go to court and possibly had stays put on them like so of his immigration policies so that will be a question of whether the tables then will be turned under a president trump administration. and see where that plays out. >> where else do you expect him to take steps to increase economic growth. where else do you -- what do you expect to hear from this new administration. >> well, the interesting thing that he didn't talk about in the video is his infrastructure plan and tax cut plan. it's something that else
democrats would favor under certain conditions. his plan has private funding that i don't think democrats would be crazy about. senator bernie sanders kale out criticizing that aspect of the plan. that's something he talked about spending up to $1 trillion. >> before we get to our callers and we welcome your phone calls and questions and comments about the economic agenda and team let's talk about what positions make up a president's economic team and who is he considering? >> well the most important post that we're all waiting for is the treasury secretary job he haze the former goldman sachs banker and possibly in the lead for that job and he also met with the congressman that's the chairman of the house financial
services committee and also has his own roll back dodd frank plan that he pitched to president elect trump so we'll see where that goes. other interesting names that have come up are jp morgan's chief executive jamie dimon. some reports are out yestery that perhaps that wasn't actually on the table but there's a lot of names being thrown out there and he's trying to make a point of meeting people that didn't necessarily support him. he met with the head of real estate john grey that's actually a democratic supporter but maybe in the running for treasury secretary. >> what about his inner circle economic advisors. >> what are you hearing about who can take the post. >> he he had a host of wall streeters on his ecomic council that includes ross, a well-known distressed investor, a billionaire that has his own
hedge fund as well. he's in the running for commerce secretary. we're trying to see what happens with the federal reserve. he had criticized the chair janet yellen saying she was artificially keeping interest rates low to help democrats and talked about possibly replacing her. she would stay on through 2018 but that's not that far away. it's a pretty important post for how the economy runs in the future. >> let's get to questions mark, you're up first. good morning. >> yes. my comment is that trump is doing a really good job and that he has the rest of the world leaders scared about their economy. flying over here and running meetings with him and i think our past presidents got to the point where they got worried about everybody else overseas
and how much money can we borrow to give away to help everybody else instead of even with a disaster how many products from america get shipped overseas that's manufactured here to help them to get those people used to our products even so i think trump shook up the hornet's nest where he is making people think and giving the leaders around the rest of the world saying hey, wait a second. our economy is in trouble and america's not a push over like it used to be that's a great point. he made the chinese very nervous in terms of what he could do with the tariffs that he has threatened so it has shook up the world order. i think the question is whether
some like china could see possible advantages of that as the u.s. recedes from the global stage. will countries like china and russia possibly try to step in and take more of a leadership role. >> what about our neighbors to the south and north and the impact of his trade and immigration talk on their economies and what does that mean potentially for the u.s. economy. >> well, one of the gauges of how trump was doing through this campaign has been where the mexican peso was sitting in terms of the currency markets. we have seen it go up and down depending on where trump was moving in the polls and obviously mexico is a country that's very worried about what could happen under a trump administration. not only with the wall and some of the immigration plans he has actually also threatened to rehold remittances and it's
money the united states sends back home to help relatives there and that's in terms of mexicans coming into the u.s. and mainly at a stand still. >> good morning. >> he has grave concerns about mr. trump and trump kids. and personal business and children for example. and does something within the family and we have seen him on the phone with argentine officials and indian business man talking about his hotels on
the phone and it's a personal residence and this is rim nis sent of this. >> extensive trump ventures in india. one project sunday investigation for land acquisition and irregularities. >> and react to this saying everybody knew that i had these overseas reacting now and he has talked about not being apart of his future administration. and ivanka trump in particular has been apart of some of these
meetings and phone call with foreign leaders and i was looking at trump's finance and descent positions. and the massive amount of influence as the heeder of the united states and how he intends to handle that and remains in question. >> in the u.s. constitution. and because that's going to let trump so far that's meant to
prevent leaders from foreign countries. there's the question of whether trump could violate that once he takes office would be charged with unraveling conflicts. >> good morning, ladies. >> good morning. >> i'd like to dispel this myth about jobs not being here in the united states because of technology. mr. trump is making an issue about it. they're not going to mexico because of automation.
if there are highly automated manufacturer they're going to stay here in the united states because the labor costs are very low. the reason they're going to mexico and china is because of the labor costs and the lack of environmental protection, taxes, all of that and a lot of these companies cannot continue to do their work over here is because they're competing with foreign companies with cheap labor that's being sent and products being sent into the united states, okay? so any company that is manufacturing products that is highly motivated they stay here. the ones that have high labor intensive jobs go to mexico. so mr. trump can fix that. a level playing field. that's one of the reasons why nafta has to be renegotiated to make it fairer so that those jobs stay here with lower taxes and lower regulations and that's
what mr. trump is talking about so i want to dispel that myth. thank you. >> all right. peter. he talked about wanting to renegotiate it. interesting these are not new points from president elect trump and are issues that democrats have also been wrestling with and now as ttp and other trade deals get opened up president obama said they were meant to fix the problem with nafta and now that president trump may undo it i think that the proof will then be in the pudding if these changes actually do then bring back jobs or cause more companies to stay here could be a possible winner.
>> what do you want to see him do first? what do you think he could do to bring back jobs to america? republicans 202-748-8001 and independents 8002. good morning. >> good morning. california has one of the greatest economies in the world and i wonder if california might benefit from the ttp and that if -- i want to say one other thing too is that hillary got 60% of the vote in california. that's all. >> well, we'll take the first
part. >> yeah. well, ttp, the way the obama administration has tried to pitch it although it's fallen on deaf ears a bit is that it does actually provide 18,000 tariff cuts. that's basically 18,000 tax cuts for u.s. exports going overseas. so that includes products out of california and other states. they haven't been able to compete as well because of some of the taxes on their products and the ttp is meant to undo or roll back a lot of those taxes and they have tried to pitch this as something that would help the u.s. economy and
actually create more jobs. it's just has not gained as much tractions as the criticism of the deal. >> hi, go ahead with your question or comment i was just commenting on the manufacturing jobs or percentage of jobs. it's about how technology has impacted jobs in the usa. not moving job across. it's not that they're moving across. it's the number of jobs percentage wise that is effected in the usa. 40% are going overseas. that's a myth. technology has taken away the most number of manufacturing jobs that we see on assembly jobs. they're not moving overseas.
>> i'm having you take that out. >> as i mentioned earer technology has been a major driver of certain jobs being lost and about 5 million manufacturing jobs being lost over the last ten years or so a lot of that is because of automation and technology the latest concerns is a debate happening here in washington is over self-driving cars and regulations for it. but also who could be the losers because of that. obviously there's taxi drivers and uber drivers and that sort of thing but also the businesses that rely on possibly fixing cars if self-driving cars means less accidents that means all the auto repair shops and small businesses that might be effected by this new phenomenon could also be impacted so there's a lot of sort of unintended consequences from
technology and obviously we all benefit from those conveniences but there is a down side to it as well. it is deutsche bank and i can't get anyone in the united states. they refuse to transfer me to the united states. so i have to talk to someone from some other country who they know how to speak the language
but they really don't comprehend the language. and they're 15 or $20 an hour jobs that all could be coming back to this country that would give at least the lower social economic group jobs which are desperately looking for work. >> all right. any talk about outsourcing of jobs like the one she was mentioning. >> that is also an issue for president elect trump on the campaign trail on something he has continued to emphasize. particularly to india on the counter point of that proponents talk about how they actually want to create more jobs here. high skilled working jobs.
and training and other things that happen. and lower income, the lower skill jobs and the higher ones that are also scared. >> minnesota independent. >> they're actually thinking about it. do a lot for us and i think trump has been there. >> that's been an issue on the campaign trail as have some of his allies including the congressman. he has talked about the need for further transparency. there have been the fed bills that have been proposed in congress.
most notably by senator rand paul. he brought it up continuously i think every year for the last few years and so far the democrats had been the firewall to that but now that republicans control both congress and the white house you can see that change. >> there's an idea of a grand bargain if you will of tax cuts or infrastructure. there's been a problem of u.s. companies moving their headquaters overseas because the u.s. has such a high corporate tax rate. there's been talk on both sides of the aisle on ways to change that. senator chuck schumer that's the dell cattic leader come january in the senate even signed off on tax plan a bipartisan tax plan to sort of change the tax code
to take away the incentives for companies to move overseas. that's something that republicans want to do and if you can put it all together in tax code overhaul that also includes money for infrastructure, in terms of some of the companies coming back to the u. s. and using those proceeds to spend on roads and bridges which is also something that democrats would favor because they would see it as a job creating type of initiative. that is something where there could be a meeting of the minds. the question is do democrats want to give the republicans a win that could help them in the 2018 midterms and the 2020 race. >> chris in shreveport, louisiana. democrat. >> good morning. my kbegs is this, there's plenty of violence in school so what will trump do to improve the
security in school and will he be able to reestablish prayer in the school. >> well, we were talking this morning about economic agenda for president elect trump but there are -- there is a piece in the paperer this morning about his education views. so i'll try to find that for you and mention that to you. but today's focus with gina is economics. she is the breaking views washington columnist with reuters. donald in altoona, pennsylvania, a republican. hi there, good morning, go ahead. >> good morning. i think that policies of the past come back to prevent job creation. a lot of the money is entitlement in section 8 and a lot of these other programs.
it's going to help people to show compassion from 2 years and then it should be a lifetime ban. they could find a job. win the lottery. get married. find a social network or get help from families but too much money is going in the wrong direction and it's not helping. look, i'm from central pennsylvania. we suffered a lot over the past years with high unemployment. a lot of companies have shutdown. donald trump comes to pennsylvania and there was like 10, 12, 15,000 people at his rally. i was there. the voters have said they had sufficient with the policies of the past. we need to lower taxes on industry and businesses and then slowly but surely they will create jobs. >> all right. >> well, that's been one of the disappointing aspects of this recovery is that businesses haven't been investing in their companies, in new equipment and
other types of taxes but you don't want to have a race to the bottom and there's a sense that the u.s. isn't competitive on that front and possibly cutting taxes would help businesses grow more and hire more as well. >> so that caller's questions about education i apologize, i should have asked you what, you know, many people believe education is the key to economic growth, if you educate and we have a better educated american population that means better jobs. the new york times this morning has the story where donald trump stands on school choice, student debt and common core for that
viewer but what has president elect donald trump said about the importance of education or has that been not something he has talked about. >> it hasn't been i would say a core focus of his campaign but you have seen hill in the last few days meeting with people like michelle who used to be the leader of the schools in the washington area and a bit of a controversial figure but trump has tried to make a point of saying he wants to listen to various sides and keep an open mind and ideas to possibly think out of the box or education for the economy and for other issue and career politician if you will hn thought about in the fast. >> independent. >> in regards to those outsourcing as well as actually what you were just talking about with tax cuts how do we feel comfortable that some of this was not generated by unrealistic
expectations for what in terms of profit and in terms of quote, unquote growth and ceo salary and compensation because they're relatively what the average person makes. >> that's been a question of trump's economic plan based on a lot of assumptions that actual economists don't believe are possible. trump thinks that gdp growth will hit 4% under his plan and post player b possibly higher. it's been below 3% during obama's presidency and the fact that it could go higher is a bit of a question. in terms of whether companies will reinvest in jobs and other things to produce growth, it's also a question. the last time there was a repay triyags holiday that gave companies a break to bring back their overseas cash at a lower tax rate it didn't actually invest it into their own firms.
they did share buy backs. they did dividends and yeah they probably also padded their own compensation so there is a question of whether even if you get them these tax breaks. the trump administration helps. >> avondale arizona. >> basically to reiterate what an individual had called earlier and said regarding that the jobs that were being lost were being lost due to automation. the workers were not getting injured and one of the number
one things is loss of time from these individuals at work due to injuries repetitive injuries and things like that. that is not the be all end all. the thing that a lot of people are really missing sight of and they missed sight for the last 10 to 20 years is on the outsourcing of jobs the jobs are going over to places like malasia philippines and things like that. with big pharma going over there and sometimes inferior fillers going into our medication. and everyone else and i don't know if you remember and in some
of these, they're making $1 a day. and to them, that's good money. but if we bring them back into the u. s., you're going to see the quality come up, you're going to see the economy come up and the only way to do that is give the -- >> don't you always see it go up. >> it's in additional 50 cents on the is $1. like on a pair of shoes i have no problem that it is quality.
>> is an additional 50 cents or a dollar or much more than that. >> it could be much more and you take a shopper atwal mart that is looking for bargain prices and whether they turn away from those products because they are more expensive and walmart is an interesting example as they have actually recently based on the he election four states also raised minimum wage. walmart found their employees are are happier and more productive and working harder so whether that goes for the long-term still remains to be seen. it hasn't been as positive for their bottom line but in terms of the morale in their store, their from duck activity it has helped so that could be an example for others.
>> cindy in dallas, texas, independent. >> actually i voted for trump and i don't understand why people are not as i've been hearing all morning long everybody is complaining, but we are the people nowadays and for him is what is he going to do for the don't live off the government. i kind of like had to and 15,080
he does cut taxes for the and it really does benefit the weal wealthier talking about that also help those people with child care and which for lower income families actually doesn't really help them that much they already don't make enough to qualify for those productions. there are questions about.
hedge fund managers on his economic team and interesting and during the campaign he was in conflict with the chamber of commerce, the business round table, which is made up of ceo and the major corporations because they were very worried about his immigration plan, his stance on trade. so he actually wasn't quite in sync with some of the
traditional republican allies that are on the business side. i think they're trying to take sort of a wait and see period. they are more in favor of some of the things that house speaker paul ryan has proposed and hoping that can be somewhat of a moderation on some of president trump's more extreme policies. >> how have the markets been reacting. >> you saw them actually get a bit nervous because so many of them had priced in a hillary clinton win instead of a trump win just after the elections, but since then, s&p, nasdaq, all of them may have been up, bank stocks in particular have been up because they think not only will they benefit for the regulations, but this volatility is actually helping in terms of their trading rerch news. so so far we have seen a bump. that is not to say that that could change because of president trump's plans could effect the markets in a negative
way, especially if he starts a trade war. i think that will get investors pretty nervous. they've been pretty happy, it seems. >> records reached yesterday. >> yeah, definitely. they're going higher, and some of these stimulus infrastructure spending, you've seen a lot of companies, cement makers that's sort of sectors go up in the market because they feel like they'll be able to benefit from some of these policies. >> thank you for your time, appreciate it. >> thank you for having me. >> c-span washington journal with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning an analysis of president elect donald trump infrastructure proposal, the challenges and current state of u.s. infrastructure, of the george mason university, and the
institution klein, then washington examiner national security and defense reporter jamie mcintyre, on president elect trump's national security agenda and his decision to choose michael flynn as national security adviser. be sure to watch live wednesday morning, join the discussion. >> president obama awarded the michael jordan, ellen degenerous, diana ross, robert dinero and architect were among the recipients. you can watch the entire event at our web site, go to cspan.org. now a look at the on going protest of the dakota access pipeline project on the stang