tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 24, 2016 3:00am-7:01am EST
replicating to other campuses, because it was quite clear this was a no-brainer. i don't think it is even rocket science. i don't think there is anything we do. we simply use the power and the community of a large university to replace what these poor kids have not had a family to do for them. encourage them, teach them, give them role models, and show them where that ladder is. soledad: walk us through the structure of how it works. in replicating i think you said , you have one opening in new york city? peter: yes, here is the announcement of the day. city university of new york, staten island, first intake of youth is september. the job posting for the director position went up this week. and so that will be our first new york academy, the first of many because it is part of our arrangement with cuny that we make a success of this, and they would do it on all the campuses. we are very delighted.
and there are about another 12-15 universities across the country that are in development. also, three outside the u.s. one in london, one in toronto, and one of multicultural, multireligious, multiethnic one in jerusalem, israel. we are on a roll. we are replicating. [applause] soledad: congratulations. incredible. give me the setup. peter:we are replicating. the ce third academic, one third life skills made up on the back of an envelope. how to brush your teeth sexual , education, std's, financial literacy, videography, self-assertion, meditation anger -- allement, and all hot taught to a very high level, because what do they have any university?
they know how to teach. we are using the power of their professional pedagogic capabilities to raise the kids. the other one third of it is what you have at a university. not just the t-shirt, what the t-shirt stands for. on the calendar, the kids, the students i should say, live on the campus in the dorms with those are mentors who are undergrads for four to six weeks each summer ninth grade, 10th, , 11th, 12th grade. the rest of the year the dorms are full of undergraduates. we bring the kids back one or two weekend days as day students. that would not be enough so we also have a moderated, controlled, online clubhouse where the kids go after school and they can upload their videos since we teach them all videography, post report cards,
their grades. someone can put up they got in it and and a picture of 40 other people say yes, we'd know you could do it. terrific. a lot of tutoring. we get everybody up to grade level. soledad: what kind of grade level? what is your average student? peter: they are often behind. we have kids who say to me, i really love english but my teacher reads the newspaper most of the time in class. these are kids attending very often disproportionately poor kid schools. poor kid schools, some are wonderful, a few, most are not. one of the things we do is we go and advocate for our students with their high schools so we have our lawyer go and say to a high school administrator, why is this young man no launcher --
no longer in algebra one? you know he needed to get his a-g so he can go to college. the administrator will say, he's not going to college, is he? and our advocate will say, why do you say that? and the school administrators says, he's a foster kid they never go to college. it will say, put him back and -- back in algebra and we will get him into college. it becomes a self-perpetuating thing and what makes it worse is it is so siloed. soledad: what do you mean by that? the social workers and the knowledge of the youth that they have is not necessarily shared with the educators in the high school. most of the high schools in the united states do not even know who the foster kids are in their midst. you can actually tell because in a classroom in high school, the only kids with no technology at all, that would be the foster kids. day one of ninth grade in our academy, everybody gets a laptop, everybody gets a suite
of software, everyone is taught to use it well and safely and they get connectivity. that is how they communicate. we also, one of the things we have learned by trial and error is that teaching self-assertion is very rare, unprecedented in their lives, and is of enormous value to them. so we teach videography. you do not have to teach any millennial, foster kid or not, how to press the buttons on the camera. they know all of that, but we teach them storytelling and we teach them to edit. and to go viral with their videos. soledad: i think we have a clip. peter: we're going to show a clip of linda. this would be a good moment let , me introduce it. the other thing we do for self-assertion is we teach public speaking. you got these kids who have been so beaten down, literally and figuratively, they can be incredibly shy. not look you in the eye.
we turn them all into public speakers. we encourage their creativity not only musical, we encourage them to write, especially to write poetry. so spoken word, in other words a poem written by the youth and then performed by them is a double whammy. so you are about to see linda. linda came to us in ninth grade as the shyest possible young lady and she graduated last june from our academy at ucla and she is now a freshman at san francisco state university. this was done when she was in the academy. this is linda. [video clip]
>> i cannot sit on the bus with you. let go of my hair, mommy. you are complaining like a full. who would ever knew? mamas were so powerful. i cannot trust you. i was one of those little girls. as a matter of fact, i was a baby girl. she was a red rose, wearing those fine -- i stayed by her side. but she knows how to shoot me down by the third bullet to i learned how to stand my ground. life ripped me away from your arms and put me in front of a loaded gun. i saw you here and there, i see the change in you. so no matter where you were, i still love you. it is mother's day, mommy. i wrote a song for you.
i sat with the soul of mind, mommy. it is the only way i can get to you. a song like no others. you are simply being a mother. it has been a year since i have seen you. i miss the sound of your voice and all the mothering that came with it. it is not like i had another choice. senior year i had multiple bullets. i face my fears and not the tears. i heard about what happened. everybody is talking about it, grandpa. how could you leave him? he was your baby. my baby brother left like the rest of us. i forgive you once mother. i don't know if i can forgive you are again. -- forgive you again. you told me you would not be like my father.
a loca.la vid you wanted to be a chola like the old days. i wish you were here, mommy. i wish you are here, you could see the smile on my face they , said yes to me. you were supposed to be in that memory, but you are walking the streets of east l.a. living the dream. i thought we were your dream. you know what? i have dreams, too. you are too busy for yourself to have time for your own flesh and blood. i had to put it in a pretty note for you to hear. why must you make it so hard? you are breaking my heart. but i'm not going to beg and hold onto your leg.
i hear your voice and my soul. you are missing all that it holds. there is that saying, mommy. like mother, like daughter. i promise you, mommy, i will not be like my mother. i will cut the roots and grow my own tree. i got off the bus. i decide who i am. thank you. [applause] [end video clip] peter: a couple of things from that. first of all, all children are magnificent. these children are just as magnificent as anybody else. given the opportunity, they thrive. secondly, you are watching up -- you are watching that because
we got a court order to permit us to teach videography, videotape our students, show those videos, allow the press to interview them. that is very, very rare in america. the institutional sense is that everything to do with foster care must be secret. now, absolutely there are circumstances where the dignity of a child has to be protected, but we do that with the victims of rape in a rape trial. adults. we don't allow the press to reveal the identity of the victim. but what the press can always do in an adult rape trial is come to court, look at what is going on, and write about did the , police it do a good job? did the da do a good job? what is going on here? only the identity of a victim is protected. and yet with foster kids, there
is two thirds of this country, everything secret. blanket secrecy. one third of the country, it is open, but protecting the identities of the kids. guess who has the best outcome stats? the power of the press is not available to help foster kids get their civil rights because the press has -- is stopped from covering this stuff. that is one of the things we need to change. soledad: i was going to ask you because you mentioned change earlier. what else needs to change? we started the conversation with this idea that people will hear this and be mad. what do you do with that anger? what has to change? tell me the things people should be advocating for. peter: i knew you would ask me that, so i thought there are actually five things. soledad: i will give you five, then. [laughter] peter: number one, we need to flip the presumption of secrecy, conceal the identity of the
victim, but everything else, all the institutional everything, should be open to the press so they can write about repetitive and inept bureaucratic failure and so forth. the second thing is, one size never fits all. these are individual human being children they all need a , lawyer. in two thirds of this country, they do not get a lawyer. in one third of this country, they do get a lawyer. it is not just binary. it should be their lawyer, they should have confidentiality. it should be their lawyer not the court's lawyer. it needs to be the same lawyer. there needs to be adequate prep time. because it is through that lawyer that the absurdity of a hearing where everybody in the room either has a lawyer or is a lawyer except the subject of the hearing, who is a child and may be eight years old. they need lawyers. so that is one and two. three, four, and five are
education, education, and education. because it is through education that we can pivot this family line of repetitive abuse, neglect, poverty, abuse, neglect, poverty that rolls down generations. we can pivot it into high-achievement, a good job, a happy life, children who are raised by their parents well and who go on and have grandchildren who are also well-raised. so that would be it for me. lawyers, flip the presumption of secrecy, education, education, and education. >> how about specifically around child protective services, which is very different around the country depending on where you are. what would be an effective change there?
peter: i think that it depends on where you are in the country. i have a lot of time for the administration for children services here in new york. they are very close to us. they are actually one of the sponsors of the cuny staten island academy. i think that gladys who runs it, the commissioner, is very much open to innovation. she certainly gave me the time of day. a year and a half ago, i met her at a conference and here we are. we already have an academy at cuny. there are other places that are just benighted. what is extraordinary is there are 2200 jurisdictions in the united states. you talk to experts, when i was doing my research years ago i would say, tell me somewhere good, and the judge or whoever would name a city, and i would say, why is that good? they would say, it is not rocket science. about 20 years ago the mayor called a meeting with the chief of police, head of school district, head of the children's
hospital, etc., and the head of children's services, and they decided to do a better job with weekly meetings. they do joint triage. they share software, etc. and i would say that make sense, tell me about a close-by city. the same expert would say, oh no, that is a terrible cesspool of inept bureaucratic failure. i would say, what do i know, i am just a film producer, but do so we say how do you much of a good job? can we borrow your three ring binder? can you send someone down to help us? and they would say they don't do that. and i would say, why not? because they don't do that. yes, but why? well, because, you know, it is human nature. nobody wants to be told how to do their job better. so you have the shining spots of good practice, and then you have
another 2000 where it is as if it never existed. imagine that in business. you would have to believe that any big american fortune 500 company, starbucks, 7-11, fedex. they sit there on monday morning and say, look, it is taking them 40 seconds longer to make a delivery in cleveland and in cincinnati. send the cincinnati people to cleveland to sort it out. what are they doing it wrong? raise your ships with the rising tide. we do it for cardboard boxes, for venti lattes, and for 7-eleven why not for our , children? we need to do better. soledad: tell me about the transition into college. how does it happen, what kind of support do your students get, and how do they do when they are on the college campus? peter: so far so good, they are hanging in there and thriving.
we try hard to have them go to colleges where there is a guardian scholars program. it is sometimes called "renaissance." in other words, the university puts its arm around the foster youth to help them thrive psycho socially and in material things. we try to point them out those universities and colleges, by no means all. secondly, we try to do a buddy system where we send them in twos and threes and fours to the same place because they feel like siblings, and in a real sense, they are. they are constructive siblings and they can support each other once they get there. we go visit a lot. we are now, remember, we are a five year old program. we're just now getting our heads around what does it look like once they are in our alumni
group? we are standing by them and helping them. we are a college prep program. that is how we want to be measured, but we also, they are our family, so we have to be there for them. soledad: before i get to my next question i want to remind folks , that if you have a card and want to hand it, let's everybody and it to the last person in the aisle and someone will grab the cards. we will have someone, and grab the card from you so we can have some questions from the audience in a few moments. what are the biggest obstacles? what is the thing that keeps you up at night? what is the big problem you are wrestling with? peter: money. [laughter] soledad: walk us through what , does it cost? is it cost efficient and scalable? peter: we start with a cohort of 30 ninth graders plus or minus that costs about $300,000. about $10,000 per youth per
year. when you add a second cohort behind them, and a third cohort, it cuts the per capita cost down so you end up $6,000, maybe $7,000 per youth per year. where that comes from is first of all the universities contributing in kind. i am sure there will be a day where a university will write a big check. where i will go to the campus and the chancellor or president will say, thank god you have come. we have so much excess money here, we don't know what to do with it. terrific. let's throw it at this. [laughter] peter: they don't say that. what they say is, dorm space, sure. take it. the van fleet? absolutely. catering? ok. so it brings the cost down. then we almost always get money
from government. for example, cuny, acs is paying some. the rest of it has to be raised. i am a volunteer beggar. i go out and i say, come and meet our kids. please help make this happen. somehow or other we get it done. soledad: what is the selling point when you're asking someone to come and help the kids? what is the thing you say to them that has them say, absolutely? peter: we are living in a very political time at the moment. this is the only thing i've ever done that works on both sides of the aisle. we can talk about blighted lives. we can talk about repetitive generational awfulness. we can talk about vivid, happy lives, children, grandchildren, so on. the other thing we can do is just talk fiscally. what do we want? it costs this country, the
taxpayer, us, $83 billion a year is the direct inconsequential cost of foster care in america. about $35 billion is the direct cost of foster care. for those 400-odd thousand kids in the system at any point in time. the other 50-billion with a "b" are the consequential costs is , the incarceration costs, judicial costs, welfare, and so on. added together is that is the $83 billion, size of the iraq war. why are we sitting here hearing it for the first time? because it is not noisy. it is silent, but it is huge. in the end, we have to get this wed because ido will die of fundraising fatigue at some point. i have to say it is now easier
because we have our metrics of success. quite how we raise the money before we had graduated any kids, i am not sure. mostly by appealing to high net worth people. now suddenly with the metrics of success, it is very appealing to well-organized foundations. it is the big idea, the elephant in the room idea, that they have never previously known what to do about foster care. here is a plan. soledad: do you think in terms of what the students need to return to society? i think our expectations of citizens is we deliver something back. is that something you thought about? peter: i think they are splendid, obviously. they are like my kids, all of them. they will be excellent citizens as adults. they are completely impassioned with a visceral need to serve. what do they want to be when they grow up? they want to be lawyers. do they want to be corporate lawyers? no. children's lawyers. they want to be social workers,
they want to be professionals whose life work is helping similarly situated kids. the very first meeting i had with the vice chancellor of ucla, we sat in the outdoor restaurant and were talking about how we are going to do this and who we need to hire. there is a young lady with blonde hair, ponytail, flip-flops, and shorts, and she was suddenly in our space. we said, yes? she said, i am so embarrassed, i apologize. i have been eavesdropping. i do not know who you are, but pick me. i have to help you. last year i had my jd in june from the law school. please, let me help you because i lived in foster care for 10 years. so we hired her. soledad: that was good eavesdropping. peter: it was good eavesdropping. [laughter] soledad: what do you believe, if
you can solve this, in the micro, you have an opportunity to solve a much bigger problem in the macro? peter: taken to scale, this dramatically changes foster care. by diminishing the number of kids who ever go in it in the first place and by sending an impassioned, empowered generation of young people out into the world to do good. the only class i teach is called random acts of kindness and pay it forward. we talk about the golden rule, we talk about the second law of thermodynamics. then i say, there is a man in dallas called mort and he loves you and he is giving you $200. no, it is not for you. he is giving it to you so you can give it away. somebody always says can i give my $200 to him and he gives his
$200 to me? no. you can have no benefit. you have to write a 300 word essay and say who you want to give it to. soledad: what is the point of giving them $200? peter: because it is splendid, it makes him feel 10 feet tall. it makes him feel they have value. everything done to foster kids makes them feel they are worthless. we have this thing where i live called a seven-day notice. it is a three-part form. one part is written by foster placement. one part to child protective services, saying take this person away. they are gone i don't want them , there anymore. the second copy they keep, and the third copy goes to foster care. we have kids who have lived in 15 houses, 15 group homes and -- in their career in foster
care. what happens when everything, everything, you know, every teenager acts out. god knows i did. what do we do in a family? you say you are grounded. you don't get pocket money this month. that was a dreadful, unhelpful thing that you did. don't do it again. learn from this. but what we don't do is to say, you're gone. out. gone. i never want to see you again. that does not happen in a family. when it does happen to these kids repeatedly, what is the message of that? you feel like a worm. you are three inches tall. the benefit of us making them into mini-philanthropists is they are 10 feet tall. and they realize, i have power. we had the christmas party and the head waiter came out onto the sidewalk and said, this is after the lunch, he said, so they did not eat their desserts.
we have all these icing-covered muffins. what you want me to do with them? i said, put them in little boxes and give them to the kids. they can take them back to their placements. they are all standing there, we are waiting for the vans because the vans are always late, and i see one of our boys, i will call him bob, i see him sidling away from the group and he is clearly does not want to be noticed. he is walking off. i am thinking, is he running away? what is happening here? and he walks about 120 yards to the sidewalk and there is a homeless guy lying on the ground and he just goes up, does not say a word, puts the muffin next to him and then sidles back to the group. we have all sorts of successes, but that is one of the biggest ones. because that young man who when he came to us was very troubled,
horrible, horrendous things have been done to him in a foster placement, if you can believe that. at that point, i thought he was an angel. soledad: nice story. some questions from our audience. and a few more that are coming up. i will start with these. what are some of the most important or valuable lessons you have learned as a social entrepreneur and what advice would you give to students? peter: do it. nike. do it. don't worry about step one, step two, and step three. forget all of that to begin with. go and sit on a rock with a yellow pad or with your laptop or tablet, and inhabit what success is like. imagine that it is 10 years from now. all of your wildest dreams have come true. walk around it in your mind's eyes. who goes?
is it a building, a program? why do people go? what do they get out of it to why is it good and what does it feel like and what color are the walls and so forth? once you know what your goal looks like and feels like, it is infinitely easier to back fill and work out how to get there in baby steps. the first one is, inhabit the result. the second one is, be willing to fail. it is not a war of sudden victory, nothing is. it is a war of attrition. be willing to fail. i say to the foster kids, you are inside an envelope of what you are capable of. you have a pencil and you are poking in the dark to see where the edges are of the possible. if you do that, once in a while, you will go through. that's where the edge was. come back, find a different
piece of edge. but if you sit in the middle of it and never poke the edges of the possible, how can you be anything? you will sit in the middle and amount to nothing. you have to be willing to fail in order to succeed. i think there are lessons, get mentors. do a business plan. run out a timeline. soledad: if you had one lesson, one story from the five years you have been doing this, what would you tell someone who said i want to be a social entrepreneur? peter: imagine it. because that is how you will value it. make sure it is important enough to you. go and explain it to other people. one of the things you learn as a film producer is that you are constantly raising money and hiring people and persuading people to be in your film.
which film does not exist yet? you are actually sitting and trying to put into the head of the person opposite you how wonderful it will be and what it will feel like when it exists. that is exactly the skill set a social entrepreneur needs because you are inspiring people to help you do something that does not exist. how we co-opt people, the people you need to help you are hugely well-trained in saying no. they have practiced it 8000 times, you are the first person they are willing to. how do we subvert people saying no? graphs.t do it with pie we do not do it with endless spreadsheets. do all that stuff, but that is later. you must move their hearts.
-- must tell them the story another student we taught the random act of kindness class two, last to the special olympics came to ucla. 14-year-old watched the haitian soccer team come in and she burst into tears and said, this is disgusting, how can they expect them to play in rags? my $200 ando spend buy them outfits and shoes. we said, that is lovely, but e an entireot cloth soccer team. we did not realize is that we were standing at the edge of the bleachers and the next thing we knew, 15 minutes later, a hat comes down to the front with $2500 in it in small bills. got the soccer team
measurements and got them their kit. supervisor said, can you get this student down, because we want to give her the young entrepreneur medal on monday morning. then the phone rang and it was abc news and espn, and they said, this young woman, your social entrepreneur, can we send two forecast trucks? we want to come interview her. who was quite short, feels 14 feet tall and is interviewed on television. that is a you do this. social entrepreneurs need a really big idea. no disrespect to moneymaking ideas, it is easier to do it because empathy is so much bigger with a pro-social idea.
if you can work out how to move someone's heart and pitch it again and again and again you work it out by pitching it. boring, while not do this bid anymore. that i will do this bid because it makes them cry. idea, 30nonprofit years ago, through my cousin i met a little boy who was dying and his wish bed, was to go to disneyland, which was kind of ridiculous because he was in london at the time. mum to with he and his los angeles and did the disney thing. the up tiffany for me was not his trip. it was that i had a business lunch from -- with a man from hbo, try to sell them something and he did not buy it. he said, what else is new and
exciting? i told him the story of the little boy and the man from hbo cried. i knew, my goodness, this is so powerful. i could help more kids, who knows? and that was the beginning of the starlight foundation. the emotion.pathy, spreadsheets will follow. soledad: what about kids with serious emotional disorders who need therapeutic placements, how do you manage their needs? we can deal with moderately serious psychological challenges. we can deal with ocd, things of that sort. what we have now learned we cannot deal with is schizophrenia. what we are trying to do in our called,ent is
pedagogically, -- we are asking , weelves the question, if admit this youth, will they probably go to college? them, we do not admit will they almost certainly not go to college? we had to be careful our first year. our director dreamed of the most fantastic essay question for the admissions form. please imagine it is your 100th birthday party and your best friend, who has known you your whole life makes a toast. what would you like them to say? we look for any spark. we do not look at grades, because if they have been in a group home, they may well have never done homework. they may have no grades. we took some kids with a 0.7 gpa, who were amongst those who went to college, four years later. we were looking for a spark.
why does my future have to be determined by my past? interested in science, why does the english teacher read the newspaper? i want to be someone, why did it have to be me they got abused? out of that comes a benevolent stubbornness. no, we do not take random admissions, every kid. the topying not to take 25% and the bottom 25%. we are not taking kids we cannot help, they need a different type of program with much more intense, 24/7 psychological counseling. we are not that. and with one or two exceptions, we're not trying to take the rare foster kid who has lived in the same placement for 10 years, with professional people and everyone in the house goes to college. they do not need us, so we do
not use the bed for that student. we use it for that middle 50%. soledad: next question. how it in what ways do you coordinate with foster parents in case planners and everyone else who is in the child's life? clinton did not invent the saying she applied to her book, she did propagated to make it popular. it is an african proverb, and it in allughout africa these different tribes, it takes a village to raise a child. we believe profoundly that it does take a village. what is a university? real ways, it is a village. maybe there are towns and cities. thinks it is the best of the city. [laughter] peter: everything else is secondary.
we have additional services. we nurture the foster parents. is often not straightforward. we try to help them feel supported and networked and to give them skills to do the best possible job for their wards, the kids they are looking after. it is not straightforward. what if they have their own children of similar age, and no one in that house has been to college? now arrives the first foster kid who talks about little else other than going to college, what does that do at the dinner table? some of this is not straightforward. we do a lot of nurturing families and we also work with -- togh schools who have do a better job.
the staffer who teaches teachers and high schools came back the other day and said that the college counselor that was in the group i was teaching burst into tears. why did she burst into tears? i said, in the uc system if you foster youth, you will never pay tuition as an undergraduate. the college counselor burst into tears and said i have been here 20 years, i never knew that. not send tods i did college because i thought they never would be able to afford it. raise all ships with the rising tide. we need a revolution. we need awareness. we need c-span. we need tweets and facebook. every kid needs a lawyer. we need to reverse the presumption of secrecy. we need to use the elephant in
elephants in the rooms. the universities that have a very nearly everything you need to do right by a kid who has been abused or neglected, and to get them on track to a prosperous, successful, happy, nurtured life. why wouldn't we do that? why don't we do that more? somebody said to make him a many academies do you think there will be? the young lady with the headset said, you must state your ambition and numbers. and i said, as many academies as we can do as prudently and as quickly as possible. no, you have to give it metrics. i am up there talking and i can see her coming toward me like the train in the tunnel. i did not know what to say. i said our mission is within 10 years we will have 100 academies. and i went and sat down and all the other people with me through their bread at me. why did you say that?
how can we do 100 academies? 50, not know, maybe it is 300, who knows? we are ambitious. we are big component. if we just replicate this it will put a very large dent in the number of kids in foster care, the number going into foster care. beyond that, every child in foster care deserves their own ,nique, confidential lawyer properly trained, the same lawyer from case to case. this, hello i will be your lawyer today. so sorry, we have to go into court now. not good enough. watch their caseload. do they have to take continuing education? why does it have to be such a checkerboard across the country where some places do it and some places are terrible? how do we raise all ships with the rising tide, and how do we
get every big university to do this? soledad: a little more detail on the university in these two questions, how do you identify the students and what factors do you consider? how do you sort through who you will take, and are the students given full scholarships? for those who do not go to college, why are they not going? peter: i did talk about the admissions process. we normally source through the administration for children's services. sometimes called child protective services. we work through the social workers, usually the social work agency runs seminars teach them how to have their kids apply. but we also work through the middle schools. contactedhen we first them, their eighth graders. we have to identify the middle schools that feed to the high schools.
and we work through the administrators there and the teachers. there is an admissions form. cohort of 30 rising ninth graders we usually have something around 100 applicants. we interview them and they write their essays, the famous wally capler essay, what is the toast at your 100th birthday party? it is an art as much as a science. in terms of the kids we fail, i do not think we fail at any of them. it is true that 10% or 12% do not go to college. some join the military, some go into a shelter job. college is not for everyone. but it is for most of them. we try to do right, one size does not fit all. we try to really shrewdly, as though we were the parents, the village, which we are, work out what is best for this kid and how do we help them get it? soledad: we have just about 15
minutes left. i want to get to this question, because one thing you said keeps you up at night is money. i want to get to this urgent question which is, how do we help? what our partnership opportunities with first star? peter: the undergraduates with the hats come down the aisle now. [laughter] peter: we would not do that. we gauge it by two things. one is, more universities. as of now, we have bitten off as many as we can digest in the next six or nine months. what i have found, there is no point meeting in the middle of the hierarchy. with all due respect to the entrepreneur programs within the university, there is usually only five to 10 entrepreneurs working in the university. usually the chancellor, president, provosts, vice
chancellor, maybe the dean of something. i have to go in, top down. middle up, it never seems to catch. but top down seems to work. the other issue is money. people here from cavendish, the high net worth families -- when i speak to them i say, let's remember the medici. they invented the renaissance. what does that mean? they sent the ships to the new world. no one told you, you must specialize. their ships had a doctor, and explorer, a merchant, a sculptor, a painter, a botanist. and they sent all of them and they collaborated seamlessly. , their kids sat in
the great hall of the castle and look at the chandelier and said, the earth is not flat. it must be a sphere because look up. all the castles, separated by hundreds of kilometers, all the chandeliers pointed to the ground. therefore, the earth must be round. furthermore, it must be the earth they goes around the sun. he was, galileo, and the church wanted to kill him. by the big come powerful family, the medici. my message to the high net worth families is, could you please point some of your -- ontoneurial the old epreneurial-entr zeal? we would be honored to work with you. at university's already got you. you have one or more university
relationships, that is a double whammy for us. a high net worth person who has mater, i have so many business cards in my pocket. [laughter] peter: you come and get one and we will talk next week. everyone else here, though you want to do a bake sale that contributes to the cuny academy, we would love it. fundraising is always tricky. raising capital is an measurably easier once we have kids in the academy because then we can say to potential donors, come meet them. the fact that we can introduce the kids is a rare privilege. it takes court orders and very great care. but the kids are our best ambassadors. soledad: this question comes from the founder of a nonprofit for trauma recovery care. jessica, if you want to identify
yourself you can stand up. she has a multipart question. if we do not get to all of them i know you will have an opportunity to follow up. she i'm curious as to why there is resistance to interagency collaboration. >> because grown-ups are human beings and grown-ups think in silos. one of the fundamental problems is that, when foster care was invented, all those years ago, nearly a hundred years ago, it as this child is being abused or neglected. we investigated. we validated the allegation. we must now remove this child and put them somewhere to be safe. that is the work of social workers and there's nothing the matter with that. what there is little training or attention paid to is education, which is the long-term fix.
at isat we must do better blowing up these silos. there is nothing unique to the foster care area. believe,big problem, i in our society, is that, as human knowledge has grown especially, the human brain has got no bigger at all. so in order to go deep in the we have to go narrow. so how do you answer a multifaceted challenge in our society? the answer is you need generalists in the middle. i had a meeting with general schwarzkopf. i told him we are the generalists. our job is to keep them focused on the mission. and general schwarzkopf said, mr. sanderson, what do you know about the united states army? and i said absolutely nothing at all. he said, well, when you go into the army, you don't just get a rank. you get a specialty. a rifleman, an infantryman, a
cook, whatever you are. and it is a 10 on your shoulder. that's your specialty. doesn't matter how much they are mowed to you, you still have your specialty. damn one day, if you are a finally it are, they give you the stars to be a general. they take away the state -- they take away the specialty pin because you are no longer a specialist. you are the general. i thought, that's why they are called generals. [laughter] i'm a generalist. know soith people who infinitely more than me about the nuts and bolts of the educational side and the social work side and the psychological and psychiatric pedagogic sides. but leadership is best done by a generalist. in the thousands of years of running an army, when they put specialists in charge, everybody died. so they learned. [laughter]
we should have a general in charge. that way we will live. >> jessica's second question. i'm not going to ask your third, but i hope you will come up and ask your third. what is scaling/on boarding of stakeholders look like to you? >> we try not to be precious. we partner easily. frankly, anyone who raises their hand and has either money or a good idea, we say come on down. we find a way to work together. we are sort of like a relentless bulldozer. we always move forward. we tried to do it in as a collaborative way as we can do. and if there is expertise out there, we are constantly meeting with people who know more about something than we do. and we try to bolt that on so there is a basic first star program.
good ideare is a somebody knows more about, something or other, bring it on. >> i think this is going to be our final question for the evening. and it's a really intriguing way to end. it's about accountability for the overall system. what about holding the child welfare system accountable for their epic scale. is it creating a parallel process without holding the bigger system accountable? correct of all, let me something. the system is not broken in every county. one of the things we do throughout washington, partner, is we do report cards, a through f, by different measures of the childers welfare system. -- the children's welfare system. and they don't get an f. many get a b plus. the better question is, why do
the bad ones, which is most, emulate the good ones, which is for you? -- which is few? we are doing points three for, four and five. but the other ones, right to counsel and flipped the presumption of secrecy and hold the bureaucrats responsible are also things of enormous value. be able to pack our head and rub our tummy at the society. as a we need to do all of the above. it is not an either/or. great answer. thank you for this conversation. peter samuelson. [applause] >> >> saturday at 6:45 p.m.
eastern, david baron provides a history of the debate between the executive and legislative branch over the constitutional right to declare war in his book "waging war: the clash between presidents and congress." joining him at the national constitution center in philadelphia is the dean of the university of pennsylvania law school. inthe two branches are advance of each other all of time. congress checking the president, the president pushing congress, presidents being worried about taking it too far. >> sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern, guardian journalist gary young looks that gun deaths in america over a 24-hour period in his boo k, "another day in the death of america: chronicle of 10 short lives." he is interviewed by a staff writer for "the atlantic."
>> it is impossible to only talk about guns. it is a broader, scientific thing which counts people out, dehumanizes them. and when their life is taken, well, that has already been accounted for. but yeah, i think that there is a real problem. once you start saying, he was an it is suggested that there is a grade that it you toe worthy for be killed. >> we are asking students to participate in this year's stude nt cam video documentary competition by telling us, what is the most urgent issue for our next president donald trump and the incoming congress to address in 2017? the competition is open to middle school and high school students, grades six through 12.
students can work alone, or in a group of 23, to produce a five to seven minute documentary. a grand prize of $5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. hundred thousand dollars in -- $100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded and shared between 153 students and teachers. the deadline is inauguration day. for information about the competition, go to our website, studentcam.org. >> now, i look at president-elect trump's national security and foreign policy. on "washington journal," we talk to jamie mcintyre with the "washington examiner." this is 40 minutes. alumni am ac-span jamiemcintyre -- alumni,
mcintyre joins me now. let's talk about some of the news this morning. nikki haley has been tapped to be our representative at the united nations. the reaction? guest: he was not particularly supportive of donald trump during his campaigning. it shows that he is able to hit it into the presidential -- to pivot into the presidential mode. she is a rising star in the republican party, but she does not have a variety of foreign policy experience. it is something that she will have a steep learning curve on. the ambassador to the united nations acyclic speaks for the president -- basically speaks for the president and articulates his policies. she will have to get a good idea of what the president stands for
when she represents us for the united nations. to have to get an idea of all the major dynamics and fighters around the world -- players around the world. it is a big difference from secretary of state. you are representing the united states on the world stage. that does not mean she cannot rise to the challenge. however, it should be interesting. she is the first woman that donald trump has for his cabinet. he was getting some criticism for not being as diverse. he was essentially looking only et whiteman for his -- at whit men for his cabinet that's far. host: what you think of rudy giuliani and mitt romney? their thing -- there seems to be some speculation today that mitt
romney is being seriously considered. others are saying that he will be loyal and give it to rudy giuliani. guest: donald trump, if nothing else, can be surprising. i am surprised he even met with mitt romney considering the almost vicious takedown that romney delivered in a speech in utah back in march or april. an i cannot just agree with his policies, but this was a personal attack on donald trump. saying that his promises were not work any more than a degree from trump university. now, he is willing to put that aside and consider mitt romney for this important position. isall accounts, romney discussing it with his family over the next giving holiday.
we will likely not -- over the thanksgiving holiday. we likely will not hear any thing until after the holidays. i think a lot of people are looking at this. i think republicans will be encouraged that someone like mitt romney is someone that donald trump would be willing to bring in. i think some trump's supporters will look at this as not really for filling his promise to "drain the swamp." it is a very conventional pick. as i said, he is, if nothing else, a show man capable of dropping some surprises. 2012, mitt romney famously said that russia was one of the major security foreign threats that america is facing. barack obama warning donald trump that one of the greatest challenges he will face is north korea. guest: one of the surprising things about donald trump -- we
learned about this in his discussions with the new york times reporters and editors yesterday -- it is his admiration for president obama. he said at the meeting -- after meeting with president obama for the first time in white house -- that he would seek his counsel in the future. he repeated that to the new york times reporters and editors. he really likes him. host: this is available at nytimes.com. "i think he did an overwhelming job, but i am not overwhelmed by it. i think you can do things and fix it. he said some nice things after the meeting, and i said some nice things about him. him. like i really enjoyed him a lot. i have spoken with them since the meeting."
guest: to get back to her original question -- your original question, one of the problems that is serious and korea.lt is north they have developed nuclear capability. worldwide, they are unpredictable and somewhat unstable including their leader. they do not seem to be susceptible to any pressure that would normally be brought to the international community such as sanctions. there seems to be no caret or tick thatcarrot or s can influence her behavior. even china -- influence their behavior. even china is getting frustrated with their inability to influence their behavior.
i think north korea is a problem that donald trump needs to focus on. nationalare discussing security and foreign-policy issues that president-elect donald trump will take on when he takes the office. you can join the conversation on our facebook page. donald trump continues to tweet. general james mattis is being considered for secretary defense, and he said he was area impressed by him yesterday. he is a true "general's general." guest: this is a guy who is legendary in the marine corps. the troops that he leads love him. the other enteral's respect him. generals respect him.
i would ask the call him a thinking general. -- "mad dme "mad doc" og" is for his devotion to his military career. he is also never married in his 66 years. part of that is because of this devotion to his military career. he is also a deep, strategic thinker. unlike donald trump, he is an avid reader. given a reading list for his troops about military history, previous wars going back to centuries. he is a very interesting character and very much revered in the military. host: covering the pentagon, you know it is a civilian position. he is now retired and can he served as a -- he is now retired.
can he served as a civilian secretary? we do not want generals running the pentagon. we want civilians running the pentagon. the federal statute says that the defense secretary should come from civilian life. it does recognize that people can leave the military and become civilians, but it sets the timeframe of seven years. you have to be out of uniform for seven years to qualify to be defense secretary. you could still be secretary of state or national security advisor, any other position other than defense secretary. in order for general mattis to serve, he is not yet been out of --form for seven years congress would have to pass a waiver and the president would have to sign it for him to
qualify for the position. it has been done once before with george marshall. -- got a waiver, but it is not customary. it does seem that with the public is in control of the house and senate, and with the johnrt of general -- of mccain, it does appear that he would be able to get such a waiver. before they pass it donald trump takes office or after, we will have to wait and see. typically, the candidate gets a november. on generate 20th, they are up on the third floor changing the sign. they have a nameplate, and a crew goes up.
after an hour or so of being sworn in, the name is up on the door. mcintyre with us now. let's get your phone calls. for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. independentse for . you can also send us an in mail email oret -- an treat. caller: i believe he is the right man for the call. i appreciate what all of you are doing. got bless. -- god bless. giving wonderful thanks and new year. host: i believe general petraeus was also mentioned. guest: he did say that he would work with president-elect donald trump if asked.
he does not seem to be under active consideration for any cabinet position at this time. like general mattis, he is a strategic thinker and is well respected. of course, he had his scandal will at the central intelligence agency. it was revealed that he was engaged in an extramarital affair. not soington, that is disqualifying anymore. general mattis is a little more colorful than general betray us. petraeus. general general petraeus is a little more reserved. he may be called on, but there is no indication at this point that he's being considered for a cabinet position. host: assuming he is confirmed, what does he bring to the agency? guest: he is very smart. he graduated first in his class
at west point. he is very aggressive in his questioning about the events of and ghazi. -- to enhanced interrogation techniques, which is interesting , one ofgeneral mattis the things we learn from the new york times interview, general mattis has apparently discouraged donald trump and maybe help him change his mind about the efficacy of things like waterboarding and other things that people say are tantamount to torture. according to trump, mattis told him he did not see much use for it. give me as quote was couple cans of beer and a pack of cigarettes, and i will get more information. it almost seems like he has flipped him a little bit on that, which is an interesting thing. flip-flopping is often seen as a negative.
but it can also be seen as a positive, if it appears that what you have done is keep your mind open to new information and come to a more nuanced decision. it will be interesting to see how that plays. has revised his positions on a lot of the things he said during the campaign that and sort of very out there, it is interesting. as he does that, he is irritating some of his supporters but is also getting credit for being more presidential. in the new york times interview, he says he is rethinking the whole issue of waterboarding. guest: basically, he found general mattis' experience to be a compelling argument. he did not seem to be swayed by mr. mccain's very adamant opposition to other forms of torture. right now, those
techniques are illegal. congress passed an amendment to in which they limited interrogation techniques to what is in the army field manual, techniques in the manual. that does not include waterboarding and other techniques. it would be illegal for the administration to engage in those techniques. host: if the guest of our boys sounds familiar, especially in the d.c. area, he began his aller on wtop and on npr's things considered, and also worked here at c-span. good to have you back. guest: at one point, i was one of the voices of c-span, and i used to say, c-span, our companion network. c-span2, supported by american cable companies. host: we could continue to use that. guest: my voice was on a couple
of years after i left. i was honored to be a part of c-span back in the day. i think you are just 15 years old. host: and now we have c-span3 and c-span radio. we continue to grow. i was 16. let's go to chris in gainesville, florida. good morning. i just wanted to ask your guest what he thought about the role of the press under a trump administration considering the rocky road during the campaign and continuing now into the president-elect's time period. what will it be, it he continues to alienate them, will lay have the same role as in the past? guest: it will be very interesting. one of the arguments for doing things the way they have been done in the past is that they have been done that way in the past.
we have always had a press pool to follow the president everywhere, an expectation that there would be presidential press conferences, other things. is not necessarily signing on to all of the conventions. he is questioning some of that. i don't think that is entirely , forropriate, just because instance, the press pool has followed the president everywhere, even when he goes out to get pizza. do we need to have that level of coverage? we do not have that for the vice president or the speaker of the house. it will be interesting to see what they work out. of course, the white house correspondents association is very concerned that trump will not adhere to some of the traditions that give them the opportunity to report on the president's sort of every move. we spoke to the president
of the white house correspondents association about the issue, and one of the statements that the association put out on november 16 reads as follows. this is in response to donald trump going to club 29 for dinner after they said that he would be in for the night -- some would say, why is that necessary? how do you respond to that? guest: as a reporter, i certainly endorse the spirit of that statement by the white house correspondents association. we are always arguing for more access. there is no one more important than the president. if something were to happen and there was no press there, you
can imagine what it would be like. don't think hand, i it's inappropriate to question some of these things that have always been done. do we need to have a reporter there when the president goes to dinner, a press pool? i think it is a discussion worth having. think, onme down, i the side of more access, but it is not written in the constitution, it was not always done. pretty sure george washington could go out for pizza without a press pool covering him. it's a legitimate question to a debate. host: cnn reporting that david petraeus would in fact serve in a trump administration if requested. the story is available online. mary is joining us from toledo, ohio. caller: good morning.
i can't believe i got through. at the time, you were talking about infrastructure. wello, ohio is doing very on getting our roads and schools. our city has raised enough money to refurbish all of our schools and do stuff on their own, the city has. last speech, it was announced on the tv that a big warehouse down in toledo had done a lot during the war, and had been sitting there for ages, and the city bought it. they are redoing it for small businesses.
they already have a call from therevietnam who wants in as soon as they open, which probably will not be until 2020. jump in.m going to that would have been a great topic for the previous topic. i will keep you here if you have a question on the current topic. we are here in the summer and they are doing a very good job of keeping it up. the other issue, i don't know what i would actually call. maybe you have an open time. host: mary, thank you. have a nice thinks giving. unless you want to respond to infrastructure in toledo. i would say the one issue
that appears there is some bipartisan support is this idea of putting americans back to work by investing in infrastructure. there are two questions about that. where is the money going to come from, and will there be a lot of new money, or is trump talking about fostering infrastructure programs with tax cuts and incentives that would really go to projects that are already there? i don't think you will see the democrats just automatically by on to this idea that infrastructure will save the economy. you will see a pretty vigorous debate on that. host: senate democratic leader chuck schumer will be dealing with this because he wants to see more money spent on infrastructure. fun is from matt who says c-span trivia. jamie mcintyre used to be the voice of c-span.
our next guest is in fairfax, virginia. tim. caller: thanks for taking my call. , i thinknted to say nikki haley is a good pick for the u.n. hopefully, it mitt romney were to be selected for department of all of the depomed to would quit. host: the bureaucracy within the state department. caller: a large part -- guest: a large part of the state department are foreign diplomats, people deeply steeped in their area of expertise. in many ways, they pride themselves on being not articulate political but key area and country experts. the new secretary of state will be able to draw on that.
the advantage of somebody like mitt romney, because of his stature and experience, and because of all the preparation he did running for president, he could probably slip into that role pretty quickly, and he would provide president trump with some guidance in an area that is not trump's strong suit, which is the nitty-gritty of foreign policy. president-elect trump like to talk about his goals in wide generalizations of things he would like to achieve. he even said in the new york times session that he would like to be the man that brought peace between the israelis and palestinians. that is a pretty lofty goal. there are a lot of diplomats have tried to make that happen, presidents. it would be interesting to see what mitt romney would do. host: you go back to the past to the legal presidents, often undercut by national security
advisers, henry kissinger. you have a national security advisor that is somebody that mitt romney has not selected, somebody close to donald trump, lieutenant general flynn. how would that affect mitt romney or anybody else in that position? momentlet's assume for a that romney were to get secretary of state, general pentagonds up as chief, flynn is the national security advisor, nikki haley at the u.n. it is almost like you are setting up a team of rivals that will be fighting each other for the year of the president, and trump has said in his management style, he likes to listen to people and then decide. in many ways, it is almost in the mold of president bush who famously called himself the decider. trump is also in that mode of making the decisions. anyone,e decisive as
for anyone that saw his reality television shows. i don't think this administration will run like a well oiled machine. you have people with different views and institute seas, and it will be a challenge to see how donald trump handles that. maybe he will be able to synthesize all of these views and fuse it into a coherent policy, or it could be very much challenge. host: patricia from brooklyn, new york. caller: we do the national security. we have been threatened already with the macy's day parade here. defense,ore money in open up the armories, have the national guard come through, and open the bridges back up. full security all around the united states of america. guest: one of the interesting
things trump said in his video presentation, in talking about doing things differently, interacting differently with the press, instead of coming out and having a press conference or even having a statement about what he would do in his first 100 days, the president-elect outline his views in a short youtube video, two and a half minutes. one of the things he said, one line on national security, he said he would ask the chairman of the joint chiefs and the department of defense to come up with a plan to protect america's vital infrastructure from cyber and other attacks. it shows his focus on securing the homeland. when you talk about vital infrastructure like that, you are talking about protecting public events, the electric grid, the banking system, things that could be attacked by cyber criminals.
not at the pentagon, by the way, is not already planning on how to protect the country -- there is a whole cyber command, northern command detecting the homeland, of course, department of homeland security, but it does not mean that these plans cannot be adapted and improved. that is one thing donald trump said that he would like to see done. host: a tweet from james saying -- i think you have already seen -- for instance, this morning, mike huckabee was railing about the idea that donald trump would consider mitt romney as secretary of state, particularly, because of the attacks that romney launched on trump during the campaign. he said the only way that romney should be considered is if you apologize is for all the things he said.
but one thing that donald trump is showing in these early days of the transition is that he is willing to make a pivot and make a change, do things that are going to surprise people. yes, some of the people are going to be heartened that he did not do all the things that he said he would do, and some will be disappointed and upset that he did not do all the things he said he would do. trump seems to think that it will not be a big deal that he is doing things -- that he is not fulfilling some of the, says such as not pursuing the prosecution of hillary clinton or doing the other things he said. it will be an interesting political dynamic. trump has been able to do things his way and it has worked for him, so i don't see him changing. host: confirmation from nikki haley that she has been tapped to serve as the ambassador to the united nations. a short while ago issuing a
statement to her fellow south carolinians saying -- pointing out that she will remain governor until confirmed by the senate. guest: there is an important point. when you're president calls and nan you to do something, says the nation need you to do it, that is something very hard to turn down. when i say you're president -- donald trump, where the you voted for him or not, will be the president. however people felt about him during the campaign, whether
mitt romney believed all of those awful things he said about trump, you can certainly understand how he would have to take seriously the idea that if he comes into the administration, he would have to help not just the president but the country in an important way. that may require setting aside a lot of personal feelings and animosity. it is a very powerful thing. imagine if the president called you and ask you to perform a mission for the country. very hard thing to say no to. host: winchester, california. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is how come there are so many loopholes in the system with immigration rules? if somebody is caught, yes, we are supposed to ship them back, but they get in jail, they get a lawyer, it takes a month, and sometimes they don't go back because there are so many loopholes. host: another issue that came up
during the new york times meeting yesterday. interesting, donald trump had one position during the campaign, that illegal immigrants in the united states need to be rounded up and deported. but as soon as he was elected and was asked about it, he had a different position, which was that immediately the focus should be on securing the border, b, deporting people with criminal records, which was a smaller subset of illegal immigrants. and that is something the obama administration has been focusing on, too. deporting people with criminal records. so it is not all that different from the obama policy. then he says we will get to the rest of the people whom he refers to as wonderful people. it leads one to believe that maybe with republicans in control of the house and senate
you could have some sort of bipartisan immigration reform that would do some of the things that previous immigration bills that made it through the senate but not the house would have done, which is secure the border , perhaps in building the wall that donald trump talked about, perhaps fences instead of walls, or maybe even electronic barriers that would serve the same purpose. and then creating a much more fair system for people to come if not get a path to citizenship, at least work legally in the u.s. without fearing deportation, especially children who were brought here as young children and know no other country than the united states. a lot of things said in the campaign will turn into more conventional compromise policies that both sides could get behind. a second tweet from james, because it is a good point --
guest: it is hard to say. has a bitter feud with the new york times. he almost invariably calls it the failing new york times, and that he meet with their people, and by all accounts, the meeting was cordial. he called them a jewel. trump has this ability to edit, change his positions, recognize his audience and play to that audience. it is an open question. take mitt romney. is he really considering mitt romney, or is he toying with him? if you are a cynic, you would think he is dangling out there as a bit of vengeance but will not go with romney, but we don't know. actions speak louder than words.
we are starting to see some of donald trump's actions. host: the full transcript of that interview available on nytimes.com. a number of interesting editorials, including from tom friedman. this is what donald trump said -- martha in irvington, new jersey. caller: good morning. have a blessed holiday to you and yours. appreciate president obama, president clinton.
i appreciate what they have done and i would like them to work together. peaceful transfer of power is the hallmark of democracy. see really interesting to whether donald trump will actually continue this relationship with president obama once he is out of office, will he truly seek his counsel and advice? he said he was very impressed with obama. they had never met before they had met in the white house. even though we may all recall the sort of tense moment at the white house correspondents dinner a few years back, trump was in the audience, the president was mocking him during the humorous remarks. the: did you happen to see
donald trump in the oval office video that came out? your thoughts about what was going through his mind? guest: i thought it was an amazing moment in history, the way -- the donald trump that we saw in the briefing room and the way that he indirectly with president obama, where he seemed to have some genuine affection. mentioned,at trump they were supposed to have a 15 minute meeting and it went on for over an hour. the president seemed, once again, as in the case of general mattis speaking to him about torture and waterboarding, talking about the affordable care act. trump seemed to take that to heart. -- he has beene much more conciliatory since the election. of course, we have heard his comments about not pursuing hillary clinton, the use of her
private email server, wanting to get beyond that and saying nice things about mrs. clinton, how she has been through a lot, does not want to hurt the clintons. it is almost like a completely different donald trump. host: this is the video we were talking about. all of these moments are on our website, c-span.org. just two days after this historic meeting lasting about an hour and a half. there you see the president and the president-elect. get the last word from calhoun, georgia. caller: good morning, gentlemen. with thely concerned media and the affect that that could have on our national security. we have heard so many warnings lately about the altar right -- alr-right, and quite frankly, i
was skeptical of them, like the tea party. , corporate money, all of those racists that did not like president obama, and i knew that this was untrue. they would have a prayer at the end of tea party meetings and president obama would be included. protect him, give him wisdom. guys are selling illegal copies of the constitution just so that they can have gas money. so i knew this was false. when everyone was morning about , the media road that horse all the way, promoting that. they kept on talking about these people on the alt-right, white supremacists. so i was just very skeptical of the whole thing.
and then i turned on c-span, headline news. host showed a brief clip meeting, alt-right just a few seconds. i don't know what the speech consisted of, but the end of it, this guy says hale donald trump, hail victory. and the people in the audience, not all of them, but a bunch of them started saying hail victory, and the stiff arm salute. that just rocked my world. ,s far as i'm concerned socialism, neo-nazis, it is all too sides of the same so p coyne. host: i will stop you there and get a reaction. guest: one of the things that is
really important in these days of fake news and so many questions about what you can believe and what you cannot believe, it's important for consumers of news to consider the source. c-span is a great source of that because you are able to look and see the whole thing in real time, in context. context is the holy grail of journalism. if we are doing our job well, we are providing the facts and context to help you understand. c-span does great job of that. if you really want to understand james mattis, go on to c-span.org and look at his speech that he gave to the center for international strategic studies in april. i looked at it the other day. , if you get a feel watch that hour, for what kind of general james mattis is, the way he is pragmatic, how self-effacing he is, but at the
same time, the strong leadership rejects. i would just caution people to consider the source. i think c-span is an excellent source of information because it is unfiltered and you get to decide. host: and one more time, how did that voice over go? privatelypan is funded to support american cable companies. coming up next washington journal. jamie mcintyre, now with the washington examiner, thank you for coming back.
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national able satellite corp. 2016] captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption contents and accuracy. visit ncicap.org >> the world was more dangerous in the sense that if something
science education norman lederman, an author and professor of math and science education at the illinois institute of technology, talked about scientific literacy and next-generation ways of teaching science. >> norman lederman is the author and professor of math and science education at the illinois institute of technology. he addressed an audience at westminster college in fulton, missouri, about scientific literacy and next-generation for teaching science. this is about 45 minutes. >> when we talk about today revolves around the next-generation science standards, which can only people are familiar with -- probably going okay. so those are a new set of standards that came out in 2013, and the acronym is in gss is different next-generation science standards and i have some concerns about a special with respect to the areas that you mentioned that i'm interested in an inquiry and nature science and his title, i like titles, eventually will make sense when it get to the end of a target if it doesn't then it's a good thing my talk is going to end. anyway, entitled the ends may justify the means but the means should never become the ends. and as you mentioned i'm a former high school teacher, biology teacher and chemistry. i've been an assigned profession for over 30 years
and i love science and i love kids. this first picture is two of my grandchildren. and that's another grandchild. i have three. we are trying to get them to love science but young kids are extremely curious about the world and where they live and it's not hard to get them excited. somehow over the years in schools, we get students interested in science. we give them scared of science. they take the minimum science they can, and it's unfortunate because those are future voting citizens and the general public out there doesn't have the highest attitude about science as well. it's unfortunate because everyday i world becomes more scientifically and
technologically-based. a lot of the decisions we make need some understanding of science we can make an informed decision. scientists disagree a lot. this gets portrayed in newspapers on tv, and the public very often asked react and make decisions about their personal life, what they eat and what they do and what's right for the environment. and so science is critical when we like it or not, and my emphasis has always been on the public's understanding of how science works and what applications it has with the knowledge that those are signs textbooks and besides we hear about every day. if you go to washington, d.c. on the rotund and the national academy of sciences, there is a saying they are, what's on that ceiling is one possible answer to the question.
which i will let you refer a second or it seems a little bit militaristic, but it's a pretty standard definition if someone asked you what science is. science is an interesting thing because we recognize it but if we are asked to define it's not so easy to define. when i was at oregon state university, which was many years before i was in chicago, there was a paleobiology is to you to work with a massive the question what is science, and his answer, although the different han the first one you saw. likes to be provocative. he was a great speaker this conference. he tries to get people jazzed up by using things like lies and deceiving the public. but he's just trying to get people to understand that science is not as infallible as
many of us believe and that scientists do the best they can with the data they have and they make inferences from the data. that's what he's really trying to say. those differences of what we use to describe how the world works and all the phenomena we see how the works. by does mean that we are laying. if i were in a classroom and i was asking my students what is science, or i'm working with a group of teachers and asking them what is science, really want to focus on is there are three parts to science. the first one we are all for me with. it's a body of knowledge. pick up any science textbook, commission, biology and the pages are filled with the urrent knowledge of science. the new standards call the main foundational models disciplinary core ideas and that these overarching or
integrating ideas called crosscutting concepts. things like equilibrium, things like homeostasis, things like osmosis and so on. you are filled with things called theories and things called applause and it goes on and on the. on. i'm not understand a lot of time talking about that today because the main interest i have is in the second thing appear, and the third which i will reveal in a minute, that's tradition thing called science and cory. and a standard it's called science practices. it's the things that scientists do to answer the questions and to develop the knowledge that fills the textbooks. a way that science is done has implications for the end product which is the knowledge, the figures, the loss of the concepts that fill the textbooks. that's known as nature of
science. that talks about the characteristics of the knowledge which are directly derived from how the knowledge is developed. so it's things like all scientific thought is subject to change. it's never absolute. scientific knowledge is partly a function of observation and inference. scientific knowledge is empirically-based. scientists go out and collect data from the natural world. they don't just make up things about they think the world works. it always has to be tested against nature. so that's what nature of science is really referring to. i'm going to spend just about all of my talk on the second to. because all this is science that we learned in school, all the science that we learn from tv, all the science we get from museums, zoos and where ever we onfront science, and want to
learn about science, the ultimate goal has always been scientific literacy. we want our general public to be able to take the knowledge that they have in science and use it to make informed decisions about personal issues, about societal issues to be productive citizens. that's the ultimate goal. to reach that goal we need to understand the knowledge but more importantly, my argument, we need to understand how that knowledge was developed and what are the characteristics of the knowledge because of the way it was developed. the same group of people that have on this evening, the first go, national academy of sciences, here is their definition of scientific literacy you're a ittle bit more long winded but
it is saying the same thing, and that is that we want our students and our public to be able to use that knowledge to make informed decisions to that's what, we've been trying to reach this goal of scientific literacy since the early 1900s, and by everyone's estimation we have not reached that goal yet so we continually try and try and but haven't got there yet. to get more specific about literacy, this also comes from the national academy of sciences. to be scientific, students have to learn how to ask him a find and determine answers to questions as derived from curiosity but everyday expenses but we want them to describe and predict natural phenomena. we want them to be able to read newspaper articles, watch tv and engage in public conversations about the validity of the conclusions that are being presented. so they can with the evidence the way the scientific knowledge in some informed away. identifying scientific issues that underlie national and local decisions, and express
positions that are scientifically and technologically informed. we hear a lot in the news, we did much more so than now, about whether this global warming or global cooling. we have many politicians that don't believe certain things the scientific community has almost total consensus on, and that's always existed in our world, and we want people to know enough about science be able to make sense of some of these positions and arguments. methods to generate is critical. that's another whizzing scientific inquiry. and two if i would argue it's based on evidence, same idea, ust long winded. a little departure for a second because this shows up a lot. there were two phrases you will hear and most people will use
those interchangeably. but they don't mean the same thing your wife is science literacy and the other is scientific literacy your science literacy really is focusing on how much science you know. it's not about making decisions. it's not about applying the knowledge to make decisions. it's about how much science do you know. one place it is playing itself out right now is in this big push for stem, science technology and giving and mathematics. which was supposed to mean the science curriculum would be now integrated for those disciplines. but many universities, and mine included, have taken the emphasis on stem cell between we want to have more science, more technology, more engineering and more mathematics. the integration among those is
not stressed. scientific illiteracy is more in line with the position i'm talking about and more in line with the current national standards. and that is focusing things that are science and technology-based but there any context of the world we live in, our daily lives, and that's where the decision-making comes in. all decisions are not made just based on science that's involved because there are other factors, political factors, social factors that all or part of the decision. it's not as simple as we don't want to cut trees down anymore because we are trying to preserve the environment. i used to work in oregon and that was a big war that went on because many people were employed in the lumber industry. if you make a decision not to ut down anymore trees, you put
a lot of people out of work. the people would be fighting from an economic decision versus something that's better for the environment. they are not simple decisions. in the national standards, there is a stress on scientific practices and nature of science. in the ngss, nature of science have eight different components. one is that all scientific investigations use a variety of methods. not just one. one major misconception in the world here is that all scientific investigations follow one set sequence of steps that as the scientific method. .. up until 1956, we used to elieve 1929 and 48 chromosomes
and what is that about? the idea that was raised that there are 46 chromosomes that we still hope to but it wasn't until 1956 and because of advancement in technology, sometimes technology is simply reinterpreting the same data and that we have a different view of how things have worked. e used to think that dinosaurs ere closely related to reptiles and now we believe they are more related to birds. there are many, many other examples. odels, laws and theories are critical to science.
sometimes technology is not involved just reinterpreting the same data. we used to think that dinosaurs were closely related to rep tiles and now we believe they are more related to birds. there are many, many other examples. models laws and theories are cret kill to science. -- critical tothey help explain or provide science. framework for the world in which we live. scientific knowledge for the assumptions of science is that there is water and consistency in natural systems. if we find gravity here, we are going to assume it will be everywhere else on the earth, rather than every location eing different. science is a human endeavor. that is something that is pretty big. it means a lot more than humans
do science, which is true, true, but because humans do science, it has limitations and biases and it all involves creativity and imagination and all those characteristics. i skipped over that science is a way of knowing which is another vague term. what does that mean? part of it is that the way science is done is different than other disciplines are performed. science addresses questions about the natural and mature world. there are many questions that are not answerable through science. what is love? what is good? what is bad? those are not scientific questions. when we talk about science practices and scientific inquiry, it can be bag and people have written books about this and they often come out to with an addendum redefining what they mean. in curricular reform, it's used in three different ways. ne is a a teaching approach.
if you are preparing to be a teacher, 11 of the things you'll hear a lot from the classes is, you should teach science in a way that is very similar to the way scientists use science. you let students develop questions and collect data. you let them develop research design and analyze data and they come up with the conclusions and many argue about the conclusions. the idea behind it is that students do science the way scientists do it, they will and up learning better and they still debate about that. but i am on the inquiry side of that debate. there are two others, one is a performance board, giving your kids the ability to do the things that scientists do. making observations, making inferences, drawing conclusions, developing uestions, that is the doing of inquiry. lesson on there, the
one that is often ignored that essential to the work that i do is knowledge about inquiry, stepping back and looking at what we just did and why we did it that way. it's easy to teach students in the school to design an experiment with the control group. it doesn't take very long to do that. but then to have the student step back, and you asked them, why do why do we need a control, they can't answer the question. it's not uncommon for students in science classes to be able to do something that they don't understand what they're doing. my focus is, i think it's better if students understand what it is they are being asked to do, but often that is left out and students just do whatever the teacher tells them to do and it often comes down like a cookbook, a set of of prescribed steps that they follow without thinking. specific science practices, the way they are listed in the science standards, i call this
the list of birds. students learn how to ask questions, develop and use models, plan and carry out investigations, using mathematics and computational, analyzing, interposing interpreting data, coming up with explanations, engaging in arguments about the evidence, because it's not uncommon in a science class, if you are teaching, that the students, somewhere along the line, the activity, not every group in that class will come up with he same answer. usually that is pretrade as someone did something wrong, but it is very typical of science for people following the same procedures, trying to answer the same uestions, coming up with different answers. neither one of them did anything wrong. obtaining and evaluating and communicating information. these are the things you can teach students to do.
it's a performance idea of inquiry. it is formatted in a ay, i don't think you can read everything that's there but it's called three-dimensional science learning for the one on the left are the science engineering practices or inquiry, the ones in the middle are disciplinary core ideas, those those are the foundational theories, laws, ideas and science, and on the far right is called close concepts which are overarching ideas in science that integrate all the different science areas and are much bigger than ndividual factoids or facts. the two things that are circled in red are labeled as connections to nature and science. they are not considered standards, they are not necessarily things that kids will ever be tested or evaluated on, and they are things that i feel right now the new standards that will be left out in the curriculum
totally. when the next generation of science is being developed, there's a big debate about what to do with nature and science and actually that pushed to the back much further than our previous standards which concerns me because i've been working in that area for 30 years. now it's kind of an appendix. what do we want students to know? i work with teachers on a much simplified list and it is that all investigations begin with a question. it may not be a hypothesis. that's another misconception that you have to begin with the hypothesis. a lot of times there are just general questions without protection being made. there is no single set or sequence of steps that are always filed known as the scientific method. were not saying a scientific method doesn't exist, but it's not an accurate representation of all science. inquiry procedures are guided by the question which is why we have
to start with the question that guides your investigation and uides the data you collect and as i said before, all all students doing the same thing trying to answer the same question may not get the same result because they interpret things differently. they focus on some data and not all data. increase procedures can influence the results. research conclusions must be consistent with the data collected and i often have students say, we didn't get what we were supposed to. i said what did you mean? ou use the data you had in the data are what they are. the previous speaker said it's ust the way it is. there's always a conclusion and the clues conclusion must be consistent with the data.
data are not the same as scientific evidence. we get the data, but the human mind nterprets that data and then it becomes evidence for your viewpoint, evidence evidence against it or it becomes irrelevant. evidence is really data that's been interpreted by the human mind. explorations developed, these are things you don't do like observing and inferring and concluding. these are things that students, looking back on what they did, hey come to realize, this is knowledge about inquiry and knowledge about science. historically, these have always been mixed up and they've always been there but they've always been mixed up. in the benchmarks program that came about in 1993, nature science was an overarching theme within which inquiry was included. the national science education
standards from 1996 put them together in different ways. they were two separate things that were related but they were different. the and gss now has a subset of inquiries and that's what i call the little red circles where they were aiming the increase section and interestingly enough, the knowledge about inquiry or a subset of nature of science. it looks like three and four are contradictory, but the the key thing is the word about in number four. number three is about doing inquiry, doing science and number four is understanding about what you did. you can see from this that nature science and inquiry
sometimes been kept separate, sometimes are at a hierarchy with nature science at the top and sometimes the others at the top. they're always there with a cause a lot of confusion. what we have found out from over 60 years of research on scientific inquiry and nature of science is that k-12 students, and the general public did not have adequate conceptions of inquiry or the nature of science. these two things are critical to achieve scientific literacy. it is not just the knowledge, it's understanding how the knowledge was developed and what are the implications for the nature of the knowledge and how i make decisions based on that. the the same thing is true with teachers. they don't typically have good understandings of nature and science of inquiry. it's problematic because teachers are expected to teach these things but how could they teach something they do not know it's not that they can't
understand it, it's just that if you think back to your science class, you were ugly for talk anything about nature of science or scientific inquiry. i wasn't. i didn't learn about nature of science and about inquiry until after i had a masters degree in biology. it was just not included in any instruction i have had. it's actually been in the goals since 1907 but we still have a ong way to go on that. teachers conception are not automatically translated into how they teach. when i was a graduate student i used to believe if you understood nature of science it would affect how you teach. it doesn't. they are not related. it should be, but they are not. teachers, and this relates to high-stakes testing that were
getting more more into does not regard understandings of nature science as having equal status with the tradional core set of ideas. that is because teachers tend to teach toward the test because they want to or they have no choice. they don't value it as much as other areas. finally, what we found out recently is that understanding nature of science and inquiry are best taught through critical reflection on what the students have done. we talked about the extent we just did and why we did it the way we did it. without that reflection, students don't come to understand that. students learn the nature of science just by doing science. there are many people that believe that today.
when students don't go home at night, in my class today mom, not every group got the same answer. that's because we are all different people with different backgrounds and that's why we and up with different answers. that conversation does not happen automatically and frankly if more kids did that, i would be a little worried. some of the best students do that but most of them do not. they just think somebody did something wrong. the explicit approach doesn't work. the historical approach is another one that gets looked at and that is going to the historical development of scientific ideas. we have seen what makes sense but the mind works in strange ways and we logically progress in a linear fashion than what we used to know. he message from the history of
science approach tends to be that students can step out and they tend to think that these people that used to believe dinosaurs were related to reptiles were just ignorant, which they weren't at the times they came to these conclusions. the research shows that at some possible for students to do that. we come to every situation with some kind of background knowledge and background knowledge filters how we interpret what we see. 300 years ago if you looked up in the sky and saw that white object and asked you what it is, you would would say that's he moon. no, you would say that the planet planet. today you would say it's the moon. same object, same place in the
sky and one time we called it a planet and now we call it a moon. 300 years ago, we used to believe the earth was the center of the solar system and anything that orbits was a planet. now we believe the sun is the center of the solar system and anything that over it's the sun is a planet, that's why we are a planet and anything that orbits a planet is a moon or satellite. depending on what theoretical framework we have about the world, it biases, it guides how you interpret what you are looking at. there are no value free and rotations. they are all within the framework you are working with. the exclusive approaches one that treats nature of science and treats an inquiry or practices just like anything else you're trying to teach. it is a goal of your instruction ,
it is planned for, it doesn't happen by accident, and that's what makes it explicit. explicit doesn't mean a lecture. it means it's visible in the classroom and its talked about in the classroom. hopefully more so by the students them by the teacher. the students don't have to use these views, unless that takes place, they don't ome to learn nature of science or inquiry and that's the focus of my work and i think what's going on in the next generation has forgotten that idea, even though there are 30 years of of research on it. generally, teachers know this, students won't learn what is not taught. you may be able to read that fine print at the very bottom which says generally speaking, the
students learned all kinds of things you didn't intend them to learn, but if you look at what they wrote down, your class would be surprised at some of the stuff that's in there. don't ask me later, and less you talk about it, things students won't learn what you intend. my big summary points are these. this is a necessary platform of earning about scientific practices and the status of scientific knowledge. i'm not advocating at all that we should stop focusing on kids doing investigations. i am all for that. it is absolutely necessary, it gives them an idea or develop the skills that scientists use every day, but it's not enough just to do the science. doing science is necessary, but it is
not sufficient. it is a means to him and i would get back to that title, it's a means to the end of students achievement of scientific literacy. if we want students to be scientifically literate, we need to put them in situations where they can reflect back on what they did, develop their understanding of inquiry, develop an understanding of the status of knowledge and realize that it may change, realize that it's not absolute, realize that realize that it's partly a function of human imagination and inference and also a function of actual data. inquiry has a platform that students need to refer back to. if you go home tonight and you see a debate on the news about whether a genetically modified food is healthy or not, none of
you are going to run out your garage or your backyard and do an investigation. we put students in the position wherein and we have an idea about how science work and why it works that way and when they're confronted with these decisions they need to make, hey use that to wait the evidence. when we just stop at students doing inquiry, we stop at that point, were not going far enough that's why i said in my title, the means which is critical become the end point. we stopped at them having to do the science practices and were missing this whole other step which is absolutely essential. the other steps were in the
last set in 1996 but now they're just an afterthought. okay. students need to critically reflect on the signs they've done, develop an understanding its implications in the status of the knowledge. they need to reflect on those inquiry but without that reflection, they don't have the understanding they need to make the decision. without these understandings they miss the basic foundational science and the concepts to enable students to make informed decisions about scientifically based issues. we need the knowledge, we need need to know how it's developed and we need to know what status
that knowledge has. in doing science, it's absolutely necessary, as a means, but it is not the end we desire. the end point always has been and probably always will be scientific literacy. if we just focused on the knowledge or the doing and developing the knowledge, we are missing at least two components of scientific literacy. there's actually more than i haven't even talked about today. that's my message. if you are becoming a teacher, make make sure you engage your students and what you've had them done and what that means to them and their lives. if you are not a science teacher but are consuming, people that are consuming science, think about and ask yourself, how did did they come up with that. what was the data they used to come up with that. what's that mean? that picture on page five of your textbook of the adam, it
ooks like the solar system, no one has ever seen in adam. those students believe that someone with a strong enough microsoft microscope saw that adam and the picture in the book is instructional but we don't even believe in adam looks that way anymore. that's based on an old model that ooks like a solar system but in quantum mechanics the raydom oesn't look that way at all. they'll even tell you what it's made out of. whether it's solid or liquid. s far as i know other than the movie no one has been to the center of the earth.
earth. that's an inference we have made with various types of technology which have evolved over the years but no one has ever seen it. students need to know where that picture in the book comes from. they need to know what does it mean that it's an inference, that means it can change when we have a different view, in fact, in fact, we used to have a different view of it, and that becomes important because it helps guide future science because all of those parts of the adam drive the types of questions we ask, they they guide what answers are considered acceptable or valid nd there really are critical things for the students to know. that is if we want to get to the end point. so, it's a great platform, it's a great means, but it's not the end point. the in point is scientific literacy. we can't cut ourselves short. with that, i will cut myself short and ask
if there are any questions. [applause] >> thank you very much dr. letterman. if anyone has any questions, come on down and we will take your questions one at a ime. >> i'm supposed to say i learned something totally clear. okay, if if there's no questions. >> okay, you saved me. >> thank you for your talk. i thought it was very interesting.
i was wondering, something that was implied throughout your entire talk was the philosophy, do you feel as if students need to learn about the philosophy of science to understand science? do think it should be implement it into high school from an early age? >> okay so this is actually a great question and it's actually the core of a continuing debate. i will tell you what the debate is and where i stand on this debate and why i stand the way i do. there are many people who feel it's very important for students to know, and if they get a good understanding of philosophy and history of science it will enable them to understand their science better and understand nature of science and how science is done better. we always have to remember that
we are teaching biology, chemistry, physics, but we are not teaching philosophy. many of my philosophy friends argue for that. we need to have more philosophy in our i just saw question, what are you seeing about how the process is done what does it mean and how do we do it? so some ideas are good. kids love history of science. i use it as a way to engage students so i can get to my end point, which is what ept them to learn. philosophy of science can get eal confusing to kids.
hilosophers will tell you that chair over there is really just an inference that my mind has made up. it really doesn't exist. all that ever happened was i had charged particles going in and out of my nerve cells and then my brain interpreted it to be what we would all agee is a chair. if you tell a sixth grade student stuff like that you're going to confuse them because to that that's a chair and it's absolutely there. so i usually am on the side of consider the audience, how old are they? what are they capable of understanding? and use that to the best of your ability. and we -- i mean my biggest detractor is a good friend of mine actually but we've never agreed on anything. mike matthews is a real historian plus earth
scientists. and then myself and my colleagues are on the other side of that debate. but it continues to rage on and it differs from country to country. what i can say and no one seems to pay attention is what are my original doctoral students, his dissertation studied understandings the nature of science and scientific inquiry in students that were taking the history of science class at the college level. students taking a philosophy of science class at the college level, and students in a science-teaching methods class. and what he found was the students in the history of science and the philosophy of science class did not understand nature of science. they understood history of science, they understand philosophy of scunes, but not this educational scout come that we call nature of science. so that data is out there. it won awards. but people -- science educators are human just like scientists.
we have these ideas that we try to push and we just ignore the thing that is go against it. but that's an excellent question. > thank you. >> what do you think is missing, the reflection of the process and what is the meaning and why we do it. correct? that's what -- >> isn't that the -- i mean, something like that. but more like a critical learning part. why we did with a we did. and why in the specific case that process is valued and why the other case it is process may not be valued. isn't that why what we miss if we do not do that?
like a process or factory machine, really. >> i totally agree with that. we call it cookbook science. students follow the steps and come up with the answer that they know to come up with because we talked about it yesterday in class and verification kinds of activities. >> if that is true, i think the philosophy of science are tested to accommodate the heightened levels, the mature levels. i agree with that and a couple of things in that statement,
his is something that was done k through 12, k through 16 because it should be in college classes as well. you can catch it in terms of critical thinking, you're hinking about scientific technology and how that is developed. it leads to a better understanding of that knowledge. if we realize the picture of the atom is a model derived rom data and that's a better understanding of what it actually looks like. i understand we can start early and go through college. the elementary curriculum in his country, when they tried
to teach more process skills or thinking skills and didn't focus , kids used to do a lot of hands-on activities. now we talk about hands-on and minds on because students have to be thinking about what they are doing. just manipulating things is not inquiry. nquiry involves manipulating things to collect data and also thinking about what you've done and how that could influence the results that you're getting and are there any alternative explanations. i think what we do does not foster critical thinking. it really doesn't. critical thinking is another battle cry you hear from many educators around the world as
well. my wife and i get called upon to go all over the world to help their students develop critical's inking skills because nobody really feels that their country is doing a good job with those kinds of thinking skills, although everybody values it. everybody values creativity and critical thinking and he still trying to figure out that development a lot better than e are. >> thank you very much. let's give him another round of applause. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national able satellite corp. 2016]
>> this is part of a conference hosted by the milken ininstitute in new york. >> thank you all for being here and regardless of your politics i think it's safe to say this past week has been a little tumultuous. and i think either way no matter who had won the election health care issues would have been front and center. you can imagine that where hillary clinton is the president-elect and we are having a panel this morning on the drug pricing down. instead because donald trump's or president-elect the news has been dominated. good news has been dominated with talk of obamacare repeal and some of the issues that are most important to this sector have been overshadowed so for me selfishly this is a tree. i've had my head down and what
the eta's next steps will look like but i'm curious to know what happens to the sector and experts will talk it up this morning. what i think i would like to start with is this. sitting in this room we are one-mile exactly from trump tower. if i looked on google maps may be apple maps with a slightly different calculation but one-mile walking, trump tower has 58 floors. for the sake of argument we will say it takes about a second to go up every floor so imagine you are riding the elevator with the president-elect and hypothetically he might not know a lot about the inner workings of health care. [laughter] imagine you can tell him anything about this industry. what is sure whether all elevator pitch in 60 seconds and we will start with you. >> i'm going to tell mr. trump
to think very carefully about policies that have an impact on the pharmaceutical industry because like ge brings good things to light, we bring good things to life and to people and innovation is crucially important to keeping our country healthy as well as keeping our country prosperous. our companies employ tens of thousands of people in good paying scientific technological jobs so we do contribute to the economy but most importantly our number one priority and the thing that we make our greatest contribution to aids patients all over this country and globally whose lives we save and in those lives we make a huge and important difference. his policies could change that dynamic not only for companies
individually but for every single patient in america. >> that's inspirational. >> do i have another few seconds? >> i think they actually only have 58 floors so depending on you calculate. >> andy, how about you? >> i would tell president elected i know you were being barraged by recommendations for names and appointments but i would implore you to put policy before people and what i mean by that is that whomever you select they are going to have to deal with the fact that there are norma's policy issues and changes that are going to affect the agency they are involved in, health care and biomedical research. we are looking for example at as former commissioners at the fda
working on a recommendation to make the food and drug and frustration an independent agency and all the nuance that goes with that. there are now over 10 agencies that fund biomedical research to the extent there are tens of billions of dollars and there is a significant policy question around do we need to have greater coordination of that federal spending as a boost to a policy that embraces public private partnerships and relationships with industry. and so before making critically important decisions about personnel i believe it's important for you and your leadership to pay very close attention to the mac or policy questions that will shape the future of biomedical research and therefore the future of health care in this country. >> dora hughes from sidley austin.
c i would say very eloquent elevator speeches. we need to focus on patients with as much progress we have made in areas with hepatitis and hiv. there are thousands of rare diseases for which there are no treatments and families are suffering. i would definitely hammer home on the economic message. i think that would resonate in a campaign in terms of the number of jobs created, what means to medical centers and other research centers and i'd certainly want to emphasize that. the other message that i think we should talk about is the need for global partnership and some of his comments in the context of trade or nato have suggested that we might not have the same
level of collaboration globally and i would want to point out that this is not an institute than can go forward alone. they are very much depended dependent on collaboration and very much dependent on organization is another big area focus. that would be another message i'd want to focus on family i would want to that we do need to be mindful of the impact against all population groups being mindful and particularly given some of the rhetoric of the campaign this is the area we would have to be especially sensitive about in the days ahead. c the president-elect's head is still swirling with ideas. >> i think i would probably start off at the sixth floor of the massive elevator. echoing a lot of things that abari been said. in a new leader in a new position has a knee-jerk reaction. i think that if he has done his
90-day plan one of the most important things he can do is take a step back and really listen. he is shown an uncanny ability to listen to voices that are previously been unhurt around the country. take a step back and understand the complexity of it. we operate in 150 countries all over the world and really understand the problems that are facing them. the problems that are facing this country and our industry were the same before and after the election. the first thing he could do was really set the tone for the principle and how he wants to resolve its issues. really wanted to stimulate an economy and provide an
environment that supports innovation but also one that meets and addresses the needs of a lot of voices out there that are looking for continued options for affordable health care. he can also set a great tone by reaching out to all of us in the room to say the way of getting there is not just pearl with small people in her room but to really reach out and listen to the ideas that each one of the wall, each one of us in the sector may have. >> so, before i start i should tell you that margaret anderson gave me these thoughts last night and so when she said it will not your socks off i just don't quite get it. ask her about the significance of it. >> i'm happy to have a conversation.
>> this is what the people came to hear. [laughter] the elevator hasn't started yet. >> we have a president who probably doesn't understand the nuances of health care so i would say to him that give him a little bit of history and remind him that 1945 president bush wrote at the request of roosevelt about how the federal government should relate to science having just come out of the war effort and developed robust relationships with the community. what is going to come next, do we stop at it we don't have a war anymore and the answer surprised roosevelt and many others. what he said was support basic research. the federal government must support basic research because the private sector essentially canned. research operates on a different
timescale and it asks the open-ended questions that can't be answered so the first answer is that. that is enunciate, use your bully pulpit to enunciate the importance of a mental discovery. gerberding issued a call to remind us us all of the importance of that the second message would be the the bully pulpit is expanded because of the way scientific research has gone and the connection to patients in the health and health care and that is we know need to fill the continuum from that fundamental discovery all the way beyond the clinicians and social behavioral and population scientists into the community. patients of course but also that of healthy people because by operating together that person will be able to gather information.
i have heard a lot of threats that i want to pull this together but maybe we should just have a base question now that we have informed the next president where we all stand. republicans hold onto congress and now will control the white house too. was this election ultimately good for the sector and andy as former fda commissioner from a different angle we will start with you. was this election good for the sector? >> i think it has the potential to make incredible positive for the sector. i will say that in a couple of different ways first of all i think with this new administration and with the tax policies and regulatory policies i believe it gives an
opportunity for enriched -- for the sector. on one hand addressing issues about repatriation and trillions of dollars that are available in this country. there are hundreds of billions of dollars on the balance sheets of major corporations in this country like google and basically that money is basically sitting on the sidelines. with the right tax policies and the right fiscal policies we have the opportunity to pull that back into an opportunity for enriched investment grade you can talk about infrastructure but infrastructure for the biomedical community including infrastructure around education and the next generation, those could be for the administration to the white house and congress. then you have regulatory issues and we can talk about reforms
and the regulatory process at the food and drug administration. what you get creates a much more exciting climate for early-stage investment because the pipeline is a bit more well and more precise and a little bit more optimistic. so i believe from those two standpoints when you couple that with the continued exclusion that's going to occur as pointed out in science and ecology itself than four years could he the best of times, not the worst kind. >> overall optimism where the other repatriation investment do you agree with andy's assessment? >> i agree with it and i think the financial market agrees with that as well. within hours of the election it dropped and went right back up and the number of analysts in
particular pointed out that this is a time to invest in the biopharmaceutical industry. i think they made that recommendation based on what and he is talking about but i also think another issue, and that is the issue of the assault on drug pricing that has been taking place and was one of the cornerstones of secretary clinton bang. that assault on drug racing could have passed a continuing down i am past on the industry. i think the expectation now that secretary clinton is not in the white house is that at least to some extent, scrum of pressure that places all of this and this list on the price of drugs in the talking about the value of
drugs is going to settle down a bit and it will give our industry an opportunity to tell our story are with -- without a high-level backer money is debate. our story is and it is about the fact that our health care system is a multi-partitioned operation , so it isn't just about the price is should it is whether patients have access to quality health care including the drugs that they need. i think that conversation of how all of the parts of the health care system can work together to assure access to drugs as well as to the health care system can
take place more respectfully and a non-shrinking environment and i think that is what we can expect to have in this particular case. b something that you said, the idea that terry clinton was very anti-prices and aggressive on bringing them down. your point, donald trump has heard his voice is and capitalize on the populist message. he is not a stranger. he's also campaigning on the hydro tries you too in a public has in congress view it more -- than democrats we don't really know what donald trump can do. >> you think that we have to acknowledge that there are a lot of -- when they go to the pharmacy counter they have oh
ensure trees that are not affordable for them. that didn't change after the election. so i think for us at the company we look at that and we'll know we have have to take our own actions and are on response ability to go in the last two years, classified your medicines to be added below a price to make think that's a step that we as an industry have to do to. it's not just about innovation, it's about working and being responsible industry within the system at à la jing role to play in saving lives and addressed to mrs. but also what we can do in health care and make this a more sustainable.
>> let's flip this around for second in the world where secretary had been elected and our solutions better or worse plex that's a terrible way to ask that question. let me ask more directly. if donald trump's election last tuesday help or hurt american patients ultimately quick story, any thoughts? >> i think we can take a step back. very helpful to have this dialogue at this point in time that i think was his campaign good or bad for sector? at some point you have to start at the top and look back at president-elect trump's record and in terms of his campaign proposals they had not been particularly well detailed and there was not a meaningful focus on by medical and biotech issues. that's one and if we look at some of the stickers on science and if we look at climate change issue as an example is the
science that's true for some of his supporters. >> he doesn't believe in climate change. >> i think from a scientific level as other should flag the globalization to. there is a lot of concern globally and i also think some of the focus on the case to. part of it was is taking half a step back on that but i feel like in terms of her capital funding particular for some smaller companies i work with any of these major changes aca is hugely deceptive.
it has tremendous uncertainty and i worry about some of the proposals in that context and what that will mean for financing and keeping the industry going in a robust way. the jury is out for me. i won't say it won't be terror world is coming to an end by any means. it will be important to see what comes forward through this transition team in terms of who his top political appointees will be, what proposals will come out and we also need to watch what happens in congress. i do think i have a number of concerns but i'm not willing to say at this point it will be a positive. >> let's get to the transition stuff in a moment that it's a big box to impact second-tier point pointed answer to be what that means for the industry and whether that's good or bad and are feeling the navy could be bad. any reaction to it door at just the?
>> i think it's actually good that the president-elect is not taking a hard position on some of these issues. he doesn't have anything to actually pull back from. we can shape the future and let me be specific about that. i don't think anyone thought either side would not want to see us address the critical problem of the price of rugs. i think it's a matter of what you would do about that. price controls demonizes the industry in my opinion and would not be a very positive thing and what the ultimately negatively impact patients. but there are other possible solutions and ways of doing this. i think if you look at the people who are devising president-elect trump and i would say specifically newt gingrich, it was spoken and afraid of ways of what we can do
in an innovative way including with alzheimer's creating an opportunity for bonds that would be able to fund an offset costs. i think this administration could be open to innovative ideas. andrew whoa is an economist at m.i.t. and a fellow at the milken institute and his work on the concept which essentially is mortgage for medicine. i think going forward we don't have to view the solution to the problem of price of drugs by simply looking at price controls but rather look at innovative other ways illuminate the burden on the patient reconfigure our system. i'm optimistic that we have an open space here that we as a community ought to contribute to and help this administration defined as the solutions. >> one more perspective and keep
you are out there working with clinical trials and seeing some of the research being done. what is your perspective on what has happened in the past week? >> there are causes for concern space on what we have heard in the campaign about evidence-based decision-making and what the particular foci should be that this is not a time for trenching and on those concerns as opposed to really finding the right people to sit down and talk with and coming out of transition. newt gingrich is a great example and beginning to educate the administration about the potential opportunities for the administration to do things that will be recognized by the american populace as contributing in recognizing things that will have an effect on their health and health care. an example would be drug pricing
and looked at from a different perspective. that is that the way that pharma makes money is by selling the drugs that the fda approves and selling those drugs to make money means that to cover the cost. understanding the mechanisms and the medicine approaches we can better understand the mechanisms of disease and leads to smaller trials and more success of those trials and therefore less obligation to cover costs. that approach you'd be able to say let's get back to the basics and figure out the mechanisms of the disease for these winds which would drive down the cost per drug companies to buy will have an impact on health care and drug costs. price right now is a major driver of health care and the cost curve in this country.
everyone agrees it's not sustainable so here's a way to approach a direct way. i think that's the kind of message i would try to establish. >> one of the most encouraging parts about this election is that president-elect trump is a businessman and most people running a large business the way he has want a lot of information before they make decisions. i reflect on andy's comment. he didn't take an ideological position may be a positive thing. it may signal that he's open to all ideas and if he sets up a way of working with the industry with patience and with academics and the financial services industries all of the people and the e. as system i think we will undoubtedly come up with better solutions. i don't think it doesn't care about affordable care or isn't
in principle a goal that you continue to have 20 million people with insurance. what do things there i think is where they need to be a lot more work and detailed. >> is a businessman trump is at a lot of experience in different businesses in retail. i'm not sure about trump drugs. if i can paraphrase what i'm hearing on this question the sector overall has likely benefited from the election. before we get to policies that can be rolled out i think the operative question right now is what happens next in the transition? who is going to be put into place and what does the new administration need to do? we have some folks on stage who have experienced getting a transition through and we can start with you. again this is not hypothetical. from team based on what my
sources have told me they could use a little bit of advice on how to figure out the transition next. what comes now before the president-elect and his team especially around help care? >> but if already seen a lot of analysis. the transition team is rapidly being assembled. >> i'm sorry i'm a terrible moderator. you have the experience because you went through this years ago. >> i was on president obama's transition team so i had experience at every level. the first is continuing to have core members on board and they will have two main tasks. the first and this is what we are seeing right now is to identify and begin to set candidates at the highest level. the cabinet secretaries, a prime example and that will depend on
the right type of experience managing large organizations having policy credibility being able to work with others. you have to be part of the team. a very difficult process. even working through that there is an intense interest in starting policies. the president trumbull not too's too's -- want to start the first day in office saying what are my priorities right now starting at that point. he wants to be ready to hit the ground and pass some of them right away. a prime example is president obama during his transition team that's only drafted and negotiated a recovery and reinvestment act, are a -- r to do was ready to be signed by congress for the authorization
of the health insurance program. if the clinical function of his transition team working closely with congress to think about what are we going to be able to say that we have accomplished for the american people? i think president -- when i was on the transition team we met with groups from all different parts of the sector who came in with their ideas to fill the role of the director. i think this is the time now to start to seek these types of appointments be going to map to icon to people. i think this is the time to start that conversation. >> are we talking about 20 groups?
>> are like 50 or 60. that's the core transition team. advisers helped even more so -- and i think that's true because of the change in administration and the change of the political parties. we want to make sure that whatever else needs to be added or retooled you still want to care about that. sad this is a super self this question but when you meet with those groups how do you decide who is worth scheduling a meeting with? are we talking about only national associations, and street-level? >> i think these are groups that we would expect. the major physician groups the major trade associations. i don't know that they would even be surprised in terms of
who we met with. i will stop there. >> one of the things that is absolutely typical about a transition is the instability and the anxiety and its stability about policy and anxiety and also about personnel. i actually am going to insert a commercial here because i think at this particular moment as far as we are concerned one of the most important things i think that could occur right now immediately is the passage of the 21st century insurance legislation. ..
>> >> hugely important. maybe even moving as we are sitting up here. because of your experience, i'm curious because we are talking about the transition, what is the talent or prospective the next fda commissioner needs to navigate where the industry is headed? they should be looking for leadership and organizational management, not technical skills, professional skills.
it is not important that the head of the agencies's be notable scientists or famous clinicians. that would be nice to have, but most critically important is can they provide the leadership? the most important element is teambuilding. this game has changed from golf to basketball. if we don't have leadership, someone who knows how to coach, teach, and manage, we have a serious problem. you have to look deep into the organizations. this next administration will be hallmarked by reform. they want a different way of business, fda, nih, or elsewhere, and the next dealership will have to be adept at that -- leadership will have to be adept at that.
let's talk about the 21st century. there is a big question if it will be solved with the lame-duck congress, or be pushed off yet again. it won't play well on these ban, but they shall of hands, who thinks 21st century cures will get through congress this year? a show of hands? very few people. you are either pessimistic or readers of political pulse this morning. as we joked earlier, journalists know nothing. that is the lesson from 2016. you were on the hill last week lobbying around 21st century tears. when this panel is up you are going to d.c. to talk more. what are you hearing in your conversation with lawmakers? >> last week was a long time
ago. that i was fairly optimistic from both parties nobody is against by a medical research so futile give frank opposition to the topic and congress would like to have the wind at its back so there is some confluence in the right direction so i heard a fair amount of optimism getting something through the house for thanksgiving. as hiv-2 through fyi 17.
there is a huge amount of ground to cover. that israel they come from. that has changed lot so the decline is still there. >> what about your read? >> i would lead agree with the biomedical research i'll think it is but they're not you have opponents but if there is a bigger agenda at play if you want to end the
year as a tax cut all of these things is bigger than it was anticipated so poor that could just be issues. >> id did hear what has given the past week there is an appetit -- an appetite and now is all round the repeal but i know you have been informed perspective and of we want to see legislation go but what you think that would do for the community that is not currently being done quick. >> i think the most important piece of that legislation is the additional funding for the moonshot and the funding
that is different is different from what is going on right now but the biles pharmaceutical products are components to that legislation that they're going on now. is important that congress says that these need to be focused on in this is one of the favorite things he did such great work as a way to have a buyout market is. so it became an issue that suddenly america was all about by barker's.
so the new could argue the legislative language of that bill or whether you could argue that congress then save signal to the fda that it is important that both of those all are equal and those are important messages in the bill as well as important changes that could lead fans of development of that product to get them developed maury efficiently -- more efficiently to go back to how the clinical trials are too big or too long and one of the things that we have focused on in negotiating the prescription drug user fee access also focuses 21st century
chairs to say that we have slimmed down the review process they're practically reviewing uh drugs between six and eight months across the board and that is pretty good. but where we haven't is the amount of time that it takes to develop drugs we have to be innovative of how we design clinical trials and how we looked at the data from clinical trials of the multiple multiple sources of data and that exist? how can we take advantage of real-world evidence? when we do clinical trials? when we look at drug safety
as well as the effectiveness ? all of these are crucially important to get the drugs developed faster. we cannot slowdown the fda review process much more but we sure can slim down drug development 21st century cheers put our heads together to figure out how to slim down drug development. so we can get the effective products to the market quickly and everybody will win that battle. >> do you agree? >> yes. that is a priority i am hopeful that they will make
it through is the intention of the congress. and then to continue to be the passport but the current administration with the level of the importance because to be supported through the 21st century and then to continue for word not to do any retrenching. that also help in terms of the obama finishing is legacy so there is some
tension that that is just like a lame duck session. >> looking at the process and those that have to be addressed with these legislation and political i think right now if the bill does not get past there is retribution marco over to 1/2 years. >> just think how young we were when we started. [laughter] >> i was not. and then to have bipartisan support and brought an
amazing cross section of the community and there are more telling halls. and that all goes away. we start all over again. and when that happens there is so many editing is on the table a betty that opposes this politically and then they will be held accountable for that. >> i and agree but i do think there's a lot of anger on capitol hill right now.
of milan democrats flu resoundingly supported of those on the senate side. the question that i have is if that anchor of the election but across the board and the country. to break apart that alliance over the course of that to years in that you will see this political pullback but i don't disagree with you that there will be consequences i know what to say that. [laughter] but there acre with the public if that drives away a
>> sodium election is lovelock coal -- a black hole's a letter of the risk of missing? like the election different measures said global research. what of losing that risk? >> i've been the administration may not recognize the power that it has to bring those federal agencies to gather. look at the way the moonshot was developed with 10 years of project in cancer
research. and elements of the ways that we work to serve as barriers. in the task force pulled together 20 federal agencies to make cancer research move faster so to figure out things cooperative lead that they are not by now. so if we expand the notion to the administration to say you have a chair and hip-hop that those arty agencies that fight for their budget every year. to convince congress and
they are doing. and the way that they do that to say we're doing something unique. so there is a very strong force in the industry shinkin do things and they have done wonderful job for that job and for that group. and then to motivate these agencies to work together. and we are in danger of missing that. >> so to paraphrase. >> interagency collaboration coming together more as a team of rivals?
>> what do you think? >> those comments really touched on the theme of that this election was defined of making america a great and there is a drive to focus just on focusing on our problems as a country. i would not want this industry shin to mrs. it is health care industry is global and there is the need of campaign initiatives to drive those global health care concerns and also stimulating new innovations could they approve over 30 years?
and we are starting to see the application of the 2 million people so now we cannot handle that so i hope that as a big public health concern to reach across to other partners to identify ways of these issues. >> >> focusing on trade have they hedged against that? is there in is what. >> they are headquartered in the u.k. but you see from poolside the of the atlantic but thorax cooler heads will prevail.
but these problems that exist today existed before election and how we get there with a fresh set of eyes to incentivize the marketplace had to egad better regulatory alignment that that would be very appealing to the next demonstration. >> whether we are risk of in missing? >> and the she just quoted price said previously but. [laughter] >> should i move to the right? [laughter] this mechanized spirit negative collaboration.
>> but some of that with the transition team you want to point to ready to go with your first day in office. that this is what we will push john and to pass the budget resolution. and my fear is that if they did not have established policy there is sound flexibility that we don't take the time to go through the process. so those juniors has all of the collaboration's that is what they really need and
what are the people in their priorities can we be scheerer that we are taking the race steps wet clothes and my concerns at this point in time. >> regarding trade the most politically important issue one i am worried about with regard to transition with the administration to focus on education. anything we hope for anything we are looking for to figure out the creativity is based on the next-generation over the next few years. we have got to focus on that
long-term said the education system because without that all eight years from now we will not big country that we want or to generate that creativity is the use to. what i don't want to see that dismissed of the biomedical research and don't want us to miss those young minds to identify and nurture and we can change the world. >> if it is harder for immigration do you see that as a challenge? >> absolutely. >> but to be focused on
human capital with gdp for any nation. there are only three ways you can produce human capital you grow it, you import or you nurture and we should make that a theme how will we developed a human capital of this nation in the 21st century? >> as the administration focuses on only those things to make the assumption almost everything that happened before they got there was wrong and have to be changed and fixed so equally on those that are
working well so they are eager to make the difference to make a change. so to enhance those things that are working well. with the fda is an agency and the people that we represent there are many things that work well. not everything is bad. and for those that are regulated to be uncertain about what will happen in so if the market thinks suddenly everything will change unpredictably for the sake of change it is not
>> how good was the administration for this sector? that it was bad for the sector is looked at over the eight year period in the sense of global and general policies. i think there were things that were said, issues that were raised from time to time that had an impact on the pharmaceutical sector, because this is a sector influenced by the occasional remark. -- or the occasional tweet -- for example, a tweet by then candidate clinton about
caused literally the bottom to fallout of the biopharmaceutical market. every one's stock went into the tank. it was momentary, and a sense. it is not a good thing to have that kind of fluctuation. fluctuation. but i think that there was a sort of overall negative view by some people so the cost of having to justify its existence i don't think that is necessarily the best thing but in general i don't think that it was a bad administration. i think there were moments that were less than thrilling.
spank the fda has been caught up in the challenges and the drug was approved in the political pressure. from your perspective as a former commissioner of them is the agency insulated enough from the political pressures? >> first, let me say that in my experience at the time i was there it wasn't one decision was made on ththat was made on the l basis. they were all made on the science base and that the issue you have to come to grips with is the agency in the administration interest in
policy and the drug or the device o were something should e approved or not approved those are always based on science. how that goes forward into the public realm is shaped by the policy. let me give you a very specific example. shouldn't be allowed to be put into the milk supply and the answer from a scientific point of view is absolutely yes because it is no different between the milk that comes from a cow that's been cloned as opposed to why old or something. given the way we process milk in this country, if you put milk from a cloned cows into the milk supply, you wouldn't be able to
track and trace it and immediately all of our cheese exports were shut off. so the agency and the commissioner has to be a part of the policy aspects of government while leading an agency that has to make decisions based on science and where there is a conflict then the secretary delegates that and they make a decision. they may say wait a minute that's contrary to what we said. i don't deny that but on the other hand it's not in the best interest from the policy point of view and i can track the decision you make because it reinforces the decision i made
it when we put an age limit on what we thought was appropriate for someone 12 or 14 years of age. >> i understand all the things you have to balance. i guess i just want to come back to this for a second. from your vantage point it looked like it did in to back up the decision. did i give you new concerns about how they made the decisions and set a precedent that could be dangerous? >> to be candid and honest, i wasn't immersed in the decision and i don't know that i know enough about the discussions and conversations to comment on that. and i'm not dodging the question but there is a space where the leadership looks at issues,
judges the science and then determines what is in the best interest of the vot public. >> there are a number of initiatives we talked about the push towards more precision. do we know that any of those are paying off and i realize it is early in the going but given thathat there is effort going io these initiatives. you said it yourself, the procession medicine initiative recognized how to address the problems. it's set by how those initiatives are instructed and
intended to do. in the case of the tenor of where the industry has been the last six months which hasn't been very kind to the industry and doesn't recognize in many ways the industry and its value to society there are certain tales where the administration has not wanted the industry to be involved. whether it is the healthcare over the country and the lack of acknowledgment the industry can play a role in improving patient care and helping to drive the better improvements. it can be harnessed to do good budo thatalso good but also is improving the patient care post approval. so i do think that it is too
early to tell. i love the tone set by the administration relative to how we work together as an ecosystem and hope this continues into the future. >> i would argue that those initiatives are working and this calls into question the role of the administration in the case and that's facing big challeng challenges. i think the well enunciated challenge service quickly and demonstrates the success because it brings into the endeavor individuals and holds disciplines that didn't think of themselves as being able to contribute in the precision that says the really need to involve engineers and physicists and scientists if we are going to be able to woo the health care challenges in an effective way
to. it wasn't achievable. we were having a hard time getting their rackets into the sky forget about a man to the moon. we are sequencing dna which on a good day you could get 40, 50, 100. what happened was people from other fields and disciplines said i can do something here. we can actually make some progress. i would argue that the initiatives had already done that and these are challenges that will span the
administration ten years and so forth. we know that there are challenges to say an administration can bring forward and those are working. >> so enough peopl >> so enough people can come along for the ride. let's end with one question we can shoot down the line. that is who is the one person you are going to be watching in 2017 with impact it could be bernie sanders or someone outside of legislation. of the one person, i think everyone is thinking about their answers. [laughter]
starts with her. she doesn't have to think about her answer. >> why don't we start with you. >> i don't have to answer the questions. [laughter] i am very curious about the overshadow. i want to know who the next chair will be because they could have a fair amount over what is happening and then paul ryan macro because there is a of plug and play could he be the guy on the ground and that is bigger than the sector all across healthcare. that's my answer but i shouldn't have to give one because i'm the moderator. >> i would keep my eye and ear to the ground for newt gingrich. he is an advisor to mr. trump
and over his congressional career and his private consulting business he has remained extremely interested in the regulation that fda does. the ti time between the director and the commissioner. >> do you know who either one of those will be? >> i will tell you afterwards. [laughter] >> i would say the new secreta secretary. >> any predictions on that? is to make those are all good. i'm going to watch for barack obama. he has shown enormous interest
and he might be, general washington is the contractor. more of, it looks like what the general contractor has in mind than the architect. >> president george washington's role in unifying the country and ratifying the first federal document in his new book. >> what they wanted to do was to recruit washington in part of the coup d'etat. they had talked about the democracy stuff not working. washing 10 believed in a republican government. >> on c-span's q&a. we are asking students to participate in the studentcam documentary competition by telling us what is the most urgent issue for our next president and the incoming congress for 2017? the competition is open to
middle school and high school duden's, grades six through 12. students can work alone or in groups up to three to work on the documentary on the topic selected. $100,000 in cash prizes will be 150ded and shared between students and 53 teachers. the deadline is inauguration day. for more information go to studentcam.org. >> yesterday, president obama pardoned the annual thanksgiving the white house. the two birds are from storm lake, iowa and will be moved to virginia tech university. this is 10 minutes.
>> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states. [applause] president obama: thank you so much, everybody. please have a seat. for generations, presidents have faithfully executed 2 great american traditions. issuing a proclamation that sets aside a thursday in november for us to express gratitude. and granting pardons that reflect our believes in second chances. this week, we do both. of course, thanksgiving is a family holiday as much as a national one. for the past seven years, i have established another tradition. embarrassing my daughters with a cornucopia of bad jokes. this year, they had a scheduling conflict. actually, they just couldn't take my jokes anymore.
they were fed up. fortunately, i have by my side here today two of my nephews, austin and aaron robinson, who unlike my daughters have not been turned cynical by washington. they still believe in bad puns. they appreciate the grandeur of this occasion. they still have hope. melia and sasha are thankful this is my final turkey pardon. what i haven't told them is we are going to do this every year from now on. no cameras, just us, every year. no way i am cutting this habit, cold turkey. [applause] president obama: that was pretty funny.
thanksgiving is a chance to gather with loved ones, reflect on our many blessings, and after a long campaign season, finally turn our attention from polls to poultry. we are looking to be honored by two of the lucky ones. they were raised by the domino family in iowa. tater and tot. tater is here in a backup role just in case tot can't fulfill his duties. he is kind of like the vice turkey. we are working on getting him a pair of aviator glasses. it is my privilege, let's just say it is my job, to grant them clemency this afternoon. as i do, i want to take a moment to recognize the brave turkeys who were not so lucky. who did not get to ride the gravy train to freedom.
who met their fate with courage and sacrifice and proved they were not chicken. [laughter] president obama: it is not that bad, now. come on. we have a lot to be thankful for this thanksgiving, six great years of job creation. low unemployment. wages are rising again, inequality is narrowing, the housing market is healing. the stock market has nearly tripled. our high school graduation rate is at an all-time high. our uninsured rate is at an all-time low. thanks to the 20 million americans with health insurance. [applause] president obama: that is worth gobbling about. proud of families across the country are finally complete now that marriage equality is the law of the land. there are many families of
service members who had md -- had empty chairs in recent years but can celebrate with our brave troops and veterans who we welcomed home. thanksgiving is also a reminder of the source of our national strength. out of many, we are one. we are bound not by one race or religion but by adherence to a common creed. that's all of us are created equal. while building a diverse society has never been easy, it has never been more important. we are people that look out for one another. get each other's backs. we keep moving forward, defined by values and ideals. that have been a light to all humanity. we have to teach ourselves and each other because we all have families we love. we all have hopes for their better future. we lose sight of that sometimes and thanksgiving is a good time
to remember that you have more in common than divides us. the holidays are also a time when it is important to reach out to those who need a helping hand. i believe we are judged by how we care for the poor, vulnerable, sick, elderly, the immigrant, the refugee, everybody who is trying to get a second chance. in order to truly live up to those ideals, we have to continually fight discrimination in all its forms and show the world that america is a generous and giving country. we should also make sure everyone has something to eat on thanksgiving. of course except the turkeys because they are already stuffed. later today, [laughter] president obama: later today, the obama family participate in our traditional thanksgiving service project. when somebody at your table says you have been hogging all the
side dishes and you can't have any more, i hope you respond up thecreed that sums need of hungry people yes we , cran. that was good. you don't think that was funny? i know there are some bad ones in here. this is the last time i'm doing this, so we are not leaving any room for leftovers. how am i doing? good? let me just say one last thing before i spare these turkeys' lives. i want to express my sincere gratitude to the american people for the trust you have placed in me over the past eight years. the kindness you have shown my family. on behalf of michelle and my mother-in-law, or girls, we want -- our girls, we want to thank you very much. and now, from the rose garden, tater and tot will go to their new home at virginia tech which
is admittedly a bit hokey. they will get to live out their natural lives. a new facility called gobblers rest where students and veterinarians will care for them. let's get on with the pardoning. everyone knows thanksgiving traffic can put people in a foul mood. happy thanksgiving, everybody. let's go pardon these turkeys. ok. alright. is this tater or tot? this is tot. taterigning documents for also. i should stand on the side so everybody can see it. i hereby pardon you from the thanksgiving table.
we hope you have a wonderful time at gobblers rest. you want to touch him? you want to do that? what you think? that was good. what do you think? you want to try it? no? there you go. all right. congratulations. [applause] president obama: you guys did great. give them a big round of applause. [applause]
president-elect trump on the new administration's plans for taxes job creation and the economy. we talked to robert wiseman president of public citizen about the a position to the deregulation proposals. ♪ host: officials planning the inauguration for donald trump said the will accept funds from wealthy donors. they hope to raise $7,500 the transient team also adding they are expecting as much as 3 million people for that event. journal onashington this thanksgiving day, south carolina governor nikki haley in michigan education activist betsy devos