we had to get rid of summer vacations and with year-round schooling. well, that hasn't had a huge resonance around the country, namely the recreation industry sort of likes teenage available for work in the summer. but did she find schools move in that direction? has there been more about? >> welcome in our study we found primary schools adding time to the school day. there's a number of schools that do have more of a 200 day school year, an extra four weeks of school. so breaking up that summer was support. you know, we did not find any, many in our study. >> we often do summer school academic programs for students struggling academically and if they began to experiment with helping find summer scholarships for kids to camp programs or

other enrichment programs at times it from them ourselves. i was sitting with a friend a few years ago when talking about how we really need to do more for kids in the summer. she said that the summer can be so fun. you can go horseback riding and you could go sailing. i just love the summer. and i said well, yes, but for a lot of our students, those are not really the options that they are considering. and i think that's the challenge. if kids aren't in a school-based program, what are they doing this project even the summer? as the secretary pointed out, we see violence in young kids in the summer because their kids about things to do. teenagers, elementary school kids get into trouble because there isn't something to do for them. and so that i think it's another challenge we need to take on as a society. >> so let's talk about money and then we'll open it up to the

audience. means it costs more. and we know it only costs -- it is not a one-for-one increase. i've got that straight. but what do you see, jennifer, claire, john, what kind of trade-offs have to be made? we have tough economic times. we don't have a lot of extra money to invest. we know that states are trying to protect education budgets, but they are cutting them. i see the same thing is true here in washington and the parties in congress are trying to protect education to some extent. ..

met many believe particularly the fcs program is not having the effective impact on student achievement so there are certainly discussions underway and the new waiver options i think will open up new opportunities to use those very significant resources to support models like these schools feature today. this also supports as to many of the congressional education leaders the opportunity to open up the 21st century after-school program to allow local leaders and educators to use those resources for both afterschool and summer and expanded learning time for schools. so the ability to use resources flexibly we think is incredibly important going forward.

we are also seeing across the country and in a city which is profiled pittsburgh, when they knew for their low-performing schools they needed to increase time. them a strategic choices. they close some schools that were under enrolled and took those resources and put them into the local -- low-performing schools with her for i.d. of support including kids learning time so that superintendent made a strategic decision to reallocate resources strategically toward the needs of the entire students that needed the extra time. tough decisions released a report recently where they lay out some options about class size. for districts and states that are looking at for example cutting time, you know we are really urging them to look at a variety of other ways you can adjust the cost challenges, the economic challenges. certainly, cutting time is moving in the exact opposite

direction and of course we believe strongly that they need more time. being very thoughtful and groups like karen holly miles and the ers are trying to help thing thoughtfully about that resource of time and money and staffing and how to deploy them in a way that we will have the strongest educational impact. we think those thoughtful decisions, a lot of leaders need help thinking through some of the options. the emergence and technology has a lot of people excited but how do we really do it anyway that is going to have again the impact we want to see and save the resources? and so there is a lot of again innovation and going on, but leaders are going to need continuous models and support and helping to think through what those options are. >> you have anything to add claire? >> that is actually one of the next areas we need to dig in further with the school is understanding how they finance the time beyond the scope of

this particular study, but i would emphasize is jennifer mentioned autonomy across the board here that they really are, they are treating money and time, the resources very carefully about how it is used. it is not a sort of factory one-size-fits-all model that they are really drilling down and thinking okay how are we going to deploy every resource we have to help our students meet the standards we want them to achieve, and so they will make decisions about how many administrative staff to have, class size as jennifer mentioned and all the difference different you no points on the budgetary decisions that principals may have been one of the things that they prioritize are the additional time. >> and john, and also john the commissioner of new york, not only am i interested in your thoughts on reallocation but the state agency helps districts and schools figure some of this out?

>> not enough. we need to do more as a state i think to support extended learning time and to invest in extended learning time. the other thing is there needs to be some difficult challenging complicated labor-management conversations around these issues. i think you see that playing out in chicago in some ways and we shouldn't understate the scope of the challenge there. we have districts with vastly different lengths of school days already. we also know individual schools, individual teachers are spending vastly different amounts of time. and so i do think there is work to do to think about how we organize our labor contracts to try to support this extended learning time agenda and those will be tough conversations but we have to have them. >> john and i serve on the department of education commission on equity and excellence and there are very tough conversations about school budgets and differences in amounts of money that schools get because of the way staffing

is done and that is a tough conversation to have right now. it looks too much like a zero-sum game but we will come out of this recession and as we increase our investments in education to some extent, we need to think about fair distribution. i will say that rather then you. you won't have to get in trouble then. let's open this to comments from the audience. we can start with the president. i know who you are. please say who you are and where you are from. >> thank you. peggy. amid congressional reporter for the hispanic outlook on higher education. and, you guys haven't talked once about unions. i've been covering this for 10 years and every time i start -- they all support extended time and they all say the unions are

the biggest obstacles because they want our money than the teachers are already spending and now you want them to spend more time. and so especially clear, what kind of negotiations are you having with unions? and again now arne duncan says no more studies. let's do some action so what are some of the action to see including involving unions? >> the range of schools that we looked at, there really diverse and a lot of different organizational structures there. for many of the district schools, for example part of the massachusetts extended learning time, those schools all participated or those districts all participated in the negotiations with the union around new contracts for teachers to cover the additional time. those were sometimes complicated

today go she but it has been a very strong relationship in those areas and as the secretary mentioned, the president of the teachers union in massachusetts is very enthusiastic about what that has meant. for the teachers. so, we have evidence of where it is possible to have those strong relationships to have the additional time, and again in other areas of the country, we see teachers who are very satisfied, very excited about their experience in the schools. >> if you look at the data on teachers across the country, they say two things. they do not have time to cover the curriculum or meet the individual needs of students so teachers really get it. they understand that teaching particularly in high poverty communities they can't get it done without more time.

so then the question is how does that initial time get worked out? as claire said the school schools we have looked at all over the country there are all different kinds of arrangements. some are staggered scheduling. some allow partners to come in and some teachers opt out of some of the time. some are compensated at a contractural hourly rate and some are -- they are all different innovations unfolding and in many places across the country the union is right at the table. >> any other press questions? yes? >> michael with the american independent and my question is we hear a lot about keeping the at-risk students from having to deal with the reality of their neighborhoods if they are in a particularly bad neighborhood. i can imagine some advocates, some politicians saying that is not the role of public institutions. the school should not replace

how a parent, how a household deals with their children and deals with the realities of you know, a low income neighborhood. so, how do we respond to that? how do you respond to that? >> that is for john i think her go. >> one is that affluent families are given lots of things for their kids outside of school. it is just that poor families can't afford those things, right? so, tomorrow is saturday and i will be taking my daughter to dance class because that is what we do on saturday mornings and that has a cost to it. i am fortunate to have the means to be able to do that and i think those kinds of opportunity shouldn't only be available for some kids. the other thing i would say is that this is again, i do worry about this tension between school provided extended learning time and community-based organization activities with kids. i don't think those have to be

separate. there are ways schools and communities can partner effectively. it happens that many the schools in this report focus their services at the school level but we know there are programs like harlem children's sewn, where students are going from the school building to the ymca down the street or to some other setting for the enrichment program. >> it is an extraordinary budget and there are usually questions about how realistic is that model for other neighborhoods outside of new york city without the philanthropic arm of the mayor etc.. >> two observations. one is in many of our economically distressed communities we have lots of programs, lots of city state and federal dollars going into the community that but they are not coordinated in a coherent way

that serves families well. there is more money available than we think if we leverage it effectively but the other end not to be flippant i think we need to make a bigger investment in young people. i don't think we should be afraid to have that conversation as a society about where we are willing to invest. i made the point earlier about prisons but we do seem very comfortable as a society investing in remedial education programs in our higher ed institutions and prisons and in all the social costs that come with students not being successful. it would be a much smarter use of our dollars to ensure their future success. >> ride, which we never as a country have done. okay. governor? >> i want to connect this movement with the other big movement in education which is the common core standards. look, speaking from -- i can't

hold this. the experience in l.a., if this is kindergarten and this is 12th grade, there is to be a new set of standards in language arts, math and soon in science. the problem of running the district is as a superintendent which i did for seven years, is what do you do about those in the sixth to eighth grades and others who are three to four years behind? you can't, you can't -- you have to have either a strategy where you can catch them up and meet that high standard or you have got to lower the standard. that is the threat. and a strategy of catching them up has got to involve more time. so in a simple sentence the whole standards-based movement i think will come to a conclusion that it is not just enough to have standards and assessments and curriculum and professional

development. it is not enough. that is the package they are working with. they have got to have more time, so they need you and my question is, how can you communicate with them? finally, one thought, on your geared chart, where do they fit in? someone working with the movement of common core standards. they involve standards, assessment, curriculum, professional development. what gear do they relate to? data is after-the-fact. that is after you arrive at both the standard and the test but the assessment is the result. if you just want to communicate with that other movement, kink -- think about how you include a. >> thank you furred bringing that up. as many of you and all of you at no the governor was the leader when he was a new governor from colorado and took up the mantle

of the national education -- we are finally getting a place where we are implementing comp and standards. it took a long time. i was at a panel last week or two weeks ago with the teams from 35 states and what i was pleased to see because we are working with folks in chicago and other urban districts where the instructional leader from chicago made that very clear connection. we we are adding an hour and a half because we are implementing the common core and our kids in chicago are already behind. there is no way we can do it without more time so i do agree with you though. there isn't enough of a connection yet and we are getting closer and closer to where the implementation is really hitting the rubber on the road. we need to do more and/or leadership here and your support of the national center to our dice report is much appreciated because you are the spokesperson

i think that can help us make the connection. certainly we are talking to the chiefs and the governors and i think we are getting closer to where the connection is really starting to resonate. it is very important. >> okay, let's go back to some of those hands back there. >> i was wondering about her pre-k programs to connect with what the governor said and also mr. king because we have heard about extending the day in the year but what about extending the career that students spend in time -- my school not only the front and back for the students who are behind as the governor spoke of maybe extending the time that they spend beyond the 13 year's. >> good question. >> yeah. [laughter] we need that. it is the same message. we need to invest more in early childhood education than we do as a country or as a state.

in the case of new york we have the universal pre-k that is not. it is pre-k but it is not universal and we we know there are low income kids in some of our districts whose parents want to enroll in our pre-k program and can't because there aren't enough resources. when we need to make a lot of -- and the other would need to do a much better job on quality control and early childhood education. it is a very scattered sector. the services that are provided to kid zero to five and i think part of what doe is trying to a accomplish is calling on states to really focus on quality and ask are these programs really helping kids get the academic and social skills they need to be successful in school and ultimately the kindergarten ready? unfortunately many of the programs are not at the necessary level of quality and that raises questions of investing in professional development and training and support and so forth. all these pieces have to work together in a sense.

but i couldn't agree more with you about extending students careers and education. >> tell us who you are. >> my name is -- i am the finder of math alicia's. >> a good title. a nice title. >> when you speak to middle school students and in particular with math they don't know why they are learning what they're learning and they don't know what it means. it seems like our national conversations tend to be around performing where education happens, reforming who does it amber reforming how students access it so platforms and devices and things like that but the content itself seems to be very traditional. i am wondering if you guys can speak to innovations you see in actually curriculum namely the thing that is getting taught and

if that continues to be exactly the way it was in 1930 then how can we expect to have different results? >> you are on. >> a couple of examples in the schools that we saw and more specifically i think it is science. in schools where really having more time allows teachers to go and depth and teach in a hands-on way that is so important for really understanding signed so it is beyond textbooks and beyond health sciences. it has always been taught many ways and getting into experimentation and exciting activities. for example, the middle school in massachusetts where students participate in four and six robotics environmental science electives, and astronomy programs where there are

partnerships with museums and science organizations that really allow them to deliver science in a different way. i would also refer to another one that i mentioned already the programs where students will spend four weeks on a very specific topic, so technology for example and so rather then their typical classes during those four weeks they will spend time in the community really learning about the ways in which some of the things they are learning in school are actually applied in the workplace, in careers, that they could eventually get into. so we definitely did see schools using additional time to teach things in a very different way of a much more hands-on way and again it takes time.

>> thank you. i'm bob seidel from the national summer learning association. in his opening remarks, secretary duncan said that we don't need another study, that we need to target students horror are in need in this regard. we have a concern that the discussion on time well spent focuses primarily on extending the day. the panel has already address the importance of summer, but they challenge is even if we add 300 hours during the school year, what does that do to mitigate summer learning loss? and, so my question to you is whether the panel would support policies, including the mention of summer and the reauthorization of the elementary secondary education

act that are more explicit about including summer as well as extended days? >> let me just reflect on something that i noticed. the report was being written and claire was working on a graphic, which was i think incredibly powerful because what we found in the schools is a layered time on top of time on top of time so many of the highest performing schools, yes they have a longer school day but they do have longer years and specialized programming and they do everything they can to make sure their students are learning throughout the year. and so i totally agree with you that the summer piece is critically important. on a policy level it is harder to get your head around and is financially costly and i think while you see a lot of these schools they have figured out a cost model that they can find

the resources to implement, it is harder to look at that as you think about the entire summer and i think that is one of the challenges we face, although luckily many of the national foundations are very focused on summer and the philanthropic communities and many of the districts we work in are very committed to looking at how we can combine private resources and public resources to really accelerate the number of slots that are available to students and i agree, it is very very important. >> one thing i wanted to emphasize was that while we found most of the schools with longer school days across the board for all students, really across these 30 schools there is tremendous thing happened during the summer. it's not necessarily all students in the program are good they would change the schedule to include that but we saw schools that very purposefully identify programs for their students to participate in. other schools that holds full summer school so that students

certain sets of students will actually attend that. it goes beyond traditional summer school that really opportunities for much more hands-on learning and also drilling down into the standards that they are struggling with so that they start school caught back up by september. lots of summer orientation program so students come in with the right mindset and are learning some of the beliefs and habits we emphasized earlier that are so important. they are coming into school with that, and so they can also be enrichment and the well-rounded opportunities. we saw many activities and many things happening during the summer in these places so the schools took it upon themselves to really think about summer in creative ways and certainly for teacher development summer was critical. >> in the front there. >> thank you. i am ambassador of finland here in the u.s..

what is highly interesting discussion. thank you very much and i think it is very, very exciting program that you have. i am a mother of a 50-year-old daughter and i am very new in the town, four weeks. and i've no the differences between the school systems. my daughter is complaining about long days. she is saying they are is an enormous amount of homework and she is really under enormous pressure, quite a change actually. so there seems to be a lot of challenges for her. a couple of observations, when i think about this finish school system. we are scoring high in the visa studies over the high-quality of our school system. emphasis on teachers and

teachers profession holiday. i think that is one of the core items we are emphasizing. the professional capacities and improving that. thad implies also what i think the governor was saying. how to keep the pupils who are not scoring that high, how to keep them in the class and that they are not lagging behind. that is our experience, that you need a special teaching for those who are not doing that well. it is very important to keep all the children -- and it seems to be according at least to the study that test schools in the world are the most equitable so

having all on board all of the time. the other issue is, you were talking about flexibility. i think we are talking about the numbers of schools also, how the best practices and i understand that flexibility is what is here as well. bad seems to be one of the areas. the third one is this safe and encouraging learning environment i would like also to emphasize, i think some of you were also emphasizing that very much. i don't actually have any questions. the secretary was referring no more studies but i would be more interested in learning, what

have you taken out of this visa study? what has been the sword of three key elements what you think is worthwhile? >> i would like to congratulate finland for your wonderful educational success. it is amazing and our look at some of the international countries that are outperforming us tell us a lot of interesting things and of course how teachers use time in finland is a very interesting story and the time that they have to really not only repair before they are in the teaching form but to spend time preparing as they are teaching in schools. is a wonderful story. we have a long way to go to catch up to a lot of the highest performing countries. one of the reasons we feel more time is necessary again is critical and that is aligned with the teacher improvement effort is critical as well. we are actually looking very deeply add other data available to try to really understand some

of the significant differences and we are looking at releasing some of the data in partnership with oecd and others likely in march so thank you for raising the topic. >> and i just want to say that we in the united states are finally looking beyond our borders to see if there are things we can learn from other countries and so we have then interested in the finish education system. there are some really tremendous differences, probably the most -- the one certainly i focus on the most is the very different preparation of teachers and the selectivity of who you let into the teaching profession and who you let into teacher preparation programs. and then you generously financed their preparation and teachers have great standing in your country. that is quite different from how we approach preparations.

but the other thing that is interesting to me about finland and it is not talked about that much is that you change in a relatively short period of time. you were not always a high-performing country and you were not always as wealthy as you are now, and the changes that finland made in its economy and approach to education really occurred over a 30 year period this doesn't have to take forever. and, i think that is something that has not gotten enough attention in this country about the seriousness of purpose and how you went about it. there is time for maybe another question are two. oh dear, we have more questioners but please come up and talk to us afterwards. >> good morning. i am from the department of defense on line tutoring and homework help service.

i wanted to call attention to the issue of student preferences. i noticed that one of the schools profiles was giving attention to doing what students want more of, and the military has a unique focus on providing higher levels of student education in many cases because the military knows that if it wants to retain the highest quality force, it has to maintain a high-quality education because that is often one of the most important things that servicemembers report keeps them in the service. the department of defense has a very popular program, which allows all u.s. military family students to connect any time for live one-to-one academic support from a qualified tutor and that is an effective way of expanding the school day. every week tens of thousands of military kids voluntarily choose to spend extra time on their homework and their academics because it is meeting their

needs. and so, i am wondering, in the overview of your program, which i know is more focused on the school day, how much attention are you finding is focused on finding student input and taking it into account? >> there are three things that we saw a lot of. want to mention is the student input and i think we saw that most often in terms of things like electives, things students can choose based on their own interests, so that the tae kwon do class versus the guitar class versus science program and elective science programs. and, so we definitely saw that, but to other things you mentioned were the on line work, which is tremendously exciting and it's really only starting to evolve in schools.

and i mention one example of that, the rocketship schools in california, that purposefully put in an adaptive software program that allowed students to work on it either reading or math during the technology lab period and work exactly at their level so that students sitting next to each other at doing very different things based on exactly what they need. we see tremendous potential there. we just haven't seen many schools adopting that. there are pockets of that across the country and that does hold tremendous promise for extended learning time too. and then, you know i think on line learning, and tutoring was the other piece i wanted to mention. not necessarily on line.tutoring with another piece that we saw a lot of across the schools and we continue to see emerging as a real best practice. when students have an opportunity and a more

one-on-one or very small group, in a very small group way, church earl down on specific skills that they are weak on. we see tremendous results so there are schools like match in this report in boston that have developed a really renowned model for tutoring, where students are matched with a whole match core of tutors, and those tutors can work very closely with teachers and identifies what students need help on. but again a lot of other places well so whether that is taking place during the school day or sometime after school or sometimes on a saturday or sometimes in the summer, we have seen all of those different idols. it is a really promising practice. >> chris talked about students, building a school culture where students see that effort leads to achievement. tutoring i think is very powerful.

jeff howard used the phrase the nintendo effect which is less relevant maybe call it the x-box effect the kids will play a game for chairman is amount of time because even though they keep losing they get a little bit better and they make it from level 3 to level 4 and level 5 and they see practice leads to improvement and tutoring i think has a very similar effect. they get to see i actually got a better score in a math quiz because i worked harder. now i have a new way of thinking about my own potential as a learner so i think tutoring is a powerful effect as well as an academic. >> okay, we are at a time that we have done this in partnership. with our partners at the national center of time and learning so i want to let jennifer have the last word. >> thank you india made team for cohosting this event for the ncop team for all your work in making this movement and pushing us forward further with this terrific report. this has been an extraordinary year in public education.

the last two years, but there are extraordinary times and opportunities ahead and we are going to be looking forward to working with all of you to help make the promise possible for markets across this country because we do really believe and i think this report really shows that when you accuse time and the resources well we can do extraordinary things for our kids and that is really what america's all about the tank is very much for being here today. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] which part of the u.s. constitution is important to you? that is our question this year studentcam competition open to middle and high school students. make a video documentary five to eight minutes long and tell us

the part of the constitution is important to you and why. be sure to include more than one point of view and video at c-span program. entries are due by january 20, 2012. there is $50,000 in total prizes in the grand prize of $5000. for all the details go to studentcam.org. >> it is the first time the justices talk about a case together, and so when justice scalia or justice ginsburg asks a question, i can figure out what is bothering them about a case and where they are leaning. >> by law since 1915 the new supreme court term begins the first monday in october. each ear hearing almost 70 cases. this year cases already include gps tracking without a warrant, profanity on television and copyright protection. watch the justices appearances around the country on line at the c-span video library all

archived and searchable. it is washington your way. the center for american progress recently hosted a discussion about jobs and the economy. they also invited afl-cio president richard trumka to speak. years congress to pass the presence jobs bill and made other recommendations were lowering the unemployment rate. this is an hour and a half. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning everybody. i am strobe talbott of the brookings institution is my great pleasure to welcome you here today. and it is also a particular pleasure to be able to welcome our speaker, rich trumka.

rich has devoted his entire repression alive to the labor movement. he is a third-generation miner, he spent 15 years as the head of the united mine workers union. in short, i think you could say that his job but low these many years, has been looking out for other people's jobs. and the same can be said for john sweeney, one of his predecessors that they afl-cio. it is great to have you here with us this morning and jim bolin of the bricklayers union. and, the same statement i just made about those three gentlemen can also be made about john wilhelm. he is the president of unite here and very importantly one of our trustees here at workings and therefore one of my bosses. when i first met john, and that was i calculated this morning

five -- 45 years ago he was hard at work organizing service and maintenance employees on a university campus where we were both hanging out at the time. having john on the brookings board of trustees and having president trumka on this podium this morning underscores our commitment here at workings to the importance of having the voice and the perspective of organized labor as part of our national effort to come together, solve the jobs crisis. which is it should be noted, not just a national crisis. it is also a global one. unemployment, especially unemployment among youth, fueled the arab awakening at the beginning of this year. it is fueling right now the populist backlash against the political status quo in

capitalist democracies and many parts of the world including of course notably in europe. because the jobs issue is so pervasive and because it is so consequential, both for individuals as well as for whole societies and indeed for the whole world, there is a major focus of the work in all five of our research programs here at the brookings institution. our scholars are looking for new ways to meet the needs and promote the aspirations of all citizens, especially the least well off and they are looking for new ways to encourage investment in long-term sustainable export-driven economic growth that will revive the jobs market. the head of one of our programs, darrell west, vice vice president director of government studies, will lead a discussion once we have heard from our

guest of honor. but now rich, the podium is yours. [applause] >> thank you drove for that very kind introduction and i thank all of you for coming here this morning. i guess i should start off by saying for almost a century, the brookings institute has provided independent research and enough native recommendations and solutions to problems that the country and quite frankly the world were experiencing. i think that is why president franklin delano roosevelt commissioned a brookings study to understand the underlying cause of the great depression. well, here we are today. we are discussing the causes and the cures of the worst economic crisis since the 1930s.

and it seems crystal clear to me that we don't have a debt crisis. we have a jobs crisis. america isn't broke but america's basic promise and ever rising ever widening prosperity is being broken. counting all the casualties on the jobs crisis, our real unemployment rate is over 16% right now. earlier generations of economists would have called that a depression. the nation has lost almost 7 million jobs since december of 2007 and another 4 million jobs that should have been created as people entered the labor force, giving us an 11 million jobs in our labor market. quite frankly, that number, that number should be on every bulletin board and every screen saver in every public wolesi

makers office every day. and this is not an equal opportunity recession. the official rate, unemployment rate is 16.7% among african-americans. 11.3% among hispanics, 23% among teenagers. but this quite frankly, this jobs crisis isn't only about statistics, because work is and just what we do. work quite frankly is who we are. it is how we support ourselves and our loved ones. it is how we connect with their our fellow men and women. it is how we can chaffee to the world and it is how we leave our legacy. so when one in six people can't find work, that defines and

dignifies their lives, the harm that results is lasting and deep. it is lasting and deep for individuals, it is lasting and deep for our families and quite frankly it is lasting and deep for our entire quality. if policymakers and policy elites are in different to the deepening suffering, the public will look to answers anywhere that they can find them. purveyors of irrational hatred will step into the void, making it more difficult to solve the very problems that are polarizing our politics. see today's economic crisis has roots that date back generations. for three decades, we have pursued a contradiction. a low-wage, high consumption economic strategy. our trade policies have depleted our manufacturing base.

our tax policies promoted inequality and purported wealth over work. leaving us without enough money to fund our public infrastructure or the education and trading that we need in a global economy. and now we see conscious and coordinated efforts to delegitimize government and to destroy unions and other progressive voices. in order to eliminate countervailing powers and corporate interests. when the recent release of the census bureaus poverty and income statistics, we see how these policies have downsized the american dream. for the first time since the great depression, most americans lost ground between 1997 and 2010.

so after a generation of wage stagnation, the rich really are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. and the middle class, well, it is on life support right now. while household incomes declined in 2010, ceo pay jumped up via a 27%. now why were so many ceos getting double-digit raises while working americans were up against doubled digit unemployment? and in the land of plenty, official poverty rate is 15.1%. bad is the highest in a half a century. think about that. one out of five children, one out of five of our children live in poverty right now.

how can schoolchildren win a race to the top while the economy is running a race to the bottom? so, obviously with unemployment and poverty rising, inequality is increasing as well. it is sobering to know that the median wealth for african-american households has fallen by two-thirds since 1983, and now stands at about $2200. think about that. median wealth for african-americans, $2200. it is about 99,000 for white americans. meanwhile, the right wing populism that is being fueled by the anger and the frustration of working men and women, who are

watching their jobs disappear and their paychecks declined. the brookings institute and michael greenstone of the project have reported the medium real earnings of working men of all races age 25 to 64 declined 28% between 1969 and 2009. 28% decline in standard of living. and for men without college degrees the media and earnings declined by 47%. and even college graduates, men's earnings declined by 12%. quite frankly it is only women's entry into the work horse that kept families from falling more desperately behind.

so in this era of remarkable technology and innovation and productivity growth, americans are working harder and they are working smarter. most families are still losing ground. they play by all the rules and get further behind. and the fault quite frankly is not worth the working people. the problem is that public policies that just aren't delivering what they say they would. and we need to rethink some of the assumptions that have distorted the debates and the decisions of the past 30 years and today i want to think about three of them. i want to talk about the corporation. corporation. i want to talk about the free trade and i want to talk about the addiction to austerity. almost 60 years ago, and jen charlie jan charlie wilson who

went from ceo of gm to secretary of defense declared what is good for general motors is good for america. and we chased -- chafed at that at the time but in many ways, he was right. you see back in the 50s, general motors profits were shared with its unionized workforce, lifting production workers into the world's first middle-class majority in history. 60 years later, president obama's rescue of the american auto industry has saved tens of thousands of jobs. not only in the detroit big three companies, but in all companies that supply the industry and serve its employees. you see with a new collective bargaining agreement between gm and the auto workers, the

workers will gain or share in again that they worked so hard and sacrificed so much to achieve. but, many multinational companies want to be treated as american institutions while they treat the stars and stripes as a flag of convenience. think about this. the big rand name companies that employ one fifth of america's workforce, while they cut their u.s. workforce is by 2.9 million during the 2000's, while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million. that is a big switch from the '90s. you see when they added jobs everywhere. in the '90s they added 4.4 million jobs in the u.s. and 2.7 million jobs abroad.

so us-based global corporations simply no longer have the same interest as domestic businesses and as the american people. now this is a fact about the new global economy, where capital is mobile, where labor is not and it should shape our government's response. when the same local firms demand lower taxes, less regulation and more free trade deals. you see, america is our people first from steelworkers to software writers. our country's resources are our infrastructure, our education system, our natural resources and the businesses whose operations are actually located here, whoever owns them and whatever alpha bet their corporate logo are written in.

public policy should be focused on improving our competitiveness as a nation and not on improving the cash flow of global enterprises that are ultimately indifferent to our faith as a nation community. so when we consider how to reshape our economic policy, such as corporate tax rules, let's remember to reward the companies that invest and produce in america. and the surest way to move jobs out of america is to let corporations pay lower taxes on the profits that were earned overseas than they pay on profits that were earned here in the united states. and it is also time to have a 21st century reality-based trade policy. now, we can talk all we want about free trade, comparative

advantage, free markets, but our competitors to their credit are consciously pursuing national economic strategies. while we are our wing almost a half a trillion dollars every year from the rest of the world, just to buy the goods that we used to make right here. you see the chinese government manipulates its currency to hold down the prices of its products throughout the world. the chinese government's unique style of engagement in the global economy undermines both international trade rules and all of our best efforts to rebuild our manufacturing sector. as the economic policy institute and the alliance for american manufacturing recently reported, our and balanced trade with china has cost the united states

more than 2.8 million jobs since 2001, including 1.8 million manufacturing jobs. and i have got to be clear, our relationship with china is about more than currency. you see a prosperous china can be an enormous boon to the united states and to the global economy. but only if workers can build a middle-class life and they can have a strong voice through independent unions. and if the chinese government plays by the same rules. you see the question is, what is our government strategy for ensuing bet -- ensuring that our relationship with china is mutually beneficial and not a zero-sum game played by unfair rules where workers both in

china and in the united states are sacrificed to corporate interest? you see these kinds of questions are not just limited to china. congress will soon consider three agreements with south korea, with columbia and with pam ahmad. the korean deal will boost korea as an export platform to the united states and it will likely cost almost 160,000 u.s. jobs. but the real killer is columbia. almost every week, i see come across my desk the face of a new dead colombian trade union or another dead priest who preached the gospel of jesus the carpenter. ..

that deficits are the problem and austerity is the answer. for fridays ago, we learned that unemployment was stuck at 9.1%. in the interest rate for a 10 year bonds was approaching a record low. now, if the nation really were in danger of the debt crisis,

the interest rates on u.s. bonds would be claiming. not cratering. take a look at greece. see, we have a massive jobs crisis that is caused by collapsing demand, austerity for makeup wearers, not better. the economic crisis and the growing budget deficit created a note name for tea party extremists and the hypocritical obstructionism of cream -- a feat fiscal crisis last summer that needlessly jeopardized our country's cricket. see, there is a difference between phony crisis and real ones. our challenge today is preserving jobs and creating new

ones. not throwing people out of work and cut enough essential services and benefit. as the new managing director of the international monetary fund, christie and that very day has explained, reggie terry austerity should not be pursued at the cost of economic growth. one shovel ready project we go need is to dig ourselves deeper in a hole. with the same failed policy that got us into the ditch to begin with, common sense would tell us that we have to stop digging. to any of the bold new approach that creates 21st century jobs and invest in 21st century tech talent genes and the skills and strengths that america needs to make the most of them. now, president of bonus jobs

bill puts america on the right path. and congress i believe should pass it right away and then do more. because if we have the will to tackle the jobs crisis, there is no mystery about how to do it. i'll outline six pillars very quickly. first, we need to rebuild america's schools and transportation and energy system. that investment in infrastructure that we direly need will put millions of people to work while literally laying the foundations for long-term economic growth and competitiveness. we can start by renewing to building star programs to create jobs by installing energy-saving type allergy. we need an infrastructure bank to fund public infrastructure. at that infrastructure bank have a white america and davis baking

safeguards so that american tax dollars create the family supporting american jobs, not job somewhere else. and congress must enact the fully funded surface transportation that reauthorization to support millions of jobs and to build a cleaner, safer, more efficient 21st century transportation system. second, we need to revive american manufacturing and to stop exporting good jobs overseas. we need to end currency manipulation by china and other countries. we need to reform our trade policy is an end to tax incentives that encourage and reward the off shoring of manufacturing jobs. we can't afford to replace trickle-down economics with trickle out economics. third, we need to put people in

the hardest hit communities back to work, especially in communities of color. their unemployment rates are two and sometimes three times the average. we need to do it with direct, targeted government hiring. it's time to face the truth than in the deep economic crisis, only government can put people back to work on the scale necessary to revive our economy and get it out of these doldrums. fourth, president of him is right to call for more aid, the state and local governments, to prevent war cut tax and public services. because the enormous fiscal stimulus that we've seen is being negated by the contraction of state and local governments, to the point where it is negative right now. public layoffs are dragging down

the economy and they are making a double dip recession far more likely. however, it should not layoffs and more federal employees and should prevent additional state and local layoffs. police officers, firefighters, health care workers and public service workers of all kinds quite frankly deserve medals, not layoffs. safely, we need to reform wall street so that main street can create jobs. the financial area supposed to channel capital to put up a set or is it the economy. the wall street prefers far too many resources from the project to the economy and it endangers the global economy with its reckless gambling. the administration should support and congress should pass

legislation to encourage more lending to small businesses. and we should enact the financial speculation tax to discourage harmful speculation and to make wall street pay to rebuild the economy that it helped destroy, just as the european union stood. and we must enact and enforce tough safeguards to stop the kind of fraud that caused the crisis in the first place. sixth and finally, we need to restore consumer demand and jumpstart our economy by extending unemployment compensation and keeping homeowners in their homes. you see, congress and the administration should provide for mandatory reduction of principle, for homeowners facing foreclosure or bankruptcy reform, through mandatory mediation where there means.

if banks lower the principal balance of all underwater mortgages to their current market value, more than $70 billion would be pumped into the economy every year. millions of families with you to stay in their homes in over a million jobs would be created in the process. these past three years have been a wine theme and rocky road. president obama once again is heading the nation, i believe, in the right direction. the labor movement is proud to stand with him as he takes on the challenges of job inequality and investment in the future. the american jobs that is a great start and we will work hard to shape it, strengthen it and build support for us. and we will build support for sound majors to the campaign for job creation, such as the bus

attacks to make sure that millionaires pay their taxes rates as high as their employees. see, america faces historic choices right now that will shape our economy and our society and democracy for decades to come. the question is not whether president obama is appealing to his base. it's whether we will rebuild the manufacturing base, which is the foundation of our economy. the question is not whether the administration is moving away from the mental. it is whether we will restore the middle class, which is the heart and soul of the american dream. what is ultimately at stake is the oldest question in american history. where we the people can bring our country closer to our interests and our values. together, we can continue the

work that brookings institute has conducted from its founding during the progressive era to its groundbreaking research during the great depression. as your mission statement declares, we must strengthen american democracy and foster the economic and social welfare and security and opportunities for all, all americans. the labor movement will do our part and we are counting on your intellectual inspiration when we do it right in your constructive criticism when we fall short. i want to thank you for having me today. i look forward to discussing some things with you in the question-and-answer period. thank you very much. [applause] [applause]

be not thank you, president trump card. i was very interested in hearing your thoughts on our economy and possible policy remedies. it certainly is a challenging time. you pointed 50% poverty rates, 20% decline in the real earnings. so let me start with a couple questions and that will open the floor to questions and comments from our audience. a think it is clear that the decline and power of unions is a major error in the increasing economic inequality that you highlighted in your top. but it is hard to see in the short run how labor can join a lot of new members quickly. obviously you'd like to change

labor laws to peace organizing. in the short run, how can the labor movement help workers who are not going to be organized anytime soon get a larger share of the economy in terms of higher pay and benefits and also, what are the strategies pursuing them behalf of those workers? >> well, first of all, and there's several ways that we can and do help workers, whether they are in a union or they are not. advocating for increases in middle-age every time the minimum wage is increased, everybody benefits, the benefits we provide. we are also reaching out to them right now and bringing them in. take people that are excluded from the law, whether they are workers centers, may that are covered by the law, we have reached out and we formed partnerships with them. we are hoping to work in a finding new ways to be able to negotiate with people to get

themselves much better raise, much better standard of living. because if you look and i just want to highlight one thing you say. with the fall for the decline of the labor movement, the decline of the middle class. from 1946 to 1973, productivity in the country doubled and so did wages. unions representing about 40% of the workforce back then. we were driving wages for everybody. we drove wages for nonunion workers menaced his those union workers. so people at the bottom end of the spec, their wages are actually increasing higher than people at the top of the wage gap was closing in the country. the middle class was boring. from 73 forward, you've seen productivity increase, but wages have stagnated. it was a conscious decision by many to eliminate regulations, to eliminate workers.

so from 73 to date, productivity has increased. wages have stagnated and all that money, the money that we lost that didn't go to the workers went to the top 1% imh. because the last 20 years, 100% of the income gains have gone to the top 10%. in the last 20 years, 56 or 57% of all the income gains have gone to the top 1%. and in the last 20 years, 30% on all income gains have gone to the top one 10th of 1%. we represent now about 12% of the workforce. we don't drive those speeches. so if you are looking to break the economy in the long run, i don't want to fast-forward past the time you have to look at

collective bargaining and say it has to be part of solution. unless you are going to mandate that workers get x share out of the pie, collective bargaining is the most flexible, most efficient way to be able to make sure that workers have the money in their pocket to be able to trade the economy because you know and i know that the economy is 72 or send driven by consumers sending. and we just -- we did it by firing, but it doesn't work. but we're working with this nonunion people in the short run and in the long run. we are trying to drive wages. we're trying to change policies that will give workers a bigger piece of the party by trying to change labor laws because they are the most antiquated in the world, the most depressive of any industrialized nation. don't take my word for it. go talk to the ilo, the attack to an international nation that casts when they see the things

going on in the united states. they consider us uncivilized quite frankly. the next that you mention the collective bargaining laws. and of course recently in wisconsin and ohio we have seen major challenges to collective arginine. i am just curious, what lessons are we to take from what has happened in wisconsin and ohio, in particular, recalls in wisconsin lunch to republicans and enders, but yet the senate gop control. was what happened there a defeat or a victory or something else? >> it was a major victory for workers. and mean, take a look at this. we've been trying for three decades to get a national debate about collective bargaining. scott walker gave us a national debate that we were looking for. and guess what, here's the good news. 70 some percentage of american worker, public or private eye to collect bargaining and no one should take it away. that is the way and itself.

look at what else happened within the content. we organized nine hospitals. we work and has a grants to visit different universities. we brought 30,000 working american members into the afl's tio come into work and in a member. we had eight or 10 unit working with each other. there is more solidarity on the ground, more determination in the ground and we've seen. we are vibrant, i've been together. and here's the real skinny about those elections. in 2008, president obama was caught some by 14 points. the six senators won their elections -- republican elections by an equal margin. so they decide to trend in wisconsin and i like it by double-digit margins. we didn't pick the six senators. they were the only six that can be recalled because of the laws.

now think about this. we thought collectively out of those six districts, six of his biggest, highest performing republican districts, we had 491st and plus of the aggregate collect trick and they got a little over 8%. now i've got to look@the strategies and day, in my express performing districts, i just broke 50%. i've got a problem. we took to buy them out. and by the way, one of the republican senators voted against that bill comes to effectively react to the majority when it comes to collective bargaining, and the wisconsin senate. [applause] >> said there's been some discussion in the thompson about the path ability of an effort to

recall governor walker. would you support that? [laughter] >> i support going after this affair? let me think. of course are going to be there. i mean come on the guy has overreached a minute bad governor. he tried to use a contrived deficit to take people out. but let me go back to the genesis of all of this. it was alike this day, and the state decided they would all of a sudden take him either. did you ever hear the group called alec, the american legislative economic tax. after the 2010 election in the large meeting. they brought in 2000 republican state legislatures. they had to step up model bills this big. they said take these pills back and give it up because article is to suppress the vote by 10%

in the 2012 election. so they didn't just go after workers. they went after students. they went after anagrams. they went after the elderly. they did these seemingly innocuous voter ideologues. we have a voter i.d. what's wrong with that? this is a little disenfranchised. he has to voter 80? 24% of the elderly don't have a voter i.d. they don't have an i.d., a government i.d. 56% of hispanic women don't have a government i.d. 53% of african-americans don't have a voter i.d. and 78% of african-american males between the ages of 18 and 24 don't have that i.d.

i say that's real simple. you can just go one by one. well, first of all, they shut down the mds on saturday so people have to take a day's work to go and it cost them $20 to $30. a lot of the elderly don't have 20 to $30. he said there was no voter fraud in wisconsin. this is about suppressing the vote in this whole attack was about going after every progressive voice that was out there to shut them down, making this spend money. what they didn't count on was the uprising that would have been in there having to spend a whole lot by many and we are quite frankly, i think we are winning. we have the citizens detail in ohio. we will able leave when the citizens detail staff bathroom

taking a period they didn't i.d. bill in ohio. we have enough votes to get that on the ballot, which will stop at voter i.d. bill from changing the rules for the 2012 election. but i wish it were as having a crisis and everybody was genuinely trying to solve the crisis. they are using this to try to take every last player of presenting opposition to their point of view of the playing field. and that to me is not the way america functions. that is not the way america operates best. suppressing the vote isn't something that should be cheered for by the american public. it had to be condemned for what it is, and intend to disenfranchised americans from the democratic existence. >> i ask i ask him a question and then we'll open the floor to comments from the audience.

in the past commute express some frustration with president obama, they get today and elsewhere in the last couple of weeks, you have expressed support for his job's proposal. i am just curious, where does he stand with you in one point hey, would you think he stands with your members right now in the lead up to the 2012 elections? >> well, i think he stands in a lot better position than two weeks ago. if you'd asked me three weeks ago, i would've said our members are concerned that is not leaking and and is not leaking of fighting for jobs because that's what they care about. not just by members. all americans out there, all workers. even workers with the job are concerned, fearful that the loose their job. so jobs is the number-one issue. they want somebody that's going to fight for jobs. they want someone that's going to go to the map for jobs and quite frankly i think you made a tactical or strategic goal mistake when he started talking about debt reduction and he got

into the morass and made that same i.q. as the number one issue. i go to a lot of doors, knocking on doors, visiting members, hearing them on the phone. i could tell you precious precious few have said we've got to do something about this deficit stuff. you know, it's jobs. we've got to do something about health care. we've got to make sure pensions are there to protect us. social security and medicare. so he made the turn and i think he's now fighting for that and i think going after city after city, lame demagogue lyndon saying we need jobs, jobs is the most important crisis right now in if the don't pass them, shame menu, senate shame on you, house for not doing that. they think he's starting to leave him because of that, he is in a better position with our members. i think even a much better position than the other side.

if you look at this stuff that they've proposed -- if you look at mitt romney spoke, it's 160 pages. here's what it boils down to. give rich people more money and take all the holes in the create jobs. that's what it is. i just want to end with this. think about this. for eight years, george bush was president. and at the end of his two terms, there were fewer jobs in america than when he started being president. and he did every one of the policies that these guys are now advocating. he cut tax is. he took away regulation. he did it all and that brought us to a crisis. and what is their solution? let's go back and do it again. maybe it will happen a different way this time. well, it won't. and i don't want workers to be the guinea one more time. we need somebody that's going to

create jobs, not destroy our jobs. >> okay, let's take questions from the audience. in the very back, there's a question in the back. give us your name and if you are with an organization. there's also ask you to keep ocean spray signature as many to as many as possible. >> paul crist, i'm a board member with americans for democratic action. my question actually has to do with the occupied wall street protest going on in new york city. and there's been recent activity, were some union locals are kind of becoming involved in now. and i am wondering if you have an opinion on some of the afl-cio national member organizations kind of beginning to take a warm night. because i sort of think that street demonstration activity is

sort of forcing dialogue on the issues that you're talking about. i just wondered if you have any thoughts on that. thank you. >> i happen to agree with you. i think being in the streets and calling attention to issues that sometimes the only recourse you have because god only knows he can go to the hill and you can talk to a lot of people and see nothing ever happened because it doesn't happen. and the streets, i think a lot of people -- our international unions are involved, locals are involved. and you'll see a lot of working people. you see a lot of small-business people. go see a lot of manufacturing people that actually produce in this country that are being stepped on the same way by the multinationals on wall street. so i think it's a tag ticket is a valid tag to call attention to a problem. wall street is out of control. we have three imbalances in this

country. the imbalance between imports and exports, the imbalance between employer power and working power and the imbalance between the real economy and the financial economy. we need to bring that balance to the financial economy and calling attention to it and peacefully protesting is a very legitimate way of doing it. god only knows i've done it thousands of times myself. >> okay, we have a question here in the front row. bill and solicit her teens. >> hi, president trumka, thank you for coming today. i want to ask about the jobs billing infrastructure and particularly your relationship with the chamber of commerce. over the afl-cio and chamber of commerce have always been allies, the infrastructure you in president donahoe said in the past recently that she wanted to do. i'm wondering both with respect to the job stability could

update us underline to come with respect to the jobs that what you see that play now. and then on an issue talked about in this beach, the repatriation of two issues talked about in the speech. one is the repatriation of foreign earnings for corporations come of it to us infrastructure bank. as a booking proposal to reload the page creation if it was to fund an infrastructure bank. i'm wanting what you think of that particular point. >> well, that is going to give me a bunch of things to talk about right here. the first part was about the jobs bill. can you just repeat that portion? >> you work with the chamber of commerce on the infrastructure. heidi soukup are playing out? >> you, actually, and i went in and had it brain transplant for both of us. [laughter] we don't normally agree on many

things. that being he is wrong and right of course. but on this, it's such a no-brainer. i mean look, the country has a $2.2 trillion infrastructure deficit that being he's wrong and i'm right of course. but on this, it's such a no-brainer. i mean look, the country has a $2.2 trillion infrastructure deficit and it has the $2 trillion deficit course. but on this, it's such a no-brainer. i mean look, the country has a $2.2 trillion infrastructure deficit and it has the $2 trillion deficit with new infrastructure, things that are necessary to get us into the 21st century by broadband and high-speed rail and a number of smart great in all of those things. it used to be that we need to the reauthorization of the surface transportation pack bill, it was bipartisan. it was a no-brainer. because if you don't build infrastructure and a country, you can't compete. booklets have been. what are the top five in infrastructure in the world to number 17 and our infrastructure is going down. that means are less competitive, less able to compete in the hole gets deeper in the bill gets bigger. the longer we put it off.

so whenever i started thinking about it, i called tom and i said, you know, can we go to lunch? and he agreed. and you know, a personal basis, tom is an exceptionally charming and friendly guy and i mean, he's fun to have lunch with. i thought maybe we could talk about infrastructure. we did and he said i agree with you. so we issued a joint statement together and we've done some stuff together and will continue to do that. and i don't think the chamber supports the president's jobs bill, but i think he'll continue to support infrastructure. how we pay for, we would probably do need a little bit, but they need and skill to get it done really is a no-brainer. the country is just slipping further behind every day because our infrastructure is falling apart. roads, bridges, schools, everything we need to compete in

the economy is suffering. so we went back on that. and i think he'll continue to support that. you will support the jobs bill. too many things in it he doesn't agree with it. they will support taxes, any tax increase. though supporting a tax decrease regardless of whether it is deserved or not, but not an increase. so we will see what happens. with the repatriation part of it, here is our problem with repatriation. we support an infrastructure bank. adding a few postal had white america in a, but if it doesn't, we will support you because an infrastructure bank that takes american tax dollars m. buys 90% of its staff from overseas and stimulates the economy and the deal for america. and it is also one that drives down wages because the use tax dollars to pay less than the prevailing standards. not a good deal for america.

the u.s. government or state government shouldn't be in the business of driving down wages. yet to be the business of driving up wages. if he doesn't have any of those things come your bill is a favorite of the bat. he was our problem with the repeater you should notion, though. the employers take the money off shore. they make a bunch of money and they hold it out there. in a way for repatriation. the last time we didn't repatriation, remember what they did with it? created no jobs, created no infrastructure. they use it to pay dividends in future ceo salary. giving them every word seems to me. letting them pay a lower rate for money they make overseas than the money they pay for here, what would you do? at the rate was 5% here over there and 25% here, what would

you do? to put my money over there, knowing every five or six years there will be a repatriation and wanted to bring it back on the cheap. that doesn't make sense to me. it doesn't seem like good long-term policy. do we need an infrastructure bank? i think we do. i think we are to have one. you know, we've tapia, which functions almost like an infrastructure bank. a couple of other programs that do the we could expand, but if it doesn't by america and it doesn't pay prevailing wage, i think it's a bad policy because it will drive down wages and it will stimulate somebody else's economy rather than our economy. >> right here in the third row. over here coming out right there. >> tim lewis at congressional quarterly. if you were to read jon kline's press releases you think the

nlrb is ground zero in the fight over unionization. the question is, is there anything that can be done via the nlrb that would have substantial effect on increasing the decline in union density? and if not, is there any administrative step the government can take that would have that effect? >> , the nlrb is limited in what it can do. it can't change the lot and a lot.. here's the truth about. any law student that came out of law school graduated last in their class and a cut law school can delay unionization for years. it doesn't take a smart lawyer. the system is designed to prevent it from happening. every year, 25,000 to 35,000 are fired illegally for trying to

unionize. it takes years to get them back to work. and under the current law, just for? if you've got a job in the inch around, they fired you illegally and you got a job in the interim, they did that for all the interim earnings. for making the employer has to pay back. so theoretically, if you've got a job to pay a nickel an hour more, they wouldn't call you anything. but what is the disincentive for them to fire people? that the law needs to be changed. the nlrb can do some things administratively to make collections have been a little faster and a little more fairly. we would hope that they would do that. it's not going to be revolutionary. not going to change the system because they can't change the system. they can do things administratively can make things work a little better administratively. but that they can do.

now, i'm glad you asked about the nlrb because that gives me a chance to talk about the assault on the nlrb. and i want to talk about bowling for a quick second because this has been one of the most amazing i've ever seen. for 70 years, the law has been that if workers take concerted action and an employer retaliates against them, it violates the law of. well, towing, the big sophisticated interim space company announces to the world that they are discriminating against these workers because they just disconcerted at tbd. complete violation of the law. for 70 years, not precedent-setting, didn't change any laws, to stretch the last comment didn't require any reinterpretations. then the rules for 70 years. now think about it. they should be complained which

means there's an investigation. and in the case will go to an administrative law judge. the administrative law judge is neutral. here's the facts. decide whether i have a violation or not. then it goes to the full national labor relations lord. the money goes to the court of appeals and then it goes to supreme court. the process has just gotten started and people like lindsey graham and others jump all over this, saying this is an assault on boeing's ability to create work everywhere. you are going after 1000 jobs that we need. well, the people in washington need to jobs just as well. they are being discriminated and it's a big company. it's violating the laws. the only thing different about this case was this is a major donor of the republican party and their giant corporation that has giant government contracts.

now, here's what i want to say to you. south carolina has nothing to do with it, nothing. because if there's a settlement settlement in oregon or washington, where boeing is that, they can bring jobs back from china, from japan, from the other 50 locations around the world with their jobs. they can actually bring all goes back to comply. it doesn't have to be south carolina. but we've never mention south carolina and a case. it's about people being discriminated. so what's the response? the national labor relations board started investigating them, threatening to cut off their budget coming to an all kinds of things to try to show or influence what is supposed to be an independent agency. now imagine if you were a judge

by what happened if there is a case in front of them at the graham says, we are cutting off the court's budget if you don't drop this case. we'd scream when a murder, wouldn't we, trying to influence the position of the judge, the system doesn't work that way. but that's precisely the same thing that's happened here. they try to influence the decision of the judge or a board. and here's the other thing. so then they passed this law at the house last week. it's so overly broad coverage or so but have. here's what would have been. women are being discriminated against. they file a complaint with the nlrb. the nlrb comes in and says he back. they've been discriminating against women because they were women. the company says, sorry, we are moving the work elsewhere.

under the law they propose, the nlrb can do nothing about that. another example, you are blatantly discriminating against blacks or hispanics or asians or anybody else, blatantly discriminating. file a complaint at the nlrb. they come in and say absolutely, you are discriminating them. the company says, too bad, we are moving the circus out carolina. don't care. the nlrb can do nothing about it under this new law. so it takes a week off and makes it weaker. to me that it's almost despicable when you think about passing a lie that you haven't even thought about the consequences, the bad consequences that could have been two different groups of people that need protection. so the nlrb now has three people

on the board. the republicans will not endorse it would not confirm anybody for the nlrb. don't care how good you are. has nothing to do with it. they don't want the nlrb to work. they don't want workers to have protection. they don't want anybody in the playing field except corporate america. and so, we'll see what happens. though have to be appointments made so you can keep the board running. the bill is alive on december 31st this year there will be two people left on the board or the supreme court is already said to people on the board even with a great agree can't conduct business. that will mean that the nlrb will be nonfunctional, precisely what they try to do all along.

>> right there in the aisle. >> mr. trumka, i am a member of the bipartisan u.s.-china commission, a congressional intent on trade with china. since 2000, we've had about $2 trillion worth of trade deficits with china. the commission has recommended that we take action to countervail china's underprice currency. peter reid has announced he is taking a bill to the floor, a bipartisan bill to put pressure on china to change this illegal practice of underpricing its currency. i had seen where the u.s. chamber of commerce, the u.s.-china business council, the club for growth and others have all announced their opposition to the bill. so i wanted to get your view on why are they so what does this legislation? to what is the position of the afl-cio on this legislation?

and three, what is the position of the obama administration on this legislation? >> well, i am sort of amazed that you are surprised. of course there are. they represent the multinationals. there's been a group that have been crying from the national association of manufacturers and the chamber of commerce. all the small employers to produce here, the small and midsize players manufacturing support that though because they know they're getting creamed. they know they are being treated improperly. and here's one thing, he pointed these to be made. when china cheats on its currency, it's not just china. there were 12 or 13 or 14 other countries do not specifically in that cheat on their says well because they have to do that to be up to compete with china. so you got that whole area that is skewing currency in gaining

an unfair advantage over the american producer. we support the bill. brought in front of it. we think that china should play in everybody should play by the same rules. we don't manipulate our currency. they should be out to do it either. they should get a 40% to 45% advantage over american producers because they manipulate currency. that's wrong. they should do. so we're against it -- we are for the bill enacting chamber of commerce and the rest of the people obviously are against it because they are big numbers at the multinationals to benefit from it. you produce here in the united states. you would think, why would you tolerate that? until you think what i said earlier, remember christ between 2002 dozen nine, they destroyed 2.9 million jobs in this country and created 2.4 billion jobs over there. they are making a profit over there. they benefit by this system working the way it works rather

than being a fair system. that's why they're against the bill and why they support china's ability to manipulate its currency. and not give you lip service about it, but ultimately, they support china's ability to manipulate its currency and that's wrong. >> okay, there's a woman right here with hand up and a white blouse. >> hello, my name is anna cries and internet the state department. i just wanted to know your opinion on the occupational training aspect to the edgeup on a jobs plan. >> , occupational training is obviously a good thing. if you are talking about -- there are things that we disagree with. if you're talking about the torture works aspect of it, were they forced workers to go to work for an employer for free, that's not a good idea and they call it training.

you could work for this company and there'll be 2000. yoga to three and then we may hire one or two of you. didn't work out so good in georgia and i think they got 14 people enlisted in the program last week. not a very good deal. but the biggest supplier of adult training and skills training in the united states is the american labor movement. we skills training that more people than anybody else. the building trades do an outstanding job of training apprentices. now we're going back and doing pre-apprenticeship training. people couldn't pass the apprenticeship to get into it. we are teaching math, english to my reading skills so they can take a test to get into it. then after they are in there, we get them skills training. we pledge this year, the afl-cio's pledge this year is to retrain or train 40,000 new role and bring job skills and to

retrain 100,000 of our members. we made that promise in june. we party gotten to 42,000 of our skilled people in retraining and we've trained almost 9000 new people off the street in skill training. so we need the skills training. it's a great thing, but it is not the end-all. when people say what's the solution to the problem? basic education. absolutely education is one sliver of it. but it doesn't create jobs. you can be the best educated person in the world and they're still five if you right now applying for every job opening that to air. we need jobs. we need jobs and so training for them, supplying those jobs is important. >> right here. there's a microphone coming right here. yeah, right there. >> hi, my name is virginia.

nop iu faculty member and i wanted to know what impact it back or public statement three weeks ago i saying we didn't want to just write a check to the democrats said they wanted to try to hold all of our politicians accountable. what impact do you think that had him up on writing of the job skills? i do think that our leaders need to be holding politicians accountable no matter what party they are. in terms of jobs going overseas, it seems that that passes out of of the barn. really our main strategy should be to bring standards up for all working people everywhere because if we do that, it seems like the economic motivation for companies to just pull up in the will be taken away. and lastly, it seems the latest attack on our collective bargaining rights is happening with the u.s. postal service. obama just came out for the five day delivery week and i'm wondering what you think we can do to help save that public

service and protect those union jobs and workers rights. >> you know, you gave me two days worth of stuff. last night's >> that kind of unfair. hopefully i can address a couple of them. i don't agree with you that the horses out of the barn. i think a lot of it can be and will be. you tape the artificial incentive they had a cheating, it becomes economically unfeasible for them to ship products back here for news that is the platform. some of those jobs can come back. i agree with the other premise that we have to do the other things that present more or eliminate the incentive to take other jobs in the future. i will start first with the independence i was talking about political action. here's what we used to do in the labor movement. six, seven, eight, nine months before an election we would build up our structure, has people in the field doing phone banks, everything. election day would tear it down.

so we had no ability or less of an ability to do advocacy or accountability. what we are going to do now is our program will goes year-round so after election day, will be to move seamlessly from electoral politics to advocacy, from advocacy to accountability. and yes, we're going to hold everybody accountable. democrats, republicans and independents. the working people support working people with friendly policies. will support them. the other change that we are doing is pleased to just talk for our members. now we are going out and were going to start talking to nonunion members of flout, people that don't have a union yet, but are workers in each to be invested in the fight. the more we get back, the more we get them educated, mobilize, the better off we all are. we build a base of support around issues and not around

people appeared if you give all your might to a candidate or party, the day after the election, workers are no stronger than they were the day before or 10 weeks ago. of these for a candidate or party gets done, so will be using more money to create structure that stays in place to help workers and stand up for workers. when a politician is right, we'll support them on the issue. when mayor bob, they won't. you mentioned some thing about -- >> u.s. postal service. u.s. postal service. >> that there is also collective bargaining. [inaudible] >> okay. here is one thing we can do right now it's talk about this. they say the postal service's roque, right? to have this $5 billion bills they can't pay. it may give you the facts.

in 2006, the bush people really did privatize the postal service, but they couldn't. because everybody loves the postal service because it is such a great job. you live in a rural community where i am, people go to the post office and then go and it does a great job. billions of pieces of mail a day, very efficient. they wanted to get rid of it. so here's what they did. they passed a law in 2006 but said the postal service, nobody else in the world, no other agency, no other comp any has to prepay for all their health care, 75 years for in 10 years, which meant that they have to pay the enormous sum every year she predefined the health care for pensioners. nobody else has to do that.

guess what it was this year? the pain that was $5 billion this year. guess what the deficit was this year? $5 billion. but here's the real kicker. they already have $42 billion in a fund city mayor, refunded. they are lucrative to let them apply some of that, you wouldn't have any problems. when it comes to operations, the postal services operating in the back. they put these artificial rules on them. now, that may take a company out there and say you have to pre-find all your health care for the next 75 years. in 10 years i guarantee he'll be in the red next year. unless they only had to employ somewhere and then they might make it. but, six-day delivery is an

important thing it's important for business. it's important for family. it's important for the country. and i've got to tell you, closing the rural post offices is like ripping the heart out of a little community. because that is where they go to socialize. that's when they go to see friends. and that may not mean anything to people here in washington or in seats of power, but i can tell you in small-town, that means a whole lot. people care about that. and especially when it's working, it is an efficient delivery system. either way, i don't know if you do this or not, the eps and fedex sees the federal government to deliver two over 2000 cities in the u.s. because they can't get there. they use the postal service to

get there. it never worked that out. because if they go, they won't be able to help ups and fedex untimed overnight delivery. they won't be all to do it. it's a sin to take something that really works and try to destroy it artificially. what we can do to help them, get the facts out. because i saw the heads in this crowd when they saw the bat, they go wow, that doesn't make sense. right? how many people here still want to privatize postal service? raise your hand. >> okay, right there on the i/o. fifth row that. >> icon andrea time with family voices. i'd like to talk about the use of technology. for instance, i didn't know that the postal service was not much with assets in holding.

why are we not using organizations, small nonprofits, small businesses to push outward the message by way of youtube? 90% of minority for cell phones, fully functioning. this is how to use computer needs, internet. why are we not using those kinds of tools to educate the populace and then put a link to go right to the website of that congressional representative, fled the e-mails, ringdown the website and then they will hear us. >> we are. go on our website. you can go right to that representative or senator's house -- or his website for her website, any one of them. but we are struggling. the bigger point you make is when you were using media more effectively? we are struggling to catch up with it. right now as we speak, with the conference in minneapolis going on with young people. we bring young people in and started to make a concerted

effort. the labor movement for the last two or three decades, we paid a bad mistake towards young people. we had a non-telemetry to get them to come into our model and our model didn't work for them. instead of having an lawyer, i call it the peak society. they do take care and one here. so our model does aware, so we started bringing them in. these eight to 900 of them now but there secretary-treasurer, talking about how we can change ourselves to meet their needs. not taught them how, i somehow. were teaching them to the use of social media more effectively, how to twitter into facebook and a multitude of other things. were also using it and it's really fascinating. we have a tele- town hall conference. i did one in ohio. we have 77,000 people on. average length of stay on the phone was 12 minute.

so we talked to 77,000 people for an average of 12 minutes without moving, without getting out of our room. so we are working on it. are struggling on it ever tried to get better. i can only tell you this. we have it on their radar screen that we are focused on doing a better job it using technology to educate, motivate and get people out. but i think you're right on the money with your point. >> we have time for one more question. gentleman over here in the red. there's a microphone coming over to you right now. >> kevin mcsherry cw local 22 and i agree with everything you said, president trumka for the last hour. for one of the issues that's ever been brought up is the 30 hour work week, time and a half after 30. and i think it would really

reduce the unemployment rate, but nobody's talking about it. i've called all over the place and i can't get anybody to raise it. >> i think you make a good point. we call at work sharing. >> now, as workshare cristal it takes one step down, but she needed time and a half change on the 40 hour work week. that's the key. once you do that, for instance that verizon, we could put three workers on monday through wednesday, put them on the same track and thursday through saturday the second driver. so you have to workers cummerbund truck utilizing all the capital equipment. same way with the post office. both of those contracts are open right now. why can't we do that? >> we can. it's the will. it's the will. is the desire and the ability. i told you about the balances.

it bounces between employers and workers. getting it done as a difficult thing right now. the tea party republicans in the house i can't imagine ever doing that. the larger point you make is an important one. we had to be talking about things like that. we have to talk about innovative ways to increase the economy and increase jobs and work sharing quite frankly is another system. they used in europe whenever they didn't have to demand instead of laying people off, they reduced workweek of everybody and everybody still had a job and they were still getting benefits they are, which was a step up what we do, which is like encourage people to know without much of a safety social net. there's a reason why other than political will that they couldn't and shouldn't be done. >> thank you. >> we have time for one more question. will give you the last question.

you have microphone right over here coming to you. >> hi, my name is chew coca time. i retire but i was once a labor union economies. many economists looking at what president obama is proposing in the jobs bill and it really isn't strong enough to get the unemployment rate down to her should be. part of what he proposes is an extension of what's already existing over much-needed unemployment benefits and payroll tax holiday. how much we should have been missing this. your position on that very satisfied with what the president asked for? where do you stand on that issue? hamish to be made? >> off about the first innocency when it was underfunded at that point. the second one, this is an important step. it's an important step that we took for two reasons. he's making jobs the focus of

debate, which should've been all the wrong rather than deficit reduction. we know this isn't going to get everybody back to her course although the problem, but it's an important first step. the second thing it does is he starting to leak. he's leaving a job creation and talking about jobs creation. he's fighting for jobs creation and that's a good thing for workers, good thing for the country and coincidentally a good thing for him because people want a strong leader that's going to fight for them. it won't solve the problems. if you look in infrastructure, i told you where the $2.2 trillion deficit for old infrastructure, 2 trillion for new stuff and it's going to take a lot of money to be able to do it. but think about this. the more jobs we create, the lower the deficit. put people back to work instead of taking unemployment benefits, their pain in unemployment

benefits. they paying taxes. do not take you now. they're putting in. that's the long-term solution. we think this bill is not the end, but it is a very important first step to have a national debate on the jobs crisis and that's why we support it. we don't agree with everything in it, but it's an important first step and will put people back to work if it's implemented. and my question is chew our friend the republicans, you don't support it, what's your alternative? what is your alternative? and here's what they'll say. but more taxes, eliminate regulation and everything all behind dorie, just like it was after eight years of george bush. 700,000 jobs a month being flashed. we can do better than that. this country can do better than that. that's why we support the bill.

it won't be the last one. i told you if you listen carefully, i said we support it, what to strengthen it and will attempt to get it passed and i will move on to the next portion. we got to go step on first. >> will make that the advantage on this. president trumka, thank you for sharing your views with us. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> you should always start with the assumption that when a politician or a ceo is saying something, they are not telling you to choose. but it may be telling you the truth, but the burden should you attempt to prove prove it

>> supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg recently spoke at the university of california hastings college of law and sir the ersity sisco.caifor her interview with a member of the faculty covered legal issues, including gender e facuty, judicial confirmation process and the death penalty. half.s an hour and a [applause] >> thank you and good evening. is with tremendous pride that wt welcome here to hastings the first law school of the university of california systemn

to create pioneers for nvnversation and for thoughts about and justice. i am so honored to be to present two yeah, fun about law and justice. i'm so honored t abl ito you, john williams, a member of our faculty who is a rock star. he's actually been called back by "the new york times," for her terrific work over so many years, really reinventing the law of the work place. joan has been a major voice on issues of women and law firms for more than two decades. in 1999, she started a project called the project for attorney retention, which came up to modern policies that have allowed working women to make partner at major law firms even after they need to lower their

hours. for this work, she was given the aba's barker ran toward for women voyeurs of achievement. beyond that, through the center for worklife last year at you see hastings, really demonstrates the best of what scholarship is all about, taking big ideas and apply them in the real world. she developed the theory that protects each and every one of us. he may have heard over the past two years that it is now an improper to discriminate employees on the basis of their having family caregiving responsibilities. that was john's work, virtually single-handedly she came up with this idea in 2000 eeoc adopted it officially in 2007. joan will be speaking with justice ruth bader ginsburg. justice ginsburg following a distinguished career as a law

professor herself was appointed in 1980 by president jimmy carter to the united states court of appeals for the d.c. circuit. she was elevated to the supreme court in 1993 by president bill clinton. so please come and join in welcoming both john williams, professor of law and justice ruth bader ginsburg. [applause] [applause] >> i really want to start by welcoming you, justice ginsburg. justice ginsburg and i were talking before this and we realized that she was on the same law faculty is my father and i was sent her daughter's law school class. [laughter] >> and son-in-law as well. and i want to thank you so much for coming out here. not everyone's willing to jump

out of a plane onto inflatable ground. [laughter] [applause] >> i had not planned that is part of my journey here. but i had a unique invitation from hastings law school and it is this way. i think it was evidently his side, here is the program for the san francisco opera in september. [laughter] pic anyone in mary kate will invite russert asked. and so, we thought last night a remarkable production at changi and i think i think the reporter firm insists remaining, so i highly recommend it. [laughter] >> i get the ticket to the opera despite the fact he relate?

>> we missed the first act, but it doesn't appear to think and act. it was the david hockney design and production. it was standing. >> i wanted to go back a little bit and talk about your past in early life. you've often said that the person who influenced you the most was your mother and her two key messages were to be a lady in to be independent. and i was thinking about that. i think for many, many women of her generation, they wouldn't have seen it as a problem if a wife was supported by your head spin. she think differently? >> on the contrary, if a woman were, it was a sign that her has been couldn't make it. it was a disgrace for a man to have a woman who worked outside the home. i think my father realized many years later that my mother would

have been -- she would've had a fuller life had she been gainfully employed. >> and so, it sounds like if she was sending it back or leave a message that it is very important for women and even a wife to be independent, she sounds like the bit of a free thinker for generation. >> she of course hoped that it was something neat prince charming. the >> which he did. >> and be married happily ever after, i say was for 56 years. but he also thought it important for a woman to be self standing and should be able to support herself and her family if need a. >> interesting. another inside view was the novelist cannot let them in off and i wanted to hear you talk about that a little sense most

people don't think of artists and lawyers in the same breath. but you're clearly interested in a track meet to our. >> well, nabokov with a european literature professor at cornell, university and he changed the way i read an influenced the way i write. he was a man in love with the sound of words. and let me see if i can give you one example. it was a quiz that we had on the dickens novel, flea palace and the question was, when we first meet the care here, where is she? and our professor announced that most of you remember that bp said is sticking to re-create.

but only seat number 59, which happened to being a has-been, marty's seat, wrote that we see her at large head sticking through the great and that large could see with an edge of this child you would not have otherwise. i remember that he read to us the first page of the sleek cat, leaving the pictures midflight. he also spoke -- english was his third language. his first was french and russian and in english. and he spoke about what he liked in the english language. suppose you wanted to say a white horse. well, in english eisai whitehorse. and when you get to the horse,

it's already way. in french, you say brown horse that many have to convert it. >> you are known in your opinions far, as he said, keep it right and keep it tight. did that come from him in power? >> it came apart from him. it also came from my being a law teacher google year and realizing that opinions for much longer than they have to be. [laughter] >> i think my students would agree. i also wanted to ask you about your husband, marty gives burke, who you said was the first boy i ever met who cared i had a brain. he is really unusual for his generation in his thinking support for your career. i just wonder very concretely

how you balance work and family day today. for example, when he took off to study civil procedure, your daughter must've been five or six. how did you put it all together? >> marty and i married the same that they graduated from cornell. i have never lived alone and they worried about little things like can i figure out the tip at a restaurant? could they do those things for myself? so marty understood and was supportive of my decision and kept chained, who i guess was in kindergarten and when her school finished, she came and joined me. so i had six weeks on my own. i got it out of my system. i was confident that i could manage for myself. but one of my two-year college friends noticed something about

marty when we were very young. we met when i was 17 and he was 18, that marty was so confident of his own ability, so come trouble with himself that he never regarded me as any kind of a threat. on the contrary, he always ate me believe that i could do more than i thought i could. >> my gender and the law class wanted to know what advice you have for finding a partner who's really a partner. and i think he just gave it to them. >> the other special thing about marty casey was a great cook. [laughter] and he said he attributed his skill in the kitchen to two people. first his mother and then his wife. and i think that is very unfair with respect to my mother-in-law that i was an accurate

description of me. so we started out, i was the everyday cook and he was the weekend and company cook. i had seven things i could make. and when we got to number seven, we went back to number one. [laughter] and they all came from a book called the 60 minute shots, which meant nothing took longer than one hour to go from the kitchen to the table. marty got us, as a gift -- who spent the first years of our marriage in oklahoma, the location of four cell. and marty was an artillery officer. so, when jane was born, i went back to his folks and she was born in long island. my cousin sent marty theus copy a cookbook, an english

translation of that, this will give you something to do while your wife is away. marty had started out as a chemistry major until golf cart this interview. so he took the scope book and treated it like a chemistry tax and started with the basic stuff. and we were apart for two years, said he was quite accomplished by the time we left. >> so kookiness chemistry. >> and then, the best part of the story for me is jane is a brown years noticed the tree in mommy's cooking and daddies cooking and she decided that i should be phased out of the kitchen. [laughter] we moved to washington d.c. in

1980 and i have not cooked a meal for the day we made our move. master even today. my has-been died a year ago june. but my dad or comes once a month for me. she fills the freezer. sometimes she makes so much i have to take the overload to the court brief fridge. >> that's wonderful because having risen much about you and know when you don't to cook, i was worried about who is cooking for you, so now i know. another question related to your leg has been from my class as well, as you mentioned when you got appointed to the d.c. circuit, he gave up his job in new york or was he just a professor? >> u.s.a. council.

he was a professor at columbia law school. >> and he gave up both in color due washington. >> he transferred to georgetown. >> georgetown, yes. what would you say to young men about why they should expect a family situation where their careers sometimes come second? >> i think in a family there is a balance. sometimes when we started out fortunately in oklahoma and then we were students together for the next two years. it is natural to share everything. and when marty was starting out in the park this and eager to make partner, i'd say it was responsible for the lion's share of taking care of jane and the

home. but that allen's changed when the women's movement came alive and marty appreciated the importance of the work i was doing. so then i became the person that was -- whose career came first. and when i was appointed to the d.c. circuit, so often people would come up to me and say, msb hard for you commuting back and forth to new york. i couldn't imagine that a man would leave his work to follow his wife. and even then we go to parties and we would be introduced. i was introduced as judge ginsburg. a hand would extend to marty.

[laughter] that didn't happen when i was appointed to the supreme court. [laughter] [applause] >> so you see young ladies, we have a solution to that problem. >> i should tell you too, that marty was a member of the denis thatcher club. he was introduced by john o'connor. and the qualification for being a member of the denis thatcher club is your wife has a job, but in your heart of hearts he would really like to have her job. [laughter] >> i wanted to talk about the first case, he seems you're a supreme court case which is christian legal society versus martina. it was the first amendment case

that said that hastings would insist that all student groups except all commerce. in other words, be open to anyone who wanted to join them. and what we teach that case, we find that students are generally satisfied with the supreme court's opinion i'm sure you'll be pleased to hear. but they wondered this. if every student group is required to accept everyone, they wonder how an individual group can distinguish itself or its viewpoint. do you have any thoughts -- is not ethical question. >> the history of that organization answers the question for years. the christian legal society accepted all commerce. and then when they became an affiliate of the national, and he was the national who said you can accept only true believers. and people who are part of the club when it was open to all commerce tacked about the

experience of having people who were not the same. and particularly, having gang members and how it affect the demand. so it ain't he was pretty clear that the equality policy worked and it did and not in any way the story the mission of the organization. it just made them more understanding of other things that were different. >> i want to shift to an establishment case and the establishment cause of course prohibits the establishment of religion. and in one entire prior case law, for example, as you know prohibits states from buying books for religious schools. last term, the supreme court decided arizona christian sto versus when it involved a stay

at the dedicated tax credit for up to $500 worth of contributions to student tuition organization when that money is used to buy scholarships to pay for students to go to private schools and other religious schools. a taxpayer suit, saying this violated the establishment clause and the supreme court majority, which you didn't say they have no standard to pursue common distinguishing and maybe overruling past cases. as a think about arizona christian sto comment makes me wonder what is left of the establishment clause. it seems that all the government needs to do his structures have through a tax credit for a different tax expenditure rather than pay a direct subsidy. so why is the establishment clause so important and how is that case affected interviews?

>> there are two distinct issues. only one was involved in that case. and that is, who can complain about if violation of the established that cause? the presidential case cited, although taxpayers in general tampering suits because they're not hurting any more than the next person as taxpayers, but we have an affection to the establishment clause because unless we allow taxpayer standing, then the government arguably in violation of the cause says to go unchallenged. and the arizona case said taxpayers needed to an attempt

to distinguish it said that unless you have the facts themselves, it's doubtful whether you'll be able to challenge any action of government is a violation of the establishment clause if you're establs he ctent oaxpaying. got back back back. and .. the church is each tended to its own house in the government stayed out and the internet going with religious organizations. there is frankly a different notion that the current maturity of the court has and that is there is no wall of separation,

but there is a rule of nondiscrimination. that is in the tuition case, if you're going to give money for scholarships to cathol >> and the prohibition is onef favoring one religion over others.h that is the current debate what has it cost me? that means you stay out of church affairs more you can support religion as long as you do so without referring one religion over others. >> that is a dramatic shift from the understanding of the establishments. clause. >> the two strains were

there from the beginning but yes, it is. t >> host: you have always loved civil procedure. [laughter] because i must say that is a mystery to me. [laughter] >> the reason is the greatest loss schoolteacher i had was benjamin kaplan the first class i have a civil procedure.e this man was so engaging, i also have a civil procedure class, a classmate his name is anthony lewis and was on a nieman fellowship to harvard as a journalist in was taking kurt -- courses in the law school and in the college and on that first day performed brilliantly and glass. i went home and said if they're all that smart guy

will notd make it. [laughter] and he said you are at least as smart as he is. i said i will try too volunteer and talk as much as that of fellow. [laughter]s but i dunno if i would have loved the subjects so much if i did not have an extraordinary teacher.a >> host: i think access to justice? >> guest: you can have all of the rights in the world but if you cannot enforce them they are now worth very much. >> host: there was a supreme court case i will not remember the name, last term that was where you dissented having to do with whether americans who were by a machine

manufactured abroad could sue in the united states. do want to talk about that?s >> guest: it was a man who worked in a metal shop in new jersey. in the employer had purchased a shearing machine that was -- allegedly defective and responsible for the accident. the manufacturer had engaged with the exclusive distributor in the united states the manufacturers object was to sell as many machines -- machines in as many places in the united states and the manufacturers showed its wares every year at the trade fair of the metal workers organization. but the court held that was not sufficient ties to the state of newga jersey to allow

for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the foreign manufacturer. my point* was we are a nation in the world theya know from the united states. this manufacturer could not care if it was at new jersey or arizona it just wanted the machines in the unitedw states. the question should be is there sufficient contacts with the united states? is it manufactured sufficiently with the united states to authorize sues? then the question becomes one is of then you. yes the affiliation of the united states. the place of the entry was a logical place where that is the accident happened in where the witnesses were.

my colleagues it was five/four decision. the thais have to be too new jersey and not to the united states as a whole. it is a classic example why theun current court is not pront corporation and it is a bum rap for this reason. not a single manufacturer incorp the united states that could escape liability to someonep fo injured in the united stateser from the use of that product but the foreign manufacturers are home free. they can exploit them but can escape liability for the injury their products cause. and most important is personal injury awards which are vastly higher than awards elsewhere in the world. so the majority decision i found a hot very difficult

to understand when you havede an entrepreneur who sees the united states as the market but to say you have to pinpoint a specific thing if you don't and avoid doing fact there will be noific personal jurisdiction. >>id host: i think i eight understand why you cares whe about civil procedures but it was clearly an important case in mynd view and so bring.ve s to talk about the case is that i teach and have spent my life studying, just the key cases beginning in the 1970's and you litigating with the amicus brief and i, quote you. >> the supreme court never

met a classification it did not like.a the 14th amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law was seen as applied to raise but not gender. this was a subtle interpretation over a hundred years. so the question is what made you think you could get thee court to overrule over a century of precedence? >> the court to is a reactive institution. it is never in the forefront ofin social change but always a movementv that pushes the court that re day -- that way. the campaign not only was thurgood marshall a brilliant lawyer, wbut the 10 or of the times.

we had just fought a war. against another form of racism but yet to our troops were separated by race but the apartheid had to go after the second world war. because racism of the kind that we had in the united states was only against what we were fighting for broad.whol so the time was right to for that recognition and similarly in 1970, the women's movement was revived. not just in the united states but all over the world and some places ahead of us buy international women and there was that

issues that people cared about. and the court as the great legal scholar once said said, should never react tou thel weather of the day but inevitably it will react tow the climate of the euro and it was right four that change doing in the very first brief that i helped to write, so the names of two lemon those women were saying the same things when we were riven bed time when no one was prepared to listen or very few people.

think of the sixties, the liberal warren court in the case against or up. today we would call ai battered woman abuse by her philandering husband. one day he had humiliated her to the breaking point*. she spied day baseball bat bologna to her young son and took it and hit him over the head. he felt. that was the end of the argument. the end of his life in the beginning of the murder prosecution in hillsborough county florida. or it did not put women on jury unless they came into the clerk's office to volunteer for service. how many men would volunteer df they could escapes

service?vi her thought was of there were women on the jury they may better understand my state of mind. not that they would lead the quote -- acquit me but at least she thought she may be convicted of the lesser crime of manslaughter rather than murder. she was convicted of murder by the all male jury. and she had raised the question of the absence of women from good jury rolls andco florida all the way through the lower court, the supreme court heard the case and the attitude in 1961 was we don't understand what two women are complaining about. they have the best of all worlds. they can serve if they want to. if they don't want to they

don't have to.e but the notion of a psittacine who escapes the basic obligation to participate in the administration of justice really means that you don't consider the person a fullll citizen. if she is expendable in the administration of justice. the supreme court did notthe react as it should have to the case. 10 years later, the burger court writes a unanimous decision in the sally reed case to say that a provision of the idaho probate code that said persons are equally entitleda males muste ber preferred to females. the court unanimously held

that was unconstitutional. it was the times and sally reed was a representative of what women were complaining about. her case arose from tragic circumstances. she and her husband were childless and adopted a boy.e then that they separated and she was awarded custody when the boy was of tender years and it needed a mother's care.sa when he reached his teen-ager years the father said he needs to be prepared for a man's world. sally thought the father would not be a good influence and was quite right. the boy was terribly depressed and one day he took out one ofe his father's

guns and killed himself. says sally wanted to be appointed the administrator of his estate for sentimental reasons and she was faced with a provision and said that is not fair.id, i applied first. i should get the appointment. sally reed was not a sophisticated woman. she made her living by taking care of elderlyre people in her home. she would not have called herself a feminist and probably did not even know the word but she thought she was suffered an injustice and have faith in the legal system it could right the wrong.

these are real everyday people you are ready toe we complained and thought theve system could do something to redress their grievances.heir i was very lucky to be there at the right time and in the right place. a law professor with a flexible schedule.on [laughter] >> host: you were veryed lucky to be the right person at the right place and thete right time but also quite brilliant to do some things at that when you try to use legal change in response to social change with the feedback, how do orchestrate the court, the legislature, the press, the a executive to make it happen? i imagine you thought about that. >> guest: when restarted thee?ag aclu women's rightst

project, we had a three missions in the first was public education. people have to care about the change.ca the second is that the legislature to change. that is one of the reasons why i was the big advocate of the equalha rights amendment to promptr legislatures to clean up the law books. then finally the court. we worked on all three levels and on legislativende change, we got a great gift from said dean of the law school that i first attended when he was solicitor general. and came about in a tax case mywo husband and i the

both-- the only one where weba were co-counsel and it involves a tax deduction for the care of a young childcti for a dependent, a disabled dependent of any age. the deduction was available to any women or men if that were widowed or divorced.co the plaintiff was charros, a man who never married but it took great care of his mother although she was 93. he could not get the deduction and represented himself in the tax court and the amicus brief was the sole of complexity. if i had been a dutiful

daughter i would get the h deduction for the care of my mother.i i am a dutiful son in do not get the deduction and that makes no sense. [laughter] so that was the case. we wrote the brief in march and it was the model for the brief. my idea was, it did not work out that we would have two cases of stereotype. sally reed who was assumed to be less competition to a minor stir the estate, in charles who was considered less competent to care for the elderly parent. if we could get those two before the accord at the same time they would see the irrationality of these fast

leave brought. >> i want to stop by your early cases and you did that. yo they are:they've reformed to as the formal equality cases. just for the record? one has to begin at the beginning. [laughter] >> maybe it was based on sex but we wanted it to open all doors for men and women that nobody should be blocked from an opportunity or in pursuit of a particular lot in life becauseno he was male lawyers she was female.le

so the ada is to get rid of the gender based classifications. that was the starting point* to have the law books that did not classify people on the basis of it as a mother or a father or is it aassi dishonor or a daughter? that was the mission what we encountered in approachinge court was something that was absent in the search for justice. everybody understood by the '50s and '60s that race discrimination and was bad.

they operated in women's favor when they were told they could now work at night or over time because therethis hours pledge it was hard for them to see that but from the case comment to women not put on a pedestal but in a cage. >> host: the way i see those cases is focused not on the formal quality but focused on a gender system that continues to be dead gender system may have to this day. and that is the system and

also has very particular descriptions of men and and men are naturally focused on work and in the competition. it seems to me a centrale theme is the reason is equally effective way is to to change roles for men as well as women. what do you think of that? >> i think that is exactly right. quite often, if i were to invent and an affirmative-action plan to

give men every incentive wet would have a healthier world of a shared responsibility for bringing at the next generation but you are talking about, i have a story that epitomizes the attitude of society even in the '70s when the women's movement was a live. i call them live play all the of what he called her a per active.

getting calls once a month to come down to the school psychologist or principal. [laughter] and hear the story of the latest escapade. one day i was sitting in my s office in columbia and i was very, very tired. and is wary as i was, i said this child has two parents, please.ehav [laughter] after that to even though there was no discernible change in my son's behavior, the calls barely came her semester they were reluctant to take the father away and would not hesitate to make them e feel guilty and

she was off working while her children were making issues. >> thatff is an important story but when i had my own children 30 yearsan later, exactly the same thing happened to me. they called me up every single time. and when i tried to say this child has two parents.to s there is a lot of push back. that has been far more resilient. but i want to shift to when you started to litigate the line of cases i think you hope to achieve paid strict scrutiny standard of central te, protection then you have the

fallback position when it seems that is hard to get. and for intermediatete scrutiny standards in which the government has to doch t articulate thern classificationsme through and that was substantially related to those objectives. then when you joined in the core and but you articulated the standard stiffen me. quoting from an earlier opinion put into it -- by to see that as a justification did say it up theue ante? the tests. >> we call it

heightened. it came from a case where the first case, . >> host: net was not that case? >> no. >> board of something of massachusetts. this was a civil service victim where veterans not just had the points added but if your a veteran and had a pass you would go to the top of the list and have someone that has said 99 percent score.

but those top jobs were overwhelmingly mail. although nice day lost out to a veteran who has navy escort with this excuse. have in that case, the justice who wrote the opinion said no the tends to discriminate against women. the result was in spite of that there was no intention to disadvantage. . .