tv Discussion on New Technology and Cities CSPAN September 7, 2015 5:50pm-6:46pm EDT
income, and then they are reinvesting in the local economy. it is very difficult with how you regulate these in the existing contracts. i want to talk about what is fueling the trend behind them. there are three fundamental trends that are fueling disruption across the globe are let's start with the first one, hyper connectivity. what this means is we going to a public restaurant, when the first thing to look for? wi-fi. we are all walking hotspots. wi-fi has connected us and connected a number of devices. the population right now of the earth is 7.1 9 billion people. are 7.2 2 billion devices on this planet. we now have more devices than people. an hypercreated connected network or we'll have the ability to jump online and do really interesting things. that brings me to the next disruptive trend, critical mass. globe is connected to the internet.
there could easily respect in google that are looking at richard matt stood by by cytolytic companies, drug companies, and taking internet and bring it to third world countries. we'vecloser to home, and 87% of the united states connected to the internet. we still have a gap and the digital divide that we are making strides against that device. i thought this was timely, yesterday the white house announced they are offering free internet to 200,000 people in over 20 cities across the country. google made a similar announcement, saying that anyone in a city with public housing has access to google fiber, for free. we are trying to take the digital divide and shrink it. that is fueling some really interesting behavior online. the single most disruptive trends we're saying is what people do online. this is what happens every 60 seconds online. over 3 million facebook likes, that is a lot of likes.
we get a lot of activity happening online. but i want you to rewind 10 years ago, to win the internet was just starting to creep into our homes, and we are starting to use it more. we wanted to build a website we had to learn html and 14 days, a book this effect. i still have that book, i never read it. the big challenge at that time was the barrier creating something and introducing it into the market was to grate. but now, look at today. people are creating things that rival anything 15 years ago in seconds. they're doing it from their phone. they can to get picture, put a filter on it, upload it to instagram in seconds. that is technology that would we canvaled anything created a matter have the html books we read. the area of creating has been removed. this is the single most disruptive thing for government. there are no barriers. anybody can introduce anything into the market, at what we have seen is that technology has
unlocked people. every thing the screen has been crowd funded. for those of you not familiar with grant funding to me could take any idea, any concept, and a radical thing you want to have implemented, and you can put it online to a global marketplace. it's of the lecture idea, they can invest money behind it. it is pretty fascinating technology. i want you to look at the watch at the very bottom. it is the watch. raise some money, to build this watch that connects to your phone. there was no market to this, is what they were told. this is before the apple watch. websitey went to a cloaking starter commands of this raise 100 thousand dollars in 30 days and we will have people pledge money. they look to raise $100,000 in 30 days, and in 30 days they raised $10 million. people validated there was a market need for that technology.
they were able to lead from the market. it was not about who they knew, they were able to introducing new technology to the market. fast forward today, they announced a pebble time watch, which is a competitor to the apple watch. they were looking to raise 500,000 dollars, and they raised several millions again. the market has validated the solutions. it is not by who you know, it is a global network of interconnected did people that have the ability to influence change in the market using their wallets. crazy technology. when you look at that worldwide we see very disruptive things like the arab spring, like om group are wall street -- like occupy wall street, and my favorite example, does anybody remember this? bank of america. they cannot a few years ago and said they were going to charge five dollars a month for having debit card people people did not respond farewell. but her footkly backwards and said they would
not do that. we listen to the crowd, and the crowd influence in the ripple to change the decision. because therful technology that unlocks people has allowed them to create new organizational structures online. people can self organize on the internet. whether this on facebook or on instagram, even if the platform does not have the ability to form groups, m.i.t. has done research to prove that people still form hierarchical structures online. structures toe influence the market. the influenced is this decisions, and disruptive actions. but now a lot of their sites infringe on government, because it is a big focus area for the workers that are coming out. would introduce new concepts, trying to influence the change from the outside, but most of it was deflected in almost in just just a little bit would make it through that frame. fast-forward to today, we have a very different landscape. what changes rapidly as coming into government, whether they embrace it or not.
people are able to influence change in the community using disruptive technology outside of the return control of government. airbnb, and other examples. what are people don't technology? one, people are building new ways to work. by now 53 million americans freelance online. that is 34% of our working class. million americans. that is a lot of people who are freelancing online. are 1099 employees. they're going to a website with a headset i'm good at marketing and these other activities, and businesses have met them and hired them to do this visualize actions. we have distributed work. businesses can have logo design very cheaply, but there's also changed the way that millennial's look to labor market in the future as well.
that 53 million american staff is going to go to 74 million americans within the next five years. that is 50% of the work horse. -- staggeringking statistic. as we do models of work that are embracing technology, the future is distributed, it is centralized, and workers are engaged. your best employees in the public sector may not actually work for you. they made contractors, they muffle into a model like mover foreplay before the do highly specialized task for you and do a very cheaply, and the government is able to save money . it is something we're sternly to see of the consumer side that works its way into government. the modeling this is the only way he could have procured outside of your face. mrs. very disruptive for the future. they're finding new ways to
diffuse information in the market. the way that we adopt technology in the market is changed. hundreds of millions of dollars of r&d, and elegantly front that by introducing a concept online. anyone can do it and you introduce a market change. we have the potential to disrupt a market segment. it does not matter who you know, or what your role is for you can introduce and that creates change. we look at the locations on that of government, there is a site that allows you to take civic projects and put them online and proud fun than the escrow fund them. now you can go to website because it was a new playground in the neighborhood, and you can crowd for all your neighbors and you can do-it-yourself we are starting to see the implications on land use change high-technology online as people are crowdfunding the myths that they want i have not seen it was put in a water line yet, but i
have seen doug parker and playgrounds and abilities have been done through this. let's talk about the poster to homes that is a very deep passion of mine, inattentive company. one of the staggering things that we have seen is that we have a new breed of startups that are targeting the public sector. that are startups solely focused on doing business with government for taking the place of government. so this is example that is cold bridge. it is a path of mass transit system. think of hoover for city buses. this is a real start of his life in select markets now. they basically displaced city buses and have a more efficient routing system. it is a very popular technology, very disruptive. they are operating in a similar construct to her. that thesenoticing companies that are popping up left and right, they are targeting the public sector.
and when to report potholes, and find ways i can submit ideas for my government agency, they are doing it in administration, they they are doing it as service some of thent companies on a screen here, there is a full list online as well, you can see this market is booming. state and local government alone spends $96 billion a year on information technology. that is a lot of money for technology. it is continuing to rise.
they will increase because technology is a backbone to everything. whether you are looking at building a road or revamping a website. that leads us to new ways to aid government. there are new models to provide aid to government. about code forgs america is they have a system of the relevant communities that are active, and finding new ways to help government by building the knology for government. the national civic day of hacking allowed people to come together in communities and build technology to prove -- improved cities. i was able to produce big one in austin. the technology was amazing. potholeot talking about reporting, we are talking about new plans for cities. it is fascinating to see the shifts between when i was in government than five years post
government we are seeing interesting things that are being built by the civic community and aided by organizations like code for america. let's talk about how cities are responding. we have dedicated models looking at trying to incubate innovation inside cities. boston new mechanics is an example. it is an organization that has been in the city to help incubate and diffuse ideas within city government. we are starting to see really interesting cases as cities look at focusing on innovation. they are doing it to these pop-up organizations. we also see sandboxes being created. philadelphia created an innovation lab. they invite the community and employees. they come up with ideas to improve government. they are creating a dedicated physical space for that.
when you think about innovation it is a broad concept. it is not something employees can wrap their arms around. my providing a physical space, people can go in collaborate, share ideas, and it has been interesting. ourher interesting shift new models of engagement. civic engagement when i was in government was trying to get somebody to vote or show up to account for meeting. that has been -- council meeting. that has been flipped. sensor, as you drive through boston, you can use an app that can determine if you hit a street bumps, pothole, or regular road vibration. it is interesting, you do not have to get up your car, you do not have to take a picture. it is by a citizen opting into their network, they can get that information. that is interesting because it is a new form of engagement.
copenhagen has done this with their bike ride sharing program. as people do their bike ride share some of their mapping pollution and potholes in real time. experimentingso with this in south america as we look at using phones for early detection of earthquakes. we have been able to get to seven seconds early detection using a network of phones. there are several implications of this technology. when you think about citizen engagement, the big shift is it may not be them coming to a council meeting. there may be a segment of the population willing to opt in and share data in an anomalous format -- anonymous format. we also see a racing of disruption for public of. usedcounty in michigan uber to help take people to jury
duty. most people want to get out of jury duty, but if you have a black town car pick you up, you may be more inclined. i love this example, because rather than trying to regulate and ban theseechnologies they looked at the applications of it doing good. there is one state looking 8 -- car seniorer to citizens. it is more convenient, they can report it whenever they needed -- need it. at other disruptive technologies, there is also examples for resiliency which have started to impact cities. situation disaster like hurricane sandy, there is an automatic need for housing. when you have displaced residents, you have to find a way to house them. people realize they could leverage the infrastructure of air bnb two house displaced residents.
it is using the sharing economy, using these peer-to-peer networks and flipping them around to solve problems. we are also seeing new forms of recruiting external talent and government innovation. one of the biggest challenges is procurement and government. we see cities issuing innovation challenges. they look for ideas and technologies that can solve pacific points -- specific points. it is interesting to cb's challenge-based models. the federal government have a website called challenge.gov. if you have a solution for some of these challenges, you can submit online and get instantaneous feedback and validation for the network. -- from the network. results, losn
angeles announced an innovation fund. it is easy to get ideas, it is hard to implement them print they have a dedicated fund within the general ledger for ideas that employees have. the brilliance is is they started internal grid when you start external, your employees they are trying to fund ideas from individual employees. they have had some success. they are focusing on the internal cultural asset of incubating innovation. another example is this new model of how to work with startups. i mentioned an abundance of startups targeting government. this is something called entrepreneurship in residence. san francisco said they wanted to open up their doors to the startup community and allow people to come in and incubate technology here. they put out a call, over 200 people -- companies submitted to
be a part of this program. they selected six for this program. there have been great results with different law enforcement technologies. now, open data. people are using it as a platform for innovation and change. it is the plumbing minis to be in place for some of these technologies to grow and flourish. a lot of interesting tech and government. one of the biggest challenges is how to actually implement it. city government and council -- convince the council that something needs to be happen -- to happen. i have done research. shift your mindset. for the first time in history, if you do not build it, someone else will. people are displacing and replacing functions of government like manchester -- mass transit because we have not focused on partnerships and ecosystems. redefine innovation. innovation is seen as a fluffy
concept within government. there are a lot of concrete variables tied to it. when i define innovation, i look at the ipad. it was not an invention, it was innovative, it was all of the already inwere existence, we found a new use. they took the iphone and repackaged it. when you look at innovation and the public sector, it is about finding adjacent possibilities for the existing things you have. is not always about finding or creating new. it is about taking components you already have, the people you have, ecosystem, and finding new use cases for it that can be highly disruptive. connect with your ecosystem. i cannot stress this enough, leverage the partnerships in your community. anyone that is passionate about civic change, they are your advocate.
i learned the stakeholder lesson, the importance of tying and codifying relationships, building that structure up front am a rather than doing it the backend. experiment like you invest. many times innovation and government is aborted because of this risky. -- it is risky. if we experimented, we would diversify. this is another tactic many cities are using. they are diversifying, they have quick wins -- >> -- and others that take longer. and you canmes then use the platform as a way to show transparency. if you show adaptations publicly, you also get the an -- buy in.
as long as you look at it from standpoint, and you are monitoring with the failures are before the become catastrophic. don't be afraid of big things. , everyone is capable of introducing something that can change the world. it does not matter how big your city is, how much political capital you have, we all have the ability to influence change and doing things -- do big things. i want to leave you with these squares. the big one represents 200 million man-hours that u.s. adult bend every year watching tv. is 100 millionre man-hours, that is how much time it took to create wikipedia. we have an abundance of cognitive surplus, a capacity to do big things in the public sector.
sometimes that means reprioritizing what we do. thee losing a little bit of arrested development, and focusing on different things we can do to drive value in the public sector. we have an opportunity to bring game changing models of innovation. if you're in a city of 8000 people or 8 million, you all have the ability to implement incredible amounts change. with that we will open with questions. [applause] >> today we have a timely forum featuring dustin heisler. i say timely because you may have seen the peace and "cleveland.com" yesterday about regulating uber. we encourage her questions and want them to be brief.
if you are joining up on the web and you have questions please tweeted -- tweet it at the city club. we are partnering with one of 4.9 -- 104.9. television radio and web distributional were made by best possible by cleveland state diversity. a special welcome to our viewers on c-span. be sure to join us on tuesday, august 11, as we welcome ohio treasurer josh mundell. for more information about that or upcoming or past forums, please join us online. our community partner is open in io, they help cities make public data accessible to citizens. we thank you for your support. we also think st. luke's foundation -- thank st. luke's
foundation. now it is time for the traditional q&a. we welcome questions from anyone. we have stephanie jansky and elizabeth falco holding microphones. >> this is fascinating information. and read aneard article by the gentleman who up forhe cake cap -- k c coffee. great idea. saidcently came back and he regretted making it, because now there is a critical mass of them in the landfill. great idea, unintended consequences. if you think about the shifts in disruptive technology, any unintended consequences that you envision or downsides? dustin: i think there is with any technology unintended
consequences. biggest thing is with jobs. as many of these infrastructures are put in place, even like car driving systems will eventually be disrupted by self driving technologies. we have to look at the long-term aspects of some of the jobs associated with this, and put assurances in place that employees will be dealt with accordingly. inhink you are exactly right that analogy, it is important to look about. it is important to think of far ahead -- think farhad. anytime a government looks at embracing technology, it is important to look outside of just the next year. is important to look at the long-term application. -- application. i look at colorado, they said, let's figure it out. rather than trying to come up with a box to put you in at the beginning.
i think we will have to look at that when it comes to some of these new technologies. definitely they will have double edged swords. of your workny with government have you done any projects pertaining to immigrants? dustin: i have not directly. it is an important part of city government. it is an important place they can play within that. i think a lot of the diffusion with new ideas will come from that model. i think it is important to put in place different regulatory structures that make it an incentive. >> my name is ben clark. i am a professor here at cleveland state university. your presentation and e all the research i'm working on -- includes all of the research i'm working on. some of the things i am seeing is we have a -- an
administration that is almost completely adverse to implement anything like this. i have had discussions with people in the mayor's office, it seems like we do things the way we do, we will not allow new things to happen. we will not allow open data, apps. they have a 311 system in cleveland which allows you to call 311 and get your problem solved, they do not tell anyone. -- doest work very well not work very well. i think from your perspective, how can we overcome some of the political challenges that i am seeing here that other cities do not have? dustin: that is my favorite question. that is why i am in private sector. part of what the approach has to be is the inability -- inevitability of disruption.
what happens when you try to ban some of these things. we can look to other cities that have banned uber and the chaos it has created. even looking to france in the app afteror the uber the government crackdown on it. ,- there are different examples it no longer matters were government wants to do because people have the ability to influence change themselves. they are doing it. that research points to be social norms of other agencies that are doing it is -- incredibly helpful. there are other governments that have implemented it, this is why we need to look at it because it provides a foundation. it is almost like, why are we not doing it? technology touate a core business value. there has to be some thing mission-critical.
think the challenge to all of us and the community is how to make technology, especially engagement technology mission-critical. how do you paint the business value. what happens when you do not do it? what are the potential upifications if they put their own platform and they want to operate a new type of 311 or open data system where they control the actual data themselves? i hope that answers your question. >> i have a question in regards to campaign tack or government tech. modern day campaigning is essentially going to doors and asking people what they care about. this those an -- inefficient, and the future what kind of methods are beneficial? doesn't: the paper surveys we get mailed will go away. they are inefficient and used as a way to solicit funding in order to push an opinion.
there is a lot of technology in the campaign space that are moving in the forefront of trying to leverage and split that gap. you will see technology used to crowd source sentiment and other things for elected officials in real-time. you will be old aggregated across the state. you can take the state of ohio and aggregate the sentiment of elected officials and the issues that are important to them. all of the sudden the party is able to respond to things that are happening in real time, rather than waiting for the u.s. mail. i think that is how the citizens operate today. when you look at facebook and twitter, all of us are voicing political opinions every day with how we broadcast messages and respond. i think the political parties will have to look at leveraging that data, because no one will fill out a survey. they want you to know about them, know what they are passionate about, based on likes and other things. there is when a be some big movement there, there is also going to be some big privacy
concerns associated when they start mining that data. i think it is important way to tap into the younger generation. great question. >> i'm curious about privacy issues. how do you guarantee -- 21 million social security members information was hacked. supposedly they have security, what you are talking about is a complete open society with no security, except the folks around it. who are the folks around it? and example of people renting out a room in their house, that has become popular in new york, what happens when mary falls in and illegally rented room? are they going to be responsible? the development i live in, we started evicting against that because commonly says you cannot do that. the law does not have seem to have caught up with technology.
i can see that, i also see gaps where you can mine a lot of people and then walk away like mr. made off and no one is watching the shop. dustin: you are absolutely right we need assurances for people to take and uber car, or rent a room in a house that is on air bnb. i think that is what cities are trying to regulate, have those assurances on top of whatever insurance is individual owners have. i think from a global perspective privacy will change. when you look at privacy today, it is case-by-case. everybody has its own set. -- like wouldment be social security numbers stolen, they have their own cyber security defenses, i think we will see some interesting shifts in technology. i have done some research with a buddy of mine, we will see the rise of identity data providers,
which are third-party clearances -- clearinghouses for your data. that will put you in control of your data. so today if you shared about facebook, it owns your data. tomorrow if you share something and you go through an idp, the actual data will be owned by you and you can provide a link. so you control the privacy. >> so hacking today is not a reality. dustin: you are exactly right. saidnk there was a ceo who 98% of businesses have expressed , that isd -- breach when we'll have to look at block change which is underlying issues with bitcoin. i think we will see some addressing applications of that when we start to build security into identity management. >> good afternoon, thank you for coming. i want to go back to your first
part of the presentation you said two things that had an impact on approach to making things happen. the first one was that you were in a small town, you approached and visuals locally, you did not get the support you want to -- so you went to the coast and i said yes. so how much does geography matter on the ability to change things typically. -- cynically. changengs more slow to on the coast or any midwest? do large cities have more resources? how much does geography matter? and the mindset behind individuals. with your private sector background that influence your ability to change things? have you encountered public
officials that know how the public sector operates, and therefore know how to make an criminal change happen -- incremental change happen. i want to know how much does matter. dustin: from a geography standpoint if you are small, it is hard to be taken seriously. you are a great peachtree dish petri dish ine -- academia though. when you look at the private sector, it is -- what makes a startup innovative? it is a lack of funding. those are all ingredients of innovation. there is a finite roadway that they have to go down. in government, it is looking at it from that same lens. these are all competitive ingredients that help us to become innovative. i think of a local level, even
if the larger levels, we had a policy where we did not finance technology. that was a tough spill of -- pill to swallow. forward,ut that policy it encourage us to think outside of the box. from a mindset, i think it is embracing the restraint and seeing that the government has the opportunity to be innovative. i think we do not see that as the capacity -- in our regular sector. if you look at what happened with nasa, those teeth -- those things inspire people. in a small large city, you all have the capability of doing that. for agencies on a fence, you can work with an agency and be mediocre for 30 years, or you could actually push the envelope and do not wait for the private sector to innovate for you. leave some of it here, and be an active participant.
i heard in cities with google fiber other said -- internet writers have provided faster internet with lower prices. do toe can do -- can we attract services like google fiber? dustin: that is happening in austin right now. as it relates to cleveland and other cities, it is making technology infrastructure itself. when you look at utility infrastructure, but people do not realize is when developments come in, typically be city will offer incentives for them to oversize growth areas. is a way they can pay back developers over time for building infrastructure to serve teacher growth -- future growth. i think technology should be loved in with that. when you start to incentivize
developers to put fiber in the they do it with water, wastewater, why not technology? i think the answer is looking at incentivizing technology infrastructure at the city level. ago the mediaars outlets here in cleveland did an amazing piece on regionalism. i think the city club came together with ideas stream, it was amazing. it was insightful, it showed we three hundredween percent or a thousand percent more for redundant services in our county the necessary. since then, little or nothing has happened. how do we get the government mark and get the
to work on something like this? dustin: i love strategic plans. one of the things i do a strategic planning is building an agile process. rather than having that one in section voice where this is the plan, this is everything that we have here, i set up checkpoints. every quarter, that same group gets together and they talk about how the needle has moved. that is the accountability some officials need, having a regular dialogue and conversation. putting nothing from in the room on a regular basis to talk about what is happening, and to bring ideas of how they can actually move the needle on some discoveries. i always challenge them to come back with ideas because then there is accountability. is the research, go out and find what you can do in your network to move the needle on the aspects, bring them back in a month. that puts the work on them.
if you have a key group of stakeholders, that makes them accountable to come back. >> this is really exciting stuff. i want to asking a question -- ask a question about the other half of that divide. millions of tens of folks in the low and moderate income communities, and a recent conference -- at a recent conference, they talked about school children going to a local mcdonald's to do their homework. she said that this homework with a side of fries is not only educational, but it has helped employment and public health invocations. thatu know then he cities are taking approaches to ensure that schools have an communities have access? testing: i have seen a lot of traction.
-- dustin: i have seen a lot of traction in some cities. many people are replacing libraries and the infrastructure with more computer terminals, access points, their county has printers.unty has 3-d a lot of cities are focusing on that, they are looking at the infrastructure is health as well -- it's self as well. they look at how can we offer this. fcc ruling that allows city government to get back into broadband, will allow many of them to offer those different individuals out there to serve by internet -- this service to by internet. >> i had a question on the
government signed, my father works with state government, when he does more with his budget, they cut your budget. are people able to do more of -- more with less. does the government allow the nikkei budget they can do more? -- does the government allow them to increase their budget so they can do more. ustin: i had a sponsor that said any savings you have, we will not eliminate that, they will allow that to be reinvested. . a lot of times that is set up in like, take- it is the savings and allow that to test new technology. because they do not have a line item to experiment with new technology. i think that takes a cfo on board to say that you will not lose it. it have to be transparent.
you get the nail on the head, if someone knows the doing innovation will reduce the budget, they will not be passionate about it. takeey know they can savings and reinvested or do something else, they will be more motivated to actually make things happen. about are talking incentivizing government -- perhaps you have heard we will have the republican national convention next year. do you see any way to help use that as a lever to hansen advised the city of cleveland to do more? i think that event itself will probably be heavily technology focused. especially to support that many people in a centralized area, they will look at the -- how can they use those improvements to make it more sustainable. i think since cleveland has a regular dialogue with the republican convention as they
plan it, they will look at different things they can do to help allow people from the community to that infrastructure in place after the event leave. there aretly think opportunities to do that as they start to plan how to support that many people. about opt inalk do you deal with issues of reesentativeness of your population base. when people are opting in, you may have a biased sample. how do you make sure the information you're getting is representative? have them opt in on things they cannot have bias on. the sensor data itself on your phone, they are equipped with a variety of environment will sensor technology. ,ou can actually download apps they tell you temperature, pressure, stats, it is using that data first.
where as i can allow my agency to use my accelerometer, it's just based on my route. i would start with that data first, every city apps would have another site that would allow individuals to often -- opt in. if i do not want to, i might say i will anonymously send you my sensor data. getsf a sudden, it interesting because you can start to reward and recognize them based on things they might not realize they did. i think there are interesting things that could help start to move the needle on engagement. it is all about the trigger. as you start to get them to invest and see their investment by doing little work, magic starts to happen. >> a question from twitter. sustaindid not
innovation after you left. how do we sustain? dustin: you codify innovation in your organization. maynard is you have to codify inordinate form, or a structure that is sustainable. the question is always raised, what happens when the administration changes? many of them get ripped out because they are not seen as a mission critical function of government. if someone has a different philosophy, that gets ripped out, that is what happened in maynard. the key is to tie it into the function and make it a function, whether it is editing the charter, or making an official department within your finance system. it is those little steps that make it a critical thing. it is a part of culture change. [applause]
>> today at the city club of cleveland we have been enjoying a forum featuring dustin heisler. if you like to share this for them with an elected official you love, we will have it on youtube by the end of the day. thank you very much. the forum is now adjourned. [bell] announcer: tonight mark cuban and former president george w. bush and bill clinton speak to graduates of a presidential scholars program created by several presidential foundations. ase is more from mark cuban he talks about being a successful businessman and decision-maker. mark cuban: i try to be very self-aware, i try to know what i'm good at and that it. -- bad at. i try to have smart people around me all the time. i cross my fingers. [laughter]
there are just some decisions you have to trust yourself. preparation is everything. people say, you are a huge risk taker. i never take a risk. started, is i have felt like i had done the preparation, it is not a risk. fortunately i have never been in a -- the same circumstances as our two president. -- presidents. in my world i try to be prepared and have great people around me. i hope for the best. announcer: that was a portion of remarks held this -- from a event held this summer. you can see the entire event tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. tomorrow on washington journal, thea center talks about presidential campaigns and what to expect. after that stephen dennis on the
congressional agenda when the chambers returned tuesday -- returned tuesday. that includes the upcoming visit by pope francis. we will take your phone calls, facebook comments and tweets. washington journal is live tuesday at 7:00 a.m. eastern on seas and -- c-span. president obama participates in a roundtable discussion on poverty in america. he was joined by harvard university professor robert putman and arthur brooks fred this event was held at georgetown university. it is one hour and 15 minutes. [applause]
eugene "e.j." joseph dionne jr.: it's a real honor to be here today with my two presidents -- president obama and president degioia. and my friend, david brooks, hurled the most vicious insult at me ever once when he said that i was the only person he ever met whose eyes lit up at the words, "panel discussion." and i have to confess my eyes did light up when i was asked to do this particular panel discussion -- and not just for the obvious reason, to my left -- and, again, it's a real honor to be with you, mr. president -- or arthur or bob. isolate the extraordinary -- i salute the externally people gathered here for the poverty summit of all religious traditions all over the country. our friend jim wallace once said, if you cut everything jesus said about the poor out of the gospel you have a book full of holes. and these are evangelicals, catholics and others who
understand what the scripture said. points, theanizing first is when it's time to go, please keep your seat so the president can be escorted out. the other is that bob and arthur and i all agreed that we should direct somewhat more attention to president obama than to the other members of the panel. [laughter] i just say that -- i say that in advance so that you know this was our call and not some exercise in executive power. [laughter] this is our decision to do that. [applause] in any event we hope this will , be a back-and-forth kind of discussion. bob and arthur, feel free to interrupt the president if you feel like it. [laughter] my first question, mr. president, is the obvious one. a friend of mine said yesterday, when do presidents do panels?
and what came to mind is the late admiral stockdale, "who am i? why am i here? and i'd like to ask you why you decided -- this is a very unusual venue for a president to put himself in -- and i'd like to ask you where do you hope this discussion will lead beyond today? i was struck with something you said in your speech last week, you said, politicians talk about poverty and inequality, and then gut policies that help alleviate poverty and reverse inequality. why are you doing this, and how do you want us to come out of here? barack obama: first of all, i want to thank president degioia, the georgetown community, all the groups -- nonprofits, faith-based groups and others -- who are hosting this today. and i want to thank this terrific panel. i think that we are at a moment -- in part because of what's happened in baltimore, and
ferguson and other places, but , in part because a growing awareness of inequality in our society -- where it may be possible not only to refocus attention on the issue of poverty, but also maybe to bridge some of the gaps that have existed and the ideological divides that have prevented us from making progress. there are a lot of folks here who i have worked with -- they disagree with me on some issues, but they have great sincerity when it comes to wanting to deal with helping the least of these. and so this is a wonderful occasion for us to join together. part of the reason i thought this venue would be useful and i wanted to have a dialogue with bob and arthur is that we have been stuck, i think for a long time, in a debate that creates a couple of straw men.
the stereotype is that you've got folks on the left who just want to pour more money into social programs, and don't care anything about culture or parenting or family structures, and that's one stereotype. and then you've got cold-hearted, free market, capitalist types who are reading ayn rand and -- (laughter) -- think everybody are moochers. and i think the truth is more complicated. i think that there are those on the conservative spectrum who deeply care about the least of these, deeply care about the poor -- exhibit that through their churches, through community groups, through philanthropic efforts, but are suspicious of what government
can do. and then there are those on the left who i think are in the trenches every day, and see how important parenting is and how important family structures are, and the connective tissue that holds communities together and recognize that that contributes to poverty when those structures fray, but also believe that government and resources can make a difference in creating an environment in which young people can succeed despite great odds. and it seems to me that if coming out of this conversation we can have a both/and conversation rather than either/or conversation, then we'll be making some progress. and the last point i guess i want to make is i also want to emphasize we can do somethin