tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN May 23, 2014 5:00am-7:01am EDT
secrecy over transparency by moving the bill writing process from the senate floor into his conference room, most notoriously, we all recall, in the drafting of obamacare. i don't need to tell any of you what he has done to the spirit of respect that the public has to expect from their leaders. if the republicans were fortunate enough to reclaim the majority in november, i assure you that all of this would change. a senate majority under my leadership would break sharply from the practices of the reid era, and the favor of a far more freewheeling approach to problem solving. i would work to restore the traditional role as a place where good ideas are voted upon. we would fire up the committee process. democratic ideas, too.
i don't know what they are afraid of. they have 55 votes. this is not the way the senate used to operate. my members that the price of being the majority is that you have to get the minority roots -- votes to get the bill across the floor. we would look longer days -- work longer days and weeks using the clock is consensus. if a leader brings up the bill on monday and really wants to finish it, the fatigue factor is the best tool you have. rather than try to shut everyone out and make everyone mad, you just run the clock and you say we are going to finish this thursday night, friday morning, friday night, or saturday morning. is the hourpens
gets later and later on thursday an amendment start disappearing. [laughter] the thought of what they have scheduled friday noon or friday night produces an incredible consensus. [laughter] to try to finish. testing, you have to mean it. it does not shut anybody out. amendments geoeye because -- go away because people get tired and nobody is bitter about it because they're voluntarily gave up, confronted with the choice between staying up late on thursday night and keeping her previously announced schedule -- your previously announced schedule. we never burn the clock. we never use the exhaustion
factor. i guarantee you these are things that can and will change because one person can change most of the problems in the senate and that's whoever the majority leader is, the person who gets to set the agenda as a right of prior recognition and has the opportunity did -- to decide whether you will apply a gag rule to everybody or whether you will use tactics that create a greater level of more results. this approach would lead to its own frustrations. numbers who have good ideas of the run may or may not like going through the committee process or allowing amendments to their otherwise pristine proposals. but after castigating senator reid, i assure you we're not going to turn around and do the same thing. there is not a chance that we will turn around and do the same
thing. who will say,bers i wish we did not have to vote on this or that. , you came tol be the senate cast votes. most of the members who used to be in the house came for that very reason because it is much more open to ideas from all different points of view and, house, if and the you're the minority come you just sort of sit down and shut up. people would come over to the senate from the house and think they were free at last and under reid it is just like it used to be in the house. this is correctable. it is a behavioral issue. it can change and i will change it if the american people give me the opportunity to.
the greatest way to ensure transparency is to do exactly what i said, reinvigorate the committees and restore what we used to call the regular order. the greatest way to ensure stability in our laws is to ensure that everybody has an opportunity to participate in some way in the passage. there is no question that a republican senate would be far more hospitable for the consideration of policy proposals that you all have been writing and thinking about. i would remind you that the senate is by nature and by design an extremely frustrating institution. you remember what washington said the senate would be like. he said this is going to be like the saucer under the coffee cup. he may have said tea. i'm not sure there was coffee yet.
is going to slosh out of the cup, and to saucer, and cool off. it was always anticipated that it would be harder to do stuff in the senate than in the house. that could be the case again. requires 60 votes to do most things in the senate. that wee it is my case have not had more than 55 republican senators in 100 years. they had a hammer lock during the new deal, the great society, and the first two years under barack obama. we have not been given that opportunity by the american people for a very long time. don't assume that everything we get 60 votes. this is still going to be a challenging experience. it is important to be able to
set the agenda. the majority leader can set the agenda. you decide what we will talk about. we would not be talking about most of the things we have been talking about -- all of these job killing proposals that don't do anything to benefit middle-class people. regardless of what happens in november, we will have to deal with the government the american people have given us. not goingst certainly to be 60 republican senators. deal with aou senate in which you do not have a least, on paper, enough members to get to 60? that is where you come in. it is the power of your ideas. ,f they are attractive enough hopefully we will be able to get at least a reasonable number of democrats to say, this is such a good idea that i am simply not going to participate in an
effort to prevent this passage. let me thank you for the work you have already done on that necessary work or persuasion. we are going to need all of the arguments you've got, even if we are in the majority, because we will certainly not have 60. i think that ideas are powerful things. margaret thatcher said, first you win the argument, then you win the election. i want to thank you for helping us reinvigorate the conservative movement and to be ready to govern if the american people give us that opportunity. thanks for being here. [applause] >> we have a minute ober
fore the senator goes back to the hill. we have time for one or two questions. >> thank you. thatmply in your remarks you would not consider doing away with the filibuster if you were given the privilege of leading the senate again. could you comment on that. >> i think the super majority requirement has been it important to the country. when youe frustrating are in the majority but short of 60. if you think back over the history of the country, i think the biggest service the senate is thed to america things that has not passed. some of the proudest moments i can think of in my own career have been the things that i stopped, rather than the other. the ability to require the kind of consensus you need to have
when you have 60 votes is important, be it ever so frustrating when you're setting the agenda and still cannot get the 60. if you could detach yourself from the momentary problem you ine with that and look at it terms of what the senate has done for america, i think it is important not to change that fundamental role. reid did a lot of damage. back to the nuclear option. what was the worst thing he did was how he did it. they basically change the rules of the senate by breaking the rules of the senate. what he did was called by the parliamentarian of island -- a violation of senate roles. , substantively,
was to lower the threshold for nominations for the executive branch, for the judiciary, except for the supreme court to 51. more importantly than that was how they did it. the precedent will always be there. it is hard to unring a bell. i think it was very damaging to the institution. to probably what you would like me to respond to which is, what would we do about that were we in the majority? my advice to my colleagues is that that is a discussion for december, if we're fortunate enough to be given the opportunity to set the agenda in the senate. then we will address the question. your question was about legislation, i assume, not about executive branch appointments. turning theor
senate into a majority very an institution. tarianority are institution, even though we would have some short-term advantage by doing it. wondering, speaking of procedural fights, how do you see the amendment play on the tax extenders package lying out? >> hopefully it will be open for amendment. extender package enjoys but whatble support, senate republicans are insisting on is that it be open for amendment. you might be interested to know there were 40 democratic amendments filed, which would on this be considered
tax bill. by ae you're not bored discussion of process, but process is important. how you deal with something has a heck of a lot to do with what kind of outcome you get. i do with process every day. it is a lot simpler than it used to be. bills are brought up, the gag rule is imposed, nobody gets any amendments. when we rebel against that comment and because of the filibuster. the president said we engaged in 500 filibusters. i think it is pretty clear these people will do or say anything to cling to power. thise going to see november whether the american people are sick and tired of this. the only thing that can be , if you are frustrated
by the last six years, the only thing that can be done in 2014 is to change the senate. nothing else is achievable and for the 14. -- in 2014. change the senate and begin to change america by changing the agenda of the senate. that is where we are. there was that old movie in 1972 called "the candidate." some of you are too young to have seen it at the time. featuring robert redford. he was a bright new candidate who won the election and the movie ended when he looked in his campaign manager and said, what do we do now? do --l are helping us answer the question, what do we do now? if we are given the
responsibility to govern, what do we do now? to thank i really want you for applying your creative minds to this challenge. we look forward to being able to advance an agenda that we think is in the best interest of our country. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> coming up on c-span, speeches from the new populism conference. senator elizabeth warren from massachusetts. congressman keith ellison. ohio senator sherrod brown. coming up on the next "washington journal," retired marine sergeant jesse jane duff discusses the allegations of mismanagement at va hospital's. a look at immigration policy and
eight transfer legislation this year. -- a chance for legislation this year. later, gerrymandered congressional districts. journal" is live every morning at 7:00 eastern on c-span. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> tonight, 2014 commencement with governorting bobby jindal and liberty university. speaker at the university of mississippi law school. see it here on c-span. includes new book christopher hitchens talking about his lifestyle. >> there is a risk in the
bohemian lifestyle and i decided to take it because, whether it is an illusion are not, i don't think it is, it helped my concentration, it stopped me being bored, and stop other people being boring -- to some extent. it would keep me awake. to enhance the moment. againas asked, what do it , the answer is probably yes. easy for me to say. not very nice to my children to hear. it sounds irresponsible. the truth is, it would be hypocritical for me to say, i would never touch the stuff if i had known. i decided all of life is a wager. i will wager on this bit. i cannot make it come out any other way. withad the interview
christopher hitchens and other featured conversations in "sundays at eight." >> if we don't step up the enforcement side, the enforcement side brings the media attention. the only thing we can rely on to make these universities and colleges do what they should be doing is for them to get a bad story -- that is a lot of victims, first of all. that would be a depressing conclusion. we have to figure out some way to up the ante that is short of waiting for another tragedy to hit the front pages. i would say less the dollar amount and more the folks with the dollar of education -- to partner education.
the changes i have seen make, there is no fine yet. i would almost rather see that investment in a bigger team. >> the fines will be paying for this. we have an issue with budget in our government. we cannot just and thusly hand out the money. -- endlessly hand out the money. i think institutions can fund their own enforcement. >> this weekend, the first of several discussions on combating rape and sexual assault on campuses. cheney examines the political philosophy and presidential tenure of james madison. tv, the lifeistory and work american red cross founder clara barton.
>> the campaign for america's future hosted a forum on the gap between the middle class and the wealthy. next, senator elizabeth warren delivers the keynote address. it is 30 minutes. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you so much for having me here today. i am delighted to be here. for that and the
tatian. thank you for the introduction. i am glad that rosie last in parts of the book. -- laughed. books are part of how i fight. this is a book that i tried to write to draw in more people, because our fight cannot just be our talking to each other. we have to draw more people into it. so that is what it is about. a book written of gratitude. my parents who have never had much but always believed their kids would do better than they would and better -- gratitude to an american who invested in kids like me. i believe in that. [applause] i understand you spent much of the day talking about populism. i think it is the power of the
people to change the country. in 2009 i was fighting hard for financial agency that would help level the playing field for families. basically by preventing big banks are pushing people around, tricking them on credit cards and mortgages in payday loans. of those and many people were involved in that fight. you may remember the biggest financial institutions were unenthusiastic about the consumer agency. how about dead set opposed and were spending more than $1 million per day for more than a order to block financial reforms generally and the consumer agency in particular. that was the targeted one. able to fight back.
we were able to fight back .ecause of people like you people across the country who said i am in this fight, too. and because enough people got involved in the fight, we want. financialood, strong protection bureau. we got the pastor congress and signed into law. [applause] you know, for any of you in the room who thought i never thought i would be dorky enough to applaud a government agency, let --tell you one little slack fact. it has been up and operational for a little over two years. theas already forced largest financial institutions 3.5his country to return billion dollars directly to american consumers that they cheated. that is an agency that works.
that is government that works. [applause] so an hour uphill against the odds cannot win battle for the consumer financial protection bureau was not unique. in every fight to level the playing field. in every fight for working families, the past has been steep. our history, powerful interests have tried to capture washington and rigged the system in their favor. from tax policy to retirement security, the voices of hard-working will it drowned out by powerful industries and well-financed front groups. those with the power to fight kills in every rule their favor and everyone else
just gets left behind. rinks. the big they cheated the american banks, got bailed out and now the sixth largest 38% acre than they were in 2008 when they were too big to fail. they still swagger through washington, blocking reforms and pushing around agencies. gets caught with a few ounces of popping goes to jail on a big bank gets caught manipulating currency and no one even gets arrested. game is rigged, and it is not right. [applause] it is not just the big banks. the federalchoices government makes today. our college kids are getting crushed by student loan debt.
you need to rebuild roads and bridges and upgrade the power grid. we need more investment and medical research and scientific research, but instead of building a future, this country billions of dollars in tax loopholes and subsidies that go to rich and powerful corporations. many fortune 500 companies profitable companies pay zero in taxes. billionaires get so many tax loopholes that they pay lower tax rates than their secretaries but they have lobbyists. lobbyists, lawyers, and republican friends to protect every loophole and every privilege they have. they game is rigged and it is not right. [applause]
or take a look at what happens with trade deals. for big corporations trade agreement time must feel like christmas morning. think about it, they get special pass they could never through congress in public. because it is a trade deal, negotiations are secrets and the big corporations can work the hind those doors. we have seen what happens here at home when the trading partners here at home are allowed to ignore worker rights and environmental rules. from what i hear, wall street pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rigged the upcoming trade deals in their favor. secret?trade deals i have heard supporters of the deal actually explain i have to be secret because if -- if the
american people knew what was in them, they would be opposed. think about that. jobs atpeople, people's stake, small business owners who do not want to compete with overseas companies that dump waste in the river and hire workers for one dollar a day, those people, people without armies of lobbyists would be opposed. if people across the country would be opposed to a trade deal, that trade deal should not become law. [applause] the tilt in the playing field was obvious everywhere. when conservatives talk about opportunity, they mean opportunities for the rich to get richer and the powerful to get more powerful. they do not mean opportunities
for young people facing $100,000 in student loan debt to start a life. for someone out of work to get back on his feet and for someone who worked hard all her life to retire with a committee. dignity.the the game is rate. we can whine about it, weber about it, or we can fight back. i have decided i am fighting back. [applause] you bet. this is a fight over economics, privilege, power, but deep down this is a fight over values. conservatives and their powerful friends will continue to be guided by their age-old principle, i got mine, the rest
of you are on your own. we are guided by principle, too. all do simple idea, we better when we work together and invest in the future. whenow the economy grows hard-working families have the opportunity to improve their lives. we know the country gets stronger when we invest in helping people succeed. we know that lives improve when we care for our neighbor and help mold the future, not just for some of our kids but for all of our kids. these are regressive values. these are america's values. day. values play out every these values are what we are willing to fight for. i want to hear a good strong amen out there.
are we willing to do that caps that means raising the minimum wage. we believe people should retire thata committee him and means strengthening social security and we are willing to fight for it. [applause] we believe a kid should have a chance to go to college without getting crushed by debt, and we are willing to fight for it. rightieve workers have a andome together to bargain rebuild america's class. and we are willing to fight for it. inbelieve and can't believe
equal pay for equal work. and we're willing to fight for it. [applause] equal believe equal means and that is true in the work lace and in marriage. it is true for all of our families. and we are willing to fight for it. [applause] this is how i see it, we the people decide the future of the country. are our shared values and these are the values we are willing to fight for. this is our moment in history. we are called on to determine the future of this country. and if we stand by and let it slide away, then shame on us. but if we get up and fight for what we believe in, we will head this country in the right
you said you were urged to run for the senate you would lose that the idea is being brought to the american people. ideas and the ideas of bernie sanders continue to need to be brought to the american people and you should join together to run in the democratic primary. [applause] >> i appreciate the thought. i am not running for president. but this is really important. we have to keep talking about the issues and we have to find every platform we can, and that is what i am doing. right now in the united states senate we have more than 30 cosponsors on a bill to cut the cost of student loans for our college students.
the fight we need to have. we have a bill right now on minimum wage. the hearings on bank accountability. you have to stay on these. vote, make them vote vote. them -- make them let them go home and explained the people in the home states why they voted against. right now i will stay focused on the issues. i think it is -- i think it is critically important that i will be as loud as i can. [applause] >> we have the microphone. from west virginia. >> my question is very specific, is there any possibility of getting congress to readdress the exceptions on withdrawals from 401(k).
in my case, i am making withdrawals so i can afford to pay for obama care. hit with aget penalty next year because that will change my taxable income even though it is clearly for a necessity and there are literally millions of people across the country and are tapping their 401(k) for things like their mortgage payment, these bills -- all of things. then when it comes time to pay taxes, it goes back to the idea that we do not get any breaks, we get the shaft. let me start this in a bigger frame. america is in the middle of a retirement crisis in getting worked by the day -- worse by the day. the crisis is brought on by a combination of events. the first one is the disappearance harshly of the defined benefits plan so this has to be about people investing
in taking the risks of the market and taking money out when they have to use it for other expenses. this is part of a generational squeeze on middle class family. in the early 1970's, a one income family in america could put away about 11% of their take-home pay in savings. think about that. 2000 the median income family had to have two incomes to be able to make the mortgage, health care payments, pay for the kids education and were able to put away zero and were head over heels with credit card debt, second mortgages and the like. and all of this is the consequence of the fact that wages have not gone up. a fully employed male today,
adjusted for inflation, makes less than his father did a generation ago. families have done everything they can. they have put everybody into the work or spear he is they have run as hard as they can. a loaded up on death and then all got hit with the financial crisis in 2008. what you're talking about is fundamentally a problem of not enough money to go around. your 401(k) not unreasonably. the difficulty is we are counting on you to book to the 401(k) throughout the retirement years. so i want to push this in three directions very quickly. the first is we have to address the retirement crisis directly. lastis absolutely the point in history we should be talking about talking -- about
talking about cutting social security benefits. we need to increase them. that is part one. we are starting to take on the question about how to deal with the private savings part of retirement. i very much take your point and will take them back to my colleagues. we have to build an economy here at home again. future if wehold a are not making the investments together. educating our children, hereting in infrastructure toamerica so workers can get their jobs. investing in basic research and scientific research and medical research. we know that these investments pay off, and yet, what we have
been doing for 30 years is coming back, coming back. y? we could have a tax system that left more money for the rich and powerful, and we have to reverse the trend. we cannot do this. so part of the answer on this will be i know it is not the immediate answer but it will be the long-term answer so not everyone is in the same circumstances, has got to be we are willing as a country to say everyone pays into the system fairly. aprogressive tax -- there is reason it is called progressive. a progressive tax that gives us the revenue we need to make the investments we need to build real opportunity here at home. so, yes. [applause]
you.ank attorney general eric holder has recently changed course on too big to jail. >> it is not to shelter assets that help all the law. that is why they are in trouble. i see this largely as a public relations move on and efforts of the department of justice. do you think this is just pr or real appetite to go after american banks for real malfeasance? an enormousbeen
frustration for me, the lack of accountability all the way through. damon and i work together through the financial crisis, and i would say if there is a single issue we pushed the hardest on, it was in return for the tens of billions of dollars that were shoveled in to the big financial institutions, a little accountability, accountability on where the money went. accountability for the changes that financial institutions would make. accountability for how they would spend the money and ways to help the american economy. be clear, this is under both administrations. this is one more way in which the playing field is tilted. wall street has been rebuilt.
has anyone looked at the dow economyhe rest of the not so much. the glass-steagall bill is a great example of that. you all remember the glass-steagall bill coming out of the great depression. we put in place a rule that said in effect, thinking should be boring. banking should be boring. it has to be walled off from the risk-taking and investment that happens with wall street and other types of money management. not surprisingly, the financial institutions do not like it. they kept pecking at the wall. the 1980's and 1990's they would get another whole and another whole and in the late 1990's it was repealed. in effect, anything goes.
big financial institutions can be in any financial service they want to be. we all know what happens. this is happening simultaneously with the moment financial institutions figured out they could make incredible profit by mortgages that people would ultimately not be able to pay off. it was like selling grenades at the pins already pulled out. will be ok for a while but then it will go off. that is what is going to happen. they packaged up the grenades and send them out into the marketplace generally. both of these have gone on for some time. glass-steagall is gone. making great profits until the --nades started exploded exploding in huge numbers and
the economy crashed. what happened at that point that go at that point the federal government says we are going to come in and we're not going to let the economy go back to the stone age. we are going to put in lots of money to support the economy. but the treasury department under both administrations starts shoveling the money out on a no strings attached basis. money out onel the a no strings attached basis, you're just created too big to fail. when i say no strings attached basis, i come out of the backgrounds of teaching bankruptcy law for many years. chapter 11. when new money comes in to mo which it often does, it is the oldn terms that say debt gets wiped out. the old debt takes a haircut. the management gets fired. the deal and had to come up with a new business
plan. keep discipline in the system. that is how you make sure the new money will be protected, that they will do something different going forward. this did not happen with the big financial institutions. right now what we have is i have a bill pending. angus king, independent for maine and we have pretend -- propose instituting a 21st-century glass-steagall bill. [applause] it would have two effects. one is simply size. just breaking up the largest. it makes them smaller by breaking them apart. the second is it makes certain
the depository part of banking, the parts we must protect at all risk are very low operations. i heard someone ask the question, why? why was there no accountability for the largest financial institutions cap oh why can we not move glass-steagall right now? why is it we have heard one after another of the largest financial institutions in this country admit to breaking the law. that is what we have to tolerate, breaking the law. squandering drug money. violating sanctions against foreign countries like iran. the latest, helping people cheat on their taxes i hiding money in foreign countries. -- not, not only does not
one goes to jail, no one goes to trial. this is a about accountability. of the large financial institutions but accountability for our government, regulators to remind them they do not work for the big financial institutions. they work for us. [applause] they work for us. [applause] this really is the central point, who does this country work for? that is the question in front of us right now. work for thosery of us who have already made it big? the big financial institutions. does this country work only for the billionaires and millionaires and the fortune 500 or is this a country that works
for everybody else? a country that makes the investments that say not only are we going to have a system where we get a chance to build something for the future, but that our kids and grandkids are going to grow in a world where every kid gets a fighting chance ? that is what i am working on. [applause] >> elizabeth warren. [applause] the campaignfrom for america's future with minnesota congressman keith ellison. his remarks focused on investment, growth and sustainability. this is 25 minutes. >> we are going to start this conference. good morning.
come on, we are a bunch of populists. let's have that again. that morning. that's better. and i'mis roger hickey, codirector of the campaign for america's future. i want to welcome you to this new populism conference. new populism unites the growing majority of americans who know that the economic game is rigged against them. they know who rigged it, and we are using the political systemd to make the economy work for all americans. i also want to welcome all the people who are now watching across the country on c-span, at ourfuture.org, streaming video at thenation.com. welcome. you are all part of this growing new populist movement. goes down,hose media
just switch over to the other one. my campaign for america's future welcome you in a few minutes in a more thoughtful way, but we are going to move this conference along by keeping introductions brief so that you can hear our great speakers. our first speaker i want to introduce is a truly great american, congressman keith ellison. [applause] keith ellison was first a community activist and civil rights lawyer in the twin cities. he was elected four times to represent minnesota's fifth congressional district running as the candidate of the democratic former labour party. a party that represents the
great midwestern tradition of populism in america. he is also the cochairman of the congressional progressive caucus. go ahead, applaud. [applause] the cpc has done many great things. among them, the fight to preserve and expand social security. but he's going to talk to us today about their greatest leadership achievement, the cpc better off budget. economists tell us the budget, which would invest massively in job creation and economic growth, would boost gdp by 3.8% and employment by an additional 4.6 million jobs or so. as jared bernstein would tell us later in the afternoon, if you want to reduce inequality and cits,e the opposite -- defi you got to make sure everyone has a job with decent pay. [applause] thank you.
keith is also the author of this new book. i recommend it highly. thee, mytry 'tis of faith, our family, and our future." so please welcome keith ellison. [applause] lot.anks a roger, thank you. thank oyou to my dear friend bo, wherever he is. thank you to everyone who made this thing come off. thank you for being here today. we say to folks all the time, you've got to speak truth to power. we say that, right? but you know, i think the power already knows the truth. [laughter] think about it. do you think pete peterson is
unaware that if a privatized social security that wall street is going to make a lot of money? do you think the multinationals are unaware that if the transpacific partnership gets past along that it will make -- give them a chance to make a lot of money and disemploy a bunch of workers? think they don't know that? the power knows that if we slash and burn the budget, the supports americans depend upon to get to a better economic situation will not be there, and people will be left on their own to fend for themselves and work for any pay these people care to offer. are a huget if there ocean of excess workers out there looking for opportunity? that just means the people who do have a job better watch their mouth about talking about unions, right?
that just means the people who do have a job that are not complain about whether they lose their fingers or toes or get incurable diseases while they are working. because you better hang on to that job. power --ing truth to the fact is, we need to speak truth to our own faults. you need to speak truth to your cousin who listens to rush limbaugh all the time. [laughter] you need to speak truth to your sister who thinks she is not into politics. you know who i am talking about. you all know somebody, right? we need to talk to our people about the situation we are in, and we need to talk to our people in a systematic, persistent, intelligent, scientific, and heartfelt way. the name of the game today is
populism. what is happening now in our country is that the oligarchs are thinking they are going to use their superior dollars to control the political scene. but what we know is our superior numbers will trump their superior dollars. so long as we organize and are in touch with each other. it can be done. it might be done easier now than in the past because we have a lot of social networking tools we can make use of. because all we got to do is knock on the door next to our apartment and talk with our neighbors over some coffee and cake about how we are going to raise the wage to a livable wage. something everybody cares about. how we are going to make -- do something about this mountain of debt. .e can start a conversation we believe in the american
dream, that if you work hard, play by the rules, you ought to do well. we are living in an america where if you work hard and play by the rules, you will have and stagnating wages. this is not the land of opportunity. it is grown to be the land of economic stagnation, and we are stuck. we believe in our country, and we love our country, and the thing we love about it is you can come here and make something of yourself. but there are days where no matter how hard you work, that is getting difficult every day ain't that something to start a conversation about? that is a conversation starter. we got to talk to each other, and we need to do it in a systematic way. we have to do it in a fervent way. we have to do it in a smart way. i am telling you, the wind is that our back. skip thelicans -- republicans, the conservative types -- they have a very difficult job. they are trying to get a
program to support a that serves only the 1%. we are trying to get a majority to support a program that supports everybody. a harder job have than us, which is why they are extremely comfortable with division, lies, deceit, and distraction. so your problem is, and my problem is, we think because we are right that we are supposed to win. is what we have found out just being right, if you are up against somebody who is utterly ruthless about pushing the program, willing to shut down the government for 16 days, willing to raise prices on seniors, willing to cut social security with chained cpi, willing to cut meals on wheels, willing to cut head start -- you are talking about somebody who does this and is fine with it.
you better figure you are not dealing with an ordinary kind of person with an ordinary conscience and sensibility. you are dealing with somebody else, and you got to be clear on that. but we have an easier job. because what we are talking is good for the most people. but we cannot be so naïve as to believe that that alone is going to get us the victory that we need. aen i say victory, i mean green, fair, prosperous america and rest of the world. let me tell you, the wind is that our back. we have a lot going for us. people all over this country are on the move. it is an exciting time. with on may 15, 150 cities saw fast food workers on strike? [applause] not just 150 cities with fast food workers on strike.
mcdonald's, wendy's, papa john's, all of them. 30 other countries were striking in solidarity. they were striking in europe. they were striking in asia. they were striking all over this globe. nra, they, the other national restaurant association, is all upset about it. they are spying on the rest of the fast food workers. they are probably spying on us now. they are welcome. here is our strategy to defeat you. [laughter] our real strategy is to raise the pay of americans to create working-class prosperity, to have an america where if you work hard, you can do well. that is what we really want. what they don't know is that they can win too if they get with the program. but if they insist hard-working wagee work at the minimum
for restaurant workers, then we have a problem, right? if we think about it, not only 130 citieson may 15, in december. where do we go from here? maybe they strike longer. maybe they will be real demands on the wages. what about the walmart workers? [applause] the walmart workers are striking. we were told these people are on organize will. able.organiz they beg to differ. what about how people in north carolina are responding to the right-wing legislative acts of ope? oligarch alto -- al p a billionaire oligarch in north carolina who threw a bunch of
money around, got in the republican house and senate, far right, they cut unemployment. they tried to undermine the vote through voter id and worse. they did a whole range of things. as we all know, dramatically changed the apportionment in the state to favor themselves. arepeople of north carolina organizing. you got to remember -- this is the south. they had one rally with 80,000 people. 55% of them were white. in the south, this is incredibly important. it means human solidarity is overcoming history that has divided people along racial lines. this is incredibly important. we should all be really excited about it. as a matter of fact, one of the fastest-growing and aa cp chapters is in asheville -- naacp chapters is in asheville,
north carolina. a predominately white community. they said, i don't know why not. they are growing and making demands. they know they need unemployment , they need medicaid, they need to go to the doctor, they need a better life. in north carolina, this thing is spreading to south carolina, to georgia, and even missouri. , whether it is fast food workers, folks in north carolina attacked by a right wing swing, or even the maids. the national alliance for domestic workers. organizers all over the place. this sub-minimum wage be raised to a livable wage for people. on, and something going i going to tell you as a politician, we have not gotten the memo quite yet.
but politicians see the light -- we may feel the heat. i am telling you, i want to add that the postal workers know that darrell issa and the folks who want to privatize them have them in their sights. they are not staying in the sights. they are doing something about it. there is a move to privatize the post office by partnering with staples and allowing non-sworn, non-background check people to handle your mail. postal workers are not standing for it. they are protesting. you need to get in line and carry a sign. couple that with the immigration rights movement. we are in a populous moment. the question is, what are we going to do about it? i just want to add and build a little bit by pointing out that there are folks who thought they were not political, who thought, i am not into politics, who are now drowning in politics. they are not drowning in politics.
they are swimming in politics. way above the water. one of them is a young woman who is 22. she worked at kfc and did not get enough hours, so she had to take the train to hours to work at another kfc. she lives in an apartment in new york city with four other adults and several children in an apartment with like one bedroom -- she's like, i cannot take this. i need $15 and a union. that is what she said. she has become a spokesperson, 22 years old. there was a time nobody heard of martin luther king. he was some 26 year-old dude from atlanta leading some thing they are doing down there in montgomery. alabama. ok. then people figured it out after a while, right? my point is, this movement is throwing up leaders all the time. she was minimum wage at kfc, and she chose not to suffer the
situation. chance -- weg the can't survive on $7.25. if you want to see how smart she is, check out stephen colbert. she was on his show. he was throwing her curveballs, and she was catching all of them. she is smart like that. this movement is growing up leaders. even the president has to respond. the president has said some very good things about income inequality. he issued an executive order to rate -- raise the pay of federal contractors. this movement of federal workers, supported by the progressive caucus and others, has been pounding on this for over a year before he issued the executive order. the executive order was issued .ased on pressure from people good he did it, but on the other hand are president is still talking about trying to pass fast-track authority on the transpacific partnership.
therefore, he is doing one thing with one hand and something else with the other, and we got to get in doing the same thing with both. [applause] so what i am saying to you is that we have the power to do it because we are in this populist moment. we have the power to do it because seniors are waking up. they have seen people try to take their money from chains ebi. young people are swimming under loans -- loads of student debt. they know it is wrong because they know their parents before them did not have all this debt. people know. the question is, what do the leaders do to make the change? that is you, that is us in this room. the real question is, what decision will we make? we have got to make a clear demand, a clear demand that the real problem in this economy is not debt.
the real problem is that we do not have good jobs. we need to invest in this country, and we need a blueprint and a plan that invests in the american people so that we can have not just civil rights and economic rights , but we can have real prosperity and have it on a basis that everyone can enjoy. [applause] caucus, we dosive not write our budget in isolation. we write our budget as a participatory process where we have our friends from the progressive community tell us what needs to be done. and we talk to our friends at the economic policy institute, at the campaign for the american future, at the labor campaign. they tell us what needs to be in this budget. what should we call this budget? what does it do? it makes people better off. that is what we call it the better off budget.
we have been doing this several years in a row, because we believe the way to a better future is to chart a path to the better future, and a budget is a way to do that. one of the first things our budget does is infrastructure investment. it starts by creating jobs. we believe that how you first describe your budget is extremely important, and whereas the republicans are talking about how much debt they cut and others talk about other stuff, we, the gay talking about this budget creates 8.8 million jobs by 2017. that is what our budget does. our budget stands $820 billion as a down payment toward meeting infrastructure needs. i am from minneapolis. five years ago we had our bridge fall into the mississippi. 13 people were killed. 100 more people were terrified and had serious injuries. when we talk about infrastructure, it will make us more productive, put more people
to work, improve our economy, but it will also improve our public safety. it is a necessity that we do this. not only that, but the better off budget will create a national infrastructure bank which will receive $25 billion in funding over five years, using the funding as seed money to fund infrastructure investments around the country through loan guarantees. you know, we argue for free trade. we believe american workers can make good products with anybody in the world. but not free trade -- you will did not correctly. there trade. we believe in fair trade. nafta and nafta on steroids, tpp. we also believe that wall street has two do better by america. we have a financial transaction tax on stocks, bonds, and derivatives. our transaction tax, which we call the robin hood tax, would
build us $350 billion a year and -- [applause] in addition to that, in addition to that what it would do is stop this high-speed trading which is wreaking havoc on our economy and extremely dangerous. some of you out this red the book by michael lewis. obviously we raise the minimum wage, but we also do something even more important. we strengthen labor rights. [applause] look, if america is a body politic, the backbone of that body is organized labor. ed,organized labor is weaken the whole body is weakened. we have to pass the employer free choice act. something that is not in our budget but we better start thinking about, we need to make union organizing a civil rights. i am telling you this. ifneed to do this because
you fire somebody who is organizing a union without regard to whether -- who wins the union election, if you fire someone who is organizing, everybody else gets scared and you kill the movement right there. you ought to be able to get a lawyer, sue, get recovery, get punitive damages, just like if they fire you because you are female or black or have a disability. that is what we need to do to stand up for our rights. going back to our budget, our budget restores democracy. we do campaign finance in order to establish a present of democracy that truly reflects our diversity. wet of all, what we do is stand on the side of working americans who love this country and believe that this country is worth fighting for. country saidour women could not vote.
they thought in the idea of liberty and justice for all and establish that right. we believe it should be dignity on the job. union -- people died trying to get unions. brave people sit up and establish them. we had a country where people were relegated to second-class citizenship because of their race. we stood up and fought for it. some people died, some people lost a lot, but we still did not. -- not quit. the work we are facing right now is no less serious. the question is, are we less serious? i do not think so. we are standing on the shoulders of giants. so we should see further than king, then all the great heroes of the past to move the progressive ball forward. ourave to -- let's go take economy and society forward and away from these oligarchs, everybody. thank you very much.
her remarks or 15 minutes. i was raged -- raised in a crowd of teenage werewolf. you know why i am a progressive. i doat yelling at my mom, not mind that you became a democrat, i just do not know why she had to become a communist. here you are, your communist bolster. all of us have been in lots of cases where we have seen the data.
the start of lots of fights where we did not have the majority of the public. our job as getting and talking to the public and the majority in favor of us. i want to really urge you to read the report, campaign amer'. we do not have time. america's family does not have time, our country does not have time, and i will be working at 711 until our diet -- until i die. we do not have time. we had to make this happen, and it will happen with u.s.
organizers and great leaders like the congressmen. let's talk about the data real quick. i am clearly the fastest talking montana and you'll ever hear. the shrinking middle class everyone knows. no victory laps in this economy, not that we were ever intending to have one. think theca does not economy is better. real economy thinks the economy has gotten worse or stay the same. only 22% of americans believe the economy has gone better. the only people who believe the economy has gotten better, tea party years pretty blue-collar. we have real opportunity to talk to all kinds of audiences we would not even want to have dinner with. they did not think the economy has gotten better. college people oh our
should educate it white men. i do not propose we deny student aid to college educated white men but it is true, they really ought to learn more when they go to college. college educated white women are youly think -- kidding me? this economy is not in good shape. people believe overwhelmingly the middle class is disappearing. so badly there was a time when we had 85% of americans identify as middle-class. now they identify is disappearing middle class. you have half americans say i am middle-class. people believe overwhelmingly that in america you should be able to get ahead but the rules are rigged in favor of the wealthy. they believe our economy makes it too tough for the middle class to make ends meet.
the believe overwhelmingly next generation will not be better off than they are. this is at a record high. majority of people who think their own kids will not be better off. in this country you came to the east coast because you are one step ahead of the famine and law and venue went west because you were one step ahead of the law and to make those moves and you work hard for your kids because things are supposed to be better off. it is not worth it to work this hard for this little vacation and put up with the teenage kids who are annoying unless they will be better off. america feels this is a very fundamental violation of what the whole country is supposed to be about. many people talked about the new urgency behind the inequality agenda.
we now have economic data validating why this is happening. real people knew it already. conventional wisdom is about 95% five plus or finest -- percent. people are there. they're real experience already tells them this. people believe overwhelmingly that it is a big problem. frankly, people think they are in the problem, too. they do not think they have to go look or someone vulnerable, to look past their kitchen table. whether you came over on the mayflower or cruise ship or slave ship, we are all in the same boat now. that is exactly what americans feel. to wantre not supposed
to have a role for government. we used the dreaded g word. we use the dreaded afford sometimes, federal government. we have to have a crew here. corporationfind a that requires you to train your replacement abroad and takes away your attention and job and cannot get another one. people believe, a majority of americans believe if you work hard for living and play by the rules, you never seem to get ahead. the new watchword, stability. people think even when you work and do everything right, aig can make a decision and your mortgage is gone. who even knew aig had your mortgage? as one person said in a focus group, i do not even like greek food and my pension is gone. the right has an answer on this, to. the number one answer i would
take to you is there a republican pollsters and republican leaders who will be running for president to get the new populism. notice the strongest statement on this chart. the assistance programs for the poor, tax breaks for the rich but no real help for the american people. you know who wrote that? the republican pollsters. their populist agenda is as popular as our populace agenda. not only is it urgent to get on this but it is important because if we don't, they well. job creation. i wish i had more data to show you how popular job creation is. unfortunately i don't because not enough people are talking about job creation. this is the number one thing evil one to in this economy. the number one people think they will get out of the deficits, family ahead.
91% of americans say creating jobs in absolute priority this year. plus or minus five percent means the only people who do not think job priority is a priority as paul ryan and their friends. the number one solution for the deficit, create jobs. you will see not only this, but in data that defies conventional wisdom. agree the government should focus on jobs, even if it means increasing the deficit in the short term. the key voters in this election, blue-collar women. the people that agree with the statement most strongly, blue-collar women. not just the liberal agenda, the mainstream agenda and the only people we have to argue with our people on the hill, not with
anyone in real america. education, huge issue. it has gotten even bigger. 2012 education was not so much on the agenda. now the states have had to cut back on education. people think it is the wrong priority. they think it is the number one our kids.or overwhelmingly in favor of education. notice the education agenda and swing.base who cares about education the most? independents, homemakers and the swing vote and african-americans and latinos come up the bass boat. the biggest problem we will have in the 2014 election is turnout. inare at a huge disadvantage terms of turnout. it is frightening how much people are discouraged and not planning to turn out. you have your day job. your evening job. now you have your midnight job.
you have to get people out to vote. it will be a disaster if we do not get people out to vote. aftervening job and midnight job are devoted -- united by the same thing. make college affordable, raise fundingwage, increase for jobs, increased the minimum wage, increase funding for public schools and class-size. the investment agenda is not supposed to be popular. everybody tells us we cannot talk about these things. money if yout of do not do these things. people overwhelmingly in favor of this agenda. nobody leading the charge better than frank clemente. what a tremendous hesitation. people overwhelmingly in favor of tax fairness. this is our answer to their
lower tax agenda. the lower tax agenda still has power. in the inequality agenda. we said we will close the inequality gap between the wealthy. the republicans wrote their side of the agenda which is to say the best site is to remove taxes and cut regulation. it was dead even in their minds. when we add tax fairness, we pull ahead on taxes. as progressives, we are the most progressive we have been in decades, precisely because of the power of the populist tax agenda. taxes on the richest two percent, 70% afford it. 65% overwhelming support. taxing the corporations that are not paying any taxes. very good att math. god bless americans.
my favorite question is we asked people, how many people are in the top one percent? .he average was 10% god bless america. not very good amount. most people do not think they will be in the richest two percent. they are good enough to figure that one out. , tax loopholes, which is your view. america has the highest tax rate on businesses. this is the program of tax reform that will make the system simpler and the economy will ways -- will raise more revenue. we said the tax system is rigged in favor of special interest against the middle class. large corporations paying no federal taxes this year. they avoid billions by storing it offshore, which people think
is outrageous. they call the corporations benedict arnold. about time they started living by the same rules as the rest of us. people overwhelmingly for closing tax loopholes that allow you to ship jobs overseas, allow you to lobby, hedge fund managers suffering talked about. this is all data from americans for tax fairness. tax about the rule am a close loopholes on corporations that have offshore tax havens. this is wildly favorable. 62-79 in support saw majority strongly in favor. more popular than most in america. these are strong winning policies. agenda, people are worried about money. they are worried about where the money will come from.
you know how to turn that around? add tax fairness to it. we talk about investing and creating jobs and the wealthy, we win overwhelmingly. 62-39%. this is the same data and sermon -- in terms of tax data. everyone knows conventional wisdom, cannot talk about regulation, it is a dirty word. we have to use rules and standards. when we tested that, we said what do you think about rules and fairness? our word, the dreaded regulation. people are not supposed to be for regulation because they are scared of big government. 93% think it is important that we regulate financial services and products. it is amazing it was legal to begin with. it is illegal to sell you a toaster that would burn down your house are perfectly legal to send you a mortgage that
would burn down your house. this is not even a debate in the public mind. this is that the level of core value. love the consumer financial protection agency. the number one area that would have the consumer financial protection area move into? retirement. you know the one build a lobbyist got as a loophole, financial retirement. that was part of the compromise to get the agency. rules and enforcement on practices that created this financial or have made enough changes. people go are you kidding me? that is absurd. no way we have made enough changes. when we talk overwhelmingly about opportunity, people are -- i have a couple more slides. people would like trade but they like trade on our terms. solid majority of americans today against nafta.
a solid majority against colombian and peruvian trade laws. they wonder what are we getting from columbia and korean. to get thed we are best product free, it is called drugs. we do not need a trade deal. god bless, america. do, wet thing we need to are not going to get these policies until we change the way campaigns are funded. we [applause] have to take democracy back. [applause] the only people more unpopular than members of congress are the people who put them there, the big money campaign donors. people believe we need big changes in the campaign-finance system him and that number is on the rise. that number is on the rise. it is our time. the public is with us.
we need to organize, nominate candidates. and we will plan and it will not take a long time. thank you. >> if we do not step up the enforcement side, the enforcement side during the media attention. so if we are going to say the only thing we can rely on to make these universities and colleges do what they should be doing is for them to get a bad story, first of all, that is a lot of the dems. would be a depressing conclusion. so we have to figure out someway is short ofte that waiting for another tragedy to hit the front pages. i would almost say less the
dollar amount more that a carbon effect. of 13 team person can do it. the changes i have seen institutions make our when they are under investigation. no fine yet. i would almost seem that team.ment and a bigger >> in all fairness, the fines will be paying for this. where does the money come from? we cannot endlessly handed out to institutions that have done wrong. they can fund their own enforcements. on c-span,ekend senator claire mccaskill and the first of several discussions on combating rape and sexual assault on campuses. on book tv, the wife of former vice president at cheney and senior fellow at the american enterprise institute examines the political philosophy and presidential tenure at james madison sunday morning at 11:00 on c-span two. american history tv, the life
and work of american red cross founder clara barton will visit her missing soldiers office in washington followed by questions and comments life. george wunderlich national museum of war veterans. likes now, senator sherrod brown of ohio speaks of the campaign for america's future from keeping things on wall street to becoming too big to fail. these remarks are 20 minutes. >> thank you. i like to see everyone packed
i really like the way he you wake me up and say i love you baby. true story. mostly i came to say thank you. bob invites me, and i so appreciate the work you do to make congress better, state legislature better elected officials better. you understand way better than most that is not just electing the right people, keeping the heat on congress, reminding them of things going on in our country and telling stories. about -- let me say a couple of comments and then i want to talk about too big to manage, too big
to regulate, too big to exist. is-- bicvick in the back of the room. i heard him beat 30 years ago. he said something i will never forget. he said when a voter goes to the polls and thinks of himself for himself as a tax payer they are likely to vote republican. when the same voter can go to the pull to the next year and think of themselves as workers they are likely to vote democratic. keep that construct in your mind. to expand on that, president clinton was talking to a group of senators several months ago and was talking about the white working-class. ,nce the real base of the party thinking of nonunion workers especially. he was talking about some of his
old political base in arkansas and said they do not think either political party or do anything for them. he said they vote republican because they think democrats will do something to them. often means something to them, means may be raised their , social issues. it is guns. whatever it is. the point is democrats are not following the advice of all of you with the economic populism that will speak to the voters. i was on the ballot in 20 12 in ohio. president obama won the point by -- won the state by three points. by six points. thank you for that. those of you that did not clap, there is another election 2018. i run as a progressive, populist. as aednesday flick ohio
populist. because the national democrats have not gotten the message that you need to be a populist economic party, it is much to get their attention because there are not enough of us without economic populist message. that is where you come in as activist of people that have made such a difference for our country. let me go back. i got on the banking committee in 2007. i first year in the senate. i was on president kenny's committee. the committee was kind of a sleepy committee. 2008 i was in ohio. of columbus.east i got a call from the majority leader's office saying they would be on the phone with
paulson and ben bernanke and figuring out -- listening to them. we heard a frightening what is happening to this economy. they wanted a bailout. i will not get into all the details but it was pretty clear the problems the country was facing in the days of september 08. since tarp in the bailout the six largest banks have gotten larger and larger. let me give you a couple of numbers. 20 years ago the six largest were, the combined asset about 18% of gdp. six largest banks combined asset eight percent of gdp. today this six largest 65% of
gdp. so it is not just too big to fail. not just too big to manage. it is too big to regulate, exist. not just economic power they have in the marketplace, it is political power they have here. that is what is so important that when you support people and live --people like is a like elizabeth warren and bernie , it changes the committee, slowly but making significant progress. the six largest banks are twice as large as the next 50. secretary geithner has come out with a book. i have not read it yet it -- have not yet read it.
he made interesting comments at harvard. of course these banks are too big to fail. but then he likened those of us trying to fix it to captain ahab forever chasing the white whale. he finally acknowledged now that he is not in power that these things really are too big to fail but did not think fixing this really matters that much. a presidential adviser was in my office four or five years ago. i was talking about the importance of manufacturing, especially when you look at manufacturing as 22% of gdp. now it is not much more than 10. a couple with three decades ago. cannot pick winners and losers. i said i am not picking which
company or even industry, i am just saying we have picked winners and losers in this country for some time. the middle-class and working-class and poor people. it is timely we've focused that if you will. [applause] so from the remarks, as good middle-class jobs have gone overseas, wages decline. as americans borrow more, wall street gets bigger. emphasis on one sector takes wealth away from other parts of the economy. this is why i teamed up with many of those in the senate.
with. frank to the bankthe size of relative to the economy. anything over 600 billion in assets had to start selling off some of the assets. my math tells me it is well less than 51. a bank regulator has endorsed the approach. so has george will. peggy noonan has endorsed it. jon huntsman. second, i have teamed up with a member of the senate, david bitter.
legislation ensures the biggest bank cap prop or capital reserves. risky processes are so taxpayers do not have to. during the recess, during the depression, significantly more effective. banquet 500 billion in assets, there are six of those. you are not underwater, you do not need a bailout. it prevents excessive leverage. always forves are the bankers on wall street to take more risk. the more risk they take, the more money they make. when the sun is not shining some
of the risk they take means we are on the hook to bail them out. we cannot have a financial system that works that way anymore. costegislation with tech on the amendment and senator fedor on the bill has obviously not passed. they have influenced the national debate because progressives like you are speaking out on it. the government accounting office said funding advantages of the six largest banks, some number of different studies. some were close to one percent. if you go out and borrow money to me you are paying probably close to one percent more for the money than the six largest banks. why? because you are a risk. they charge you more because they do not know if you will pay back. charge lesss they
interest because they know even if they fall, the big banks will be bailed out. that is why ending too big to fail fundamentally is so important. the large banks that innocence get government subsidies, these things will not continue to grow larger. the government subsidies can borrow money more cheaply than other banks and individuals. they will only grow larger because of the competitive advantage. that is why the consensus is building. we are seeing things happen. the major federal regulators who other two,e, but the the fdic and federal reserve have always been too biased toward the wall street banks. they have begun to change. they have hired a new leverage
ratio. 's, 50%ht largest bank higher. that happened because of the debate and legislation. it happened because of your activism and because you speak out on issues that matter. it speaks a lot about what raising the public the bait means here and make such a difference. let me illustrate with a story. just about the impact that you and your mothers and fathers and grandfathers have made over the past several decades. in this pan for 15 years. the depiction of a birdcage. the canary in the mind. the canary with a very small long capacity from toxic gas. the canary died and the mine worker got on the mind. no government secured enough to protect him. back 100 years ago when they took the canary in the
minds. born in thea child united states and have a life expectancy of 45 years amid today a child born, my daughter just had her second child in the past 16 months as a law student. a child born in this country has a life expectancy of three decades longer than one hundred years ago. why is that? not just because of a high-tech medicine and not just because of cholesterol drugs or heart transplant, it is about what progressives have taught for four these 100 years. it is civil rights, safe drinking water, protection for women's rights, prohibition, minimum wage, medicare and medicaid. meaningthings that you, you personally and your parents and grandparents generations have fought for. thesess just does not do
things. state legislatures to not enact protections for workers because we are all true a stick. we do them for whom you elect and you put pressure on. this is all about the pressure you put for labor unions, child .dvocacy groups or civil rights people and their religious institutions and church halls putting pressure on congress on the legislatures, mayors, governors, presidents to do things better. that is your role. that is the role we always have. conservators are always there to protect the status quo, to protect privilege, to protect property. the progressives are those that
want to move the country forward. there is always going to be the pressure. the conservatories are more likely to win because they have so much privilege and money and power are already on their site. we win because we appeal to the public and because of the passion so many of you have for the progressive issues. a corporate lobbyist called. he called these radical ideas. lobbyist afterte the president signed on. the day he signed he said now it is halftime. in other words, the bank lobbyist said we will go to the agency to try to slow the reforms down. it is not a radical idea that banks compete on the level playing field. not a radical idea that underwater homeowners have the ability to refinance or they do not get foreclosed on. not a radical idea to ensure taxpayers are not punished at the bank is too big to fail.
too big to fail, too big to manage, too big to exist. that is our mission to take the fight on. it will not end tomorrow, next year. it is going to be a continued battle. two steps forward, one back toward. sometimes backward again but we move forward. look what we have all done in this country. i will close with this story. calledrnational bank bearings. it was destroyed by fraud, committed by one of their traders. in reality, no profits, just big losses. this traitor who later was convicted of fraud. just losses. he managed to conceal us hope the firm collapsed. here is what neeson wrote. luckily for my fraud in a moment of candor -- luckily there were
too many chiefs who would chat about it at arms length but never go further. they never dared to ask me questions since they were afraid of looking stupid about not understanding futures and options. bankingeen on the committee eight years now. i started off not knowing the issues as well as i should have or wanted to. i also understand that is the game they play. they use language, intimidation. to make youguage not want to question them. regulators do not want to sound -- sound stupid so we do not challenge them. i think this story shows why we do challenge them. don't be afraid of looking like you do not know enough about financial reform and financial
regulation and the economic issues. do not be fearful about now -- not knowing enough when you challenge power in their comments. that is why the work that senator merkley in sanders the you will hear from shortly are doing in the senate is creating a new and vocal dynamic to hold wall street accountable. we have an opportunity to remake the economy. we know what has happened to middle-class wages. we no profits are up. we know corporations are moving overseas to avoid taxes. profits are up. executive salaries are up. workers, the middle class, working class, poor people not making the wages they once did. you know all of these things. that is the importance of remaking the economy in a different kind of way. mississippi civil rights leader in the 1960's, and this is perfect for your activism, he said do not tell me what you
believe, show me what you do and i will tell you what you believe. that is really the motto of the progressive movement. we win sometimes. we win enough to have the canary in the cage that symbolizes the progress we have made as americans. fighters to give working-class people the opportunities they have earned by the sweat of their brow that really matter in this country and i am so thankful to you for playing such an important role in all of that. thank you. [applause] >> ukraine holds presidential election sunday.
looking policy implications for the u.s. live at 10:00 eastern on c-span2. the institute for korean american studies old a symposium on how the relationship between north and south korea affects u.s. national security. see it live at 1:00 eastern. >> c-span's new book sunday at 8:00 includes writer christopher hitchens talking about his lifestyle. >> aliens newsletter is a risk in the behavior and lifestyle and decided to take it -- i always knew. it held my concentration. stops other people being boring to some extent.
it would prolong the conversation. if i was asked what i do it is probablynswer yes. i would have quit earlier hoping to get away with the whole thing. it sounds more responsible if i say i would do what i can to you. it would be hypocritical for me to say no i would never have touched this if i had known. because i did know. i decided to wage on this bit. out any make it come other way. >> read the interview with christopher hitchens and other featured conversations with both notes and q and a program c-span sunday at 8:00. now available at your favorite bookseller. >> "washington journal" is next with your phone calls.
at 10:00 about a.m. eastern, chuck hagel speaks at the u.s. fay value academy. and at 12:30, the council on foreign relations post a discussion on his advancing technology on policy making. and coming up in 45 minutes, retired a routine sergeant jessie jane duff on allegations of mismanagement at v.a. hospitals. at 8:30, a look at immigration policies with mark rosenblum. and at 9:15, "washington post" blog writer on the congressional districts. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national able satellite corp. 2014] host: in 50 democratic and
independent senators signed a letter to the nfl asking for that nonprofit organization to endorse a name change for the washington redskins football team. so for the first segment here on the "washington journal," we want to get your reaction to congress's involvement in this issue. should congress be involved in the redskins' name controversy? you can see the numbers up there on your screen divided by support or oppose.