tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN April 30, 2015 3:00am-5:01am EDT
black americans are very much absorbed into the dominant culture. even as it gives back to that culture. and this continues to be the case. these values reflect the mainstream in many important ways. in fact, the individual taking responsibility for one's own actions. what bothers me, is when we talk about black america, and we have gone through all of the major surveys, they take responsibly for their actions. they are among the biggest
supporters of the military. in this country, in fact, they are essentially a group of people who are about as american as you can get. what we learned about this sort of culture of poverty in the cities, we learn that segregation matters. segregation matters. there is a long history of how america has treated them. look at the early civil rights leaders, segregation was a problem. martin luther king was referring to the need for integration. about the same time there was this group going against the culture, there is also a reaction the idea of segregation as problematic.
coming from the black leadership. and the same set of forces, in fact, they come from the rise of black pride. to learn and so on. what it did, as well as the most decorated sociologist tried to point out, it brings segregation off the table. let me tell you, it is a problem. to succeed in america, you need not just book knowledge, not the knowledge you learn in school, but cultural and social capital. whom you know is not as important as what you know. not because you have a superior teaching, there are lots of other places where you can get a better education and terms of the content and the relationship between professors and students. what you get at harvard is social capital. if you go to harvard business school, you can read the case studies.
that knowledge is social capital. but there is another kind of knowledge, which is the culture of capital that is acquired. it is one of success in society. those things you do not learn in school. you acquire them from families and so on. it is that knowledge that has invaded interaction. that is what blacks are excluded from.
we find that it enhances and provides protection, we have seen that religion is very important. up until the age of 14, black men will never go to church again. but it also presents problems. i want to move quickly to the difference between culture and policy. because i want to say something about it. culture is not immutable. let's get to the hard stuff. there is no problem with having
many cultures. one sociologist recently argued that -- no, think of culture not in terms of macro black culture, think of it in micro cultures. as we do in the ghetto. what works, you know there are hundreds of programs from local and state governments that start to review the best cases. and what we have found, many of them work and some even showed profit. ok? the family partnership program is an excellent example of a program that works. the national guard youth challenge, the rand corporation, these randomly selected opportunity programs that do work, there are some that work but are not effective. some are clear failures.
this administration has helped the families program. there was a wonderful study that shows what is important and what doesn't work. i want to emphasize the culture of elites is as important as the culture of blacks in understanding the problem. look, for example at the blinders. this is an analysis of why we have such a high dropout rate. it finds that a good part of the problem has nothing to do with decisions, it has to do with the elaborate bureaucratic and academic demands. obstacles that are put in the way which contributes to the culture of elites.
this is true in a primitive society, children require adult supervision. you cannot have a system, you cannot sustain a system that doesn't address the problem of single parenting. single moms with resources can do fine. but unresourceful single parenting is a disaster. i want to say that it is obvious what the solution is. one of the main reasons that kids join a gang and shoot people, the answer in every study is family. the gang becomes a family. it is social. a single mom having to work two
jobs isn't coming home. between 3:00 and 8:00, she is so tired. they find another family -- that is a gang. the solution is not a matter of saying pull up your socks. the name of the point that i made is that culture cannot be seen in isolation, there are economic factors. the problems we face are how can we enhance and motivate people to change? [applause] >> that is an act to follow, for sure.
i just want to tell you a little bit about where i'm drawing my expertise. i spent eight years doing and ethonography of low income philadelphia fathers in the camden area. i joined forces with mathematica in following 90 men in four cities. i am also, by coincidence, i have been following a cohort of baltimore youth. who are all born in baltimore public housing.
and early article from the study appeared in professor patterson's book. it is a terrific volume. so i am and ethnographer. and you will hear from an economist next. i think when i was asked to identify the biggest problems, everyone knows that the answer that orlando alluded to are jobs education. these are things we know. what i focus on is something more subtle, but possibly equally profound. and i stumbled upon this insight. some of you know bob lerman was
around these days in the 1990's. i studied how mothers made ends meet. i got a very strong sense of what welfare met. it was a sort of separation of pushing people across the road a way from the citizenship side towards the disenfranchised side. you had to trade your citizenship card in exchange for your credentials. when i moved to boston and was a colleague of orlando's, i looked at the east baltimore office. it is a gloomy, dickensian building caked in grime. over the door, there are these block letters "overseers of the public welfare."
it was a stripping of citizenship. i finished that book with laura, and i went on to study the family. i came back in 2007 to study the new welfare regime -- the eigc. the largest anti-poverty program in the country. it is the same welfare system, but you get to claim your wages. the dancing taxmen out there 70% get their money from a for-profit tax preparer.
what i learned by studying recipients of the new welfare regime, something radically different had occurred in citizenship. take h&r block, only a few blocks away from east boston's welfare office. they're saying, "money in minutes." a popular slogan was repeated -- i have people. people viewed the eidc as a radically incorporating experience. it was a brand of citizenship. and laura and i wrote a new york times op-ed about this.
why was this form of social policy, or social provision so radically different than what preceded it? we learned that it was very important to be tied to the work to get it. to american values, it is part of a tax refund -- it is perceived as they return. you get it at h&r block, it is a brand of citizenship. will be argued in our book which came about two months ago, unlike its predecessors, this form of social policy is knitting people into the
communities in a way that american social policy has never done before. if you hear these interviews people talk in such striking language about being real americans. and how their children are real american kids. we know that the eidc has huge benefits that extend to graduation. and if we believe joe fox, these programs might have positive externalities regarding community participation. this is not a liberal or conservative idea, it is just plain common sense. i am big on common sense. what this research taught me is that we need to have a new litmus test for social policy. when you think about a solution to the problem of any disenfranchised group, we need to ask ourselves does this build citizenship?
or does it deny it? what i'm proposing today is that we propose this test to social policy for men. it is not as hard as it seems. recently, i was at an international conference for policy, there was a four-point platform for how we would help men. i gave him a zero on the litmus test because all four ideas were disincorporating. child support: in all but two states, we have what is called taxation with representation. it is almost as if they are snatching the money out of your back pocket. and i'm in favor of child support, i would emphasize that. without offering any recognition that you must have a role to play in that child's life, and
those of us who are deep into the support world were really sickened by the circumstances surrounding the death of walter scott -- which implicates the system. taxation without representation, you have the opportunity at your child's birth to demonstrate your value as a parent. two not only sign up for child support, but to assure that your parent time would be adjudicated. because you have a vital role to play. extending the program would help celebrate the active participation. including the prenatal clinics the dad would need to participate in.
i want to draw here because i was trying to think how i was going to convince robert of this. with some basic principles from development of psychology, i'm sociologist -- my knowledge of what i'm about to say is thin. i'm hesitant to do this, we are talking about adults here. status that should be given to equal honor of everyone in this room. i'm going to borrow from the terminology to advocate strongly for one. we know that permissive parenting is not good. it doesn't benefit children. and in some ways, you can think of the pre-welfare era as permissive.
or maybe as a form of not so benign neglect. authoritative parenting is bad. this is high-end structure but no warmth. in this area, we have been engaging in a lot of authoritative parenting. but we have been doing it in ways that is stripping rather than incorporating. what we also know from child psychology is that the magic bullet is authoritative parenting, where you have both high structure and high expectations. we do so in a radically incorporating way. so we have to maintain high expectations.
this is going to make robert happy. you have to work in order to get it. but we need to do so in a radically incorporating way. let me emphasize that i have become in favor of approaches that are really fully in line with american values. we make this argument, and it is not like i am poor, living on virtually nothing in america -- that will be out in september. that is why i talk about high expectations and participation. ultimately, the history of social policy in america -- this is the best way forward not only for us, but for everyone. including the disenfranchised. i spent much of my career documenting the poor and that they shared the values that we do. orlando pointed that out
beautifully. we also need to remember that one core american values that rings true is that americans along with valuing self-sufficiency and work, desire and have a strong sense of community. americans want to help the poor, just not through welfare. i want to make one remark about baltimore. as a new daughter of baltimore the greatest city in america and if you do not know i am calling it that, you need to get up there. my conclusion from the last couple of days from watching these events and coping with them, what unites us is far more profound what divides us. the punchline of the op-ed the laura wrote a couple of weeks ago -- incorporate, don't separate. and for this audience, include men. [applause]
>> i want to begin by talking about employment issues. the latest data indicates that only 70% of black men from the age of 25-34, only 70% at any point in time are working. if you take into account the prison population, they could be some men one month and others in another month. close to one half of black men in that age group have substantial job idleness each year. so that it is a serious problem. this idleness, and it goes beyond -- the data may show 20% or whatever in this age group. in my recent work, there was a shorter version of the national affairs piece.
i link that the family. there are lots of reasons why there are unstable families within the black community. and i think this source is jobs. and that is why it is more serious in the white community. you have the same problem in the white timidity, because more white people are employed, don't have it as seriously. a lack of money could lead to family instability.
but i think the evidence shows that it is much more the kind of anger and frustration that many black men bring into their relationships that lead to the dissolution of those relationships. you now have a situation where if you look at women who have more than one child, 70% of them have multi-partner fertility. you now have a state of flux regarding black men in the lives of their children. much is written about absent fathers. and that is certainly a serious problem. only about one half of black fathers see their noncustodial children for a meal once a month. but there is also the issue of child maltreatment. if you look at those rates, they are triple when a male partner
is present. then if a black seeing a mother lives alone. you have very serious dynamics to go on in the family. there are certainly issues of intimate violence. so i think that the lack of jobs has this dynamic. it happens in white families, as well. but white families have much more significant numbers of jobs.
and i think that this kind of problem for children ends up in the school system. you see behavioral problems very early. in preschool, is nearly three times the rate of black kids being suspended than white kids. you see it, ultimately, in the high schools. where kids come in, particularly the black boys, with both educational and behavioral deficits. you have situations now in new york city, only 28% of black boys who enter the ninth grade graduate in four years. 24% in philadelphia. you have these very serious problems. and they are just events waiting to happen in the street. but what is going to be done about these problems? yes, there are things that can be done in the schools.
there certainly should be much more of a way of positively intervening or attempting to when kids at an early age show serious behavior problems. there should be more counseling, more psychologists involved in the school system to take a much more holistic approach than suspending kids. and yes, many families will say how dare you? but they are probably a lot more would look positively if this were done. there are certainly things that can be done in the schools. but i want to spend the rest of my time talking about what can be done to generate paths to direct employment. orlando spoke little bit about the university system, which i
am part of. being an economist, i am probably more elitist the most. which is this vision of don't close the door to four-year colleges for all. so that almost every program even if it looks like it is occupational oriented, like getting people into community college, always make sure the door is open for four-year transfers. and that means the academic skills that are expected are much more demanding than if it was simply preparing them for direct employment. i think that for high school kids, there should be much more of an effort to get year-round part-time employment.
in the private sector, that is where subsidy should go. there are soft skills that kids need. where do they get that? because of the segregated housing and other things they're much more likely to get it if they are in an employed situation. where do they get their spending money from? you know, 17-year-olds, they see what the world offers? where the girls getting money from? you look at the black community, the pregnancy rate of teen women is one out of ten teen women. that is down from a few years ago. but it is still serious, look at rates of stds.
there are serious problems, and employment helps in these situations because it gets the spending money. but it also gets these soft skills. the second thing that i would mention is, there are a number of programs in the high schools to move people in a more vocational way. bob is here, there are apprentice programs it should be expanded. there are technical education programs, cte programs that get them into community college. those are all fine and good. but if we are talking about the people who are at the most risk of not graduating high school, it is really the direct
employment. and secondly, finding ways to link up and have partnerships with certificate programs. and very narrow occupational programs. many of those programs are given by the for-profits. for many people, the for-profits are the worst. and there are certainly examples of them being the worst. but there are some a and you mentioned james rosenbaum. he has some positive views of what might be called the best practices for profits. they do much more counseling they're much more hands-on,
they're much more direct in getting the training towards employment. i think it brings them out from the cold, if there are partnerships. you can pick out the best practices, you can pick out the best programs. you can get the counseling to the students to select what is best, rather than penalize them out of existence. which may work, may not work but that is where they will go. who is going to itt or devry? the university of phoenix graduates more blacks than any in the country. starayer university, yes the community colleges have programs, but is about time to bring them in from out of the cold. i would not say this, but i am at the american enterprise institute. i was a something different elsewhere.
we have to look much more closely at trying to ameliorate what goes on in this very chaotic and too often abusive family. and that is figuring out how to get some counseling services to these families and just not use suspension or something that leaves out what is going on in the family. i think we have to realize that it is unfortunate, but many of these black men bring their anger and frustration into the family. and think should be done about that. most importantly, we have to figure out how to have more direct employment and pathways to direct employment, while they are teenagers. so they do not end up as part of that 50%, 25-34 group that are
out of the work substantially out of the year. [applause] >> robert, thank you for inviting me here today. and thank you for hosting this important conversation. it is also an honor to be on the panel. i do not have a book that i have authored, maybe when i leave the white house. i thought i would just share a little bit about why my brother's keeper was created. and what has happened since it started. you heard today all of the statistics. you look at latino boys, people from tribal nations, asian-americans and pacific islanders, when you look at the boys, they are more like the to be born into low income families. to have teenage moms. to attend high poverty or or performing schools.
when you look at what is happening in the courts, they're facing harsher penalties. they are least likely to begin a second chance. we see them more likely to live in communities with higher crime rates. whether it is reading at grade level by third grade or graduating from high school or unemployment, you see boys and young men of color double-digit's behind their peers. and you have shocking statistics a black when you look at black boys, specifically. you sit back and you pause and realize there is something in our stream. we should do something about it. at the same time, though, it is important that we do not forget the framing. we're told you are what you are ineat. and you start to believe that. young people across the country,
it is amazing how much pressure boys and young men of color -- it seems insurmountable. a few studies talk about what are the positives that are happening. 1 in 4 black men are veterans. 400,000 black men are active serviceman. there are more in college. seven out of 10, when they are in the homes, they are intensive dads. more so than any other race groups. changing diapers, shuttling kids to school. nine out of 10 completed high school or the equivalency. we need to think about the
solution to realize that we have a generation of young people that have unique talents and assets, so we should think not only about the challenges that we have to face, but the opportunity that we have to engage with the population that is finding itself struggling. in many ways, what let the president to create my brother's keeper, this whole idea of an opportunity agenda has been important to the president. a man who saw his family and circumstance change, for the first lady as well. how do you create middle-class for able that our disadvantage? the genesis of my brother's keeper, it came out in the trayvon martin case. it surprised the press briefing core to explain the anger and
the angst that americans were feeling, especially parents of young boys of color. and he talked candidly about his own experience. how before he was famous, he would walk by a car and hear the doors locked. the implicit bias that young men of color face. and how we need to bolster them and find pathways of opportunity. but also understand there are barriers that need to be removed. and we need to make sure the kids know they matter. not facing the negative reinforcements that kids get. that was the summer of 2013, he said i don't have a secret plan. i don't think we are going to create some massive program here, but there has to be something we can do. fast forward to february of 2014, the president lost my brother's keeper.
it addresses the persistent opportunity gaps and hopes to make sure that all can reach their potential. we are looking at cradles to college and careers, we are focused on evidence-based intervention. before i took this job, i ran the social innovation fund. i think when they were looking for someone to run this, they wanted someone who had that appreciation. i am one of a nonprofit group that has a theory of change. we have to change the way we think. and for those of us that are in business and have been in business burnout philanthropy, there's something that happens we go completely to heart and lose our head. and we got sustain these organizations that have no impact. that is something i feel
strongly about. my brother's keeper is focused on intervention. we are looking at six milestones. where we know if we can have an impact, it can be transformative for any kid. but certainly for boys and young men of color. we look all the way from zero, looking at kindergarten and maternal health. reading at grade level by third grade, where he have that shift from learning to read to reading to learn. graduating from high school and rate for college and careers greeting post secondary training, and reducing violence. when you look at the high school dropout rate, we can applaud some reason gains that we made.
even for minority populations, thank god our graduation rate is about 80%. we look at boys of color, we're down to 50%. we had a team in from rochester a few weeks back, and a couple of years, -- a couple of years ago, their graduation rate was 9%. i think them work it up to 20% now. we know what education means for your future. those are the areas where working on. and the president talks about it in three ways. one, there is a moral obligation. if you work hard and play by the roles, we have a responsibility to help you succeed. when you succeed, we succeed. our neighbor's kids are our kids. i grew up poor in western massachusetts. but i grew up in a neighborhood where i knew i could not the door and i ride my bike. just making sure that we ramp up
that ethic, that we have a responsibility for each other. the other piece is recognizing that sometimes you can work really hard, and there are barriers we still have to remove. and there is an economic imperative. the stats have disconnected 7 million youths. the vast majority of them have many boys of color. there is a $1.6 trillion loss to society from a fiscal perspective, and a $4.8 trillion lost from a social perspective. if we look at a nation that is based on production and consumption, we have to make sure that we have boys and young men of color that are producing the next apples the next big thing, and we have to make sure they
consuming at $50 an hour jobs, not $9 or $10 an hour job. that is something we are focused very much on. i will tell you a lot about what we have been doing. the first thing that happened, the president created my brother's keeper task force. almost every single cabinet member and director that has anything to do with domestic policy, they were charged with coming up with recommendations to how we can expand policies and remove barriers that were not working. and in the case of those recommendations, i have been tracking the incredible work ever since. i give you examples. the department of labor has the american apprenticeship program that is working on finding pathways to employment and
jumpstarting the spirit of apprenticeship. we heard about the national guard youth challenge. public private situations like americorps, to make sure that the kids are being served. getting back to that roosevelt idea of getting kids involved and working and getting their hands dirty. we are seeing the department of education of justice issuing new guidance. there was correctional education guidance. there was an event at an alexandria juvenile detention facility. you have to educate young people when they are in your facilities. if they have disabilities, they are given certain allowances. a certain amount of time, they have to be in the classroom and are eligible or pell grants. clarifying helpful to communities -- clarifying the rules has been helpful to communities. we are seeing young boys and girls of color being suspended ridiculous rates.
you're now being pulled out of the school and sometimes involving law enforcement. you have made more money available for mental health. one of the pieces i'm most excited about -- the president want something called the my brother's keeper community challenge. there are many who have accepted this community challenge. they are convening communities in a public way of developing plans for how to reduce
disparity. the mayor in the philadelphia was the first to release his plan. the mayor from indianapolis was the second to release a plan. they're looking at doing block by block work. we are seeing communities take this seriously. there have been all sorts of there have been all sorts of ngo's that are helping these communities. we have webinars. it has created this great momentum of network across the country. has been a great private sector response. we are hearing from corporate ceos that this is usually important to their bottom line. it has been over $300 million between philanthropy and the
business community. nba has a big campaign. ubs has the next gen leaders program. we have been really impressed to see corporate america step up. it has been about building the infrastructure and beginning to implement the work. we are focused on impact. on making sure that is implemented well. make sure it leads to impact. this isn't something that is just the presidents's.
when we leave in 18 months, that this work continues. i'm hopeful that it will happen. >> that was great. [applause] >> i have maybe two or three questions and then we will open it up to the audience. there may be reactions from things that were set. if i have taken liberties, i apologize. you say above all, african-american and must find a way of dividing a viable household environment with authoritative -- we do not know what kind of hassle patterns to -- what kind of household patterns to use.
if they are dissipate in the complex postindustrial society of which they live in that this might require a social movement, facilitated to buy strong private sector report. we have heard a lot about more jobs. i am a government person. i am familiar with all of these things. if the we do those things but don't do what you are to be talking about here, do you think that we will be successful? [laughter] >> this has got to be a mutual effort.
government and private sector has to be involved in incentivizing this move. we have another situation like this? i could not find any. there have been many kinds of experiments. the icelandic thing which -- a high proportion of -- guess what, it is not a problem. most do get together. more importantly, it provides some key points in terms of childcare. for me, i am focused on the aids
problem -- when you look closely at the child rearing of who is minding the kids, there is a detailed look at what the arrangements are. whether there's a grandmother or so on. african-americans -- the one significant difference is the much higher proportion rely on siblings. twice as high. all the kids are bringing up
younger kids. i'll tell you why it is not a good idea of kids bringing up kids. they become responsible. one of the things i feel as a consequence that is you normalize the idea of hits being authoritative figures. for boys, that streams into the gang leader being the substitute for the sibling at home. this is where the government -- after school programs -- this is where i would really focus. we need structures. we know that they have improved cognitive skills. that is where i put my money as far as government support.
having done all of that come it seems african-americans have got a workout. i will not tell them how to do it. there are variations that are possible. they have got to work a system in which ensures there are adults there supervising children. too many are being socialized. what they are going to do, i carefully say, i'm not going to tell african-americans how to do it. there may be other arrangements or what have you.
i'm going to leave it to the wisdom of the african-american crowd. some solution has got to be firm. >> anyone else want to follow up? >> i think any reasonable social scientists would say family structure is a consequence of poverty. doing the best i can, we demonstrate that the rate of instability of complexity -- it is historically unique among rich nations. at no other time in history in a developed nation have we seen such a high rate of turmoil in the family about the effect on kids -- the question is what to do. we argue that the couples arrive at the hospital together saying
they are going to get married. this magic moment. we really look in depth under the hood. families are being formed by families are being formed by accident, rather than design. very brief courtships. there is no bedrock. these are not relationships. they became relationships after the fact. in response to a surprise pregnancy. the couple didn't know each other very well. there is no glue. when hard times come, they break up quickly. men and women in early adulthood are in desperate search for meaning.
if they don't have jobs or other sources of meaning, if they do not feel that they matter -- children will be that meaning source. childbearing, we argue, is motivated. multiple partner fertility, this family go around, this father go around, it is partly consequence of the fact that there are alternative sources of meaning for men and women. if you want to promote a young of color, talk to young man about his kids. what we notice or emphasise is how much men have embraced the father roles. since the time they have
embraced it, they're less and less likely to be able to claim it in a meaningful way. >> i think kathy is dead wrong. i think that this notion that is based on what men say is problematic. it wasn't the narrative that you had in your previous books previous writing, are that these men, many of them, whatever their rhetoric is that their behavior speaks much differently. i think it is a balancing act that we have to take where yes i think they are genuine. they are not lying. we should have no illusion that is their behavior. when we look at intimate violence, when we look at --
there is this book that came out. she wants to blame all the problems on the criminal justice system. these men are cheating. they are irresponsible. we have to be much more honest. not be tough love like we are with child custody, but i think we have to take a more honest approach to what the behavior is and not simply what they say in interviews. >> one of the things that i'm most fascinated about and please buy is the example that the president and first lady set. i was so thankful to the new yorker for calling to my attention this dialogue that
apparently is in the new biography about the first lady that just came out. the first lady was a couple years behind me in school i knew her brother very well, so i'm very loyal to her out of that concern. but the dialogue goes like this. when barack doddling over proposing would ask if marriage really matter she would say marriage is everything. that's in this new biography about michelle, which i think there was a lot of cooperation involved. so what i want to ask you, michael, is when the president gets some blow back about the example he and michelle have set or the role in children's lives or the importance of two parents in kids lives, how do you react to that? what does the white house react to that? what's the current importance of them as role models? >> i think the administration has certainly invested quite a bit in healthy fatherhood and
healthy relationships. you've heard the president certainly around father's day talking about what the data shows. that when kids are growing up in a healthy stable two-parent home there are all sorts of positive consequences and negative consequences when that doesn't happen. so that is something that the administration continues to push. but i think what you hear from the administration is making sure that it's a healthy situation when two folks are coupled together. so i think that is one. and i think the president's example with the first lady is hugely important for communities across the country. one of the things i noticed when i am talking to folks whether it's my own family in massachusetts or other folks they oftentimes refer to the president and first lady by their first names. it's not a disrespect thing. i think people feel an affinity towards them and a familiar quality toward them. and in my grandmother's house
next to martin luther king and john f. kennedy is now a picture of the president and first lady. so i think there's a huge role they play and the wonderful relationship they have with each other and with their daughters. >> so now let's turn to fleecing. both kathy and orlando talked about the rock and the hard place. and so bob or michael and then you guys can circle back. how possible is it that the reaction to the aspects of bad policing will be no policing in areas where many, many families and citizens need that protection? >> oh, my goodness. one of the inspiring components of my brother's keeper has been -- and i've been to many of these local action summits that
they're hosting across the country. and almost every single one law enforcement is there, they are there in force. they are helping to cofacilitate sessions, they are working with young people almost every time whether the head of public safety asking me what can we do? so i think it has created for these communities that are developing these action plans a safe place to have very difficult discussions and also to think about the long-term planning, whether increasing policing whether expanding programs having more law enforcement youth programs. so they're doing this work for the long term as opposed to waiting for crisis to happen. i think that is one of the most hugely important thing to think about this now, be honest about the challenges. we also had a group of about 20 cities they're law enforcement folks with us at the white house about a month ago for a public safety data forum where
they were thinking about how to use data. the public was very excited to make sure thaur targeting time, attention, resources where it most mearlingts and not blindly going forward. so i think that is just one of the pieces that is incredibly important. i also think the policing report that came out the 21st century policing report has been helpful, because it gives them a tool kit, a guide, set of principles that have been developed by this bipartisan diverse group of folks that they can go back to their public safety officials and also to their local elected officials and ask what are we doing here. are we adopting these principles. how far are we away from that. that's really the focus that we're trying to put there. >> could i substantiate that. i participated in one of these -- in my brother's keeper meetings. mayor lapped rue of new orleans
had a meeting on the issue of violence and the role of police. i was so impressed by that because he had the police chief there and they didn't just come in and leave. they were there for the entire length of the conference. it was remarkable seeing community leaders around new orleans as well as quite a few youth. this is really a truly remarkable meeting which went on for two-and-a-half days in which we discussed the issue and really came up with a wonderful set of suggestions. and in which the police were very much involved. but recognizing the issue of violence on the other hand that the community itself has a role to play and need the police in this program. so that was one -- if the others are like this, we are in for greatly improved situations. >> kathy or bob.
all right. so now we're going to open up for questions from the audience and we'll see what we have in the back there. >> [inaudible] i have a question about what you think are the similarities or differences between -- with the trends that you've seen among black youth when you distinguish between african american families that have been here for hundreds of years versus young immigrant african families. because i have people who tell me they use that as -- they say that oh, well african families perform better or the children from those kinds of backgrounds are better. what are your thoughts? >> first, let me say that there is a wonderful chapter in the book of just that subject. first of all, let me get rid of
one myth. a good part of the relative success that are performed in school in immigrants is a selection problem. africans have one of the sort of highest education levels. we know that. this is not reflecting cultural problem. it is concerning the immigrant which is a highly selective group. now, on the other hand i don't go to the other extreme which people simply like saying that the cult -- the culture makes no difference just selection. because as pointed out culture is important. american grown culture, that is to say immigrants in america in interacting and taking advantage of the situation in america do develop the distinctive culture, which in
fact buffers them. even as the trend shows even though they are living right there in the ghettos with the kids and all the problems and so on. so culture does matter. not because indians are bringing over this wonderful indian culture of them, why is it? there are 500 million poor people in ibbedia. or africans are bringing it over. nigeria is a mess. but the culture of a highly motivated group taking advantage of the american country, creating what they call american immigrant culture which is in fact grown here. so culture does matter in that sense. >> my name is jimmy kemp. i run the kemp foundation. thank you for having this and you all for your perspectives.
given that the topic is jobs and policy and the economy and, yes culture matters. but in terms of public policy government is not exactly the leader on the culture front. what policies can you specifically say here's the lowest hanging fruit that democrats and republicans can get on board with and -- you may not be surprised that i'm partial to true enterprise zones which from my perspective have been bartrdized into empowerment zones which aren't all bad but they're not enterprise zones which really unleash the aspiration that we want young men in our society and young women to have. so enterprise zones are an example. what are some of the other? >> well, we'll have kathy and
then michael. and we're looking for low-hanging fruit where there's potential for bipartisan consensus. >> so some will be low hanging and some will be bipartisan. >> whatever that means. >> the first thing i think we need to do is to think carefully about -- and i think you'll like this too -- this process of accidental family formation. the top of the income distribution we have all the planning in the world and at the bottom we have -- to say there's a lack of a bedrock i think is an understatement and we need to figure out how to motivate young women and men how to plan their families. and i think we can do that through public information campaigns, high school curriculum. there's been some experimentation around that. if you form a family by accident rather than by design you are almost condemned from the get-go from having a stable family. number two, i think there's a lot of -- there's not a lot of support for this idea and it's
kind of unusual because i think we're a very family oriented culture. but the idea that every child should have a mom and a dad and the culture should honor every father and treat every father as if his contributions are important. i can go on all day about how alice's book is the least social contributed book i have ever read. not all dads are thugs. that is not true. the research i've tried to replicate has shown that at any given time a man who ever has a nonmarital birth is actively fathering on a weekly basis at least one of his nonmarital children. so it's a complicated picture but we need to really focus on child support as a way -- as a way that men can claim their right to parent their children. and the third thing that i
would advocate for is the simple solutions that transform single mother serving institutions to fragile family serving institutions. behind every so-called single mother there's probably a fragile family so we should get dad in, get dad involved, get dad on the emergency contact form. >> i will be brief. i think there are three things that we have been focused on in seeing certainly some bipartisan support even if it's coming from the private sector. one is just making sure that we are filling the jobs of the future and really kind of moving away from this idea. i started my career in philanthropy and i saw my fair share of writing resume courses and you bring people in and teach them how to write a resume and soft skills and good luck. so the shift now are what are the jobs of that community and the nation and how are you making sure to prepare the population to have the skills they need and create path weags to those jobs. so one of the bing things right
now are stem fields where we have millions of jobs that we haven't prepared our nation to take on. so the president will have something called tech hire which is trying to focus communities around building those skills and creating pathways. so that certainly is one thing. we're also seeing a lot of coding work that's happening. because sometimes you can start getting into a lucrative career without even having to have a four-year degree if you can learn coding skills. so that's one piece. how do we -- this is low-hanging fruit and everyone can agree around that. the second thing is just this idea about upskilling. and i've had a chance -- the department of labor has been focused on this. i've had a chance to see it at so many levels taking someone that may be a bellman at a hotel and making sure they're getting the skills and training on the job they need so they can become the night manager and then the manager. but making sure people are
getting the skills to take on higher paying jobs and more education to take care of their families. the third piece is second chances. we're seeing all sorts of -- you have so many bad programs with folks getting out of jail and trying to get them a job. but now you have efforts like the center for employment opportunities that's an evidence-based program that is beginning to work with folks that are incarcerated while they are still in jail giving them skills, helping them think about the life afterwards, getting them a job the day after they get out, interacting, making sure they have money in their pocket the first week. how are you integrating people back into the community. so i think those are three things that are already beginning to work if we could get more support it could be even bigger and better. >> i want to mention four. i think the private sector can really become creatively involved in what i want to emphasize, that after scool care and precare. i want to see the private
sector become more involved because many are simply not efficient enough. and secondly, job training programs. we actually studied various organizations which addresses the issue of not so much how you get a job, because the problem isn't getting jobs it's keeping jobs, because they lack the soft skills. emphasis on respect, for example, looking the wrong way you walk off the job. so there are organizations which are six weeks, eight weeks, that trains these people into how you sort of -- how you smile at people, how you present yourself and so on. the one we saw is called strive gu there are many others. they work. in terms of these kids to not resent. they welcome it. they want it. and third one of the
remarkable thing about inner city kids, is their level of entrepreneurship. it's pretty amazing with what's done with hip-hop, for example, the way in which the internet technology is used. i think that in some equivalent of the microcredit system which has existed all over asia and so on, an american version of this in which these entrepreneurial talent which is out there in the cities is encouraged and people are provided with some capital. i'm pretty sure it will work. finally, we are very impressed in our evaluation of programs that the youth opportunity programs have been the sort of thing the president used to do before he became president. that quite of few of them have been evaluated and shown to work very well, have sort of
very, very significant positive contributions. so those are four upscaling these would be great. but those are four areas in which i think the private seblingtor could really sort of help. >> so we are scheduled to go to 1:30 which we are passed but maybe i will take one more question. this gentleman right here. and then -- but i want to thank everybody for a great panel so far. yes, sir. >> i want to thank everybody all the panelists. it's been very refreshing. i've been trying to capture this on video because when i get back i want to share it with quite a few people. i'm starting to know why sometimes academics tend to get out of touch. because i think oftentimes we're using old and outdated data. i think what michael is talking about getting out in the field today is going to be the best
measure and caliber of trying to set the tenor as to where the dollars should go, as to what the academics need to sometimes come into the trenches or put research dollars in programs such as what we're doing. we run a program called career innovations of america. our program deals with student-based options, personal discovery. i'm working with young people that i'm sitting down talking with and i'm trying to find out what is it they want to do with their lives? we pull all types of discovery programs first. we do personal discovery, which is more subjective in nature. then we do objective discovery which allows us to see what's the divide and the deviations
between subjectively what they want and objectively what are the inventories they have right now. and then we attempt to build a pathway from what they say they want to do based on where they are with the various inventories as it relates to character. >> we need a question. >> so what i'm trying to put as a question here, are there research dollars available for programs that need funding so that we can take models such as mine? >> i can answer that. that is what i call a quamet what you just did. so i have to pitch my old job the social innovation fund. we deploy about $70 million a year not tons of money but pretty good money to improve in scale evidence-based practices. so if you have at least
preliminary results, we provide grants between 1 and 10 million to both do the research and evaluation and to increase your level of evidence getting up to randomized control trials as well as scaling. so it's national service.gove forward slsh slash fiss. so there's the i 3 program at the department of education that does the same thing. and sometimes philanthropy talks about evidence and evaluation but the money is so hard to come by. we have our grantees spending 30 40% of their budgets on the evaluation base because we know how important that is. thrgs money certainly out there from a federal government perspective. also take a look at michelle's organization, america achieves. they have something called money ball. and they have been tracking
funders and government and private sector sources. >> that is very good. also is it notre dame professor sullivan has set up a laboratory on economic opportunity to do strong evaluations that find result. so great panel. thank you all for being here. thank you. this is just the beginning of a discussion. we have lots more to talk about in the coming years. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> good evening everyone.
welcome to this latest on candidate series. tonight we'll be getting to know senator sanders and find out where he stands on the key issues. after the break we'll have our studio audience ask the questions. before we start with that let's get a quick look at the candidate's biography. >> bernie sanders was born in 19 41 in brooklyn. he graduated from the university of chicago in 1964 and soon after he moved to vermont. sanders first elected position was as mayor of burlington, the independent won that 1981 election by only 10 votes and went on to serve as mayor for four terms. in 1988 he launched his first run for vermont's soul congressional seat but two years later he was elected to the house of representatives. then in 2006 he won a seat in the senate and was elected to a second term in 2012. with 24 years of legislative
experience he is the longest serving independent member of congress in the history of this country. he has focused his career on supporting the middle class, environment, universal health care, supporting veterans and is very outspoken about what he calls the influence of big money in politics. sanders is married with four children and seven grand children. >> let's introduce senator sanders. . i'm not going to be able to ask this of a lot of candidates because you are an independent. which party would you run in? >> there is a lot of i think disappointment and disillusionment with both major political parties and i am the longest serving independent. on the other hand, putting together a campaign in 50 states outside of the two-party system having to get on the ballot et cetera, requires a lot of time, energy, and money. so that is one of the issues that we're weighing right now. >> is there a preference? would you prefer to run as an
independent if possible? >> if i were a billionaire that would be the preference. >> the likelihood is that you would run as a democrat? >> we'll see. >> let's talk about some of the things that have been in the news. obviously the situation involving foreign policy and isis is garnering a lot of opinion varying opinions on how aggressive the u.s. should be. >> let me start off by saying i was very disappointed by the letter sent by 47 of my republican colleagues, which essentially is trying to sabotage the effort of john kerry and the obama administration to reach an agreement with iran so that they do not develop a nuclear weapon but do it in a way that does not require a war. we have been in two wars for over the last decade in iraq and afghanistan. i voted against the wake. i do not want -- wark i do not want -- war in iraq. i hope very much that that agreement will in fact be
developed. the second point that i would make is i get very concerned by countries like saudi arabia who literally border on iraq where isis is functioning, and they say we want american troops on the ground. well saudi arabia and people don't know this, has the third largest defense budget in the world. bigger than u.k. or france. i think at the end of the day the war against isis is about a war for the soul of islam which is going to have to be won by the muslim nations themselves. we should be supportive and we are supportive with air attacks and special operations. but the day-to-day struggle is going to have to be waged by the muzz almost countries themselves and i want to see them get more involved than they are right now. >> so a more limited approach and no boots on the ground when it comes to isis.
>> correct. >> as for the letter you were alluding to involves the nuclear program in iran. do you believe iran should have the capability or have a program? >> absolutely not. that would destabilize a region that is already unstable. but i think if the alternative to a negotiated process to prevent them is a war i want to do everything i can to prevent the war and support the effort for a negotiated peace process to prevent them from getting a weapon. >> what do you think the u.s.'s role is in the middle east when it comes to -- big picture now -- the islamic terror groups that are growing in size and we're seeing some home grown instances of where they're able to recruit in the u.s. >> i think we have to organize mobilize, and support the nations in the region. along with the rest of the industrialized world we have got to give them support in terms of air strikes which we are doing right now, special operations. but the idea -- we have been at
war in iraq and afghanistan for well over a decade and the cost has been extraordinary for this country. and the idea of getting involved in a never-ending war this that region disturb me very, very much. so i think at tend of the day the muslim countries themselves with our support, they're going to have to take the lead to defeat isis. >> and you're aware that people will see that as that's burying our head in the sand. by the time we do get aggressive they will be on our door. >> i don't accept that. we have been in afghanistan and iraq. how did the war in iraq work out? was it so good? i don't think so. i think it destabilized the entire region and led to many of the problems that we're seeing right now. so i don't think that the united states is going to win the war for the soul of islam. i don't think so. the muslim countries themselves are going to have to win that war -- with our support.
but they're going to have to be front and center. >> how much does the immigration debate play a role when it comes to national security? or do you believe that to be separate? >> i think that's a separate issue. not a national security issue. >> so as that issue is being debated in washington, d.c. and what to do about it, a lot of people believe the country can't sustain more immigration, legal or otherwise, just because of the stress that it puts on our public services. where do you see this debate headed and what's -- >> i believe -- i voted several yeerings ago against the imdepration bill. because of provisions that it had in there that worried me very much. that is, right now real unemployment in this country is 11%, youth unemployment is 17% african american youth unemployment is higher than that. i don't think we should be bringing in a lot of low-wage workers from other countries because god only knows that we have a lot of people in this country that can do that work.
on the other hand, what i do believe absolutely is that we need to develop a path towards citizenship for the 11 or 10 million undocumented workers. we're not going to ship them elsewhere. there needs to be a process. the last bill which i did support, i managed to get a $11 p 5 million provision which would provide money for youth employment opportunity which is a significant step forward. >> beef up border security, is that a priority? >> sure. we have done that in a very significant way. >> we'll take a quick break get to our audience. stay with us. we'll continue our conversation right after the break. stay with us. >> now conversation with the candidate continues. >> welcome back to conversation with the candidate. tonight's get vermont senator bernie sanders. time to bring in questions from our audience.
i'll jump in if needed but let's go to is a george sanders, no relationship. >> my question tonight is in addition to voting in each of our elections what can we as individual citizens do on an ongoing basis to hold this congress more accountable for its dysfunction? >> thank you. that is an extremely important question i think shared by millions of americans. in my view what we have right now in this country is a congress which is heavily dominate bid big money interest and large campaign contributors. that's the sad reality. in this last mid term election the koch brothers and other billionaire families spent hundreds of millions of dollars. so what does an ordinary citizen do? number one we have got to address the issue of voter turnout. the very least we can do is vote. but in the last election 63% of
the american people didn't vote. 80% of young people did not vote. low income people did not vote. and billionaires spent huge sums of money. so the first thing we have to do is create an environment which says american democracy is supposed to involve all people, not just the people on top. second of all, i think what we need to do is to develop a middle class agenda that says that our main function in congress now is to reverse the decline of the american middle class. what does that mean? it means raising the minimum wage in my view, it means creating the millions of jobs that this country desperately needs. it means asking the wetsdziest people to start paying their fair share of taxes. that is what the american people want. if politicians in washington are not prepared to support the middle class, tell them thank you but no thank you. your term is over. >> thank you for the question. let's go to our next question from kathleen. >> thank you for being here.
with the average social security yearly earned income of around $15,000 how do us seniors get the message accepted by politicians and the voters that we can't afford any cuts to the social security and medicare programs whether by privatization or plain cuts? >> thank you so much for that question. and i say that as the founder of the defending social security caucus in the senate. just a few facts. let me be very clear. if you see somebody getting up on tv and they're saying social security is going broke and we need to make cuts in social security they are simply not telling you the truth. today, social security in its trust fund has $2.8 trillion can pay out every benefit owed to every eligible american for the next 18 years. social security is not going broke. and as you indicate, the
average person right in the middle of getting $14 thou a year there are seniors in new hampshire, vermonts and in this country trying to get by on 11, 12 $13,000 a year. it is cruel to talk about cutting benefits for those people. i have help lead the fight against efforts to cut. what's the solution? 18 years means we're not in crisis but we need it longer than that. if somebody is making 10 million and somebody is making 118,000 a year they are paying the same exact amount into social security trust fund. you lift that cap. you start at 250,000. and you can can not only extend social security until 2060, you can expand benefits. i was last week at a press conference with the national committee to preserve social security and medicare. 2 million signatures on petitions from seniors all across this country don't cut social security. i'm the ranking member of the budget committee and i'm going
to be in a fight with my republican colleagues who in many cases want to cut social security. it is an enormously important social issue. we have got to expand it not cut it. >> do you believe, senator, that you can expand benefits in social security without means testing? >> absolutely. it's a bad idea because what's the means? you know what the means is? not billionaires. it gets down to 40 or 50,000. we have an increase in poverty in this country among seniors. people are struggling to determine whether they are going to pay for their food, heat, medicine. you don't cut social security. you strengthen it. >> thank you. this next question from ken of franklin. good to see you. >> senator if you were chosen as the next president of the united states, a child born on your inauguration day would probably graduate from high school in the year 2035, would probably retire from the
workforce about the 2080's. i wonder if you can tell us your ideas, your plans policies that you would put in place to ensure that that child is able to compete in an obviously increasingly in plex and difficult marketplace in the world. >> thanks. let me be very frank. as the longest serving independent in american history my views are a little different than many of my colleagues. let me start off. we treat children in this country abysmally. every american should be ashamed that we have by far the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized world. about one out of five kids is living in poverty. that should not be the case. second of all, our child care system is a disaster. working families in vermont new hampshire, all over this country are finding it very difficult to find quality affordable child care. thirdly, if a kid graduates high school and wants to go to
college. and i think as you've indicated we live in a highly competitive global economy. why are we making it harder for kids to go to college because the cost of college is off the wall off the roof. in countries throughout the world, germany scandinavia college costs zero because they understand it is a good investment for the future of their country. i am going to introduce legislation very shortly that will make public clidges and universities tuition free. i think that's a good thing for the american people and a good thing for our economy. so naking college affordable, ending the outrage that so many of our young people are struggling with these huge student debts. all of this speaks to changing our national priority. you don't give tax breaks to billionaires. you don't spend more than we should on the military. and then say to working families all over this country sorry your kids can't go to college. so i am very much in favor of changing our national priority
paying more attention to the needs of our young people. >> free tuition sounds great but how do we pay our bills? >> at a time when we have massive wealth inequality, when 99% is going to the top 1% i can think of many ways to fund higher education. >> next question. coming from social media facebook, jim and meredith write, over the years there have been a variety of labels placed on you not the least flattering of which is socialist. do you feel you are a socialist? >> i am if you ask me i am a democratic socialist. what does that mean? it means that it makes sense to look at countries like denmark and norway and sweden and countries throughout europe who have accomplished some great things for working families. go to a country like denmark. they don't have discussions about whether or not people can afford health care. health care is a right of all people and they end up spending much less per capita than we
do. we are the only nation in the industrialized world that doesn't guarantee health care to all people as a right and we end up spending a lot more than other countries. there's something to be learned from those countries. in terms of higher education the huge issue in this country. country after country throughout europe, which have had labor governments or democratic socialist governments, their cost is zero for the family. that makes sense to me. retirement benefits are stronger in many of those countries. in denmark you know what the minimum wage is? minimum wage is about $20 an hour if you work at mcdonald's. not too bad. so i think as a nation we should learn from those countries the combat poverty to provide health care to all people free college education and have a tax system which is fair and progressive. which says to the people on top in those countries you've got a lot of money we're going to ask you to start paying a fair share so we can have a strong middle class.
>> we thank them for that question. back to our studio audience. eileen. >> welcome, senator. how can the clients that i work with at a homeless shelter and soup kitchen be part of the political process when they're totally convinced that money buys campaigns and they're very discouraged and unfortunately i think it contributes to the huge percentage that don't vote. >> eye lean, that is a -- eileen that is an enormously important question. i think it is not only homeless people -- and congratulations for your work. taking care of the homeless and the most vulnerable people in our society. it is not just homeless people who think that the deck is sfacked against them. it is tens of millions of people who understand that while they may have the right to vote, billionaires can spend hundreds of millions of dollars and really buy politicians.
and changing that is not going to become easy. and if i do run for president that certainly would be my major mission. i would hope that regardless of our political point of view whatever it may be, no american is happy when 63% of the people do not participate in the last election. so what we need, in my view, is to give hope to people through an agenda which speaks to their needs. all right. what do low income people need? they need decent-paying jobs. right? so we've got to raise the minimum wage to a living wage. you've got people in this state and vermont who make 25, 30,000 a year, don't get any overtime because they're so-called supervisors. women are making 78 cents on the dollar compared to what men make. that's wrong. we have to change that as well. in terms of the needs of low income people we should not have homelessness and i have introduced and passed legislation to build low income housing, low income rental housing so people can live with dignity.
but we have some 45 million people in this country living in poverty. that's almost more than at any time in the modern history of america. and at the same time we're seeing a proliferation of millionaires and billionaires. that is the crisis that we face and that has to be changed. >> thank you, senator. let's go back to the audience. another question from will andrews. >> thank you. it is my pleasure to be here. my question is a form of united states consider a form of isolationism to not send men material, and money overseas until we get our own v.a. our own social security taken care of. >> what i'm hearing you say before we spend billions more abroad let's take care of the american people. >> yes. >> as the former chairman of the veterans committee in the senate and who worked in a bipartisan way to pass the most significant veterans legislation in many, many years which will significantly improve health care for our veterans clearly we need to
take care of the people in need in this country. but i would also say that we can't bury our heads in the sand. it's a dangerous world out there. as i just mentioned to josh a moment ago i do not support sending american combat troops into iraq to take on isis. that's primarily a job of saudi arabia, of qatar of the u.a.e. of jordan. those countries should lead the effort. on the other hand, we can't be isolationists. but what you're really talking about is changing national priorities in the country taking care of those people who are hurting and not giving more tax breaks to corporations who stash their money in the caymen ilents. but let's get back to the question asked earlier. why does that happen? why do we ignore the needs of the middle class and provide for the billionaire class? and that is the power they have politically today. that is what we've got to change.
thank you. >> all right. another question from the audience. robert up next. thanks for joining us. >> thank you. senator sanders, as president would you pursue a carbon tax to make all forms of energy competitors and to give much needed dollars to infrastructure projects? >> well, the answer is that's what i've done along with senator barbara boxer, she and i several years ago introduced the first carbon tax in the history of the united states congress. look, let me touch on an issue that i know is controversial and it's sensitive. i happen to believe and agree with the overwhelming majority of scientists who tell us that climate change is real, it is caused by human activities, it is already causing devastating problems. and if we do not get our act together the situation will only get worse in years to come. so i believe that we need to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel.
it is unacceptable to me that you have these cole companies and oil companies putting forth all of this carbon and not paying the cost associated with it. so the answer is yes i do support a carbon tax. >> when you talk about climate change being real, in your opinion, how far should the government go to combat it, deal with it? >> i agree with the world's scientific community that climate change is the major environmental crisis facing the planet. that they are estimating that in this country the planet will become five to ten degrees farenheit warmer by the end of this century leading to floods droughts, extreme weather disturbances. coastal communities under water. i think we have a major crisis. and i think the government has got to be very bold along with governments throughout the world. not only an american problem. it is an international problem
in transforming our energy system. it is a huge issue. >> another question coming from facebook. he writes. >> well, when i was mayor of burlington we have university of vermont there, one or two kids were actually smoking marijuana. that was a joke. it was more than one or two. i don't recall that too many of them were being a arrested. it wasn't an issue we felt was the highest priority of arresting kids smoking marijuana. i'm also on board legislation have cosponsored legislation dealing with medical marijuana. i think colorado was the first state in the country to legalize marijuana. i want to take a good look at the pluses and minuses of that and we can go from there. >> we have a couple of minutes. let's go back to studio audience. gabe. >> welcome to beautiful
downtown manchester. so personal public cost dealing with alzheimer's and dementia. research to prevent these debilitating diseases is definitely inadequate. would you support investing in high levels of funding for research to curb future costs that could bankrupt medicare and medicaid at some point? >> we have about 30 seconds. >> the the abc is absolutely. and you're right. the projection is that the cost of dealing with alzheimer's' is going to be many, many tens of billions of dollars. so it makes a lot of sense to us from a human point of view as well as a cost effective point of view to try to find cures to that terrible illness. yes, i certainly would support increased funding. >> thank you for the question. thank you, senator. that's all the time we have. next in our conversation with the candidate series republican donald trump is going to be opt
>> the hearing will come to order. i need to first express my thoughts and prayers to my colleague elijah cummings and what the people of baltimore are going through. our hearts, prayers and thoughts are with you and your neighbors and your friends, community, the police officers and we're proud of you in the way you're conducting this and getting through it. and you're a true leader, as i would hope the people of baltimore maryland would listen to your message but know our thoughts and prayers are with you. >> mr. chairman, i want to take this moment to not only thank you but thank the members of
our committee and who have expressed their concern about baltimore. and you mr. chairman have a kind of unique perspective because you had a chance to visit baltimore with me before you even became chairman. so you had a chance to see what the issues are in our city. so i'm looking forward to working with you and others to try to heal some of that pain. and i do appreciate you. and i will never forget your visit and people in my city will not forget your visit. thank you for your comments. >> well, thank you. we will be conducting this hearing a little differently today. i am going to ask unanimous consent that we're going to change the order here that we will recognize our panel, allow them to give their opening statements, and then we will go into recess. we will reconvene. we will give our opening statements, and then we will
get into questions. but given that we have the very historic presence of the japanese prime minister here to address a joint session of congress, we are particularly sensitive that, for instance, one of our witnesses the house sergeant at arms, mr. paul irving has to leave us early in order to fulfill his duties. to accommodate his schedule scuke to foregow opening statements for us and to swear in the witnesses and begin their testimony. without objection so ordered. we'll reconvene 3034u7b9s after the conclusion of the joint session to continue our hearing. without objection so ordered. we will now recognize our panel of witnesses. first we have the honorable paul irvingings sergeant at arms of the house of representatives. accompanied by the deputy sergeant at arms whose expertise may be needed during question. we have admiral commander of
nor ad. mr. robert -- help me. seles deputy secretary of defense home integration and defense support of civil authorities at the united states department of defense. the honorable michael huerta, administration of the f.a.a. the honorable joseph clancey, mr. robert mcclain chief of the united states park police, and many kim dine chief of the united states capitol police. we welcome you all. pursuant to committee rules all witnesses are to be sworn before they testify. mr. blodgeet you are included as well. we would ask that all the panel please rise and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
thank you. you may be seated. let the record reflect that all the witnesses answered in the affirmative. all of your written statements will be entered into the record. we would ask that you limit your verbal comments to 5 minutes. we will recognize administrator -- mr. irving first. we will then excuse him to eesscort the prime minister into the house of representatives. >> thank you. good morning, mr. chairman, mr. cummings, and members of the committee. i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. as sergeant at arms and chief law enforcement officer of the house of representatives i am fully dedicated to ensuring the safety of the capitol complex, a mission performed in close cooperation with the u.s. capitol police and men and women. before i begin i would like to extend my thanks to all the men and women of the u.s. capitol police for their capable and professional response to the incident on april 15.
police officers and officials promptly responded to the west front and arrested the individual and ensured the craft was harmless. we are currently working closely with our partners in federal law enforcement the department of defense transportation and homeland security to maintain robust air space security within the challenging confines of the urban environment of the national capital region. in particular working with our partner to make sure early detection tracking and warning systems ensuring there is consistent and constant interagency communication and early warning communicated in real time. improving and ensuring immediate and ongoing communications to members and staff during a security incident. and honing the counter measures and policies consistent with those counter measures. since the event, i have ordered the chief of the capitol police to utilize the housing notification system to alert members, staff, and to the extent possible visitors in as timely manner as possible to alert regarding all life safety
and potentially threatening events that impact the capital community. the incident on april 15 reminds us all the greatest access to the capital can at times be one of our greatest challenges. however, iver incident allows us to enhance our training and be better prepared. thank you. >> i thank you. please be excused and tend to your duties. we thank you and look forward to seeing you back at the conclusion of that event. admiral, you are now recognized for five minutes. >> chairman chafe ets ranking member cummings, and distinguished members of the committee i am honored to be here today from a national security perspective i want to emphasize the sbs tit of these discussions in an unclassified environment. an open discussion of even unclassified information could be pieced together to pose a risk to our national security, therefore i cannot go into many details that are deemed sensitive. however, in a closed session i
am ready and able to talk to you in as much detail as you need. nor adds role is to dedepevpbd the united states and canada including the national capital region. known as the washington, d.c. special flight rules area is monitored by a sophisticated integrated air defense system which is a vast network of radars cameras and other detection warning devices. each system is designed to detect track and monitor specific parameters. the integrated air defense system was in direct response to the attacks of 9/11. we are extremely capable of identifying and tracking potential threats to the national capital region from commercial aviation down to small single propeler aircraft. however, a smaun mall gyro capture despites it's assessed low threat presents a technical challenge. this is an interagency effort
that collectively understands the technical challenges associated with these types of threats and vehicles and with our partner here at the table we will continue to implement technical and procedural solutions. i know the committee has questions and i look forward to talking with you today. >> thank you. i appreciate it. >> thank you chairman ranking member and distinguished members of the committee. i would like to thank you for the opportunity to address the don department of defense's role in securing the air space of washington, d.c. i would like to acknowledge that aspects of this issue are very sensitive for the department of defense from a national security stand point. i look forward to continuing this discussion in a classified setting. because i know there is much to discuss i will be brief. to this end there are four points i would like to emphasize today. number one defending the united states is the department of defense's highest priority. number two we are well poss
turd to defend the united states number three the department works very closely with its federal partners and law enforcement to protect the national capitol air space. last, the department continually pursues opportunities to enhance our homeland defense capabilities. the national security strategy makes it clear the united states government has no greater responsibility than protecting the american people. our national defense strategy makes protecting and defending the homeland the department's first priority. to the men and women of the department of defense military and civilian these specific words are the reason they serve and the very core of their professional lives. every day these fine men and women whether serving here at home or some far off location across the globe dedicate themselves to protecting the american people and defending the united states. due to the leadership of the president, the secretary of defense, and the congress'
steadfast support d.o.d. is well poss turd with the capabilities. under director's lead, we are positioned to monitor to dissuade deter, and if necessary defeat airborne threats. in this effort to secure the skies over our nation's capitol, the men and women of the department of defense do not serve alone. they are joined by their counterparts at the department of homeland security, department of transportation, department of of justice, and our law enforcement partners and the whole government approach to protecting the national air space. working together we have built a network of barriers to protect the national air space system against any and all threats. we have improved our threat detection capabilities integrated our threat response, and refined our procedures to
optimize response effectiveness. we continually look for opportunities to improve our defenses. we understand that no matter how good we are the adversary remains committed and we can always be better. to this end, we are dedicated to continual improvement over our policies procedures, and operational capabilities. working with our federal partners we test plan, exercise to improve our effectiveness. this is what the nation expects. we are committed to meeting this expectation, and this is our obligation. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. we appreciate your leadership. and your supported of the men and women of the department of defense. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. >> thank you chairman chafe ets, ranking member cummings members of the committee for the opportunity to appear before you today. i would like to address