tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN November 10, 2015 2:00pm-4:01pm EST
not-for-profit or a tribal development organization and in cases, they are working, succeeding and making money and now they are finding ways to reconnect with their community. and both things are legitimate. there's -- if anybody here on this panel, you graduate, you decide and decide i want to be a business person and you are successful, i have confidence that you are going to stay connected to navajo country and you are then going to be able to
give back and you're going to open up opportunities for cousins and brothers, not just by way of example, but because you are part of that community, part of that tribe. and that is going to be part of how we also grow the economy. young people investing in education and really being focused on being able to compete in the larger economy, that's really important as well. >> our next question -- we got it online also. what measures have you and your team taken to ensure that the next administration pays attention to native voices? president obama: i'm bias here. i'm trying to make sure it's a democrat. [laughter] [applause] president obama: there are some republican members of congress who represent native communities and are really supportive of these issues like tom cole of oklahoma.
i don't want to sound too partisan. part of what we have done is we have tried to instaugsalize new -- institutionalize new practices. and my expectation is whoever is the next president, they bill -- they will be able to see we have been able to build some real trust with revelations. and if they're smart, they'll want to continue what we've done , because i think we are really making progress and the good news is that the tribes now know what's possible so they can hold accountable the next administration and say hey, we were meeting with obama and his team once a year and they were going out and visiting us and doing all kinds of things and we haven't seen you. and i think that can make a difference.
but i do think it's important for the next president to be able to articulate very clearly how they are going to interact. one thing i'm proud of, one -- a lot of you i knew before i was president. i made a commitment, i made a promise about what i would do and better, but it starts with, as you are listening to various candidates -- making sure that you ask them now before you offer them support. and it's true whether it's a republican or democrat, ok, here's what we have been able to build over the last seven years, are you willing to continuity? -- committed to continuing it. if they say yes, now you've got something that you can hold them accountable to. [applause]
moderator: since we have more time, would you like to ask your second question? >> yes. i just wanted to let you know that i lost four friends to suicide since middle school. and i want to know how your administration can support health and mental wellness of native youth and our veterans. president obama: well, they're two different groups. veterans have some very specific needs. and through the v.a. we are really focusing on this. and in the department of defense, when people are still in uniform, we're focused on this. letting people know that it's not a weakness, it's a strength for you to seek out help when you are suffering from severe depression or other, you know, challenges like that.
with respect to young people, you know, i'd be interested -- this is one where i think i'd really like to hear from all of you. because this is a story i hear too often. when i was at standing rock, i mean, it was just -- the number of stories that i heard was heartbreaking. and we can provide more resources, and we are doing so, i've asked sali and others to really focus on how do we prevent suicide, addiction, provide more mental health services and counseling, but i think i'd love to hear from you guys who are in it. what you think would make the biggest difference. what you think would be most helpful. since you asked it, why don't
you -- >> i feel like it's very taboo to speak about it in native american communities, especially the older adults might think that it is. but i feel like the youth are really ready to speak about it and i feel like there should be a little bit more support in the school system. because some of the schools i've actually got to work with, on the reservation they don't have after-school programs. they have -- they're really strict on education, but there's really nothing that can connect you to your culture after school. or teach you some of your traditions after school. but i feel like some of these are very important to youth. there might be some kind of cultural identity or identity loss and some of them might be confused and feel like there's no help. the only logical explanation that they might have or they might think is maybe suicide.
for me, i want to i guess prevent suicide. and i'm in theater, i do theater, i love theater. i try to do a lot of that in my work and try to understand why these youth think the only answer is suicide. it could be something at home like abuse, child abuse. or just their parents might be alcoholics or something. but no one really speaks to these kids. president obama: anybody else want to offer some thoughts? >> i think talking about suicide is very crucial. it should be talked about. we should knock down the stigma of talking about your problems. a lot of people look at it as it's a sign of weakness and it isn't. it's actually like you said stated, a sign of strength. i lost a friend, a very good friend. he was at prep school and he came home and he committed suicide.
i never -- you know, we constantly searched for the answers but the answer usually is that -- it's that stigma. you don't want to be -- be looked at as a weak person. i think we need to knock down that barrier. and have it be known that talking about it isn't a sign of weakness. president obama: anybody else have any thoughts on this? >> i do. i'd like to shout out to my friend jasmine over here. because she did the warrior circle project and -- president obama: hey, jasmine. [applause] president obama what's the : warrior circle project? >> as she explains it, she helps children that think about suicide and also have problems within schools, right? and she talks about them because people can actually connect to youth more, like youth to youth, instead of youth to adult. so i just thought that was a good project to bring up because i work with her.
president obama: absolutely. that's great. [applause] president obama: any other thoughts on this? >> through my experience of traveling and speaking and seeing a lot of native americans across the country, i've also come to realize that, and growing up and living on a reservation, i've realized that young native americans do struggle with -- whether it's emotional or mental or physical abuse. i know that it can be frustrating being a young native american in a society that you feel like you really are the minority and things like that. but i just feel like we as native people need a resource or need an outlet and a lot of the times i feel like young native americans are scared to speak about it. whether it's because they feel like they're weak or because -- whatever the reason might be. but i know it's easier said than done. but there is -- we need to get through to them to let them know that that really isn't the answer and you need to find
somebody to talk to. how do we get that through to them? president obama: one of the things, i talked about generation indigenous. the goal is to get native american youth leaders to be able to network with each other nationally. and then we're trying to set up a youth network digitally, through the internet. so that if there's a good idea, like the one that tatiana was just talking about, a program that we know is working, then somebody across the country can learn about it and try to set up a similar model. and share ideas. and i think one of the things that i'm hearing a lot of you guys say something that, making sure that young people are supporting each other is really important. because adults have to be there, but i will tell you from my
experience talking to malia and sasha, that sometimes when i'm talking to them, i sound like -- you guys ever see "charlie brown christmas"? [laughter] president obama: wha-wha-wha. you can tell they're just looking at me but the words make no sense to them. but i think that how their peers are supporting them and talking to them and encouraging them, a lot of times can make even more of a difference than what they're hearing from adults. obviously if somebody's got a severe depression, that's a medical issue. and they may need medical help. if somebody even at a young age already has an addiction, they need help. if they are experiencing abuse in the home, then they need adult help and law enforcement
help to prevent that. and you're right. it has to be talked about. and we have to be honest about it. but sometimes with young people, you know, everything is magnified. you're just going through a lot of stuff, especially in the teenage years. and just having friends and people your age who are bucking you up and supporting you and listening to you and relating to what you're going through, that a lot of times can make danchese -- a difference before it gets worse. so we're going to see how we can help facilitate more of those youth communities around the country. >> just to add on to what you were saying about when i was in high school, i was a senior, we had program called sources of strength. that's what it was. it was a student to student peer, you know, if you were getting bullied, if there were problems at home, you could speak about it. because there's that barrier. it's hard for a student to speak to a teacher about it.
for a student to talk to another student, it was mauricier and a lot of the students were able to relate to it because they might have experienced it in their life at some point. that seemed to work very well. president obama: good. moderator: that concludes our question and answer session. i would just like to thank you, mr. president, and each of our panelists for being up here with us today. president obama: let's give everybody a big round of applause. [cheers and applause] president obama: all right. good job. the only thing i want to say in closing is just, this is an example of the incredible talent and potential of our young people.
and it's true in every tribe as cross the country. we have a huge stake as a country in making sure that they get opportunity, that their voices are heard. and i want to be a partner with you to make sure that every possible door is open to them. ok? they inspire me. you guys inspire me. you make me feel good. thank you, everybody. come on. get a good picture. come on. these guys are going to take our picture right here. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] ♪
>> the choice for governor could not be more clear. john edwards, who answered our and served as a ranger and 82nd airborne. or david better who answered a prostitutes call moments after he skipped about honoring soldiers who gave their lives in defense of our freedom. he chose prostitutes over patriots. now, the choice is yours. 15 years ago, i failed my family. but found forgiveness and love. i learned our falls are not what defined us, but rather, how we get up, except responsibility, and redemption. now, louisiana has fallen on hard times. low wages in failing schools. i'm a fighter. and as you governor, i will get up every day to fight for you for a better, stronger louisiana.
eastern,t at 8:00 watch the debate between candidates to become louisiana's next governor over on c-span two. >> c-span has a full lineup of veterans day programming for you. join us tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. former first lady laura bush and labor secretary thomas perez on hiring our heroes, a conference about veterans organized by the chamber of commerce and the george w. bush institute. on wednesday, veterans day, " washington journal," with the latest on veterans issues and your input via calls, tweets, and facebook postings. and 10:00 eastern, conversations with freshmen members of congress beginning with -- asentatives that mold representative that served for tours in a rock. at a former army ranger whose unit helped hunt down saddam hussein. eastern, live coverage
of the veterans day wreath laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknowns at arlington national cemetery. and new, more for freshmen members of congress. a representative talks about his service in iran as a former navy seals, followed by representative who is a harvard graduate who decided to join the marines and fight in iraq. watch all of c-span's veterans day coverage. >> a signature feature of c-span twos book tv is a coverage of book fairs and festivals across the country with non-picture author talks -- nonfiction author talks. are live from the 32nd annual miami book fair. coverage starts saturday, number 21st, at 10:00 eastern. authors include representative john lewis discussing his book march. author peggyn with noonan, and talks about her book, the time of our life.
joinslist judith miller us to discuss her book, the story, a reporter's journey. and ted koppel on his book lights out, a cyber attack, the nation unprepared. surviving the aftermath. on sunday, speak with the author's life. easier work takes his -- p.j. o'rourke takes her calls. fracture,alls about barack obama, the clintons, and the racial divide. 21, be sureovember to follow in tweet is your questions. >> in under an hour, 3:00 eastern, live coverage of benjamin netanyahu speaking at the center for american progress. first, we take a look at money in politics, and campaign 2016. this is from today's "washington journal."
rohner,ining us is tim he served the state of indiana as a representative and is now the senior strategic advisor for issue one. joining us to talk about money and politics. could you tell us a little about issue one? guest: we are a not-for-profit that's very concerned about the growing influence of money in our political system. this is something i think your viewers know very, very well. it seems like most of america knows there's a big problem with .26% of americans funding about two thirds of the elections, and getting too big of an influence our legislators. there is a lot of good move it across the country, from the common sense of the people i'm a from ballot initiatives in seattle and san francisco and maine to clean up their politics. yet here in washington, the most powerful place in the world, this place seems to be insulated from it.
i think what is happening with the influence of politics, and what issue one is trying to do is, we have formed an historic group of over 100 republicans and democrats, former members of the house and the senate and governor's to take back our government. the american people, to washington, to that capital over there. it seems to be disconnected and dysfunctional. we need our democracy back. we need the middle class, would meet the poor -- we need the poor of this country. we need the voices heard from everybody, not just those with access to money. host: so this group of 100 former legislators is working to restore our trust in democracy. -- whathat happened is happens is catastrophic. we are at a tipping point here.
when people lose trust in their government, they tend to vote less, they tend to believe that the great capital, that is a place to represent the people, not the moneyed interest -- that not only don't vote, they don't believe in the institutions of government. they don't want to participate in those institutions. and this great democracy that jefferson and lincoln and our founding fathers talked about, which was the begin for the rest of the world -- i served in india. my travel around the world today , and people are starting to look at us and saying what's wrong in america? why are you guys the great voice of democracy that you have always been? you are our inspiration. take back your government. let the middle class and the people have a voice. host: given for instance of how big money has skewed -- goodbye to previous campaign cycles and
give an example. guest: as a former member of congress, i was blessed to represent my hometown in south bend, indiana. i ran against a republican incumbent back in 1990, and i won. the amountust about of money to raise, it was about your ideas. it was about knocking on doors and getting people involved in the campaign. it was about how hard you worked , and hopefully, your integrity in your ideas. today, it's about money. money is not only determining whowins, is determining runs, and who actually can even get in the race. more and more, that impacts minorities, women, the middle class, the poor. those folks are starting to say i can't even run for congress because i don't have a big fat wallet. i don't know a bunch of
millionaires, i don't know a bunch of donors. i can't get into the political system. yet we are seeing some good changes across the country. we are seeing this rising up and percolating across america that states and local governments are saying enough is enough. we need transparency, and we need disclosure, we need to do something about the citizens united and buckley versus valeo decisions. we want our legislators in washington to do something. host: let's go to the phone line so people can call and ask you questions. independents,, give your thoughts on twitter. former representatives in romer is our guest. -- tim rohner. guest: you only have so much time in a day. these folks that work in washington are hard-working tenacious, they
want to represent their constituents. yet they are spending more and more of their time raising money. often times we are seeing a member of congress might spend 40% or 50% of their time on the phone at republican or democratic headquarters raising money. why is that not good? that means they are not spending time with their constituents. that means they may not be spending times in committee hearings. that means they may not be helping us solve problems, whether it be climate change, syria, terrorism, balancing the budget. whether you are liberal or conservative, democrat or republican, this money interest issue works against all of us. we all pay a price for this. if people are spending 40, 50, 60% raising money. to?who are they talking we are not talking to the middle class. they are not talking to the
poor. they talking to big check writers the want to talk to them about their own selfish interests. that really skews our democracy. that will belators working for a system that represents all the people. host: in your way of thinking, what's the most practical way to even that out? guest: we have a lot of issues with -- a lot of solutions. one of them is transparency and disclosure. whenever there's a contribution, whatever you spend money, you have to disclose it immediately. host: so what the super pac level -- guest: absolutely. it can't be black money, money coming in the campaigns of the last minute. nobody knows where it's coming from or who is funding and. a tsunami and flawed of secret that way is a race at the last minute. secondly, we are for enforcement with teeth, with power. the sec today, it's divided
between democrats and relatives publicans. it doesn't get anything done. we need to reform the body so it has teeth, so it has enforcement mechanisms, so if somebody breaks the law, they will pay a price for. they will go to jail. and that we have election laws that network and represent all the people, and also engaging action,dence, do legal bringing buckley versus valeo and citizens united overturned. money is not speech. money is property, not speech. it should not be equated with freedom of speech and our second amendment. if congress were to pass a law to define and regulate money, maybe the supreme court would weigh-in and maybe even without a new justice they may overturn this. overturn the flawed weisions of the past and need to disconnect and cut the cord of lobbying with giving money and politics directly.
>> we are people lined up to talk to you. >> will start with tom and texas, republican line, go ahead. c-span, i justg wanted to say that every year, only a tiny fraction of the oney spent campaigning campaigns is spent on republicans and democrats because you have these leftist pbs, cb -- like abc, cbs spending billions of dollars every year campaigning on behalf of democrats attacking republican so your guest said that money is not speech. support strictl limits on the amount of money cbs, pbs, nprnbc, every year to produce their products pay their employees and pay their expenses every year, is that correct? guest: tom asked say good
question within that. but we are a nonpartisan organization. we want to get spending whether it is a leftist organization or a right-wing organization. we want a system that represents all of american so they all have a voice. sweater that money is being raised and spent by a secret left-wing pack or a right-wing pack, we have democrats and republicans coming together with for thosemer's caucus of you following this back home and across the country. care what kind of partisan organization is raising the money, we are equal opportunity reformer. want them all to be under the
same rules left and right, democrats and republicans with a big donor on the left and the right and they should all disclose and have immediate transparency, they should all be limited by new jurisprudence and overturning the clay versus valeo.- buckley versus flawed that was a decision that needs to be overturned. host: from bill in sebastian, florida. independent line. ifler: i would like to know your alliance will do anything about tpp. it will kill the middle class here in america. some of these governments that we will be dealing with our on the shady side. alabama and the voting
suppression, what they have done with the motor vehicle bureaus. spending specialized -- to these, or any others? the first point, tpp, the transpacific partnership, which president obama has been advocating, whether you are democrat or republican, the presidential race, i hope, will how we create an infrastructure in america to create more jobs so the middle class, the working poor, the people who lost jobs have opportunities again. i come from the heart of the midwest. many fracturing created --
manufacturing created all kinds of jobs. we need an america that really supports the private sector, the public sector, research and development, state and private business sectors that will do thanks to create jobs. i hope we hear more about that at the republican debate tonight. i know hillary clinton, and others are talking about how to work and create those jobs, and how to engage in the trading system in the world. about spending and voter repression, i think part of the reason why people are not voting is because they feel like no one cares about their voice. their voice cannot be heard with this influx of money anyway. it is the people writing the $100,000 and $1 million checks that are drowning out everyone else. talking about ways to increase
loading turnout, respect for dream for ahe democracy the ahead as a kid to run for an office one day, and winning. we did. i was lucky. we want to support issue one and the performers caucus. you talk about the presence of campaign. donald trump is self funding his campaign. what you think about that approach? he is not taking money from anybody. guest: i think he has said some very positive things about campaign finance reform. money gets you access. he has given examples of getting money in the past influencing legislators and people in congress. that should not be the case. that should not dominate people 's time.people people trying to raise that
money and not in their oversight jobs, not in their committees -- when you are democratic or republican, you are concerned about jobs, guns, climate change, or balance budgets. this money, special interest, dominating politics hurts everybody's agenda left and right. it paralyzes the system and causes people to not believe in it. host: carl is up next from michigan for our guest. .aller: hi c-span, i'm a big fan. i want to tell you, at the outset, your landmark cases series is fantastic. every patient taking a chance to watch that. mr. roemer, citizens united has bothered me since it happened. however, the free speech battle of it, i don't know if i can really argue that much. congress could pass a law to cap
contributions. talking about donald trump spending his own money, maybe a lot of people will tune into that, but that says that says the only rich people can run for office. also, i've been following this for a week or so, the reports about 150 families -- what was the percent of the money donated? .26% of americans donating two thirds of the money to congress, and over half of the money for presidential elections. caller: we're talking about 60% plus being donated by approximately 150 families? guest: that is correct. caller: that is the worst part. to me, these people have this kind of money, they are not paying enough taxes. guest: directly to your point, it is a very good point. plus, i agree with you on complimenting pedro and the good
work that c-span is doing. it has to come back to buckley vallejo.l citizens united was a terribly flawed decision, but buckley equatedted money to -- money to speech. you are absolutely right that we have to do something about limiting expenditures. there were laws that worked prior to 1972. i know, i have talked to my colleagues that limited campaign expenditures at the campaign level. ,hey ran for election, they won they lost. it was a fair assessment of their skills and strengths. we can do it. it has worked in this country before. they have limitations and places like great britain and canada about the time that you can run and the money that can be spent
in democracies. then, to your point about donald trump, i also agree with you that even though donald trump may be saying some good things about the influence of money in campaigns and he is self funding, he is not relying so , the facter pac's that he is unbelievably wealthy wed can self fund -- cannot afford to have our congress made up of millionaires and people who can run. this process of evolving through the 1990's and 2000s, people started going to recruit candidates not based on howr ideas, not based on are they going to help america, not based on their patriotism, but based on how much money they could raise, if they were rich and could sell fund, if they had .ccess to a donor list
we have to get that back. i think people like you across the country, we see people across the country recognizing this. we need people going out there and asking the presidential campaigns, what are you going to do about money in our elections? how are you going to solve this? how are going to make a difference. host: from new jersey. caller: good morning. what i would like to say is in pp, those are the ones who send the jobs overseas. when we funded wall street, we had to do it because if we didn't, a lot of people would lose their 401(k)s.
now, in terms of our economy, our economy is back because the american public has become so disconnected. we have a president of the united states who happens to be black. we happen to be blinded not to know why his programs are not going through. there are good programs. we have an industry that has been floundering for years. what we need to do is rebuild our infrastructure, our roads and bridges, using american steel and hiring the middle-class. it would pay taxes, they would pay into social security. lastly, we need to change our tax code. of the money to the state, and 10% to the federal government, and 2% to the city, we will have enough
money to do what we have to do. we just have to change the rate. you pay into social security, but you don't pay federal taxes. if we do that, this country would be revised. everybody would be happy, and the millionaires and billionaires cannot complain. host: we will let the guests respond. guest: i might vote for her for president. that was a good platform. i remember when president obama took office. i flew with him to my district where we had about a 19% unemployment rate. today, through the work of the president, the private sector, the midwest, the states have been working hard on this, now we have 5% unemployment. we still have too many people underemployed, too many people
not with the wage income they should be making. those wages have come down too fast and too far, but back to the caller's point, and back to the agenda that issue one or the reformers would support, how do we get congress paying attention to that very eloquent agenda? qualityle-class, the and justice and democracy, jobs, infrastructure. that is a middle-class and pro-america agenda. the bigep seeing money coming into the campaign .26% givinge point t money to congress, i'm not sure they are the same -- their agenda is the same as the caller's.
what convince you that that agenda is different than that of say the owner in any americans? guest: i get the feeling that when you talk to these reformers , we have over 100 of them who have signed up, and you get these confessionals where people talk about the influence of money and campaigns. some of them will tell anecdotal stories about the pentagon, for instance, and weapon systems that should be canceled, our antiquated -- are antiquated, do not protect our country. cut to be shinseki him and -- contributions that comment made y sustain something that
wa would otherwise go on the back burner. they may have a brand-new idea on climate change -- instead of being in that committee hearing, .26%are raising money from . that agenda may be very different from what we just heard from the caller. host: a view or on twitter says, what do we do about loving -- lobbying? guest: she makes a good point. caucusve the reformer believes the constitution awards you a profession. lobbying serves an important service to congress, however, the big disconnect here is lobbying and giving money directly to legislators.
we should try to cut that connection. we have seen success on doing that very thing. in south carolina, they have and lobbiedobbyists the state legislator from giving to a candidate. that kind of legislative activity, that ban on the connection has been held up by the south carolina supreme court. you've seen the law goes through, the supreme court , and to the twitter question, that is something the reformers caucus would be in favor of. caller: thank you. question.ple mentioned a few times
now the ruling on citizens united. you have yet to bring up what about all the years the union backed the democrats? t supergot the bigges pac, the mainstream media. look at all the free advertising the democratic policies get. , if you bring down businesses' taxes, they will stay here and give jobs. you speak about the koch brothers all the time, what about george soros? guest: i think that is a fair point. the reformers, a group of bipartisan democrats and
republicans, we do not care if republicans or george soros, we need to do something about too much money in our political system. we need to restore the dream of democracy in our country, and get this under control. point, we going after everybody and anybody, treating them all the same. callers also to your point, we have heard this a couple different times, your callers keep saying over and over again, and i completely agree with them that the .iddle-class is getting a shaft we need a middle-class agenda in congress. we need to build on what president obama has done, creating jobs with the private
sector, restoring the dream of laddertter of -- of progress. a way to make sure that higher education is affordable. trying to make sure that that mentioned your caller is not stuck overseas, taking our jobs away from americans. that middle-class agenda, which should be passed through congress, but isn't, is probably being prevented partially from helping the corporations keep that money overseas. we need to bring that money back home to build factories and create jobs. host: jerry, baltimore, maryland, go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. that youke the fact
expunge going after both parties. i have a simple, maybe naive, way of attacking it. tax it. any contribution over $500 gets taxed. a progressive tax on all political contributions. .specially on the super pac a more aggressive, and i call some, tax on all money. taxes --m not a fan of on raising taxes that would impact, especially the .iddle-class and the poor you are not doing anything about self-funded candidates that can
still be willing to pay those taxes on anything over $500. people can still flood the system with not just thousand dollars contributions, but million-dollar constitutions that no one knows where they are coming from. that issue solution one at a bipartisan group of republicans and democrats have come up with is a better way to do it and get out all the different ways that is coming in. overturning buckley versus vallejo, and citizens united. a disconnect between lobbyists giving my directly to legislators, and enforce them that gets in the flood of money
from all different directions. i wish i had a silver bullet for you. i wish i could just say, here is one answer. even the constitutional amendment, which i would support , and think might eventually get passis, if congress would a law, and the supreme court would have to decide on that, that woul could be the deal that overturns buckley versus citizens united. host: how far would it bring it down? guest: you have congress that could pass a law and forced the supreme court to decide on it. you have presidential candidates the i hope will here, for instance tonight, i hope we will trump,n carson or donald or marco rubio, or john kasich, or somebody talk specifically about what they would do in the white house to do something about this flood of money and taking interests, and in away the dream of democracy.
do they support immediate disclosure? with a support supreme court justices that would overturn buckley versus vallejo and citizens united? we have had some candidates already say they would interview a potential supreme court nominee and asked him specifically about this question. that is extraordinary. all the time you hear presidential candidate say there should not be a litmus test, yet, this time, we are hearing people started to say, this is so important to the health of democracy and the beacon of our hope to other countries internationally, when we go to china, and we talk about human rights and democracy, we don't want to defend the system that is flooded with big money. we want to talk about how this works for everybody -- the poor, the middle class, the jobless person, the person with the 12 great education, the rich, the wall street people.
it should work for everybody, and not be skewed for people who can pay. host: in that case, it would be the legislator? as well money interests as raising money. isn't it hard to walk away from that kind of money? was not to raise money. my job was to legislate and listen, and be a commonsense , andn for my middle-class the people i grew up with in my hometown. i thought about the people i went to high school with, people who lost a job. to some of your callers very poignant and good questions this morning, i remember a plant 1993, and 1992 or somebody lost their job, and they committed suicide. that job meant everything to
them. that was their dignity. that was their way to say to their kids, i'm somebody important, i help provide for this family. this middle-class agenda, and this job creation agenda that we need to get back to so that this country continues to be the and propelledracy forward if we want to do something about money and her politics. tim roemer, of issue one, also former representative of indiana joining us to talk about politics. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. .202) 745-8002 for independents here comes mark from massachusetts. caller: a beautiful good morning, gentlemen.
i agree with a lot of what mr. roemer, has been saying. this citizens united decision and they'll in the coffin? like i said, i agree with you. i will let you comment on that a second. , isaking contributions be,inuating that it is a brid or the politicians are some help indebted to the people who have given them money? tpp, youabout the have covered so much ground in the past half-hour, it is hard to keep track. guest: i don't know if that is a compliment or an insult, but we have covered a lot of ground. caller: about the tpp, isn't the
i grew upree trade -- in a manufacturing area too, and there is a reason why we have lost these jobs. people don't want to make i amrts, to use that, what familiar with. guest: great questions. let me try to get to all of them and remember all of them. the citizens united decision, i agree with you, a terrible decision. it builds on buckley versus vallejo. both need to be overturned. i think buckley is even more important. you used the term, "mel in the nail in the
coffin." i think that is why you have seen this group of democrats and , people around the country representing 40 of the , we have to do something about that today, now, we have to get washington, d.c., the beltway people, paying attention to this. 80% of republicans think the system is broken and dysfunctional and needs to be either entirely broken down and th democratsof think that. back to the decision of buckley and united, we have also heard supreme court justices start to deal, this is not
working. maybe even short of a new justice who can help us overturn buckley and united, maybe they would revisit it because they recognize now, even with this , itrent court recognizes this is creating almost the death of democracy. i don't want to overstate it, but we are in a crisis here. secondly, a bribe -- that is a strong term, but it is getting close to the heart of the matter. when you only have so much time in a day as a legislator or presidential candidate -- for instance, i would love to hear one of the moderators tonight say to marco rubio, or when the democrats are there, bernie sanders, or whoever, how much time every day do you spend raising money? how much a week?
how much in the last month? those questions have to be asked . when you are spending all your time with those people, it is , if thatch a bribe is all you are listening to, you are not listening to the middle class, people working in the products toreating build a strong >> we are going to leave this to go live to the center for american progress in washington, d.c. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu making remarks. mr. prime minister, mrs. netanyahu, will come. for coming to the center for american progress to engage in a dialogue on a range of issues including many areas
of concern to progressives as well as all americans. have disagreed on some issues, including the iran nuclear deal. that theelieve deeply u.s.-israel relationship is vital. that relationship is critical to both our countries, particularly as the middle east becomes a more unstable and dangerous region. we believe that the u.s.-israel relationship strongt conversation like this one are an important opportunity to strengthen the relationship. scholars at the center have studied the region closely. we believe please can and must be found for israelis and palestinians so that both people can live with real dignity and security. it will take hard work to build mutual confidence and negotiate difficult compromises, and we really understand that. as prime minister, we thank you for taking questions here, because the choices you make
matter profoundly to israel's future and the future of the region. we believe that matters profoundly to america. would you want to make a statement? thank you. that reminds me of the israeli ambassador who came back and said do you have anything to declare? he said, yes, i'm happy to be back home. yes, i'd like to make a declaration. i would like you to understand that i have a sore throat, but i'm sure you will discover, have not lost my voice. know that my visit here has been a source of some controversy, so i doubly appreciate the invitation. everything you said is something that is crucial and important. because iame here to understandtal
how important it is for me that israel remains an issue of bipartisan consensus. [applause] it is crucial. the relationship with the united states, all parts of the united states and the american people, to ourrategic asset national security and our future. that is the third reason why i'm happy to be here. the fourth reason is something else. i would like to talk to a progressive audience about progressive values. israel is, at the very least, misunderstood. if you look at all the values and all the rights that you deem , talking about the rights of women, the rights of gays, the rights of minorities, the rights of arabs, the rights
of jews, the rights of people -- these are enshrined in an imperfect society. perfect. not i don't know anyone that is. the one that is facing incredible off with incredible successes. i would like to talk about those values. i would like to talk about our quest for peace. and i'd like to talk about why that quest for peace is not yet it achieved. and i hope you will ask me questions on all of these things, and anything else, if you want. when people come me.nterview i broke my rule because i did not have it here -- it is not my office. in my office, i put out a white board. everyone who asks a question, i write it down, and i go to all the questions. if i don't want
into into occupied the west bank and control gaza and the next 20 years, how do you see the future ? prime minister netanyahu: it depends on what is happening in the middle east and in the world. there is a great convulsion. it is really a battle between modernity and early medievalism. say medievalism but my father was a great scholar of the middle ages and this is early medievalism, a
very early and primal movement that shakes the arab and muslim world. so far it's taking its toll primarily in muslim lives, syria . almost 300,000 dead, millions displaced, and elsewhere as well. i think, ultimately, medievalism loses and modernity wins. that is usually the case in the great battles with these fanatic ideologies. naziism lost. took 50t went down, it million people, a third of my own people. militant islam would go down, i'm quite confident. competethink it could with the desire for freedom or the technology of freedom, even though we are using it right now
, using the internet, other forces.gainst the other ultimately, they are in the choices of constrained what will happen in the next 20 years, i don't know. it gives us know -- no encouragement to have militant islam defeated in a jewish state disappear. we don't want to go through a repetition of the other tragedy. we have to make sure the state of israel is strong and robust. i was prime minister on the 50th anniversary. i may well be in the 75th anniversary, two years away. i would tie you what happened over 20 years.
that may be a good guide to what will happen in the next 20 years. israel has turned into a technological powerhouse. we are in a century of knowledge, century of conceptual byducts, geometric growth created a friendly .conomy for this growth in 2014, israel received 10% of the global investment in cyber security. in 2015, the number doubled. we are seeing 20% of the investment over the world in cyber security, that is an astounding figure. it also shows exponential growth. i think we will continue that trend to ensure israel grows technologically, the future belongs to those who innovate.
another example, water. we solved our water problem, even though rainfall has roughly been halved since our year of independent. our gdp per capita has grown 40 times, yet we have water surpluses, because we are the number one recycler of water in the world. we recycle roughly 90% of our wastewater. the next runner up is spain, 25%. we have the capacity to shape the future. here is what is happening as a result. thatse nations understand the future belongs to those who innovate, we are getting alliances, a lot of alliances. this may not be understood in western europe, but here is what is happening. i am so isolated, as prime minister, i don't have time to
see my own can as it members, my own faction, or the other politicians because i have diplomats and heads of state coming from asia, africa, latin america, and they all want three things. i am talking about small countries, like china, or india, where i will be going soon to visit, or japan. 20 african states that have come and said, come back. countries in latin america. they all want three things. first, israeli technology. second, israeli technology. third, israeli technology. this is a fundamental change that will accelerate in the next 20 years. , in the knowledge century, is uniquely poised to multiply its capacity. can we get peace with the
palestinians, which is what you are asking me. we are going to talk about that more. i just wanted to get my commercial in. how great an investment israel is. remember the joke? how do you make a small fortune in israel? start with a big fortune. >> apparently they have not heard this one. prime minister netanyahu: the important thing is, how do we change our fortune with our palestinian neighbors. what is it that we do not have peace. why? well, isn't this government, is it me? there were five other prime minister's since this process began. how come they did not make peace? the reason they did not make peace is because the underlying problem preventing peas is not
israel's willingness to make a territorial compromise, even a very generous one. it is that, after gaza, israel do we gethe question, a state that lives in peace with us, or do we get a state that seeks to destroy us and fires thousands of rockets at us? israel went to buy the book. it left gaza to the last square centimeter. it took away all the settlements , took them apart. it even disinterred people from their graves, handed the keys over to abu mazza, who promptly , even thoughmas they were only 3000 strong then and you had 15,000 troops. they kicked them out. they have fired 15,000, 16,000
rockets from gaza. the same thing happen with lebanon. in we have another proxy iran, hezbollah, and they fired about 15,000 rockets at us. so israelis ask visible question. if we were to set up a palestinian state, how do we make sure that that state does and isome another gaza not committed to our destruction and does not work toward our destruction? the answer to that falls into two categories. and these are not conditions for entering talks. i have no conditions for entering talks. you should invite abu mazza here. that is what you should do. i am sitting here, i'm willing to wait. we will see if he comes. i am willing to enter the talks without any conditions. for the last seven years, abu
mazza spoke to me for six hours, that's it. how can you make progress on the issues on about to talk about, if you do not talk? that means the charges are not leveled at us, but they always are. these are facts. ,n order to avoid another gaza which is the opposite of peace, you need to things. first, you have to make sure that the palestinian state that is formed is not committed to israel destruction. that it ends all demands, recognizes israel, and does not seek to flooded with descendents of refugees, anymore than i would seek to flood a palestinian state with the sentence of settlers. do you agree, mr. abbas? refuses to answer. that is what we mean by a nationstate state of the jewish people. palestinians go there, if they choose. jews go to israel, if they
choose. can we have that each will recognition of two nationstates? the second thing is, what happens if things go awry? in this ticket -- territory is taken over, like the way gaza was. then we need a long-term security presence to ensure that does not happen. right now, i don't see any other force. who is going to do it? austrian peacekeepers? we tried that in the golan heights. these two conditions of mutual recognition and security think, do we see that let me know in the immediate future? no. is this the right form, down the line? yes. will it happen? i'm not sure the palestinians
will accept it by themselves, but because of the change that is happening in the region, because there is a huge change happening in the region, it might be that leading arab encourage future palestinian leadership, or even this one, to accept that kind of deal. if that happens, israelis would go for it. they would go for something that they thought was mutual recognition and that was secure. , i think, -- a lot of progressives think, in the u.s. and around the world -- that israel is not currently acting neutrally, that it has been acting vis-a-vis peace, and acting through the advancement and expansion of settlements, the idea that there has been a steady growth of settlements that are strategically placed, understanding that they are
placed to make the palestinian state more difficult, or that it has that result. what do you say to those concerns, that the settlement expansion is actually something that is making peace more difficult? prime minister netanyahu: two things. first, factually, there have been no new settlements built in the last 20 years. even before i became prime minister the first time. the additions are in existing communities. the map to do not materially change. by the way, this is repeated ad itseam, so it assumes that is a self-evident truth that they were gobbling up land. the total amount of built up land is just a few percent. and the addition, if you look over time, it is maybe a fraction -- maybe one/10 of 1%. that is the land that is being gobbled up. that should not be something yet, it hasted, and
axiom that we are in cow -- gobbling up land, but that is not true. here is what the actual statics is of construction are. 5000 units a year, 1800 units a 1700 units a year, my government has built 1500 units a year. that is a fact. that is not subject to question. case, are not our in any way influenced by political manipulation. this is an independent authority and was quoted in one of the papers that most supported me "haaretz."
the settlements are there. the growth in the settlements has not affected the potential map for peace. third, it is an issue that can be resolved, but i don't think it is the core issue. it may not be the core issue in gaza here, so what is the problem? my grandfather always said this. the conflict was back to 1920. my grandfather came on a boat in 1920, landed in jaffna, went to the immigration people in jerusalem. that office was hit a few months later by arab attackers. they killed six or seven jews, including a great writer. in 1921, 1929ots in the ancient jewish community of have run, 1936, 1947, and 1948.
there was no settlement. 1967.his continued into untils 47 years, 1920 1967. half a century. there cannot be territories because there were not any. now we get in there. they keep on attacking us. i am telling you that the real -- the palestinians are divided, one have living in gaza, overtaken by militant islamist, and the other half in the west bank refuses to confront them. mazza, for godbu sake, recognize the jewish state already, as i recognize the palestinian state, and for god's sake, let's talk about long-term security arrangements, so we
have those two acres for real peace. he will not do it. the settlements could be resolved in that conflict easily. easily. well, not that easily, but not that hard either. >> i think one of the issues is, you say there have been 1500 a year. i hear there are less. so i continue with them? >> people live there. they are human beings. say all the firstborn, throw them on the other side of the green line. they are living their. they are living in three blocks primarily. that is where most of the construction is taking place. to say that common this is the belgian congo, but they have been living there for 4000 years, and so do arabs. i don't say, we will throw you out. there is massive arab construction that is against all slow -- it is not important right now. nobody says, how come they are building in disputed land?
there is this ethnic cleansing idea. what is this business? have arabs living in the galilee, everywhere in the knesset, in the supreme court, full civic rights, not a perfect society. the onlye middle east, ones that enjoy the rights of a democratic society. nobody questions that. we don't question that. certainly i don't. yet the idea of a palestinian state, it has to be human rights, it has to be clear, there cannot be any jews there. what kind of standard is this, that the world accepts, and progressives? they don't want that. i think you should ask these questions to the courts. i prime minister netanyahu: they are supporting the people who
would murder them. sealed in gaza. host: we are not making equivalents. prime minister netanyahu: forgive me for being so clear. i think there is something fundamentally wrong. we have made enormous sacrifices for peace. religious universities -- they have not made a speech, he has not gone to his own people. we are not going back. and israel is here to stay by right. i did and no prime minister has done it before. he would not come to the table.
i did other things which were harder. like releasing prisoners, which was probably the hardest decision, it did not help. it did not help them get to the table. wedid not want negotiations wanted. and it did not itself be of the plane that is attached to the prime minister of israel and the government of israel and people do not understand what is driving this conflict. in the middle east, what is theing the conflict is battle between modernity and early medievalism. -- and serious collapse the other states are welcome. that is a larger civilizational battle. between the israelis and
palestinians, what is driving the conflict and still driving it is the persistent refusal to recognize a nationstate for the jewish people and boundaries, that remains the problem. if you want to solve the problem, address the problem. do not address what is not the problem, address the problem. it is not settling, it is the refusal to accept digital -- jewish state. if you have a willingness to accept the jewish state, you will solve the settlement problem. host: i want to follow on comments in the region and ask you about what is happening in syria, the recent actions by russia, the nature of the region , hugely unsettling but i would love your views on that topic. prime minister netanyahu: it is a very complicated tapestry.
i think you should ask mr. is doing putin why he what he is doing. i think he said that he wants to bolster that regime, he says he is --to prevent islam islamic fighters from going back to us. i went to see him and i said, the first thing we have to make do not our fighters start turning on each other, or we should down your aircraft batteries and he said, i agree. so we agreed on this horrible jargon, do inflection -- deacon flexion. i think it was the same
procedure two weeks later between the american military and russian military. second thing i said, look, i have not intervened, is really has not intervened. principally because i'm not sure which intervention is preferable, i am not sure, but here is where we do intervened -- if syrian territory is used to fire, we fire back. and we put our army and position more than once. secondly, if iran wants to establish a second front as it has established in lebanon, we will take forceful action, as we have. third, if iran and hezbollah want to use territory to arms,er arms, very lethal from syria to lebanon, we will take action, as we have.
werth, if we do not see it, st syriane action again arms, but we do see it. if we went through, it does not prevent us -- if we did not see it going into lebanon, we could take action in syria to degrade the inventories that could be passed in the future. so we heard that. clearthink it was a conversation. and this is the policy we are following, as far as syria is concerned, i cannot tell you. if you can put humpty dumpty back together again, i doubt it. if there is a solution out there and stopstores conflict, but we want to make sure that our region -- that is
this new syria or serious -- sy rias are not used against us. host: you have made the point and you are right, israel is a rare democracy and a dangerous neighborhood. down democracy's -- democracies around the world agree that no one is above the law. i want to acknowledge that we very much condemn the heinous israel tacks targeting ies that continue today in recent weeks. we were all taken with the israeli-american working for peace and we stand against index -- acts of violence, we stand with you in that area. innocent palestinians have also been killed, extremist killed three members of a family and an
arson attack in a village this summer. old baby,an 18 month they have not been prosecuted. people have questions about that. i would love for you to explain what is happening. prime minister netanyahu: sure. when you had that attack, which is uncommon, but is horrible. i went to the hospital. , the babythe baby boy palestinian boy. any that we would shoulder expense, but unfortunately the parents died. i did then something that the israeli premise or has done -- prime minister has done, i issued an administrative detention on israeli citizens, that is you put them under arrest for -- without trial.
because i thought that this was such -- something we have to fight with, such ferocity, that i was willing to break this resident asked precedent -- but this is not organized network. typically the way that you discovered terrorist attacks or criminal gangs is that they have hierarchies and they have communications, so modern state, israel is a very modern a. it cracks that sometimes quickly, sometimes over time. when you encounter something that is not structured at that level and -- you are not sure, but you don't communicate. clever andry
obviously have been figured out ist where the achilles' heel and avoid any communication, then it is very hard to catch them. we have cracked lesser crimes, somebody did damage to a church in the galilee and we cracked that. we cracked, actually others, but this is the most violent act. i do not want to get into a discussion of our measures, but difficult- and it is precisely because it is not structured, that is the problem. host: there is a concern that secular violence has not been prosecuted, that the vast majority of cases against palestinians have not been prosecuted, what do you say to that? prime minister netanyahu: it is not too. we do not have a policy with them.
look at the violence. -- horror forr this family, what we have had families burnt, a woman walking with her husband and two children, the husband is knifed to death and the woman tries to children and she is insulted. i have seen drive-bys where rocks are thrown into passengers in the middle of jerusalem and the guy dies, i have seen horrible things. there is no comparison. you cannot hide this violence. it is not as if they go in and kill someone and it is a secret, we are a country of laws and transparency, there's no comparison. there is no comparison. it is not symmetrical or equivalent, but what is illegal is illegal. we prosecute even if somebody
downs graffiti or takes all of trees, it is a crime, but i would not put it on the same level as duma. duma israel -- is real. and there are many on the side of the duma, not duma, because they try. all thenot succeed time. so i do not think there is a symmetry. there is no symmetry in israeli and palestinian societies, we do not teach our children to -- we don't send them to suicide camps, we do not teach them that we have to obliterate palestine, we do not name our public squares after mass murderers. on the few occasions we have had mass murderers like goldstein, we condemned it, from the right to the left.
-- ise public square named after a killer who murdered hundreds of innocent jews. there is a difference in values. they glorify these people. we do not. so there is an asymmetry that produces this glorification of terror and right now what we see is a layer above that, or below ist and that is the internet meeting militant islam in the hearts and minds of children and teenagers and driving them to believe this fantastic fabrication, we will tear down the mosque, build a second or third temple. it is insane. you say, how can people believe that -- they believe it. if you repeat a live often enough -- lie often enough it
becomes true. it is in the minds of the people. when we have young minds poisoned, we take action. we are -- i am much more tocerned on how to get who wantan young minds to disabuse these lives and to get them to accept the idea that we are going to have to live side-by-side in this small piece of land and we will have to do it in peace and prosperity. that is a tough order. i do not think that their political leaders are ready to embrace us. i think that is the toughest obstacle. host: we will go to questions, i will ask one last one. everyone should identify themselves and question should be short and to the point.
there is many areas, but i will focus on one, where israel has -- where we can learn lessons from israel, the military has been very exclusive for a very long time. prime minister netanyahu: you have done ask -- don't ask, don't tell. we have, we don't care. and for women as well. are there lessons in that space that you can share with us? prime minister netanyahu: i think that israel has women will,r pilot navigators combat soldiers. themselvesve proven under fire. lastievable, including the
rash of them, this tremendous urge --and will tremendous courage. this is the opposite of goliath, resourceful. there it is. tremendous resourcefulness. host: a previous ambassador had been. prime minister netanyahu: i am very disappointed here. [laughter] prime minister netanyahu: amazing capabilities. got, where iou i was deeply moved, i went to the messiah -- and they showed me that cyber stuff.
a young woman and i asked her to tell me about , she could she said be very wealthy, but she is working in this area. and i asked her why she is doing it, because she said, this is what i can give and i believe in this country. this woman is probably respond for -- responsible the more -- well,n below anybody can imagine.
-- we want to be sure that we do s, be able palestinian , that iste from them the real test. i am not sure that -- i think we have to talk about that more. i think we have get that into the international discussion, because that is the basis of a tactical solution. unfortunatelyt will be like that for the next years. >> i am the chair of the board of j street and i wanted to ask about year negotiating advice, that you will negotiate without preconditions, but in negotiations, you want these two issues to be settled before you talk about other issues. i wonder whether you would
-- they do a way things, to talk about the borders, conditioned on them, but make their what it was -- clear what it was. and show palestinian that they can have in a thomas existence, even if they do not secure security arrangements, but by letting them allow it now on the west bank. prime minister netanyahu: on the question of territory in borders , this is about 95% of what israel has to the. on the question -- feed. on the question of recognition, on a jewish state with jewish people and the security arrangements, that is what we need on the other side. it is a question of limits
specifically. i just don't see right now is was that and i think that it has to remain under israeli sovereignty and that is the only way to prevent it from exploding into strife. but on these two issues, israel itsasked -- percent of position without receiving it, confidence returns and i do not think it works that way. i predecessors -- my predecessors have negotiated differently. , theyave got nothing didn't really breach that rejectionism, which has been around since the 1920's. it has been fused with islam, which makes it worse. the point of fact, these things
should be put on the table together. that was basically the position that we tried to have, but has become more difficult. with the palestinian leadership. i nevertheless am willing to miley other used , isay -- father used to say would think this -- translate this, he said conversation fertilizes thought. you can generate new ideas if you actually sit down and talk, i cannot get this type to sit guy to sit down and talk. hoarse,t has become
inviting him again and again and he refuses. but there is a right to draw , and whatdistinctions i believe are the two foundations of any potential deal. including long-term security -- theyents were israel have their own terms and he does not need to have me except them -- accept them in order to sit down. conversation realizes. fertilizestion thought. >> prime minister, i am great -- greg rosen/ . i want to thank you for being here today in the spirit of reconciling americans of both
parties to focus on the shared values that unite us with israel . my question concerns economics and trade relations. as we know from the famous e-mails, it is not easy to import products from israel to the u.s. and not that easy to import products to israel from the u.s. this could be due to an important part of security, do you have plans to streamline trade relations between the two countries to create a robust relationship in the future? prime minister netanyahu: i am minister of the economy for the next two weeks, so i will make ire that we put in -- look, am an open traitor. i do not know if you are aware of this -- trader.
i do not know if you're aware of this, in the midst of the tax, there is -- attacks, there was a call for me to -- the territory. and the terrorists -- we do not want to inflame the rest of the proposition. about 140,000 workers, palestinians, work in israeli every day. it is that open. gaza, this is one of those amazing factoid, here is a fact. thanright now has had more one million tons of reconstruction material, military and eight --
humanitarian aid, they have been passed through israel. very little of it has gone to -- t we don't want them to come through the sea. we care about weapons and they can smuggle them. this?-- house shall i say do not encourage avenue and into gaza, but we do. weapons, but we have increased the flow. we used to boast that we have passing, and it is now 900. my position is,