analysis from tv. and tv has many stories on the dramatic front the have some connection to politics. so i think it has a pretty big impact. >> of all the programs you produced over the years, which had the most impact on politics, on the pop-culture scene? >> i will answer with a movie we distributed. we distributed a movie several years ago called in the loop. by a guy named britishand it was a take on politics. armando went on to do a beautiful show on hbo called "veep." it was the lighter side of politics. i don't know if you've seen it. i'm not sure it is the most profound effect but it has caught some attention. not our show. a wonderful show done by hbo. watch those that don't everything that you do, what do you do? i work at amc networks. >> you run it. >> yes. i will name some of our shows. i don't want to bore you or anyone watching this. we have "mad men was quote and "breaking bad" and "walking dead." we have a show call "hell on "wetv," which is a channel for women. we have a bunch of shows specifically targeted for african-american women. it is very popular was something we put together called "braxton family values." devoted tohannel independent film. and we have taken a left turn and made a lot of comedies. one of them is called "portlandia." and a couple of other new ones coming up, and is sent -- in addition to "company bang bang" and "stars about le bon -- "stars of babylon." and a couple of wonderful dramatic series and miniseries. >> so the sundance channel, the we channel, afc. ok, here is a piece of video from 1993, 20 years ago. 00. -- oh oh. toi want nothing that i say mitigate the fact that there is too much violence in television and films. i think it comes from the news organizations, from the news collectors on any local station in my town. the first five or seven stories every evening are of her rape, murder, a mass murder, child never the national or international stories of significance, but the violent stories. a great goal of harm is done that way. thinkhasten to say that i the greatest piece of violence done to the american people has by thene by omission congress of the united states, by the fact that they have not managed over these years to find a gun control law that will prevent children will years of age from finding guns. >> norman lear, 20 years ago, people for the american way, former television producer and your on that board of able for the american way. fit it all together. he is talking about some of the violence on the shows you have on pimp i haven't seen some of them. i saw one episode of "breaking bad." where does that fit in? that was 20 years ago. ?ave things changed da >> that was 20 years ago. people for the american way is, among many things, meant to protect freedom of speech and i am a proud long time twenty-year plus board member. that admire the work norman set up and that able for the american way carries on anduse they are vigilant -- that people for the american way carries on because they are vigilant. they do wonderful work. the question of television balance, it is interesting that --t is the clip he cousin because it will be a complicated answer on my part. that, in asome shows narrative sense portray violence. and i don't know what impact they have on people's behavior. there may be experts to understand it better than i do. i have a personal opinion and a question about it that is actually -- happens to be somewhat similar to that that was expressed by norman lear in that clip 25 years ago. which is -- his reference was not to the portrayal in acts and of violent i'm not enough of an authority of what impact that may or may not have, but he talked about news,in particular local and what leads local news so frequently. i must say that i have share the same perception and the same concern about its influence on behavior in the name of news and i am not enough of an expert if it either -- expert of it either to definitively say but i watch it and wonder and worry and i share the view that he expressed. guns.the availability of rich oneuestion is a ad my opinion is i hope reasonably humble one and a personal one, not necessarily an authoritative one. but it is -- and i have much more concerned about the and what is of guns news thanin and on what is portrayed in fiction. there could presumably be a rich violenton on what fiction has a vocations on -- violent fiction has implications on the american people. >> the united way. how did you get involved with that? >> it appealed to me personally because i think america is a wonderful country and freedom of speech is in my view central to what is wonderful about america along with a bunch of other things. people for the american way was born to protect freedom of speech and to watch out for where freedom of speech is being compromised. and i thought working in the tv business that was central to what makes tv, media intimidations great so i could lend a hand. waypeople for the american does a whole lot more than that in terms of their overall agenda, which is more broadly civil rights, first amendment rights and protection and they have a whole bunch of activist programs. scope. go on beyond the >> there is something on your website, people for the american wingedlled white watch. >> yes. >> it looks like the people for the american way track right wingers and you actually call it right wing watch. does that make you a left the space winger -- a left winger? >> my own view is that it is good if we all monitor one another and it's good if we all express views about what we are all up to and i really mean that. and you can like it or not like it. and i think it's good to say it, whether you like it or not and some people won't like my views. at probably won't want to use them not liking my views but i would like to hear them express their views. so to monitor people of import to have influence, who are saying things that should be expressedconveyed and and questioned. i think it is a worthwhile and virtuous effort. >> who are some of the people besides norman lear and alec all baldwin -- andc tried to think of others on the board. >> mary frances berry, a longtime and well-known civil rights leader. >> michael keegan. >> he's the president for the people of the american way -- people for the american way. members of the clergy, probably from the baptist church, rabbi david from the jewish religion. ande is a catholic priest congressman. >> kathleen turner the actors. >> some people from the arts. people from politics. people from the clergy. a pretty wide range and wonderful group of people. >> how effective do you think you have been? >> i would say them, not me. they do the work. i am on the board. i wish i were a little bit more active. i would like to take it for their work. i think i'm -- i think it times they have been terrific and at times not so much so. at the the directive people for the american way is important and maybe even profound. i think very important, not dayssarily effective every but certainly no long run. >> there are people watching that say -- we hear it on the air all the time -- that the media is controlled by left agenda, whohave an are dumbing down the society by bringing more and more violence to television, more language to television, more sex to television. what do you say to them? if your worst critic were in front of you and then you add to called have this thing the first amendment. >> i have a different view. i think the media world is largely in the interest of the free market today which i think is terrific. and the free market in the u.s. probably operates better than perhaps anywhere in the world. and that free market brings to the american television screen on cable television literally, as you know, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of channels of immensely diverse views and they are probably best seen in the news spectrum because they are the most on the nose and you can watch cnn or you can watch msnbc or you can watch fox news and now you can watch al jazeera or you can watch business news or two forms of business news. but on this channels alone, you will get news that is argued on the left, on the right, somewhere in the center, from somewhere else and what a phenomenally rich dialogue and it is all operating in a commercial world in which the market is guiding a lot of what happens. and i think that is fantastic. >> let's go back to amc and a program that you have been given many awards for called "madman/" "madmen." >> advertising is based on one thing -- happiness. >> you are better off with a little sex appeal. >> then your mother and father are responsible for all of this? >> you are ok. >>, i know you are having an affair. >> what do women want, who cares? nostalgia, it is ok but potent. >> look forward. >> we are starting a new agency. >> what is this program about and when did it start? >> it started about six years ago. a six-yearace over period and it takes place in new avenue andmadison it takes place in what some consider to be the golden age. >> 1960s. >> yeah. it is a social study but more of a character study than brilliantly by matt weiner who created it and create all the characters, -- and created all the characters. >> you watch it? >> yeah, i watch it. >> what impact has this had on your company? >> yeah. it has been a great help to our company. we operated in something that we called him wreck and classes before it was called amc and we made the determination to go into did term -- to original program. and we had done a couple of "hows before that but "mad men represented the new aero amc. so it sent us on our way to the chapter we are in. were the people to -- so the people back in the 1960s as bad as the film portrays? [laughter] affairs --e time, drank all the time, affairs at the office. in 1962, he would've been free to -- he would've been 42 years old. .e was a born in college he squeezed his way through high school but he was well dressed. so to protect the legacy of the family, i will refrain from answering more specifically and say that it seems to have created a portrait that rings true. >> why did it catch on? oni think it really caught because matt weiner did in constructing it and the way it was cast and directed and the incredible work of everybody who is involved was a great study of character and a great study of relationships. >> when did you know it was having an impact? just numbers -- beyond just numbers. >> it was two or three seasons parodied iwas first think on "saturday night live." onn you are parodied "saturday night live," you know you have made it. >> talking of all the blogs i have been devoted in breaking down the plots and all that stuff, you mentioned the importance of the on demand and people catching up with it later , explain that. "ther is connected to sopranos," which some people the best thingsf i has ever been made. is thatpinion, brian, great stories and great characters affect people. and they affect them sometimes deeply. he not to be too highfalutin about it, but if you read a novel and you think the novel is rated 300 years later and people are still reading it, it has staying power and the characters have staying power and they have something that means beyond the t they werey tha first written in. they become permanent. " in theink "madmen, television framework, has some of that. as for the technology question, which is interesting to me working in the business, we benefited and the show benefited at least to a degree through the emergence of cable on demand and the ability for people to go to their server and say i am going to watch that later. and then internet services on demand or you can catch up afterwards. and then be current and you don't need to be limited to a linear schedule of sunday night at 9:00 or 10:00 p.m. you can find in your own schedule and immerse yourself and pay great attention. from a purely commercial point of view, get hooked and watch live with us. i think that was a great benefit. >> what role does twitter play in it and facebook and dvds and all the technologies? , the slingsrted didn't exist. crexendo most profound one is the most profound of all the d tvnical changes sterilize is being able to find the show that you want in sequence for stories that are ongoing. they require more attention. some of our shows do and some of the shows on hbo and showtime and f x really do require more attention. that is what is great about them. people can go to them when they are ready. partner,they are with spouse, friend and watch when they are not distracted. i think that helps. media those social opportunities act as if seller is because they allow you to play with it to engage, to discuss it they are sort of like a permanent book group on a tv show that is going on concurrently and digitally which has supersize consumer attention an. >> "the next clip is from "the walking dead." this blew the ratings right off the charts a couple of weeks ago and it is the opening episode with 15 million viewers. >> 16 million viewers. >> has that ever happened? >> i want to be careful about identifying records. but i think it was a record 4 -- i think it won the season if i am not mistaken. there is a question about the football game that was on that night. ita delayed three-day basis, won the highest-rated show of the season. >> and this is violent. >> yes. >> there are people walking and they are supposed to be the walking dead and they get their heads bashed in. let's watch. then i will ask you about it. >> sure. [video clip] ctor. doctor. >> the walking dead, on the episode sunday night at nine amc. on nbc -- only on am one have only watched episode, i will admit. i have watched people bash other people's heads in. what is the point? [laughter] why do we like? >> i will give you my opinion. pretty sound like a answer. i don't mean it to sound like a pretty answer. but i think it begins with it is a great character study set against a backdrop of a post apocalyptic world. zombie case, a apocalypse. but i think the post apocalyptic world is very interesting. they are interesting because of the world we live in and because of all the things that a lot of us are occasionally afraid of. all of which could have the effect of making the world not quite as we know it. and i think it is also phenomenal so-called theater. it is a great backdrop for what happens when people are together and alone in a world that they no longer new -- separated from ones, reconstituting relationships with one another with this lingering threat caused by the apocalypse. what a wonderful set up. beautifullyecuted and the characters are great and surprising and actually pretty subtle among notwithstanding the violence. good.keup is spookily so you believe it and you immerse yourself in it and you are invited in and your captured and your heartthrobs. throbshink it occasionally with fear and a little bit with sympathy and a little bit with love and a little bit hoping for someone to have a good life. so i think it is a great story. >> how did you get that many people to watch it? in numbers today, that is a huge number for anybody to watch any television show except a sports television program or to stay couple of others. people.on >> yes. we are in season three. it has been building. ie technology, things mentioned earlier, people can find their way to it not only when it is on our schedule on amc. so they are inviting and suggesting their friends to it. >> go back to the violence thing. successful with this heavy violence, does that mean that the american people love violence? this is an old subject. you look in the movies. it is constant boom, boom, boom, what hollywood puts out. >> one can judge for themselves. i don't think it is the violence. i really don't think it is the violence that makes the show of attractive -- the show attractive. it is obviously caricature. that has been a zombie apocalypse. not been are has zombie apocalypse. so it is sensible -- so it is fanciful and extreme and creative. i think it creates drama and it is a great construct. it is fundamentally about survival and fundamentally about how people organize with one another and actually how they and in love and have babies all the good stuff of life that dramaticainst a very backdrop. >> let's talk about josh say pan -- josh sapan for a moment. where does the pronunciation come from? >> i will take anything. anyone who says my name in any vague way, like a dog, i will just respond if it is close. >> where does the name come from? at ellis island, we lost the ifty. >> where did you grow up? i grew up in brooklyn and went to college in the midwest. >> why did you find your way from queens, brooklyn area to the midwest to the university of wisconsin? >> i went to visit it and i thought it was the most beautiful and unlike anything i had ever seen. i had never actually been to the midwest in my whole life. i was attracted to all of it including the university. >> what year did you graduate? >> 1970 -- i took a little time to graduate so i think it was 19 76 or eight i the time i graduated. >> one of the things that i saw when looking at your background, you started out reading roughly smith's "wired nation." >> yes. >> tell us who that was and why did that matter to you? >> yeah. i don't know how i got the book. was interested in tv and studied it in college and came upon "a wired nation" in which he offered a view. at the time, there were few tvs wired to cable television. of everyfered a view tv set in america hoped up to a hardwire where, if you recall, not only a diversity of national channels, but he was really focused on local and cut that there would be this robust local editorial television opportunity that the sort of -- if one can analogize -- something like an electronic newspaper. it seemed actually that his vision was grand and i thought perhaps exaggerated who knew that he would be right on the money. then the entire nation would be absolutely wide and along the way there would be satellite alternatives and a second wired alternative. the unthinkable at the time is that, along the side -- alongside all of it, there would be a worldwide internet. question one of the stories often told about you leaving college, getting two 16 , havinger projectors put them in your automobile and going from campus to campus showing your films. how did that happen and expand more about that. >> the university wisconsin, we had a film society and showed .ovies i we show them from -- we showed them for profit. it was a fun experience. my friend and i hatched a plot that we would not have a movie theater but a mobile movie a naturalo we had rambler station wagon and we had two 16mm projectors. we began to tour the midwest, setting up in college towns. we began in ohio and showing movies that we thought would be of appeal to university communities. but it worked ok. >> you charged money? >> oh, yeah, it was a for-profit venture. in each town, we would find a location. it was an odd notion. it was an itinerant alternative movie theater on 16mm in towns before there was the diversity on television when there was only broadcast television and one most of these college towns didn't have our theaters. so we should french films and the bicycle thief and "duck soup." and we showed alternative cinema, if you can pardon the word. >> would you charge? -- what did you charge? >> i can't remember. it was two dollars probably. >> did you make money? >> yeah. >> what year did you start? chronology.with i think it was 1976 because i graduated surely thereafter. 1975. a little earlier. we did for not all that long. maybe getting toward a year. but it worked economically. we figured out how to do it. we remitted some of the money to the companies that owned the films. we split the gate with them. it was a fun business. >> were you political back then? the university of wisconsin is known as a fairly liberal school. >> yes. that is in part the reason i went there. i was interested in the politics. >> how active were you? periodically.e i was in and out of political activism. ? >> what does that mean -- >> what does that mean? >> i was active for a while and then i was engaged in theater. so i was in and out of politics. there were more people more consistent. >> use but how many years with were howamc -- you many years with the dolan/amc company? local cableat a system in nearly days of cable television called "what was then -- called what was then teleprompter. >> why were you attracted to cable tv? it was a very dominant or prominent than. prominentd then -- then. future" read "the wired and i found my way to teleprompter manhattan. see whatrun this and they can tell us about it. [video clip] >> tonight's guest has received an academy award, golden globe and broadcast film critics blocked the stern attainment and screen actors guild awards for her performance "girl interrupted." >> the new school where that was done is a school where you had been on the board. are you still on the board? >> yes. >> again, a very liberal school. there seems to be a theme here. [laughter] >> i got to the new school because of "inside the actors studio," which is the show that we just such -- we just saw. it is a show that was on bravo. it still is on bravo. operated thathool as their theater program. you haven't done much politics. in other words, you have gone to the creative side and why? have you missed of that? or is that where people for the american way comes in? >> yeah, i got all the time. >> have you had any urge to do political programs? >> i have a lot of interest in it, brian. i watch a lot and a listen a lot -- and i listen a lot, but i don't think i have found my way to it. >> we have an unusual looking book. it is a nine usually size the book. and so isis on it another gentleman. >> luke sant. >> tell us about it. >> i had been collecting for 30 plus years these big photographs. when people see them, they are often of sports teams were a church which group -- or a church group. i couldn't resist him. i would put them on my wall, somewhat to my wife's chagrin because they don't necessarily always portray a happy picture. but i felt that they were intriguing because they told a little bit of a sort of random story about american history and about moments in america and about style and culture and .elief and community and war i always wanted to put together a book so i finally found a overture -- found a publisher. it came out a couple of weeks ago. >> this is a world war i transport, a location and date unknown. what got your attention here? look --now, the people in that photograph -- a look so hopeful happy. i don't know exactly where they are going or what they are doing. people onks like their way to something they thought would be better. it was dramatic. >> here is a picture called "mohawk peace conference, lake mohawk new york, 1915." you have some lighter notes here and youby mark halperin had several others write notes for you. >> right. when i was discussing the book with the publisher, we together hatched the notion that, in order to make these photographs that were historic in little more accessible, it would be nice to have captions from people whose lives or work connected to the subject in the photograph. so we were fortunate enough to get 20 people. and it is a great list of people. i cannot come up with them all of martha wrote a range norman lear and actually kathleen turner was kind enough to write a caption and con john lewis was kind enough to write a caption. .> here's one ariana huffington wrote this one. location unknown. 1908. -- there are some tidbits in there. on to mention the electronic media and the change in cable television and all of that. did you tell them what to write? themselves.wrote i gave them a selection of photographs to write about and they made their own choices. thehis is one written by clothes designer joe abboud. it is a photograph from new york of 1906.igure 23rd of 1906.ruary 23 it has something to do with the tuxedo. what is this photo about? >> i just thought it was sort of exquisite in its own way and and a little bit .bout men's fashion joe was kind enough to write about it and talk about tuxedos. >> what did you hope to a compass with this book? >> well, just to finish it. [laughter] i actually wanted to -- i thought it was fun to have a little view of history, of a time in america that wasn't instructional first and foremost. it was a little bit more anecdotal and a little bit more archaeological, meaning random. so you sort of take a look at them and you see bunches of where it photos and then the captions explain them. i had an image of high school students flipping through it and loving it if they flipped through it. >> maryland, date unknown, infantry division. the liner notes say that there's a mailing 25,000 people in this photograph. >> yes. >> where did you find that? >> the source of that i don't recollect. drew from my own collection of the library of congress and from the collection of a guy named bill hunt who lent me a bunch of his photographs and he has a vast collection. >> here's one of the liberty bell that also has thousands of soldiers in it. why did they do that? do you have any idea? >> i think it was a thing. i think people would gather. are hanginglatives in what was her parents house, a picture in a flag. they were in a fight formation. it was to create an impression. >> this is from 1931, brooklyn, new york, the wallace circus annex. what you have done with this is that you have a broad ensure for you can see everybody. then in the next slide right next to it, you show, i assume, the fat lady and the door for the midget and all that. would we allow this in our society today? >> that is a good question. i think yes, under certain circumstances, because i am familiar with the circumstances under which it is allowed. but i hope that it would be treated sympathetically and it would be treated just as an expression of differences. and i mean it. >> what circumstances? >> we did a tv show called "freak show," which was about a guy in venice beach who has a boat who has extreme characteristics. i am making it sound really kind, but it is. he sort of celebrates their differences with wonder and not with any derision or judgment. really with wonder. >> in your experience, looking your privateand collection, what is that about? [laughter] us.se tell and how many lightning rods do you own? >> i think that if you have over 100, you have the world's largest collection. you can call it a private collection but you can have 1, 2, because they are so formal. oo,e, t u can have because they are so affordable. they have these beautiful globes on them. so there is a little bit of a marriage of industrial art and folk art and function. i was intrigued by them so i started to collect them. >> you are married. >> yes. bikes kids? >> yes. -- >> kids? >> yes. >> women or men? >> older boy, younger girl. >> what are their interests? >> the boy, not surprisingly, nate is interested in all things story, machine, device and virtual. , has a wide, claire range. she is a high school senior and she has a wide range of interests. she likes to write. she likes history. she likes her friends. she likes tv shows. >> i want to bring you back to the family but first show another clip on another successful program that ended -- program that ended its run, "breaking bad." >> he is a high school coach who gets terminal cancer and turns dealing. >> when did you decide to do this and how successful was it? >> we decided to do it six years ago. and becamedest daily -- it began modestly and became extraordinarily successful. if anyone is a television genius, it is vince gilligan. he created a complete world and series of characters that captured somebody people. >> let's watch a little clip of this. [video clip] an f.is is not >> are you nuts? >> want to find out? tv.ou call this slowburn what does that mean? refers to tvly shows the take a longer time to move people through the story. and a longer time to carry on the story and for characters to develop. >> could you do that on network television? i mean, the over the air networks? >> historically and pretty much to date, there has been very little of it on network television. >> why?> >> i think it is largely an economic consideration. at least historically, network or has mores urgency to get ratings quickly. it doesn't have from a pure business structure point of view and of patients or does not allow as much patience to develop and build. a needs to perform more quickly and shows that are a slowburn are slower. thet has the starkly not on -- so it has historically not been on the schedule. >> your wife came out of showtime. >> yes. >> you paint a picture of the sapan family. the you take measure of your own kids. something like "breaking bad." >> i do. i cannot avoid it. it is fun to do. >> what was their reaction to "breaking bad?" >> i showed a somewhat random then--- random probablyto my then- well-year-old daughter and it was a skeptical parental judgment. >> why? my -- it was an exquisite episode that featured an atm. it was out of context and it was really dramatic. and it did leave a little bit of a mark. i think ultimately a good mark because she talks about it to this day and she talks about actually the venal nature of drug addiction and i think it actually impressed her at the time. that was not my consideration. i was just being a lazy indulgent parent and wanted to see the tv show with her. get -- not your interest in much by your creativity? >> i am not so sure, compared to real created people, i am creative. >> what you mean? you have 100 lightning rods. >> that is just a bad little construction of dna that makes you buy stuff and keep it. >> what is i come from in your family. >> my father was a copywriter and he liked to write. >> do you have brothers and sisters? >> yeah, brother no longer living. he liked to write music. my mother was a writer and actress, broadway actress. so it is probably in the gene pool. it's in the water. >> who owns amc? family are the controlling shareholders, but amc is a public company. it asserted by chuck dolan who, by the way, founded b before it was sold to nbc. founded before it was sold to nbc. he was the godfather regional sports. he created regional news. he created all of this niche stuff, which is why i went to work with the company, to work with an arts channel b and movie channel amc. channel, b, and movie channel, amc. bravo, and movie channel, amc. >> where i landed for a moment, the first chuck dolan -- he started the first regional channel. it was 1986. and i must say i thought, even though i read his book and thought it was wonderful, i thought this is not going to work. it is in the shadow of these broadcast network-owned and influenced new shows. but it first. from the time i read the book to 1986 is not too long. >> back to politics. this is a clip from a national press club appearance by the former vice president of the united states. take a look. [video clip] >> it doesn't help matters when prime time tv has "murphy brown," a character that supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly paid professional woman mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice. i knowent on and i said it is not fashionable to talk about moral values, but we need to do it. even though our cultural leaders in hollywood, network tv, the national newspapers routinely jeer at them, i think that must've us in this room know that some things are good and other things are wrong. that was not in the national press club. chamber the kansas city of commerce. as you know, the right wing things they left wing hollywood types are using their platform for politics and i ask you if that's true. it if that's good or bad you mason -- or bad. and it may sound obvious. given a chemical answer. i think people feel very strongly about what they believe. they really believe it from their hearts. they don't do leave it for bad reasons. they believe it for the best reasons. it is true for them. and they have deep conviction about it. thethe great ring about first amendment in america is that people can really vigorously disagree and you can call each other names. >> should the government have anything to say about the content of television? >> the government has something to say about it. >> should it? >> oh, should it? i think that my arsenal opinion -- my personal opinion is that, yes, regulation in a number of different forms is very good and is helpful, particularly if it is setting up guidelines and indexes or indices for what to expect and what the calibrations are, imperfect as they may be. i think that is a helpful be. >> what would your reaction be if the fcc calls you in and says i don't like violence on amc? think it would be a good -- i mean this -- i think it would be a very good conversation half and i would like -- and i would welcome it. >> why? >> why? because i think it is worth understanding ultimately, if we can really understand what has impact on people's lives, what creates behavior, what the isior -- what behavior emulated or imitated, if that can be understood, you make more responsible decisions. i'm not -- i'm not suggesting that i would want to be told what to do. i've i would want the dialogue. i think it is helpful. >> [indiscernible] >> i haven't thought of a better way to protect with seems to be the best thing about living here than the first amendment. it sometimes feels like there is a fair amount of friction in it because we'll have to listen to people whose opinions we really don't like, who we think are amoral or immoral or dangerous or venal and there is a bit of a price to pay for tolerating what some might consider to be a torrent if not hateful -- to be abhorrent if not hateful. >> how many people were for amc? >> roughly a thousand. >> what is your annual gross revenues? >> about a billion and a half dollars. >> when you look in your career, what is the most important made, besidesave having two 16mm cameras in a rambler? what is the most important decision you made to become ceo of amc? to have the ratings success you have, but your own personalization on where you went in your own life? >> i guess my answer would be that i just wanted to do what interested me most. it happened to have led to a series of failures. probably failure trying out acting, not much success, trying out riding, not too much success, trying out being a producer in a small way, and i failed up to being an executive. >> but there was there a decision along the way that took you to the dolan family, that took you to showtime, that made a big difference in your life? >> yeah. so probably the decision that was the most important one for me, careerwise, was going to rainbow then going to dolan television. the way they ran that comfy with the invitation to be adventurous and entrepreneurial, take risks and do new things, and their interest in what was new and relatively was probably it. >> what would you like to do before you quit? >> probably do more of the same varied,er, better, more , on the globeer and on the internet. around the globe and on the internet. >> what is your favorite program that you have done? that you like to muster self? -- that you like the most your self? >> it is a hard thing to say. >> take a chance. >> it is hard for me to get over ."reaking bad" and "madmen we have a new show called "rectify" that is quite exquisite. , thank you very much. the book is called "the big extra, america in panorama." how much is this, by the way? >> check with your local retailer. [laughter] >> thank you very much. >> for free transcript or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at q and a -.org.t qand >> this week, encore presentations of "u.n. date," starting with robin nagle. she talks about her recent book called "picking up," which chronicle is garbage collection in new york. >> in a few moments, question time in the british house of commons. after that, kentucky senator rand paul speaking at the citadel military academy in charleston, south carolina. later, a look at how elections are being affected by partisan politics. >> during question time this past week, prime minister judy cameron -- david cameron talked about his call with the iranian prime minister. it was the first call between a british prime minister and iranian leader in over a decade. on iran's nuclear program. the prime minister
front the have some connection to politics.so i think it has a pretty big impact.>> of all the programs you produced over the years, which had the most impact on politics, on the pop-culture scene?>> i will answer with a movie we distributed.we distributed a movie several years ago called in the loop.it was done by a guy named armando and it was a british take on politics.armando went on to do a beautiful show on hbo called "veep."it was the lighter side of politics.i don't know if you've seen it.i'm not sure it is the most profound effect but it has caught some attention.not our show.a wonderful show done by hbo. what impact do you think television has on the political system and political culture.>> for those that don't watch everything that you do, what do you do?>> i work at amc networks.>> you run it.>> yes.i will name some of our shows.i don't want to bore you or anyone watching this.we have "mad men was quote and "breaking bad" and "walking dead."we have a show call "hell on wheels," "wetv," which is a channel for women.we have a bunch of shows specifically targeted for african-american women.it is very popular was something we put together called "braxton family values."we have a channel devoted to independent film.and we have taken a left turn and made a lot of comedies.one of them is called "portlandia."and a couple of other new ones coming up, and is sent -- in addition to "company bang bang" and "stars about le bon -- "stars of babylon."and a couple of wonderful dramatic series and miniseries.>> so the sundance channel, the we channel, afc.ok, here is a piece of video from 1993, 20 years ago.>> 00.-- oh oh.>> i want nothing that i say to mitigate the fact that there is too much violence in television and films.i think it comes from the news organizations, from the news collectors on any local station in my town.the first five or seven stories every evening are of her rape, murder, a mass murder, child abuse -- never the national or international stories of significance, but the violent stories.a great goal of harm is done that way.but i hasten to say that i think the greatest piece of violence done to the american people has been done by omission by the congress of the united states, by the fact that they have not managed over these years to find a gun control law that will prevent children will years of age from finding guns.>> norman lear, 20 years ago, people for the american way, former television producer and your on that board of able for the american way.fit it all together.he is talking about some of the violence on the shows you have on pimp i haven't seen some of them.i saw one episode of "breaking bad bad."where does that fit in?that was 20 years ago.have things change?>> that was 20 years a . ago.people for the american way is, among many things, meant to protect freedom of speech and i am a proud long time twenty-year plus board member.and i admire the work that norman set up and that able for the american way carries on because they are vigilant -- and that people for the american way carries on because they are vigilant.they do wonderful work.the question of television balance, it is interesting that that is the clip he cousin -- because it will be a complicated answer on my part.we do have some shows that, in a narrative sense portray violence.and i don't know what impact they have on people's behavior.there may be experts to understand it better than i do.i have a personal opinion and a question about it that is actually -- happens to be somewhat similar to that that was expressed by norman lear in that clip 25 years ago.which is -- his reference was not to the portrayal in narrative of violent acts and i'm not enough of an authority of what impact that may or may not have, but he talked about news, in particular local news, and what leads local news so frequently.i must say that i have share the same perception and the same concern about its influence on behavior in the name of news and i am not enough of an expert if it either -- expert of it either to definitively say but i watch it and wonder and worry and i share the view that he expressed.about the availability of guns.so your question is a rich one and my opinion is i hope a reasonably humble one and a personal one, not necessarily an authoritative one.but it is -- and i have much more concerned about the availability of guns and what is portrayed in and on news than what is portrayed in fictio fiction.there could presumably be a rich discussion on what violent fiction has a vocations on -- violent fiction has implications on the american people.>> the united way.how did you get involved with that?>> it appealed to me personally because i think america is a wonderful country and freedom of speech is in my view central to what is wonderful about america along with a bunch of other things.people for the american way was born to protect freedom of speech and to watch out for where freedom of speech is being compromised.and i thought working in the tv business that was central to what makes tv, media intimidations great so i could lend a hand.and people for the american way does a whole lot more than that in terms of their overall agenda, which is more broadly civil rights, first amendment rights and protection and they have a whole bunch of activist programs.so they go on beyond the scope.>> there is something on your website, people for the american way, called white winged watch.>> yes. >> and i have the copy in my hand. it's going be old when people see this, it's back in october. but it looks like that the people for the american way track right wingers. you actually call it right wing watch? >> yes. >> does that make you a left winger? >> i don't think so. i think the -- the -- the intention of right wing watch was to be a monitor. and my own view is is it good we all monitor one another and express views about what we're all up to, i really mean that. you can like it or not. and i think it's good to sigh it whether you like it or not, soem people won't like my views. i probably won't like to hear them not like my views but they should monitor. monitor is to monitor people of import who have importance and who are saying things that should be heard and conveyed and expressed and questioned. i think it's a worthwhile and virt without effort. >> who are some of the people besides norman larry and alec baldwin and, oh, trying to think of so many others on the list that are on the board? >> mary francis barry, long-time and well-known civil rights leader. >> michael keegan? >> the president of people for the american way. there have been and are a number of people from the clergy on people from the american way. i think happily and proudly from the baptist church. from the jewish religion. and there have been -- there have been a catholic priest. >> kathleen turner, the actress. >> people from the arts, people from the politics. people from the clergy. a wide range and wonderful group of people. >> how effective do you think you've been? >> i would say them, not me. they do the work. i'm on the board. i should be -- i wish i was a little more active. i would like to take credit for all their work. i think at times they've been terrificically effective. at times, less so. i think the existence of the people for the american way is wonderful, important, maybe even profound. so i think very important, not necessarily effective every day, but over the long term, very effective. >> let's play this -- there are people watching saying with hear it on the air all the time that the media is controlled by left wingers. who have an agenda who are doum dumbing down the society by bringing more and more violence to television, more language to television, more sex to television. what do you say to them? if your worst critic was in front of them, then you add to that, we have this thing called the first amendment. >> yeah. well, i have a really quite a different view. i think that the media world is largely in the interest of the free market today. which i think is terrific and the free market in the u.p.s. operates better than anywhere else in the world. the free market brings to the american television screen on cable television literally as you know hundreds hawneds and hundreds of channels of immensely diverse views and they're best seen in the news spectrum because they're the most on the nose and you can watch cnn or msnbc or fox news and now you can watch al jazeera or you can watch business news or two forms of business news. but in those alone, you get views that are somewhere on the left, the right, from the center, somewhere else. what a phenomenally rich dialogue. it's all operating in -- in a commercial world in which the market is guiding a lot of what happens. i think that's fantastic. >> let's go back to anc and a program that you've been given many awards for called madmen. i want to run a clip of it. explain -- it hits me right between the eyes because it's my era. but let's watch this. >> sure, good. >> advertising space. happiness. >> a little sex appeal. >> so your mother and father are responsible for all of this? >> you are okay? >> damn it, i know you're having an affair. >> what do women want? >> who cares. i could do anything i could to make you happy. >> this is delicate, but potent. >> move forward. >> starting a new agency. >> what's the program about and when did it start? the program started about six years ago. the program takes place in over a six-year period now or so. it takes place in new york city on madison avenue and the backdrop is the world of advertising in what some consider to be the golden age or the glory days. but it's really a character study. >> 1960s. >> yeah, yeah. it's really -- it's a social study but more a character study. it's done by the brilliant net whooiner who created it and created all of the wonderful characters in it and struck a responsive chord. >> do you watch it? >> yeah, love it. >> what impact has this had on your company? >> it's been a great help to our company. we operated something called the american movie classics before it was amc. we made the determination to go to original programming and we had done a couple of shows before that. but madmen represented probably the most successful and first of what i would call it the new era of amc. it put us on the chapter. >> people back in the '60s as bad as the program portrays? smoked all the time. drank at the office. lots of affairs. i could go on. >> well, my father was a copywriterer and creative director on madison avenue. and in 1962 would have been 42 years old. he didn't go to college. he was born in brooklyn. he squeaked his way through high school and he was well-dressed. so to protect the legacy of the sapan family, i'm going to restrain myself from asking more specifically and say, it seems to have created some sort of a portrait that rings true. >> why did it catch on? >> i think it really caught on because what matt whiner did in constructing it and the way it was cast and directed. incredible work of everybody who is involved, scott horn beck, all of the actors, a great study of characters and relationships. >> when did you know it was having an impact, besides just numbers. >> yeah. it was probably two or three seasons in when -- when -- it was first parodied, i think, on "saturday night live." when you're parodied on "saturday night live," you know you've arrived. >>. >> there's more to this than just a television show. you're talking about all of the blogs that have been devoted to breaking down the plots and all that stuff. you mentioned the importance of video on demand and people catching up with it later? >> right. >> where did -- explain that. and whiner is connected to the sopranos which some people think is one of the great things that's ever been made? he feels a producer on the sopranos and a writer on the sopranos. and i think that my opinion, brian, is that great stories and great characters affect people. they affect them sometimes deeply. and not to be haifa luting about it, but if you read the novel and the novel is great and 300 years later, people are still reading it, it has staying power and the character have staying power. they read something beyond the little story they were written in. they become permanent. i think mad men in the television space, it has impact. as no the technology question which is interesting to me working in the business, i think we benefitted and the show benefitted at least two a degree through the emergence of cable on demand. and the people to have the ability to go to the server and say i'm going to watch that later. and internet services on demand, you can catch up and be current so you don't have to be limited to a linear schedule of sunday night at 9:00 or 10:00 p.m. you can find it, give it the attention. from the commercial point of view, get hooked and watch "live" with us. >> what role does twitter play and facebook and dvds? all of this technology when you started in the university of wisconsin didn't exist. >> i think they all helped. the most profound one is the most profound of all of the technological changes for serialized dramatic tv is the ability the go find the show when you want in sequence for stories that are ongoing. if they require more attention -- some of our shows on showtime and fx and hbo, they do, they require more attention. people can go there when they're ready and with partner, spouse, friend, and watch when they're not distracted. i think that helms. and then all of those social media opportunities act as axel rants because they allow you to play, engage, discuss. like a permanent book group with a tv show occurring indigiting endly. >> i want to run "the walking dead" a clip. one of the main reasons i want to show this is because it blew the ratings right off of the charts a couple of weeks ago. the opening episode was 16 million viewer s? >> 16 million viewers. >> does that ever happen in -- >> you don't -- i want to be careful about identifying records to make sure i've got stats right. but i think it was a record for -- i think it won the season, if i'm not mistaken. there's some question that the football game on that night, on a delayed three-day basis, it won the season -- highest rated show of the season. >> this is violent. >> yes. yes. >> there are people walking that use supposed to be the walking dead. they get their heads bashed in. we'll ask you about it. sure.[video clip]>> docto doctor.doctor.>> the walking dead, on the episode sunday night at nine only on nbc -- only on amc.>> i have only watched one episode, i will admit.i have watched people bash other people's heads in. what is the point? [laughter] why do we like? >> i will give you my opinion. it will sound like a pretty answer. i don't mean it to sound like a pretty answer. but i think it begins with it is a great character study set against a backdrop of a post apocalyptic world. in this case, a zombie apocalypse. but i think the post apocalyptic world is very interesting. they are interesting because of the world we live in and because of all the things that a lot of us are occasionally afraid of. all of which could have the effect of making the world not quite as we know it. and i think it is also phenomenal so-called theater. it is a great backdrop for what happens when people are together and alone in a world that they no longer new -- separated from their loved ones, reconstituting relationships with one another with this lingering threat caused by the apocalypse. what a wonderful set up. and it is executed beautifully and the characters are great and surprising and actually pretty subtle among notwithstanding the violence. the makeup is spookily good. so you believe it and you immerse yourself in it and you are invited in and your captured and your heartthrobs. and i think it throbs occasionally with fear and a little bit with sympathy and a little bit with love and a little bit hoping for someone to have a good life. so i think it is a great story. >> how did you get that many people to watch it? in numbers today, that is a huge number for anybody to watch any television show except a sports television program or to stay couple of others. 16 million people. >> yes. we are in season three. it has been building. the technology, things i mentioned earlier, people can find their way to it not only when it is on our schedule on amc. so they are inviting and suggesting their friends to it. >> go back to the violence thing. if this is so successful with this heavy violence, does that mean that the american people love violence? this is an old subject. you look in the movies. it is constant boom, boom, boom, what hollywood puts out. >> one can judge for themselves. i don't think it is the violence. i really don't think it is the violence that makes the show of attractive -- the show attractive. it is obviously caricature. that has been a zombie apocalypse. so far, there has not been a zombie apocalypse. so it is sensible -- so it is fanciful and extreme and creative. i think it creates drama and it is a great construct. it is fundamentally about survival and fundamentally about how people organize with one another and actually how they fall in love and have babies and all the good stuff of life that is set against a very dramatic backdrop. >> let's talk about josh say pan -- josh sapan for a moment. where does the pronunciation come from? >> i will take anything. anyone who says my name in any vague way, like a dog, i will just respond if it is close. >> where does the name come from? >> at ellis island, we lost the ifty. >> where did you grow up? i grew up in brooklyn and went to college in the midwest. >> why did you find your way from queens, brooklyn area to the midwest to the university of wisconsin? >> i went to visit it and i thought it was the most beautiful and unlike anything i had ever seen. i had never actually been to the midwest in my whole life. i was attracted to all of it including the university. >> what year did you graduate? >> 1970 -- i took a little time to graduate so i think it was 19 76 or eight i the time i graduated. >> one of the things that i saw when looking at your background, you started out reading roughly smith's "wired nation." >> yes. >> tell us who that was and why did that matter to you? >> yeah. i don't know how i got the book. i was interested in tv and studied it in college and came upon "a wired nation" in which he offered a view. at the time, there were few tvs wired to cable television. and he offered a view of every tv set in america hoped up to a hardwire where, if you recall, not only a diversity of national channels, but he was really focused on local and cut that there would be this robust local editorial television opportunity that the sort of -- if one can analogize -- something like an electronic newspaper. it seemed actually that his vision was grand and i thought perhaps exaggerated who knew that he would be right on the money. then the entire nation would be absolutely wide and along the way there would be satellite alternatives and a second wired alternative. the unthinkable at the time is that, along the side -- alongside all of it, there would be a worldwide internet. question one of the stories often told about you leaving college, getting two 16 milliliter projectors, having put them in your automobile and going from campus to campus showing your films. how did that happen and expand more about that. >> the university wisconsin, we had a film society and showed movies. we show them from -- we showed them for profit. it was a fun experience. my friend and i hatched a plot that we would not have a movie theater but a mobile movie theater. so we had a natural rambler station wagon and we had two 16mm projectors. we began to tour the midwest, setting up in college towns. we began in ohio and showing movies that we thought would be of appeal to university communities. but it worked ok. >> you charged money? >> oh, yeah, it was a for-profit venture. in each town, we would find a location. it was an odd notion. it was an itinerant alternative movie theater on 16mm in towns before there was the diversity on television when there was only broadcast television and one most of these college towns didn't have our theaters. so we should french films and the bicycle thief and "duck soup." and we showed alternative cinema, if you can pardon the word. >> would you charge? -- what did you charge? >> i can't remember. it was two dollars probably. >> did you make money? >> yeah. >> what year did you start? >> i am bad with chronology. i think it was 1976 because i graduated surely thereafter. 1975. a little earlier. we did for not all that long. maybe getting toward a year. but it worked economically. we figured out how to do it. we remitted some of the money to the companies that owned the films. we split the gate with them. it was a fun business. >> were you political back then? the university of wisconsin is known as a fairly liberal school. >> yes. that is in part the reason i went there. i was interested in the politics. >> how active were you? >> i was active periodically. i was in and out of political activism. ? >> what does that mean -- >> what does that mean? >> i was active for a while and then i was engaged in theater. so i was in and out of politics. there were more people more consistent. >> use but how many years with the goal/amc -- you were how many years with the dolan/amc company? >> i worked at a local cable system in nearly days of cable television called "what was then -- called what was then teleprompter. >> why were you attracted to cable tv? it was a very dominant or prominent than. -- prom and then -- prominent then. >> i had read "the wired future" and i found my way to teleprompter manhattan. >> let's run this and see what they can tell us about it. [video clip] >> tonight's guest has received an academy award, golden globe and broadcast film critics blocked the stern attainment and screen actors guild awards for her performance "girl interrupted." >> the new school where that was done is a school where you had been on the board. are you still on the board? >> yes. >> again, a very liberal school. there seems to be a theme here. [laughter] >> i got to the new school because of "inside the actors studio," which is the show that we just such -- we just saw. it is a show that was on bravo. it still is on bravo. but the new school operated that as their theater program. >> you haven't done much politics. in other words, you have gone to the creative side and why? have you missed of that? or is that where people for the american way comes in? >> yeah, i got all the time. >> have you had any urge to do political programs? >> i have a lot of interest in it, brian. i watch a lot and a listen a lot -- and i listen a lot, but i don't think i have found my way to it. >> we have an unusual looking book. it is a nine usually size the book. your name is on it and so is another gentleman. >> luke sant. >> tell us about it. >> i had been collecting for 30 plus years these big photographs. when people see them, they are often of sports teams were a church which group -- or a church group. i couldn't resist him. i would put them on my wall, somewhat to my wife's chagrin because they don't necessarily always portray a happy picture. but i felt that they were intriguing because they told a little bit of a sort of random story about american history and about moments in america and about style and culture and belief and community and war. i always wanted to put together a book so i finally found a overture -- found a publisher. it came out a couple of weeks ago. >> this is a world war i transport, a location and date unknown. what got your attention here? >> you know, the people look -- in that photograph -- a look so hopeful happy. i don't know exactly where they are going or what they are doing. but it looks like people on their way to something they thought would be better. it was dramatic. >> here is a picture called "mohawk peace conference, lake mohawk new york, 1915." you have some lighter notes here written by mark halperin and you had several others write notes for you. >> right. when i was discussing the book with the publisher, we together hatched the notion that, in order to make these photographs that were historic in little more accessible, it would be nice to have captions from people whose lives or work connected to the subject in the photograph. so we were fortunate enough to get 20 people. and it is a great list of people. i cannot come up with them all but martha wrote a range of norman lear and actually kathleen turner was kind enough to write a caption and con john lewis was kind enough to write a caption. >> here's one. ariana huffington wrote this one. location unknown. 1908. she -- there are some tidbits in there. she goes on to mention the electronic media and the change in cable television and all of that. did you tell them what to write? >> no, they wrote themselves. i gave them a selection of photographs to write about and they made their own choices. >> this is one written by the clothes designer joe abboud. it is a photograph from new york city in figure 23rd of 1906. -- in february 23 of 1906. it has something to do with the tuxedo. what is this photo about? >> i just thought it was sort of exquisite in its own way and celebratory and a little bit about men's fashion. joe was kind enough to write about it and talk about tuxedos. >> what did you hope to a compass with this book? >> well, just to finish it. [laughter] i actually wanted to -- i thought it was fun to have a little view of history, of a time in america that wasn't instructional first and foremost. it was a little bit more anecdotal and a little bit more archaeological, meaning random. so you sort of take a look at them and you see bunches of where it photos and then the captions explain them. i had an image of high school students flipping through it and loving it if they flipped through it. >> maryland, date unknown, infantry division. the liner notes say that there's a mailing 25,000 people in this photograph. >> yes. >> where did you find that? >> the source of that i don't recollect. i drew from my own collection of the library of congress and from the collection of a guy named bill hunt who lent me a bunch of his photographs and he has a vast collection. >> here's one of the liberty bell that also has thousands of soldiers in it. why did they do that? do you have any idea? >> i think it was a thing. i think people would gather. my wife's relatives are hanging in what was her parents house, a picture in a flag. they were in a fight formation. it was to create an impression. >> this is from 1931, brooklyn, new york, the wallace circus annex. what you have done with this is that you have a broad ensure for you can see everybody. then in the next slide right next to it, you show, i assume, the fat lady and the door for the midget and all that. would we allow this in our society today? >> that is a good question. i think yes, under certain circumstances, because i am familiar with the circumstances under which it is allowed. but i hope that it would be treated sympathetically and it would be treated just as an expression of differences. and i mean it. >> what circumstances? >> we did a tv show called "freak show," which was about a guy in venice beach who has a boat who has extreme characteristics. i am making it sound really kind, but it is. he sort of celebrates their differences with wonder and not with any derision or judgment. really with wonder. >> in your experience, looking at americana and your private collection, what is that about? [laughter] please tell us. and how many lightning rods do you own? >> i think that if you have over 100, you have the world's largest collection. you can call it a private collection but you can have 1, 2, because they are so formal. -- me you can have one, too, because they are so affordable. they have these beautiful globes on them. so there is a little bit of a marriage of industrial art and folk art and function. i was intrigued by them so i started to collect them. >> you are married. >> yes. bikes kids? >> yes. -- >> kids? >> yes. >> women or men? >> older boy, younger girl. >> what are their interests? >> the boy, not surprisingly, nate is interested in all things story, machine, device and virtual. and the girl, claire, has a wide range. she is a high school senior and she has a wide range of interests. she likes to write. she likes history. she likes her friends. she likes tv shows. >> i want to bring you back to the family but first show another clip on another successful program that ended its run," they -- program that ended its run, "breaking bad." >> he is a high school coach who gets terminal cancer and turns to meth dealing. >> when did you decide to do this and how successful was it? >> we decided to do it six years ago. it began modest daily and became -- it began modestly and became extraordinarily successful. if anyone is a television genius, it is vince gilligan. he created a complete world and series of characters that captured somebody people. >> let's watch a little clip of this. [video clip] >> this is not an f. >> are you nuts? >> want to find out? >> you call this slowburn tv. what does that mean? >> it generally refers to tv shows the take a longer time to move people through the story. and a longer time to carry on the story and for characters to develop. >> could you do that on network television? i mean, the over the air networks? >> historically and pretty much to date, there has been very little of it on network television. >> why?> >> i think it is largely an economic consideration. at least historically, network television is or has more urgency to get ratings quickly. it doesn't have from a pure business structure point of view and of patients or does not allow as much patience to develop and build. a needs to perform more quickly and shows that are a slowburn are slower. so it has the starkly not on the -- so it has historically not been on the schedule. >> your wife came out of showtime. >> yes. >> you paint a picture of the span family -- the sapan family. you take measure of your own kids. something like "breaking bad." >> i do. i cannot avoid it. it is fun to do. >> what was their reaction to "breaking bad?" >> i showed a somewhat random episode two my then--- random episode to my then-probably well-year-old daughter and it was a skeptical parental judgment. >> why? >> it was one of my -- it was an exquisite episode that featured an atm. it was out of context and it was really dramatic. and it did leave a little bit of a mark. i think ultimately a good mark because she talks about it to this day and she talks about actually the venal nature of drug addiction and i think it actually impressed her at the time. that was not my consideration. i was just being a lazy indulgent parent and wanted to see the tv show with her. >> where did you get -- not your interest in much by your creativity? >> i am not so sure, compared to real created people, i am creative. >> what you mean? you have 100 lightning rods. >> that is just a bad little construction of dna that makes you buy stuff and keep it. >> what is i come from in your family. >> my father was a copywriter and he liked to write. >> do you have brothers and sisters? >> yeah, brother no longer living. he liked to write music. my mother was a writer and actress, broadway actress. so it is probably in the gene pool. it's in the water. >> who owns amc? >> so the dolan family are the controlling shareholders, but amc is a public company. it asserted by chuck dolan who, by the way, founded b before it was sold to nbc. i should say -- founded before it was sold to nbc. he was the godfather regional sports. he created regional news. he created all of this niche stuff, which is why i went to work with the company, to work with an arts channel, bravo, and movie channel, amc. >> where i landed for a moment, the first chuck dolan -- he started the first regional channel. it was 1986. and i must say i thought, even though i read his book and thought it was wonderful, i thought this is not going to work. it is in the shadow of these broadcast network-owned and influenced new shows. but it first. from the time i read the book to 1986 is not too long. >> back to politics. this is a clip from a national press club appearance by the former vice president of the united states. take a look. [video clip] >> it doesn't help matters when prime time tv has "murphy brown," a character that supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly paid professional woman mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice. and i went on and i said i know it is not fashionable to talk about moral values, but we need to do it. even though our cultural leaders in hollywood, network tv, the national newspapers routinely jeer at them, i think that must've us in this room know that some things are good and other things are wrong. >> that was not in the national press club. that was the kansas city chamber of commerce. as you know, the right wing things they left wing hollywood types are using their platform for politics and i ask you if that's true. and if that's good or bad you it mason -- or bad. and it may sound obvious. >> no, i can given a chemical answer. i think people feel very strongly about what they believe. they really believe it from their hearts. they don't do leave it for bad reasons. they believe it for the best reasons. it is true for them. and they have deep conviction about it. and the great ring about the first amendment in america is that people can really vigorously disagree and you can call each other names. >> should the government have anything to say about the content of television? >> the government has something to say about it. >> should it? >> oh, should it? i think that my arsenal opinion is that, yes, -- my personal opinion is that, yes, regulation in a number of different forms is very good and is helpful, particularly if it is setting up guidelines and indexes or indices for what to expect and what the calibrations are, imperfect as they may be. i think that is a helpful be. >> what would your reaction be if the fcc calls you in and says i don't like violence on amc? >> i think it would be a good -- i mean this -- i think it would be a very good conversation half and i would like -- and i would welcome it. >> why? >> why? because i think it is worth understanding ultimately, if we can really understand what has impact on people's lives, what creates behavior, what the savior -- what behavior is emulated or imitated, if that can be understood, you make more responsible decisions. i'm not -- i'm not suggesting that i would want to be told what to do. i've i would want the dialogue. i think it is helpful. >> [indiscernible] >> i haven't thought of a better way to protect with seems to be the best thing about living here than the first amendment. it sometimes feels like there is a fair amount of friction in it because we'll have to listen to people whose opinions we really don't like, who we think are amoral or immoral or dangerous or venal and there is a bit of a price to pay for tolerating what some might consider to be a torrent if not hateful -- to be abhorrent if not hateful. >> how many people were for amc? >> roughly a thousand. >> what is your annual gross revenues? >> about a billion and a half dollars. >> when you look in your career, what is the most important decision you have made, besides having two 16mm cameras in a rambler? what is the most important decision you made to become ceo of amc? to have the ratings success you have, but your own personalization on where you went in your own life? >> i guess my answer would be that i just wanted to do what interested me most. it happened to have led to a series of failures. probably failure trying out acting, not much success, trying out riding, not too much success, trying out being a producer in a small way, and i failed up to being an executive. >> but there was there a decision along the way that took you to the dolan family, that took you to showtime, that made a big difference in your life? >> yeah. so probably the decision that was the most important one for me, careerwise, was going to what was then going to rainbow plaza and dolan television. the way they ran that comfy with the invitation to be adventurous and entrepreneurial, take risks and do new things, and their interest in what was new and next and risky relatively was probably it. >> what would you like to do before you quit? >> probably do more of the same but bigger, better, more varied, a little riskier, on the globe and on the internet. around the globe and on the internet. >> what is your favorite program that you have done? that you like to muster self? >> -- that you like the most your self? >> it is a hard thing to say. >> take a chance. >> it is hard for me to get over "breaking bad" and "madmen." we have a new show called "rectify" that is quite exquisite. >> josh sapan, thank you very much. the book is called "the big extra, america in panorama." how much is this, by the way? >> check with your local retailer. [laughter] >> thank you very much. >> for free transcript or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at q and a dash at qand-.org. >> this week, encore presentations of "q&a" beginning with robin neagle. she talks about "picking up" chronicling garbage collection in new york city. 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.
armando went on to do a wonderful show on hbo called "veep." it was the lighter side of politics. i don't know if you've seen it. i'm not sure it is the most profound effect but it has caught some attention. not our show. a wonderful show done by hbo. jeff daniels just won a big award for his work. >> for those that don't watch everything that you do, what do you do? >> i work at amc networks. >> you run it. >> yes. i will name some of our shows. i don't want to bore you or anyone watching this. on amc, we have "mad men" and "breaking bad" and "walking dead." we have a show call "killing," "hell on wheels." on wetv, which is a channel for women, we have a lot of shows, including a whole bunch specifically targeted for african-american women that are quite popular, including something called "braxton family values." and ifc, a channel devoted to independent film. we have taken a left turn and make a lot of comedies. one of them is called "portlandia." and a couple of other new ones coming up, in addition to "comedy bang bang" and "stars of -- spoils of babylon." and a couple of wonderful dramatic series and miniseries. >> so the sundance channel, the we channel, amc, ifc. ok, here is a piece of video from 1993, 20 years ago. >> oh oh. >> i want nothing that i say to mitigate the fact that there is too much violence in television and films. i think it comes from the news organizations, from the news collectors on any local station in my town. the first five or seven stories every evening are of her rape, ape,re of rate, -- are of r murder, a mass murder, child abuse -- never the national or international stories of significance, but the violent stories. a great deal of harm is done that way. but i hasten to say that i think the greatest piece of violence done to the american people has been done by omission by the congress of the united states, by the fact that they have not managed over these years to find a gun control law that will prevent children will years of -- children, 12 years of age from finding guns. >> norman lear, 20 years ago, people for the american way, former television producer and you're on that board of able for -- of people for the american way. fit it all together. he is talking about some of the violence on the shows you have . i haven't seen some of them. i saw one episode of "breaking bad." where does that fit in? that was 20 years ago. have things changed? >> that was 20 years ago. people for the american way is, among many things, meant to protect freedom of speech and i am a proud, long-time 20-year- plus board member. and i admire the work that norman set up and that people for the american way carries on because they are vigilant. they do not take the first amendment or the freedom of speech for granted. they do wonderful work. the question of television violence, it is interesting that -- the clip -- it will be a complicated answer on my part. we do have some shows that, in a narrative sense portray violence. and i don't know what impact they have on people's behavior. there may be experts to understand it better than i do. i have a personal opinion and a question about it that is actually -- happens to be somewhat similar to that which was expressed by norman lear in that clip 25 years ago. which is -- his reference was not to the portrayal in narrative of violent acts and i'm not enough of an authority to know what impact that may or may not have, but he talked about news, in particular local news, and what leads local news so frequently. i must say that i have share the same perception and the same concern about its influence on behavior in the name of news and i am not enough of an expert of it either to definitively say what its impact is, but i watch it and wonder and worry and i share the view that he expressed. about the availability of guns. so your question is a rich one and my opinion is i hope a reasonably humble one and a personal one, not necessarily an authoritative one. but it is -- and i have much more concern about the availability of guns and what is portrayed in and on news than what is portrayed in fiction. there could presumably be a rich discussion on what violent fiction has implications on the american people. >> people for the american way -- how did you get involved with that? >> it appealed to me personally because i think america is a wonderful country and freedom of speech is, in my view, central to what is wonderful about america along with a bunch of other things. people for the american way was born to protect freedom of speech and to watch out for where freedom of speech is being compromised. and i thought working in the tv business that was central to what makes tv, media communications great so i could lend a hand. and people for the american way does a whole lot more than that in terms of their overall agenda, which is more broadly civil rights, first amendment rights and protection and they have a whole bunch of activist programs. so they go on beyond the scope of my original interest, so that is why i joined. >> there is something on your website, people for the american way, called white winged watch. >> yes. >> it looks like the people for the american way track right wingers and you actually call it right wing watch. does that make you a left- winger? >> i do not think so. the intention was to be a monitor. my own view is that it is good if we all monitor one another and it's good if we all express views about what we are all up to and i really mean that. and you can like it or not like it. and i think it's good to say it, whether you like it or not and some people won't like my views. i probably won't want to hear them not liking my views but i would like to hear them express their views. so to monitor people of import to have influence, who are saying things that should be heard and conveyed and expressed and questioned. i think it is a worthwhile and virtuous effort. >> who are some of the people besides norman lear and alec baldwin -- and trying to think of others on the board. >> mary frances berry, a longtime and well-known civil rights leader. >> michael keegan. >> he's the president for the people for the american way. there are also members of the clergy, happily and proudly from the baptist church, rabbi david saperstein from the jewish religion. there is a catholic priest and congressman. >> kathleen turner the actress. >> some people from the arts. people from politics. people from the clergy. a pretty wide range and wonderful group of people. >> how effective do you think you have been? >> i would say them, not me. they do the work. i am on the board. i wish i were a little bit more active. i would like to take it for -- i would like to take credit for their work. i think at times they have been terrific and at times not so much so. i think the directive at the people for the american way is important and maybe even profound. i think very important, not necessarily effective every day, but certainly over the long run, very important. >> there are people watching that say -- we hear it on the air all the time -- that the media is controlled by left- wingers who have an agenda, who are dumbing down the society by bringing more and more violence to television, more language to television, more sex to television. what do you say to them? if your worst critic were in front of you and then you add to that we have this thing called the first amendment. >> i have a different view. i think the media world is largely in the interest of the free market today, which i think is terrific. and the free market in the u.s. probably operates better than perhaps anywhere in the world. and that free market brings to the american television screen on cable television literally, as you know, hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of channels of immensely diverse views and they are probably best seen in the news spectrum because they are the most on the nose and you can watch cnn or you can watch msnbc or you can watch fox news and now you can watch al jazeera or you can watch business news or two forms of business news. but on this channels alone, you will get news that is argued on -- arguably on the left, on the right, somewhere in the center, from somewhere else and what a phenomenally rich dialogue and it is all operating in a commercial world in which the market is guiding a lot of what happens. and i think that is fantastic. >> let's go back to amc and a program that you have been given many awards for called "mad men." i want to run a clip of it. >> advertising is based on one thing -- happiness. >> you are better off with a little sex appeal. >> so your mother and father are responsible for all of this? >> you are ok. >> damn it, don, i know you are having an affair. >> what do women want, who cares? >> nostalgia, it is ok but potent. >> look forward. >> we are starting a new agency. >> what is this program about and when did it start? >> it started about six years ago. it takes place over a six-year period and it takes place in new york city on madison avenue and it takes place in what some consider to be the golden age. it is really a character study. >> 1960's. >> yeah. it is a social study but more of a character study than brilliantly by matt weiner who created it and created all the characters. it has struck a responsive chord. >> you watch it? >> yeah, i watch it. >> what impact has this had on your company? >> yeah. it has been a great help to our company. we operated in something that we called it the american movie classics before it was called amc and we made the determination to go into original programing. and we had done a couple of shows before that, but "mad men" represented the new era amc. so it sent us on our way to the chapter we are in. >> so were the people back in the 1960's as bad as the film portrays? -- as the program portrays? drank at the time, office, lots of affairs. i could go on. father, in>> my 1962, he would've been 42 years old. he was a born in college. he squeezed his way through high school but he was well dressed. so to protect the legacy of the family, i will refrain from answering more specifically and say that it seems to have created a portrait that rings true. >> why did it catch on? >> i think it really caught on because what matt weiner did in constructing it and the way it was cast and directed and the incredible work of everybody who is involved was a great study of character and a great study of relationships. >> when did you know it was having an impact? besides just numbers. >> it was two or three seasons in when it was first parodied i think on "saturday night live." when you are parodied on "saturday night live," you know you have made it. >> there is more than this to just a television show. you have talked about it. talking of all the blogs i have have been devoted in breaking down the plots and all that stuff, you mentioned the importance of the on demand and people catching up with it later, explain that. weiner is connected to "the sopranos," which some people think is one of the great things that has ever been made. think, my opinion, brian, is that great stories and great characters affect people. and they affect them sometimes deeply. and not to be too highfalutin he -- highfalutin about it, but if and you thinkel the novel is rated 300 years later and people are still reading it, it has staying power and the characters have staying power and they have something that means beyond the little story that they were first written in. they become permanent. and i think "madmen," in the television framework, has some of that. as for the technology question, which is interesting to me working in the business, we benefited and the show benefited at least to a degree through the emergence of cable on demand and the ability for people to go to their server and say i am going to watch that later. and then internet services on demand or you can catch up -- where you can catch up afterwards. and then be current and you don't need to be limited to a linear schedule of sunday night at 9:00 or 10:00 p.m. you can find it in your own schedule and immerse yourself and pay great attention. from a purely commercial point of view, get hooked and watch live with us. i think that was a great benefit. >> what role does twitter play in it and facebook and dvds and all the technologies? when you started at the university, it didn't exist. memo -- >> the most profound one is the most profound of all the technical changes sterilized tv is being able to find the show that you want in sequence for stories that are ongoing. they require more attention. some of our shows do and some of the shows on hbo and showtime and fx really do require more attention. that is what is great about them. people can go to them when they are ready. and when they are with partner, spouse, friend and watch when they are not distracted. i think that helps. all of those social media opportunities act as accelerants because they allow you to play with it to engage, to discuss it they are sort of like a permanent book group on a tv show that is going on concurrently and digitally which has supersized consumer attention. >> the next clip is from "the walking dead." this blew the ratings right off the charts a couple of weeks ago in the opening episode was 16 million viewers? >> 16 million viewers. >> has that ever happened? >> i want to be careful about identifying records. but i think it was a record for i think it won the season if i am not mistaken. there is a question about the football game that was on that night. on a delayed three-day basis, it won the highest-rated show of the season. >> and this is violent. >> yes. >> there are people walking and they are supposed to be the walking dead and they get their heads bashed in. let's watch. then i will ask you about it. >> sure. [video clip] >> doctor. doctor. >> "the walking dead," all new episode sunday night at 9:00 only on amc. >> i have only watched one episode, i will admit. i have watched people bash other people's heads in. what is the point? [laughter] why do we like? -- why do we like this? >> i will give you my opinion. it will sound like a pretty answer. i don't mean it to sound like a pretty answer. but i think it begins with it is a great character study set against a backdrop of a post apocalyptic world. in this case, a zombie apocalypse. but i think the post apocalyptic worlds are pretty interesting. they are interesting because of the world we live in and because of all the things that a lot of us are occasionally afraid of. all of which could have the effect of making the world not quite as we know it. and i think it is also phenomenal so-called theater. it is a great backdrop for what happens when people are together and alone in a world that they no longer know, separated from their loved ones, reconstituting relationships with one another with this lingering threat of what caused by the apocalypse. what a wonderful set up. and it is executed beautifully and the characters are great and surprising and actually pretty subtle, notwithstanding the violence. the makeup is spookily good. so you believe it and you immerse yourself in it and you are invited in and your captured and your heart throbs. and i think it throbs occasionally with fear and a little bit with sympathy and a little bit with love and a little bit hoping for someone to have a good life. so i think it is a great story. >> how did you get that many people to watch it? in numbers today, that is a huge number for anybody to watch any television show except a sports program or just a couple of other shows. 16 million people. >> yes. we are in season three. it has been building. the technology, things i mentioned earlier, people can find their way to it not only when it is on our schedule on amc. so they are inviting and suggesting their friends view it. >> go back to the violence thing. if this is so successful with this heavy violence, does that mean that the american people love violence? this is an old subject. you look in the movies. it is constant boom, boom, boom, what hollywood puts out. >> one can judge for themselves. i don't think it is the violence. i really don't think it is the violence that makes the show attractive. it is obviously caricature. there has been a zombie apocalypse. so far, there has not been a zombie apocalypse. so it is fanciful and extreme and that there is a fundamental conceit in it. i think it creates drama and it is a great construct. it is fundamentally about survival and fundamentally about how people organize with one another and actually how they fall in love and have babies and all the good stuff of life that is set against a very dramatic backdrop. >> let's talk about josh sapan for a moment. where does the pronunciation come from? >> i will take anything. anyone who says my name in any vague way, like a dog, i will just respond if it is close. >> where does the name come from? sapanisky. at ellis island, we lost the isky. >> where did you grow up? >> i grew up in brooklyn and went to college in the midwest. >> why did you find your way from queens, brooklyn area to the midwest to the university of wisconsin? >> i went to visit it and i thought it was the most beautiful and unlike anything i had ever seen. i had never actually been to the midwest in my whole life. i was attracted to all of it including the university. >> what year did you graduate? >> 1970 -- i took a little time to graduate so i think it was 1976 or 1978 by the time i graduated. >> one of the things that i saw when looking at your background, you started out reading ralph lee smith's, "wired nation." >> yes. >> tell us who that was and why did that matter to you? >> yeah. i don't know how i got the book. i was interested in tv and studied it in college and came upon "the wired nation" in which he offered a view. at the time, there were few tvs wired to cable television. and he offered a view of every tv set in america hooked up to a hardwire where, if you recall, not only a diversity of national channels, but he was really focused on local and thought that there would be this robust local editorial television opportunity that was sort of -- if one can analogize -- something like an electronic newspaper. it seemed actually that his vision was grand and i thought perhaps exaggerated who knew -- and i thought perhaps exaggerated. who knew that he would be right on the money? then the entire nation would be absolutely wide and along the -- wired and along the way there would be satellite alternatives and a second wired alternative. the unthinkable at the time is that, alongside all of it, there would be a worldwide internet. question one of the stories often told about you leaving college, getting two 16 milliliter projectors, having put them in your automobile and going from campus to campus showing your films. how did that happen and expand -- and explain more about that. >> the university wisconsin, we had a film society and showed movies. we showed them for profit. it was fun to do. it was a fun experience. my friend and i hatched a plot that we would not have a movie theater but a mobile movie theater. so we had a rambler station wagon and we had two 16mm projectors. we began to tour the midwest, setting up in college towns. we began in ohio and showing movies that we thought would be of appeal to university communities. and it worked ok. >> you charged money? >> oh, yeah, it was a for-profit venture. >> wherewith they watch these movies? would they watch these movies? >> in each town, we would find a location. it was an odd notion. it was an itinerant alternative movie theater on 16mm in towns before there was the diversity on television when there was only broadcast television and when most of these college towns theaters.e art so we should french films and french films and "the bicycle thief" and "duck soup." and we showed alternative cinema, if you can pardon the word. >> what did you charge? >> i can't remember. it was $2.00 probably. >> did you make money? >> yeah. >> what year did you start? >> i am bad with chronology. i think it was 1976 because i graduated shortly thereafter. 1975. a little earlier. we did it for, not all that long. maybe getting toward a year. but it worked economically. we figured out how to do it. we remitted some of the money to the companies that owned the films. we split the gate with them. it was a fun business. >> were you political back then? the university of wisconsin is known as a fairly liberal school. >> yes. that is, in part, some of the reason i went there. i was interested in the politics. >> how active were you? >> i was active periodically. i was in and out of political activism. >> what does that mean? >> i was active for a while and then i was engaged in theater. so i was in and out of politics. there were many more people committed and consistent with their political activities. >> you were how many years with the dolan/amc company? >> i worked at a local cable system in the early days of cable television called what was then teleprompter. >> why were you attracted to cable tv? it was a very dominant and -- it was not very dominant and prominent then. >> i had read "the wired future" and i found my way to teleprompter manhattan. memo here is a program that you hereesponsible for -- >> is a program that you are responsible for. let's run this and see what they you can tell us about it. [video clip] ♪ >> tonight's guest has received an academy award, golden globe and broadcast film critics , andbuster entertainment screen actors guild awards for her performance "girl interrupted." >> the new school where that was done is a school where you had been on the board. are you still on the board? >> yes. >> again, a very liberal school. there seems to be a theme here. [laughter] >> i got to the new school because of "inside the actors studio," which is the show that we just saw. it is a show that was on bravo. it still is on bravo. we sold bravo to nbc, but the new school operated that as their theater program. >> you haven't done much politics. in other words, you have gone to the creative side and why? have you missed of that? -- have you missed that, or is that where people for the american way comes in? >> yeah, i vote all the time. >> have you had any urge to do political programs? >> i have a lot of interest in it, brian. i watch a lot and i listen a lot, but i don't think i have found my way to it. >> we have an unusual looking book. size theunusually -- sized book. your name is on it and so is another gentleman. >> luke sant. >> tell us about it. >> i had been collecting for 30 plus years these big photographs. when people see them, they are often of sports teams or a church group. i couldn't resist him. i would put them on my wall, somewhat to my wife's chagrin because they don't necessarily always portray a happy picture. but i felt that they were intriguing because they told a little bit of a sort of random story about american history and about moments in america and about style and culture and belief and community and war. i always wanted to put together a book so i finally found a publisher. it came out a couple of weeks ago. >> this is a world war i transport, a location and date unknown. what got your attention here? >> you know, the people look -- in that photograph -- they look so hopeful, happy. i don't know exactly where they are going or what they are doing. but it looks like people on their way to something they thought would be better. it was dramatic. >> here is a picture called "mohawk peace conference, lake mohawk, new york, 1915." you have some liner notes here written by mark halperin and you had several others write notes for you. >> right. when i was discussing the book with the publisher, we together hatched the notion that, in order to make these photographs that were historic in little -- historic and a little more accessible, it would be nice to have captions from people whose lives or work connected to the subject in the photograph. so we were fortunate enough to get 20 people. and it is a great list of people. i cannot come up with them all norman lear wrote a turner wasd kathleen kind enough to write a caption and congressman john lewis was kind enough to write a caption. >> here's one. ariana huffington wrote this one. location unknown. 1908. she -- there are some tidbits in there. she goes on to mention the electronic media and the change in cable television and all of that. did you tell them what to write? >> no, they wrote themselves. i gave them a selection of photographs to write about and they made their own choices. >> this is one written by the clothes designer, joe abboud. it is a photograph from new york city on february 23, 1906. it has something to do with the tuxedo. what is this photo about? >> i just thought it was sort of exquisite in its own way and celebratory and a little bit about men's fashion. joe was kind enough to write about it and talk about tuxedos. >> what did you hope to accomplish with this book? >> well, just to finish it. [laughter] i actually wanted to -- i thought it was fun to have a little view of history, of a time in america that wasn't instructional first and foremost. it was a little bit more anecdotal and a little bit more archaeological, meaning random. so you sort of take a look at them and you see bunches of weird photos and then the captions explain them. i had an image of high school students flipping through it and loving it if they flipped through it. >> maryland, date unknown, infantry division. the liner notes say that there's something like 25,000 people in this photograph. >> yes. >> where did you find that? >> the source of that i don't recollect. i drew from my own collection of the library of congress and from the collection of a guy named bill hunt, who lent me a bunch of his photographs and he has a vast collection. >> here's one of the liberty bell that also has thousands of soldiers in it. why did they do that? do you have any idea? >> i think it was a thing. i think people would gather. my wife's relatives are hanging in, what was her parents house, a picture in a flag. it was a big, giant flag formation. it was to create an impression. >> this is from 1931, brooklyn, new york, the wallace circus annex. what you have done with this is that you have a broad picture that you can see everybody. then in the next slide right next to it, you show, i assume, the fat lady and the door for the midget and all that. would we allow this in our society today? >> that is a good question. i think yes, under certain circumstances, because i am familiar with the circumstances under which it is allowed. but i hope that it would be treated sympathetically and it would be treated just as an expression of differences. and i mean it. >> what circumstances? >> we did a tv show called "freak show," which was about a guy in venice beach who has a have extreme who characteristics. i am making it sound really kind, but it is. he sort of celebrates their differences with wonder and not with any derision or judgment. really with wonder. >> in your experience, looking at americana and your private collection, what is that about? [laughter] please tell us. and how many lightning rods do you own? >> i think that if you have over 100, you have the world's largest collection. you can call it a private collection but you can have one, too, because they are so affordable. i became intrigued by their shape. they are like weathervanes. they are decorative. they have animals on them. they have arrows on them. they have these beautiful globes on them. so there is a little bit of a marriage of industrial art and folk art and function. i was intrigued by them so i started to collect them. >> you are married. >> yes. >> kids? >> yes. >> how old? >> 19 and 17. >> women or men? >> older boy, younger girl. >> what are their interests? >> the boy, not surprisingly, nate is interested in all things story, machine, device and virtual. and the girl, claire, has a wide range. she is a high school senior and she has a wide range of interests. she likes to write. she likes history. she likes her friends. she likes tv shows. >> i want to bring you back to >> i want to bring you back to the family, but first show another clip on another successful program that ended its run, "breaking bad." tell us what it was. a it is the unlikely story of high school teacher who gets terminal cancer and turns to meth dealing. >> when did you decide to do this and how successful was it? >> we decided to do it six years ago. it began modestly and became extraordinarily successful. if anyone is a television genius, it is vince gilligan. he created a complete world and series of characters that -- ured so many people's >> let's watch a little clip of this. [video clip] -- meth.s not math >> are you nuts? >> want to find out? >> you call this slowburn tv. what does that mean? >> it generally refers to tv shows the take a longer time to move people through the story. longer time to carry on the story and for characters to develop. >> could you do that on network television? >> historically and pretty much to date, there has been very little of it on network television. >> why? >> i think it is largely an economic consideration. at least historically, network television is or has more urgency to get ratings quickly. it doesn't have, from a pure business structure point of view, patience or does not allow as much patience to develop and build. it needs to perform more quickly and shows that are a slowburn are slower. so it has historically not been on the schedule. >> your wife came out of showtime. >> yes. >> you paint a picture of the sapan family. you take measure of your own kids. their reactions to something like "breaking bad." >> i do. i cannot avoid it. it is fun to do. >> what was their reaction to "breaking bad?" >> i showed a somewhat random episode to my then, probably 12- year-old daughter and it was a questionable parental judgment. >> why? >> it scared the hell out of her. it was an exquisite episode that featured an atm. it was out of context and it was really dramatic. and it did leave a little bit of a mark. i think ultimately a good mark because she talks about it to this day and she talks about actually the venal nature of drug addiction and i think it actually impressed her at the time. that was not my consideration. i was probably being a lazy indulgent parent and wanted to see the tv show with her. >> where did you get -- not your interest so much, but your creativity? >> i am not so sure, compared to real created people, i am creative. >> what you mean? you have 100 lightning rods. >> i am not sure that is creative. that is just a bad little construction of dna that makes you buy stuff and keep it. >> the book has creativity. where does that come from? >> my father was a copywriter and he liked to write. >> do you have brothers and sisters? >> yeah, brother no longer living. he liked to write music. my mother was a writer and actress, broadway actress. so it is probably in the gene pool. it's in the water. >> who owns amc? >> so the dolan family are the controlling shareholders, but amc is a public company. it was started by chuck dolan who, by the way, founded b ravo, before it was sold to nbc. i should say -- founded before it was sold to nbc. he was the godfather regional sports. he created regional news. he created all of this niche stuff, which is why i went to work with the company, to work with an arts channel, bravo, and movie channel, amc. >> why did it take so long to change everything? >> i don't think it took all that long. where i landed for a moment, the first chuck dolan -- he started the first regional channel. i think i have the year right, it was 1986. and i must say i thought, even though i read his book and thought it was wonderful, i thought this is not going to work. it is in the shadow of these broadcast network-owned and influenced new shows. -- news shows. but it florida shtick. it did well. from the time i read the book to 1986 is not too long. >> back to politics. this is a clip from a national press club appearance by the former vice president of the united states. let's watch. [video clip] >> it doesn't help matters when prime time tv has "murphy brown," a character that supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly paid , professional woman mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice. and i went on and i said i know it is not fashionable to talk about moral values, but we need to do it. even though our cultural leaders in hollywood, network tv, the national newspapers routinely jeer at them, i think that most of us in this room know that some things are good and other things are wrong. >> that was not in the national press club. that was the kansas city chamber of commerce. as you know, the right wing thinks the left wing hollywood types are using their platform for politics and i ask you if that's true. and if that's good or bad you it -- and if that is good or bad. it may sound obvious. >> no, i can given a chemical -- i can give you an answer. i think people feel very strongly about what they believe. they really believe it from their hearts. they don't do leave it for bad -- they don't believe it for bad reasons. they believe it for the best reasons. it is true for them. and they have deep conviction about it. the great thing about the first amendment in america is that people can really vigorously disagree and you can call each other names. >> should the government have anything to say about the content of television? >> the government has something to say about it. >> should it? >> oh, should it? i think that my personal opinion is that, yes, regulation in a number of different forms is very good and is helpful, particularly if it is setting up guidelines and indexes or indices for what to expect and what the calibrations are, imperfect as they may be. i think that is a really helpful thing. >> what would your reaction be if the fcc calls you in and says i don't like violence on amc? >> i think it would be a good -- i mean this -- i think it would be a very good conversation half havegood conversation to and i would welcome it. >> why? >> why? because i think it is worth understanding ultimately, if we can really understand what has impact on people's lives, what creates behavior, what behavior is emulated or imitated, if that can be understood, you make more responsible decisions. i'm not suggesting that i would want to be told what to do. i would like to have the dialogue. i think it is helpful. --is the first amendment >> i haven't thought of a better way to protect with seems to be -- what seems to be the best thing about living here than the first amendment. it sometimes feels like there is a fair amount of friction in it because we'll have to listen to people whose opinions we really don't like, who we think are amoral or immoral or dangerous or venal and there is a bit of a price to pay for tolerating what some might consider abhorrent, if not hateful. it seems worth it to me. work for amc?ople >> roughly a thousand. >> what is your annual gross revenues? >> about a billion and a half dollars. >> when you look at your own career, what is the most important decision you have made, besides having two 16mm cameras in a rambler? what is the most important decision you made to become ceo of amc? personal decisions -- to have the ratings success you have, but your own personalization on where you went in your own life? >> i guess my answer would be that i just wanted to do what interested me most. it happily led to a series of failures. probably failure trying out acting, not much success, trying out writing, not too much success, trying out being a producer in a small way, and i failed up to being an executive. >> but was there a decision along the way that took you to the dolan family, that took you to showtime, that made a big difference in your life? >> yeah. so probably the decision that was the most important one for me, careerwise, was going to what was then going to rainbow cablevision, and the dolan family. companythey ran that with the invitation to be adventurous and entrepreneurial, take risks and do new things, and their interest in what was new and next and risky , relatively, was probably it. >> what would you like to do before you quit? >> probably do more of the same but bigger, better, more varied, a little riskier, on the globe and on the internet. around the globe and on the internet. >> what is your favorite program that you have done? that you like the most your self? >> it is a hard thing to say. >> take a chance. >> it is hard for me to get over "breaking bad" and "madmen." we have a new show called "rectify" that is quite exquisite. >> josh sapan, thank you very much. the book is called "the big picture: america in panorama." how much is this, by the way? >> check with your local retailer. [laughter] >> thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> for free transcript or to give us your comments about this qanda.org.sit us at >> next, washington journal. live with your phone calls and able -- and the day's latest news. more live coverage this president obama's marks in san francisco on immigration policy. tonight, live at 9:00 p.m. eastern, c-span's original series, first ladies. >> coming up next, a look at what is ahead for the agreement on iran plus nuclear program -- iran's nuclear program. then the improvements on healthcare.gov. he look at the pentagon's bookkeeping. plus, your calls, e-mails, and tweets. "washington journal" is next. >> good morning. it is monday, november 25, 2013. president obama begins the week on the west coast at an event on california -- in the california. -- in california. the nuclear deal that the president announced was the subject of intense debate. we will wrap that up for you this morning. first, we will take up the topic of public service. 50 years ago today, america buried resident john f.
wisconsin pays $1,000 in dues. that was taken out by the city and school board and given to the union you never saw. now it sits in your pocket until the union guys come and say, can we have our thousand dollars and you're allowed to say no. oddly enough, several do. and he got a concealed carry in a pass that was one of two with no concealed carry for firearms. and every rich republican has made a contribution to him when the unions tried to recall him. only governor who's ever been recalled who successfully defeated the recall and got himself re-elected. everyone else went down in american history. pretty cool. then go to rick perry. faltered last time because you shouldn't take large quantities of pain medicine during debates. i have not had any in hours. but that said, he spoke at cpac, conservative political action conference and establishment press was saying wow, he's incredibly articulate. yeah, when he's not taking pain medicine. very successful governor for like 14 years. so there's a real narrative that conveys a bunch of money. people in texas evidently have it. and you go down to bobby jindal in louisiana. also very successful governor. got an ethics law in montana that minnesota would have been pleased with passed in louisiana. talent, very aggressive, got school choice for 380,000 kids. could take a $5,000 voucher to any school they want to. not enough schools to do that but parents have that right as soon as schools are available for everybody who wants to take thm up on that. he could and may well run. jeb bush was governor for eight years. perfectly competent, reagan republican governor. and would be a candidate who could step up. i think somebody else may have to fall over for him to decide to step up but he could step up and do that. and then rand paul, who starts with 15%, 20% base vote in all 57 states and there i think you have a real opportunity as a senator, he could run. other senators very difficult to run as a senator. what did you do? i passed this bill. yeah, you and 50 other guys. what do you mean you do that? increasingly -- >> increasingly they don't pass bills. >> but then you're just giving speeches. giving speeches is fine if everyone else you're competing with is giving speeches. but if you're competing with a guy that will wake up tomorrow morning and do something on the front of the state's newspapers and television, it's awfully hard to compete with them. >> you didn't say rubio -- christie, walker, perry, jindal, bush, paul. is there a top three? rarefied leaderboard there? >> i think the good news is all of those guys are being tested from the last jobs and most have been through quite a bit. christie's being run through the ringer again. if he makes it, he will be tough as nails. if he doesn't, we will have five. but i think he's governed well in a difficult state. state of about $130 billion out of unfunded liabilities, state pension system and negotiated that through with democrat house and democratic assembly and senate in new jersey. so real progress there. sleepers, watch brownback of kansas. he could next year have an exciting legislative term just as scott walker did. back in 20 11 and that could put him up front. other than that i'm not sure i see a governor that has a legislature that would work with him to do the kind of amazing back flips where you go i know these six guys are interesting but, wow, look at the new kid in kansas. >> moving from '14 to '16 to the elections of the future, there's a pugh poll that came out i believe at the end of last week to look at trends among millennials and it found a couple things that i think i think pertains interestingly to this conversation. first, even though they don't, they tend not to identify as labels. republicans and democrats. mostly independent. the gap between number of them that voted for obama versus the republican candidate in '12 and '08 was the largest of the last 40 years. 68% of nonwhite millennials said if it's the government's spoment to provide health care and this is the most diverse generation in american history. the generation behind it is more diverse. 71% said they want a bigger government with more services. these are not slight majorities. they are filibuster-proof majorities all tb in a pugh survey. does the republican party have a serious demographic disadvantage moving forward the next 20 years? and what's the best way to think about that? >> sure. you need to look at demographics in two different ways. democrats think of demographics they think race, ethnicity, gender. because that's the way they think. there are also ways to look at it, look at the number of self-employed people, number of government workers versus private sector workers. people who own $5,000 worth of stock or 18% more republican and less democrat. which is why the republican solution to every problem is education, savings account, health saving accounts, individual retirement accounts, getting more people into the stock market. the democrats' answer to everything is 100,000 more cops, teachers, government employees because if you hold a government job long enough, you're more likely to be a d if you get paid more than $37,000. this is whatever demographics there are. makes you more likely to be a d or being a shareholder more likely to be an r. you add to that the other things you can change. this is why democrats shift. you look at the united states 25 years ago. 25 years ago homeschooling was illegal in just about every state. maybe two had it legal. today it's pretty much legal in 50 states and 2 million people homeschooled and they know perfectly well the modern democratic party wants to take that away from them. add 380,000 currents who know they have a 5,000 voucher in louisiana. 300,000 in arizona. 500,000 in indiana and now 750,000 in north carolina. now, again, we're not building out schools and structures and it will be very interesting to allow people that choice but then go to a different public school or the one that's they go to now might be nicer to them when they walk in and say, i got $5,000 here and i want to know how you are going to treat my kid this year versus last year. what are you think something they will treat you with respect, which they don't do now. or i can go to another school. you tell me. think of how you're treated when walk in to buy a car versus when you go visit the department of motor vehicles. so don't think the democrats ever come back in the states where school choice has been won. it's just as labor didn't come back in britain until they fundamentally change their viewing. remember when thatcher allowed people to buy council houses. buy your public house, council house. you can own it. people did. and ben the bolshevik who ran against her for re-election said when everybody gets in, we will steal everybody's house away and be socialist. they just got wiped out in the very areas who the demographic people would have told you those are labor voters. not when you're threatening my house. not when you're throatening my kid's education. or 30 years ago, 30 years ago there was very little concealed carry issue. people allowed carry a gun in their purse or car and swell of your back. today $9.3 million americans have concealed carry permits, starting with my parents. the person who's made that decision is a different unanimous human being than the one who says we have a government and if something goes wrong, they will come and draw a circle, little white chalk mark and this will be helpful. the person who says i will pass on that and be in charge of myself, thanks. try and take that away from people. try and take that away from people. that's why democrats get in trouble talking about gun control because they don't understand they're threatening something they consider important. we can by expanding liberty. that's where half of the country that lives in red states are doing all of these expansions of freedom. and d's are going we voted against that. we would not want you to have that freedom. if we ever get back in wisconsin, we will take your dues out and you will never see it and you don't get to say no and we will go back to the way it was. that's not a real seals pitch, to go to people. once you give people more liberty, you change the nature of who they are as voters. and i think you're seeing some of that with republican openness to a discussion about drug as federal issue out in the states. i don't think the challenges you mentioned will continue out. we're not the same prn at 40 than we were 20. that said, i think the modern republican party, and i work on this personally, needs to be much more aggressive with pro-immigration. take the smart people from around the world and when they come here in getting a ph.d., i'm not in favor of not letting them leave, i'm in favor of letting them stay and encouraging them to stay and stealing their airplane ticket home because we want all of this talent. and there's a lot of people in a lot of jobs that we need more people. the reason we're the future and china isn't is because we are remembering to have kids and we're remembering to have immigration. >> we have time -- thank you. we have time for one question. make it great. t's right there. >> hi, john cummings, writer. i know you promoted liberty but how do you feel about corporate responsibility, a company through negligence or error dumps chemicals into a west virginia river and declares bankruptcy? how can our economy deal with situations like that, that doesn't just fall on the government to bail them out? >> ok. you want to have reasonable tort laws so people who pollute their neighbor's property or water along that line pay for damage they do just as if they ran a truck over you because real damage can be done. i think it's very important that we ask individuals and businesses to be responsible for real things they do, which is why tort reform, where the trial lawyers have been getting rich going after people for stuff that the guy who owned the house before them did. some of the stuff you go after the guy with the deep pockets, again, texas passed a great number of reforms in terms of tort reform that dropped the koss of medical care in the state. more doctors are moving in texas as a result. louisiana about to pass the same collection rules. i think getting tort reform so billionaire trial lawyers that have been abusing the system and threatening people with lawsuits and basically getting paid to go aa, that sort of thing we really need to tamp down. it's killing -- not killing but damaging high-tech sector, being very unhelpful and silicon valley guys are very concerned about the abuse of the pat patrols and trial lawyers in that zone. let's reform those so that we n focus on cases of real criminal activity by individuals or people acting collectively inside a company. >> we have time for one more uestion. guy with the beard. >> guys with beards get to go first. new rule. >> you have taken it to extremes, sir. [laughter] >> sunshine press. if whoever steps forth what metrics make an economy better? that is what is the purpose of all of these policies whether it's tax cut or tort reform or whatever? how do you measure the economy is better here than there? you pointed to some states where the d's and r's are dominant. to you look at life expectancy, education levels? how can you tell if the economy or conomic policy is better worse? >> yeah, you want to have metrics. if you don't have metrics, you end up with all sorts of problem. i talked to the budget guy when bush came into office, bush 43 and said what metric are you going to use, right? running a.g.p., you're the government, or part of it. what's the metric you're going to have to contain the government of government? he said that would be a good idea. we should do something like that. but they never did. it wasn't even on the list of things to do. to measure the size of government. what are you trying to get to? per capita, the per capita g.d.p. is one measure. to be fair, some people decide to be monks or war locks or something and they're not interested in that. so it's not like you're required to want to earn a lot of money but most people would prefer to have more rather than less. one measure is g.d.p. for capita. one of the things i find sad or a measure of ill health is how few people are quitting jobs and how few people are moving. in a vibrant, dynamic economy where things are chugging, a lot of penl leave their jobs for something to move to and a lot of people move, something to move towards . when you look at bad numbers, unemployment number, number who left workforce, perhaps the most scary but outside of that, i also consider that we're not moving as much as we used to. we're not leaving jobs as easily as we wanted to. you don't want people handcuffed to a job. want people to leave easily and move on to other stuff. move to a different state if they want. so i think generally those measures and the one where's ask are you happy, that's pretty useful. and our friend at the american enterprise institute's done fine work on earned success being what translates into happiness. winning $1 million in the lottery oddly enough doesn't make you happy. earning a certain amount of money and knowing you earned it makes you happy. sometimes some of the people who make a lot of money but got it because luck of draw in hollywood or something, they don't get to be hani. they're not so sure they earned it. earned success is what correlates with happiness. like i said, happiness than money but it's probably easier to have money as the metric. >> big thank you to grover norquist. what's our funniest guy, funniest poll? >> washington, d.c. funniest celebrity. >> stand up here a minute. >> grover competes every year and he wins most years in something called d.c.'s funniest political celebrity and he drafted me in. august or -- >> run in december. little extra time. >> i realize i have gone back to watch who's one in many of the cases. one of the winners was john love lovett, president obama's funniest speechwriter and he impersonated ariana huffington. grover won last year for impersonating dick cheney and i think my strategy will be to impersonate grover norquist. see you all there. >> you will be a star. >> enough. >> former federal reserve vice chairman and white house budget director alice rivlin also spoke at the atlantic economic summit. she said the technical glitches with the health care website were extremely unfortunate but enrollment numbers are up and website improved. miss riv list also addressed federal judget, earned income tax credit and u.s. trade agenda. his is just over 30 minutes. >> next up, we have the honorable alice rivlin, former director of the budget office, former vice chairman of the forever board, director o.m.b. and current senior fellow at the brookings institution. you can follow alice at just rivlin. interviewing her today will be our very own derek thompson. one quick programming note, unfortunately, e.u. ambassador is very ill and really wanted to be here but can't make it so we will continue on with senator gregg after this. thanks. >> hey, thanks, everybody. alice, as you put that back on, y you fiddle, janet yellen's first meeting is today and tomorrow. one issue she's going to have to raise is so-called evans rule, which said once employment rate falls below 6.5% it acts as a threshold. that's when you can think about raising rates. the rule with me before we realize how quickly unemployment was falling and it's not necessarily falling quickly because we're creating jobs faster pace, it's falling because the denominator is changing. people are leaving the workforce. and it's become clear the recovery sent right now at a state where we want to be dramatically raising rates. if you're an ear if that room how do , and a voice, you shape yellin's understanding of the labor market issue and how do you think she's going to try to sway this group to think differently about unemployment and raising rates? >> the first place, janet yellen doesn't need me to help her understand the labor market. she understands it very well. she and her colleagues have been making some of these same points in speeches. and even in the fed materials for quite a while. the labor market is complicated. right now the unemployment rate has fallen quite respectablely but that's not a good indicator of what good shape we're in in labor markets because we know that a lot of people have dropped out, have given up looking for work. this has been a very deep and long recession. and the particular manifestation has been many more people who have been unemployed for a very long time and some of those people have given up. on top of that, we have people who are working part time and would like to work full time. these are often true in a recession but this is a bad recession. we had people taking early retirement or dropping out because there are a lot of people in the age group. this is the baby boom generation reaching retirement. it's complicated i would expect that the discussion today would say a lot of those things and they may even change the statement that they make at the end to put less emphasis on the unemployment rate and more on these other factors. >> i would like to talk about the participation rate, for example. thace -- this is a huge debate in washington. the labor force rate, share of people working or interested in working who actually are working, has fallen to its lowest rate since the early 1970's. demographics have to pli a part. what else is playing a part in this? >> demographics play a big part but the depth and length of the recession is also playing a part with a lot of long-term unemployed. and then it's overtaken by some structural factors. you also have structural factors that are not shifts from different industries. but i think it's not a surprising fact we are having fewer people in the labor force. >> right. one thing you're doing a lot of work on right now is health care research. rollout aft affordable care act, obama care, has been somewhat disastrous with the r standpoint. if you look at the democrats' forces in november, this is an enormous albatross around their neck. from a policy standpoint, what are the numbers, metrics you're looking at to determine whether or not obama care is succeeding or failing on its own merits, not just the politics of the law? >> well, the technical glitches were extremely unfortunate. i'm shocked and saddened that this happened. although sthupet surprise anybody. anybody who's dealt with putting a big new system in, in the public sector or private sector, knows it's really hard. it doesn't work the first time. you need to test it a lot. they didn't do that. don't know why. the real question is has the website recovered? the answer to that is mostly yes. numbers are up 5 million people enrolled. hat's not 7 but getting there. so i think what we will watch over the next few months is how fast do those numbers go up, particularly in the next couple of weeks? and what happens after that? do people actually get the insurance that they thought they bought or are there going to be more glitches? but we're doing a complicated thing and we're doing it intentionally. a lot of people say oh, we should have blown up the whole system and started over and single payer as if that were easy. but we didn't. we have a very complicated system, medicare, medicaid, and employer insurance and western filling in the last gap. it's much hard tore patch a system than to start over. so that's what we're doing. >> right. what -- one of the most ballyhooed findings on obama care, affordable care act, it would reduce the amount of work done in the u.s. economy tremendously based -- compared to previous estimates. this is misinterpreted by some people saying it would kill all of these jobs, would not necessarily kill the jobs but people who had jobs would choose to work less or give up their work. their mrk would -- health care would no longer be tied to their employer. is this good or bad? >> probably a good thing. many of us over the years pointed out as a reason for having a different kind of health care for the -- that would cover the uninsured that there was significant number of people that were stuck in jobs because they needed the health care and they might have a spouse or child that had high health care costs and they couldn't leave their job because they would lose their health care. and they don't get more because it was a pre-existing condition. so the affordable care act has changed that. no more concern about pre-existing conditions and you could go to the exchange and buy health care and get a subsidy if you have low income. it's not surprising some of those people will give up those jobs. >> when you look at the two issues together. on the one hand the long-term tell graphics and recession-driven decline is labor participation rate. and the number of hours less worked because of obama care, because that is giving people health care, do you have a worry that when you add these two things together, there are not enough americans working enough hours to pay for the obligations we promised ourselves? entitlements like social security, medicare, medicaid and so on? >> not because of obama care or -- but what we are seeing is what we knew was coming. baby boom generation is retiring. surprise! we have known about these people since 1946. [laughter] and you -- you haven't but i ave. so we should not be surprised if we have a large generation of retirees and people are living longer. so this is putting upward pressure on social security and on medicare and we know that. and we've got to see what we want to do about it. it's not a terrible crisis. but it is a long-run problem that we have to face. the easy part, i think, is fixing social security. that should be done quickly because the longer you wait, the harder it is. and we should get a bipartisan group together again as in 1983 and say we need to fix this. how do we do it? and they would have to compromise. compromise isn't a dirty word. we now think of it as something terrible means you don't have principles if you compromise. that's nonsense. we all have to have principles and we all have to think how do we solve problems and get something done? and social security is a good example of that. nobody serious wants to kill it. it's a very good program that served a lot of people well. we need to fix it and fixing it isn't very hard. >> what's interesting congress initially touches more than social security, we also talked backstage a little bit about immigration. the doc fix. tell me why you're absolutely more optimistic about this impossible body of government potentially coming to a solution on the doc fix? >> i brought up the doc fix as an example of something we were not fixing because we're so polarized that everybody agrees we ought to. what is the doc fix? some years ago people with very good intentions decided that we needed a formula for changing physician payments under medicare and they devised one. tied it to the growth of g.d.p. but then when g.d.p. didn't grow as fast as they thought it would, it meant the doctors would be getting less and so congress in its wisdom said we don't want to do that so they postponed it and they kept postponing it and kept postponing it. the way the law was written, it was cumulative. so right now if we did want the law said -- >> went back to current law overnight? >> back to current law, that's not a surprising thing. it's the law, right? we should -- we would have to cut doctors fees something like 27%, 28%. now that's not going to happen. it shouldn't happen. fees for medicare are not that high any way. so we have got a bipartisan compromise, several committees, house and senate came together. they worked hard. they got a compromise together. to make a permanent fix to this. it's quite sensible. it can't be passed was it's gotten caught in polarized policy. a srn party said we won't consider this unless you postpone obama care. >> you say a certain party, i assume you're not talking about the democrats? >> no, i want. i was talking about the other one. >> the other one. but it doesn't matter. there are intransigents on both sides. this is just an example of something that reasonable people on both sides of the aisle want to do and can't do it because we're in this got you politics. >> right twofment other things we want to do. one thing we want to do is help incoming equality. there are two big solutions that have been rolled out. one is raising minimum wage. the other is the earned income tax credit. which of these is a better policy and why? >> well, would i do both. >> ok. >> we have not raised the minimum wage in a long time. raising the minimum wage would but uite a lot of people i'm an economist. i'm stuck with that. economists like to think of efficient ways of doing things. actually the earned income tax credit, which is basically a wage supplement for people who are working at particular wages, low wages, that's more efficient ay to do it. so i would do both. it discriminates against people who don't have children. it's not clear why -- >> part would raise earned income tax credit for people without children? >> it would. but that's an illustration of why it's a more targeted thing to do than a minimum wage. >> the income tax credit, i.t.c., was founded in the republican administration. it's been raised with democrats and republicans. what are the odds we raise it this year? >> i don't know exactly but it's another example of my theme, which is if you have bipartisan support for something, do it and stop worrying about where the blame falls. >> with grover norquist was up here earlier and he has a mega theory or metta theory -- >> i'm not surprised -- >> -- for why we're so polarized. we used to have people who wanted to expand government a little bit and they compromise with people who wanted to expand government by a lot so we got a goldie loc expansion of new government. do you have -- it doesn't have to be similar in any way but a meta theory for why we're in such a terrible moment of polarization in washington today? >> i don't have a meta theory. i think a lot of things have happened. part of it is our primary system pulls people to the right or left, depending on which party they're in. that's exacerbated by the way congressional districts are drawn. but that's not the whole story. if you look at the senate, it's polarized too and it doesn't have to do with districts. our political leadership i think has gotten out of touch with the way most people think about things. if you get a group of average citizens or representative group of citizens around the table and give them a problem, whatever it is, what should we do about the deficit? what should we do about immigration? they will sit there and talk about it and then they will cut deals. if they know they have to have a solution, they can find one. i just wish that our congress was behaving that way. but it's not. >> right. lastly on the debt, right now it -- the deficit fell so quickly between 2010 and 12013 and it's still falling, the debt as long-term issue has stopped casting such a long shadow on d.c. politics. do you think we should be thinking more right now about our long-term debt? or are the problems we're facing in the labor market, up-front problems important enough that they should be on the front burner and we should deal with the debt after? >> it's not a choice. we have a lot of burners. and we can actually cook two things at once. i like to think of the budget situation and comparison to what it looked like in 2010. i choose 2010 because i was on simpson bowls along with judge gregg, who we will hear from in a few minutes i think, and others. and at that time remember the recovery was just beginning. we weren't sure it would take hold strongly. deficit was very high. stimulus was spending out. we knew that the deficit would come down as the economy recovered and the stimulus was behind us. and it has. it's come down very rapidly. but we also looked ahead and saw this baby boom generation retiring, very big expenditures for social security and particularly medicare and medicaid looming at us and a lousy tax system. so the solution was fix the tax system so it's better and raises more revenue and slow the growth, particularly of the health care costs. that was the right thing to do at the time. if you look at it again now, the same patterns are there but it looks less scary. long-term future looks less scary and there are two reasons for that but they may not be sustainable. system has olitical cut short -- cut discretionary spending a lot. both in the military and in the domestic side. when you run those out and assume that's permanent, you get very low numbers for discretionary spending. i don't know whether that's sustainable. can we run government at a smaller percent of g.d.p. than we had in 1940? i don't think so. but the other thing we -- that happened and also may not be sustainable is is the rate of growth of health care spending slowed. it slowed dramatically. we're not quite sure why that is true. part of it is the recession and slow growth. and low inflation. but part of it may be that we finally come to our senses and realized that our health system is very inefficient and some things are happening both in the public and private sector to low the growth of costs. without reducing the benefit of health care. i hope both of true. we're working hard on how do we keep these reforms sustained so we can produce more health care for less money. that's a work in progress. not clear. but that's where i think things are. >> are you worried from a messaging standpoint, deficit hawks are sort of in a position be careful what you wish for? i was talking earlier on another panel, there are a lot of people raising the point in 2009, 2010 we need to do something about this debt. deficits and debt are easily conflated among people whose job isn't to look at c.b.a. reports all day like you and me. it's easy to confuse these issues and as a result what we got in a way was like the opposite of what they were asking for. they wanted larger deficits in the short term, shorter deficits in the long term and they wanted do this by holding on to discretionar scombrinding because a lot of that is investment in infrastructure, in education and they wanted to cut entitlements in the long term. instead what we got is a smaller discretionary spending as share of g.d.p. since 1940's and practically no exchanges to medicare or social security. did we get the exact opposite of what the deficit hawks were oping for? >> yes. i think that's a good analysis. but the word deficit hawk, and i'm accused of being one, is used very loosely. in other words you really worried about deficits or you didn't. as you say the right policy four ars ago and still i think is invest more in long-run growth. that does mean more transportation, more skills, that sort of thing. that's discretionary spending in general. and at the same time work to slow the growth of entitlements over time. that takes slowing the growth of health care spending, especially inefficient health care spending and fixing the social security system. and we have to fix the tax system too. i think there's some hope for that but they need a real push to come back to it. i don't think woor going to do a grand bargain. but we might do some of these things. we might fix social security. it's such a sentinel thing to do. we might have tax reform. >> we have time for a few questions. can we have one right there. >> dr. edward burger. ellis addressed the issue of health care financing. i think i inferred from earlier remarks you made if we had chosen to in fact start anew with a new system rather than add mixed, a system, hybrid system we already have, it would have been easier and by inference maybe we would have had a better system. do i hear your remarks correctly? >> no, not really. i may have been misleading. i said easier conceptly to say blow it up all and start over. there never was a chance we could do that. i'm not even sure that the people who talk about single payer for the united states have a clue how hard it is to run a single-payer system in any country but we're a huge, diverse country with a lot of suspicion of government in our and don't think we're going to do that and not even sure we could manage it well if we did. medicare is the single pair system. >> very popular one. >> it's a very popular one but it's not moved towards efficiency in the incentives in edicare. why not? because the politics have been against it. it is the politics of our provider groups that make it very difficult to make big changes in the direction of efficiency. i think they're coming around and some good things are happening. but i think if we suddenly -- and it's hard to imagine this said we will blow it up and have single payer system, that we would be really, we don't know ow to do that. >> sorry, there you are. >> i'm curious about your thoughts about the fact the pace of technological change continues to improve our productivity and we continue to sort of invent things that eliminate whole job categories. and what do you think about jobs 20, 30 years from now? will we have enough jobs in this economy or the population that we have? >> yes, whether he have enough jobs. the question is how good will these jobs be? and that depends on what we do about it. if we have a filled labor force and invest in making our economy more productive, and i think that involves modernizing our infrastructure and upgrading skills and probably other things, we will have higher standard economy than we would otherwise. i'm old enough to have lived rough the cycle of the scare of somehow machines are going to take over everything or computers are going to take over everything and nobody's going to have anything to do. we go through that every once in a while. it's ridiculous. >> looks like we have a question ack there. >> hi, i'm john cummings. question you mentioned wage subsidies of the earned income tax credit. food stamps would fall into that same category. do you think not just entrenched low wages, could they not help keep wages low by corporate welfare. second as a safety net in general, do you think there should be time limits on how long a safety net is in place? .> well, i may have said wage what i meant to say about the ietc is it's wage supplement. unlike food stamps, which could e viewed as tied to your income. but the earned income tax credit. you earn those wages and then you get a little more. it's an incentive to work in a way that the other safety net programs, and i'm not knocking them but i think we need food housing we need subsidies for people who cannot afford housing but they're not the same thing. you're raising a very big question about is the safety net too generous? i don't think so. i think it might be better designed but if people are hungry and people can't pay for the ordinary decencies of life, than i think we have an obligation to do something about it. >> over there. >> thank you very much. my name is jeannie williams. to talk ike to ask you more about the trade deficit and the debt and building with that the impact of health care reform. i know you have done intensive studies on the fact if we don't work on the health care reform, our trade deficit would be tremendous. and also impact of sequestration , is there a way that we can suggest to congress to work on something that sequestration? t.p.p. about jobs and without other partners, even china. does that affect our job markets here? and to that extent, where do you think it can suggest the democratic party to work under the unions and labor law? a lot of problems converging the inimum wage, labor law and t.p.p. and job markets. >> that's a lot of questions. >> a lot of questions. >> i am pro -- pro trade and i hink you heard from ambassador fuhrman a few minutes ago and he gave the case for moving ahead on trade agreements. i would just say it's another example of my thesis, there's bipartisan support for moving ahead on trade agreements and we can't do it at the moment. because of the polarized politics. i think that that's a shame. i don't expect a revolution. i think it's very important not to 0 oversell some of these things. i was in the clinton administration at the time of nafta, and i think it was a good thing. and it was bipartisan and the president was courageous in supporting it because he needed a lot of republican votes to get it passed. but i also think we oversold it. the cabinet spanned out and said this is the greatest thing since whenever and it will save the economy. and it's very dangerous to do that. i think nafta's been a success. but it's been a modest success and we shouldn't overrate those things. >> one more question. right here. recently retired, i'm a principal or whatever. my question is social security. my wife and i are at that stage and we talked to a lot of people. it seems like there are way to maneuver the system to get more and more if you do it right, which doesn't sound right. that i go first and then she goes halftime and it does this. there's a book written on ways to make more money on this. i would love to hear, it just doesn't come right to me, want to do the best thing but i don't want to do something that will hurt others because they can't do it. is that understandable? >> yes. i think so. >> thank you. >> just had a granddaughter graduate from sidwell friends. great school. but i think you can't design any system whether it's the tax system or pension system or medicare or whatever it is that someone isn't going to right a book about how to gain the system and probably make money on it. and you need to be careful when you're drafting things so that there are not kind of loopholes people can sneak through and get money they are not entitled to. but i think stick with the big picture. social security is an extremely successful program. it keeps millions of older people out of poverty and it keeps their children from having to support grandma and my children are probably grateful on that, that they would otherwise have to do. and it's a very good system. it's well designed. it just wasn't quite designed for this huge avalanche of seniors entering it now. we have to adjust it a little. it's a tweaking thing. and i would do a particular set of tweaks. ome of which would be slightly lower benefits for people like me of people who don't really need them. i would not take them away. we need to have a stake in the system. but the top-level benefits can be a little less and we should collect more money and we could actually make the system a little more generous at the bottom. and we could fix the way the indexing is done. the president was right about that. but i think it sort of wasn't sensible to throw it up there out of the context of a total social security reform. it fits there. >> great. thank you so much, alice. thank you. [applause] >> former senate budget committee chairman judd gregg said the republican party needs to compromise with president obama on issues such as immigration and tax reform. speaking at an event hosted by the atlantic, the former u.s. senator from new hampshire also addressed sanctions against russia, financial regulations and the overall u.s. economy. his is about 35 minutes. >> next up, we have the honorable former governor of new hampshire and former chairman of the u.s. senate budget committee. today he is speaking with michael hirsch, competent from "the national journal." please welcome senator gregg and ichael hirsch. >> how about right here? i will be able to focus a little more. you have tor gregg, been known for a long time as master of the numbers -- >> i think you just had master in the analysis. >> the other part of the capital, hill part. but since i think these people have been pretty easily getting numbers all day long, i want to start out with a purely political question for you. you were one of those who wrote quite refreshingly last september that the republican party was in danger of failing abysmally because of what you called the crelf promotional babble of a few. in enforcing the government shutdown. we have now been through that and it appears leaders of the share hiseast came to view to some extent in terms of resolving those issues. effort to defund obama care and the government hawks you oppose. i want to get your assessment where you think the government parties now heading into elections, has some balance been restored? >> first, great question. let me first thank the atlantic for this opportunity and it's a great pleasure to be here. nice to be here with congressman harman, who did so much in this country in the area of intelligence and making sure we had strong intelligence community. your question is really one that is very current. the party is going to obviously going through a period in the wilderness and it has to figure out how to get out of the wilderness. i compare it to some degree to the democratic party in the early '70's when the party moved and lurched to the left with the mcgovern nomination and then spent ten years trying to get back and was led back by the democratic leadership council and president clinton and al gore and others who participated in that. we unfortunately have what i call shouters and narrowers to take the playing field and dominate the playing field for in my opinion too long as a party. national parties, and we have two and should only have two. you don't want a multiparty system in a country our size because people then go to our corners and never leave their corners and it's almost impossible to get compromise. national party must be a very big tent. it's the first step in the mad sewnian form of government, which we have, which is checks and balances of government, which demands compromise, demands that people govern by reach an agreement across the aisle and the way you reach that sort of agreement is you start with the parties gathering everybody under their tents under basic philosophies and that sort of filters up and then becomes the framework for people going across the aisle when big issues come along onto the leadership of the president at the national level. our party unfortunately as i said, i think allowed too many people who had no interest in governing but basically had an interest in promoting themselves or their ability to raise money to take center stage and dominate. and the best example was, of course, the debt ceiling fight. we used -- i served in senate leadership 16 years as the con singularry to the leader. and we used to have a saying that actually came from phil graham, who had a lot of great sayings. never take a hostage you can't shoot. the simple fact was, you could not shoot the debt ceiling or the continuing resolution. you were always going to end up shooting yourself in the foot if you tried. on two different occasions that was proven to be true. just within the last three years. now i think we have been through that exercise and those folks who basically have been shown to be more concerned with their own personal -- growing their own perm reputation and raising a lot of money have been shown ineffective in their ability to lead the party and put us forward as a party willing to govern have started to leave the stage a bit. and the party has got its act together. and it understands if it's going to communicate with the american people, it's going to have to show it can govern. i think the speaker of the house has been very aggressive in this area and i congratulate him for it. clearly mitch mcconnell is the republican leader in the senate understands this and has been pushing this approach. so i do believe we're starting to see a party getting much more back to the realistic need to govern as versus just simply shout from the corners. where does this translate to politically? i happen to think if not this spring, then certainly in the next congress, which i suspect may have a republican senate. the republican party is going to have to govern by reaching agreements with this president on core issues where everything can be reached. the obvious ones are first immigration. second, gse reform, which most americans don't really care about, which is fiscal policy very important. third, potentially tax reform. and this fertile ground for agreement there and i think we can get it. >> what changes the political dynamics? let's assume that the election does yield a republican senate as well as house. is the tea party gone? is it on the run? i think ted cruz would disagree with your assessment he's about to leave the stage or has left. >> i don't think he's left the stage and i don't think that that segment of our party will or should leave the stage. they're a very important influence on policy. but i think those folks who understand that you cannot speak to the american people unless you explain to them how you intend to do something positive. you can't always be postured in the negative. you have to be at some point posturing yourself on the positive on issues that affect everyday americans in their everyday lives. those folks within our party are going to take the basically the dominant role. i do, as i said, i see three issues where you have opportunity to have that type of consensus reached. you don't have to give up your philosophical beliefs in order to reach agreement with the other side of the aisle. gene harman classic example of that. you can reach agreements across the aisle, which are important to making america stronger and better governed nation. without giving up basic core beliefs. because there's a lot of identity of interests in our nation, most of which comes down to having people have process life and pass a better life onto their kids. >> let's talk about that fertile ground you just referred to. you wrote recently that you saw a few lights at the end of the tunnel that were not trains oncoming. d you cited the democratic senator taking over senate finance committee as opening the door at least to dynamic scoring. you cited tax reform plan that republican congressman dave camp has put forward. you also cited chuck hagel budget. do you still think those are all realistic? obviously, the ground has shifted a little bit. widen i think has gone back on what he said and we have now as sarah palin famously put it putin rearing his head, raising questions about whether we want to pair down a defense budget as we once thought. address those if you would. >> well, yes to all three. i think first off dynamic scoring is dangerous grounds to step on as former chairman of the budget committee or ranking member, i always defended the right of c.b.o. to be irrational, which they are, on all sorts of scoring issues. there's no relationship to common sense or what the practical effects of doing something are on the people's reaction in the economy. but in tax policy, some things are very obvious. one of which is that if you ask people to invest or you tell people or create a tax law which tells people to invft for the purposes of avoiding taxes as their primary goal, or you tell people to invest for the purposes of getting better return on their money as primary primary goal, you will get a better and stronger economy generating more revenues if you have people moving in the direction of investing for return as opposed to tax reforms. that is my view of the world. the fact that you have a progressive and a conservative viewing things in this context and a lot of other people of those ilks, dave camp, for example, that's good news. i think that at some point, cbo on some level will have to acknowledge that. that is important because you can't do a grand bargain on the budget -- you can't even do a mini grand bargain on the budget unless you reform our tax laws, reduce our rates, eliminate exemptions and generate revenues along the lines of what simpson-bowles proposed. dave camp's plan is a starting point, he steps on just about everybody's toes and that's the way you have to start tax reform. i was on the ways and means committee in 1986 when this was done between president reagan and rostenkowski. remember, it did not start with reagan and rostenkowski. it started with bill bradley and jack kemp and took a while to bubble to the surface. they started to talk about major tax reform in 1982 and 1983 and it was not enacted until 1986. we are further down the starting point than usual because you have the chairman of the clore -- core committee and widen, the chairman of finance who put forward his proposal so the opportunity is there. it should be taken. and it requires quite honestly presidential leadership and if president obama wants to have a legacy, reforming the tax laws may be a good one. the third issue of what secretary hagel proposed in defense spend, he didn't just propose cutting defense spending significantly. level funding it. what he proposed was thinking about it in terms in which -- which it hasn't been thought about since the end of the cold war, which is what are the threats and how do you respond to them 1234i cited, for example, eisenhower's great fare well speech, where he said the biggest threat to national defense is the defense industrial complex that fights the last war and certifies the defense community as a result of that i disagree with some parts of it but i think the concept of thinking this way is important. the main emphasis should be on the threat and the threat toward us, for our nation, is a terrorist using a weapons of mass destruction against us and they are not nation state terrorists. they are asymmetrical. so you have to find them in a different way than you fight another nation. and that requires massive intelligence gathering capability. and he is committed to that. secondly, once you find them, you have to find the ability to deliver lethal force to them. that requires certain types of military structure, certainly a task force and a deliver force. does russia and crimea change this formula? are we going to fight a land war in europe? no. it's not going to happen. we are not going to engage militarily with the russians on the issue of crimea. the historic roots of crimea go back to peter the great. we have leverage there that we haven't effectively use bud it's not military leverage. i think what secretary hagel has done is opened a discussion on how to approach defense spending in the post-cold war period that should have occurred before 9/11 but definitely could have ooccurred post-9/11. >> i don't want to stay on ukraine but what should obama have done? >> he should have gotten the european union and use what we have, which is considerable leverage over the european union to aggressively assert sanctions. there should have been a no holds barred sanction effort put forward by the president, get the european nations, which are obviously concerned about their gas supplies, but make it clear to them, they can be concerned about the gas supplies or they can be concerned about our friendship. we have much more levranl than the russians have in bringing them together to assert what should have been very, very aggressive sanctions. sanction 20g people? that's like sanctioning the board of aldermen in chicago. it's an absurd -- it's embarrassing. and i think this was the -- i think it was the wrong approach. >> back to the budget. it seems to me that the last time there was a remotely reasonable discussion in this town was the simpson-bowles commission report in 2010, 2011. you approved the work. obama did not really embrace it perhaps enough. design your perfect budget that would be close to ideal but passable by both parties in the sort of bipartisan way you have proposed. give us the key elements you think would work to address all these issues, slow growth, debt, deficit -- >> i was on the simpson-bowles commission, and the irony of that commission is that both parties in the senate and put the three most fiscally conservative republican norths were on it and the three most liberal democrats were on it and we still reached an agreement. from 20,000 feet, you don't want short-term austerity. you don't need it. it would slow the economy. what you want is a glide path that shows in the second and third decades, you have bent the curve of spending so you have your debt to g.d.p. ratio lower than 70%. our debt to g.d.p. ratio until 2008 was about 35%. very strong position. it jumped, doubled in four years by 2012 and it was at 60%. now it is at 74%, heading to 100%. to put that in context, our debt to g.d.p. ratio, there are only five countries that have worse debt to g.d.p. ratio, one is japan who can self-finance because they save so much, so it's not a big issue them. the second is iceland, bankrupt, greece, bankrupt, italy, nobody knows what they're doing, nobody knows how they keep their books but we're pretty sure they're bankrupt. the fourth is ireland, then -- the fifth is ireland, then the united states. all the countries in front of us have fallen, except japan, which has a unique situation of massive domestic saverings. we are on the wrong path. we have breathing room because we're the currency of the world and the world looks at us and says, the united states solves its problems. and we do solve our problems. so they should have that onfidence in us. at some point, someone will wake up and say, i just let the united states $100. 10 years from now, they will not be able to pay me $100 back. they will pay me dollars so it's only worth $70 or $80. so we'll have to spike their interest rate significantly. that will come. you can't get around that if we continue to borrow money that we cannot pay back without inflating our currency. how do you address this? simpson-bowles put the template down. i think you need to give credit for what has been done so far. think of it as a three legged stool that you address the budget issue with, the deficit issue. one leg is discretionary spending. one is entitlement spending. the third leg is revenues. the entire discretionary side has been done. $900 billion of savings in the 2011 agreement. $1.2 trillion under the sequester, assuming it holds. that discretionary has been done. revenues have been raised $600 billion. that is a big number. it was done incorrectly. it was done by just raising rates, should have been done through tax reform, but that's a big number. what's left on the table to do? entitlements and in the entitlement accounts there are only three that count. medicare, medicaid and social security. the united states has historically spent 20% of gdp. those three accounts alone account for 20% of g.d.p. by about 2025 and they're still going up, because of this massive demographic shift. they're all related to aging. we're going from a re-- because of the baby boom generation we're going from 35 million to 75 million retired persons and the system doesn't work. we have to adjust our entire entitlement programs. not in any draconian or dramatic way that affects present recipients. but in a way that 10 years from now 20 years from now, 30 years from now you bend the cost curve. simpson-bowles suggested raising the rate of retirement by two years, but we took 60 years to do it. so it didn't affect anybody over the age of 15. we can handle that as a couldn't i. -- country. and the president suggested changing the way we calculate c.p.i. and the house didn't take it. that was the best offer on the table for fiscal responsibility so far. so there are ways to do this. >> and these are all feasible with the new politics? >> no. unfortunately, i don't see a grand bargain coming down the street. and i don't see a mini grand bargain coming down the street. i see bits and pieces. medicare will be adjusted in a way to bend the cost curve in the out years to move -- by moving to an income based system and a system that caps cost. bill it be debby some grand scheme? no. >> i want to open it up to questions. but one last point. i wanted to ask you about financial reform. you were very involved in 2008. you spent seven months as head of the major financial industry lobby. what's your basic assess se -- assessment of where we are now? do you think the too big to fail problem has been involved or not? what about the volcker rule. we haven't heard from you in several years on this issue. just briefly. >> dodd-frank has not accomplished its goals in the send that it was supposed to stabilize the banking system in a way that allowed more liquidity in the marketplace. it's doing just the opposite. it's contracting liquidity, contracting lending and pushing a tremendous amount of activity into off balance sheets, nonregulated entities. has it solved too big to fail? i think it has. capital requirements are stiff and good. you didn't need dodd-frank which has produced $20 -- which has produced 20 million words and we have a new regulation every 2.6 days or something and we're only 40% of the way through it you didn't need that you needed tough capital requirements and that would have solved the problem. to a great extent. the issues that created the problem in 2008 were failure of underwriting, securitization, and as a result of that, lack of capital behind those two activities. volcker, thousand-page proposal from an idea that makes sense in concept but can't be executed in practice. it is almost impossible to separate market-making from the structure of how a bank works in a way that will be clear enough so that you don't end up with massive regulatory oversight which kills the market for market-making. our nation's great -- one of the great american advantages is, and it really is unique to our nation, is that if you are a person who has a good idea and you go out and take a risk and start to grow that idea and hire people and create economic activity, a whole bunch of people will come along behind you and give you money to do it. it's called stocks, it's called bonds. no place else in the world does this happen the way it does here with twitter and facebook being the most recent examples. and we're undermining that in my opinion. >> we also cost the economy $50 billion in 2008. >> no question, it needed to be addressed but the way it was addressed was in a way that had very little relevance to the underlying problem and in the end has produced -- will produce a lot of problems for our capacity as a market to be as competitive as we were before and to be as vibrant as we were before. that's one of the things drags the economy a little bit. >> let's open it up to the audience. this lady right here in the black hat. i believe it's black. >> my question to you, senator, and as far as i'm concerned, you are still a good senator. could you address the situation with russia right now where our big is on mobile has a major deal with that major elephant in russia to do major drilling in the arctic. and become so huge. and what that will do in terms of affecting us as we might change our tax code, so exxon has to pay its dues. >> i'm not familiar with that specific issue but obviously russia has massive oil reserves and gas reserves. one of the levers we have to put pressure on them is our technology, because they can't get it without our technology. if you're talking about ways to put pressure on russia, you should talk about putting sanctions on the ability of our technology but you have to do it on other nations that have that type of technology, to be delivered to russia. this is where i think this administration has failed. they have not been aggressive enough in gathering people who have some capacity to impact the russian economy in making sure we do it in a coordinated way. as the specifics on exxonmobil and their investments there, i don't know anything about it. >> the gentleman here. >> john schilling. you mentioned the importance of providing more tax incentives for investment, it would be useful for you to clarify that. things like the capital gains tax is really not by and large promoting new investment but supporting long-term gambling on the stock exchanges as you buy existing assets and carry them forward and sell them or the interest carry forward tax benefits for people who do a lot of active trading with hedge funds. so what are the kinds of incentives you think are important to promote real investment, that generates more productive capacity and jobs? >> i am not a big fan of incentives. i don't believe in industrial policy, whether supporting a group like solyndra or the tax laws. i believe what you do is reduce as far as you can the deductions and exemptions in the tax laws and bring the rates way down. in fact, you bring them down so far that you really don't need any capital gains differential. or dividend differential. your top rate under simpson-bowles, we had three rates, i think they were 10%, 15%, and 20%. when you do that, people don't invest any longer for tax purposes. they invest for the best return on their money. that's the best industrial policy. because that means you're getting the most productive use out of that money and it will probably jeb ration more revenues than a tax law that gives a lot of exemptions and has right hates. in fact, i'm sure it will. that's my thumbnail answer as to that. >> yes, sir, back there. >> thank you for coming today. my name is arnold king and i own king consulting solutions a business consulting business. my questions are, what can a get the issue- to can they fity, how the economy this year and in 2015 because talking about obamacare is not enough. e need to get back to our, get back to -- to our talk about the economy and what can we do about the economy onward? what can business do to improve ?he economy >> great question, how do we get the economy going? i believe the united states is on the verge of massive economic expansion. probably as large as we have ever had in our history. it will be driven by four basic factors. the first and most important by far is the new energy paradigm where for the first time since the 1950's we'll be an energy exporter instead of an importer. more than that, we'll have an incredible competitive advantage over other industrial nations a ause our cost of energy by fact of two or five or in the case of japan seven or eight times less. nothing translates to an economy with more aggressiveness -- we are not just talking about oil and gas. we are talking about everything in the economy being impacted in a positive way by a lower cost of energy. we discovered massive capabilities in energy and this will translate into a huge economic opportunity for us as a country. the second thing we have going for us is that we are still the place where great ideas come from. whether it is twitter or facebook or tesla or, in my part of the country, biomedicine, we are the creative people and we are creating these ideas. the third thing we have going for us is that there is a massive amount of capital waiting on the sidelines to invest in these ideas. so you have a lot of people who are willing to follow and take risks with their money, through pension funds and whatever else, on people who have these ideas. and the fourth thing we have going for us is we are an inherently entrepreneurial people. we are still the best place to come if you have an idea and you are willing to risk and put your sweat into it and grow your opportunities. that is just our culture. what is holding us back? the only thing holding us back is our fiscal policy, the fact that we are running these deficits and debts that put us at risk on the fiscal side. i happen to think we will straighten those out. i hope it will lead to a deprand bargain like simpson-bowles, but i think incrementally we'll get to it. we will get tax reform and we will get medicare reform which is really all that there is left to do. so i am pretty positive about america's future and our capacity for economic growth. a lot of it is coming. 90% of it is coming because of things washington is not involved in. >> we have time for one more uestion this gentleman here. >> yes, i'm barry stern. i'm an education and work forest development advisor to the haberman educational foundation. my -- worldwide, he was reminded of this by the professor this morning, we talked about a great economic stimulus being babies. that would be true in the united states and maybe russia but throughout most of the world there's too many babies. the demographic pyramids look very different in developing countries. that translates into tremendous unemployment throughout the world. there's a lot of angry young men, especially, around the world and the numbers are enormous. do you see any kind of geopolitical threat of lots of young men unemployed, primarily in developing countries, and are there any u.s. foreign policy initiatives and defense initiative this is a ought to ake these things into account? >> well, that is a very legitimate concern but it is not one that we as a nation or our government can do a heck of a lot about. their is no question that a lot of the radicalism in this world is driven by the fact that there are large numbers of young people who don't have much else to do but be radical. and that is especially true in some of your countries which are feeding the islamic fundamentalist movements. what can we do about that? probably very little. we cannot solve the worlds problems of unemployment. what we can do, however is have a vibrant national economy and to the extent our economy is vibrant that does help the world. i saw some statistics somewhere about the implications of wal-mart for the rest of the world's employment, it's massive. the simple fact is, as our economy is growing, we bring a lot of people with us. the best way to make our economy grow is to highlight our strengths and our strengths are innumerable. we are so well-positioned as a country, it is staggering to me. i don't see any way that we aren't going to grow and be extraordinarily prosperous. the only thing that will stand in our way is our government. and our government will not stand in our way that long because it is full of people who are wanting to do what is right. they'll get it right after a while. it just takes a while. they'll make a few mistakes first. as winston churchill said, democracies will get things right after they have tried everything that is wrong. we're in the process of trying a few wrong thing bus we are still moving in the right direction. we are still of the biggest and most prosperous nation in the world and the best place to live. and as we grow, the world will benefit. that's my answer to that question. >> on that high note, relatively speaking, thank you very much, senator. >> also from tuesday, an interview with former fdic chairman sheila bair. she addresses the economy, the dodd-frank regulations law and the housing economy. this is 45 minutes. >> i just googled our next guest and when people search for her they search for timothy geithner. there's a story there. much of the story was written by sheila in a terrific book about the global financial crisis, the subprime crisis, a wonderful book called bull by the horns, fighting to save main street from wall street and wall street from itself. without further ado, please welcome the honorable sheila bair, senior advise i don't have of -- advisor of the pew charitable trust, and in a conversation with her, debra of "the wall street journal." >> thank you, chairman bair, that's how i will always think of you. you did this conference last year and at that point you said a lot of the dodd-frank regulatory reforms had yet to be completed, we weren't at the end point yet and one of the thing this is a jumped out at me is many of the things that you ticked off at that point, leverage ratio, minimum levels of long-term debt, some of the things we wanted to put in place to prevent the banks from collapse, still haven't been finalized, are still in the discussion stages and i guess i thought as an opening question, where are we now, six years post-financial crisis, how far have we come, how much better is the financial system protected than it was previously? >> it is better but it's taking a long time. i think by the numbers, dodd-frank is about half finished. really important issues -- measures like increasing bank capital requirements, which simply reflects how much of their balance sheet, how much of their risk they need to have in equity as opposed to debt. those are important. they have been propose bud not finalized yet. and there's an issue about long-term unsecured debt which can be triggered in a resolution to absorb losses if they fail, so make sure after they fail there's loss absorption capacity so you don't have to end up assessing the rest of the industry for their losses or go to taxpayers far bailout. those are two good examples where regulators have been talking for a long time about getting them done, act knowledging they need to get done but we haven't gotten over the finish line. i think through the stress testing process, there is more capital in the banking system now. the numbers i have seen, it's been about a two percentage point increase in capital ratios. that's good but you know, considering where we were prior to the congress, it's not nearly enough. ironically a lot of it comes from merger and acquisition activity, not regulators forcing them to raise more capital. if you look at their off balance sheet, their capital levels are only 3% to 4%. if you're an auto manufacturer with only 4% equity would you do business with that company? robably not. it's frustrating to me this hasn't been a bigger priority. another priority is loss reserves, prior to the crisis, their coverage ratio, the nonperforming loans was over 100%, now it's 65%. and of course they've been releasing reserves to drive earnings. that makes shareholders happy and others, they can report earnings, but assuming these are the good times you should be building those reserves up. we passed the point at which they should be releasing them, and that's an area of concern. i would say it's a bit safer. there's less reliance on short-term funding, still too much but there's been incremental progress. but it's not enough. we need to get these rules done. >> the banks sort of suggest that there's been a piling on that regulators are never satisfied, that they're continuing to talk about new things and adding more layers of regulation and capital requirements and i guess i wonder, what are you going to look for to say that either the too big to fail problem has been resolved or the financial system really is as protected as it can be knowing that regulation can't top every crisis or problem. >> i agree with them to some extent. regulation has been a moving target. there is a sense of an overarching policy objective. to e, i think there needs be much tougher capital requirements, not these ratios that are easy to game. then also very aggressive regulatory action to make sure that they can, they do fail, they can be resolved in an orderly way in the dodd-frank process. that means they need to simplify legal structures, organize those along business lines, have more , nd alone capital liquidity that work has barely begun. i agree with you that some of this stuff has been a moving target but on others there's been a consistent theme. leverage has been one with its reliance on short-term fund regular solveability, the regulators need to move more aggressively on those fronts. even the bailable debt, we need those minimum rules in place but they haven't been proposed yet. >> for those of you who have read sheila's book, you know she was not the biggest fan of one big bank, citigroup, basically said they wering my managed and the rest of crisis, they were one of two bank this is a needed a big bailout from the government besides the regular tarp program. there were various points of discussions about whether to remove the c.e.o. and at that point, it was big ram handit he, didn't go until he eventually did and you applauded that. the company is back in the news because their mexican subsidiary has been in the news about money laundering, whether their subsidiary was doing fraudulent business, it raises a question. are these banks too big to manage. when you have a global bank with far flung operations across the globe is it just too much? is it not the size but sort of the complexity that's the problem at this point? >> i do think, first of all, fraud is very difficult. we don't know all the facts about whether that should have been discovered earlier or not but fraud has been a perennial problem. it affects even the -- it vexes the best of managers and regulators. you need to take that into account. citi's a much stronger bank than they were prior to the crisis buter that complex organization, anaged centrally at the top. i recently joined the board of a spanish-based bank that has worldwide operations, but they, like others, bbva and hsbc, foled -- followed a an approach where in each country you have major operations, you organize it separately, it has its own managers, boards, and capital liquidity. you can make mistakes with that model as well but then i think you're more a conglomerate a collection of small, regional banks, as opposed to trying to manage everything centrally at the top which i think is extremely challenging. as regulators proceed with getting these large bank into resolveable forms in way this is they can be broken up in an orderly way if they get in trouble,ic will be more resolveable in the long-term. we saw this problem with j.p. morgan chase, bbva has had its problems as well. you look at wells fargo, they're not perfect either but they have a more straightforward model. it's a simpler institution to manage but they're getting into securities activity taos, so we'll see what happens there. i do think it's simplicity and -- it's complexity more than it is size and having more stand alone entity this is a have their own boards and managers is a way to tackle that problem. there's some benefits with a global presence. if the u.s. is having problems and the emerging markets are doing well, you're in better shape than if you're just in the u.s. but the management channels are substantial. >> citigroup is now known as the new goldman zach. they have top officials in -- goldman sachs, they have top officials in washington. we have secretary lew, stan fisher, nominated for the fed, nashan -- nathan sheet, another treasury official. does it help to have people in washington who have experience on wall street? or does it hurt at this moment when we try to figure out how to rein in the banks? >> i think it's important to have diversity in your economic team and among your financial regulators. i think it's important to have diversity of perspectives, backgrounds, gee og fism so yes, when you start having a lot of people with very similar past experiences, perhaps your team isn't as strong as it might otherwise bfment i think there's also an optics issue. it's all about the individuals and you know, all the people you named are fine individuals. but there's an optics issue too that i think we need to be sensitive of, especially since there's so much public cynicism after the crisis about government and its relationship with the financial sector, to be sensitive to that and make sure there's good diversity and you know, that you have people who are identified more with reform and public protection as well. you know, the white house has a prime opportunity, they have one more vacancy to fit. i would love to see them put a real reformer in there, somebody republican, g, a republican supported. he was strongly supported, he's currently vice chairman of the fdic. known for his strong support for reform, strong opposition to too big to fail. having somebody like that, a go-getter who the public trusts as a reformer would add diversity and also bolster public confidence system of i hope they look at that last remaining vacancy as an opportunity to put somebody reform minded and associated with protecting the public. >> you mentioned j.p. morgan. i wanted to ask you, you had written a column for fortune in which you said you thought there was a lot of piling on going on. jamie diamond was being unfairly blamed for every sin, all of a sudden this company, that was the teflon bank, you know, everything was sticking to it now. every kind of possible allegation was being leveled at j.p. morgan. i would love to hear more about that, do you think it was sort of, the regulators sensed weakness and went after them or were they a big bank with a lot of operations that spawned problems? >> i think they made plenty of mistakes. the actions were more than justified but it did seem like there was a particular focus on them. that's how it struck me. that's how it struck a lot of people. i think that regulators and others who enforce our rules need to be mindful of the kind of signals they send if they decide to, well, we're worried about one of these guys getting in too much trouble, we'll go after the one with the deepest pockets because they can stand it, if that's how you manage your regulatory philosophy, you give disincentive to banks to be strong, which you don't want. i do think it's something that regulators as well as the justice department and others who are charged with enforcing our laws need to be mindful of. i don't quibble with any of the suits. everything -- they had grounds. i think they was prioritization, maybe there were other banks doing the same thing that were not subject to the same kind of focus. but we do need to be mindle of -- mindful of the kind of signals and enforcement actions just like regulation should be designed to change behavior and if the signals are confused, so are they being picked on because they're strong or because they did xyz? i think government needs to be clear about the activity that's being punished, why this is being punished and go after other institutions if there's more than one institution doing it. >> in your years of regulating banks, you've joined a bank. i was curious to hear your thoughts about why that bank, what you hope to bring to the table as an independent director but also you've been a critic in the past of european banking system. i think you said some of the banks were undercapitalized. in the early days there were concerns they were gaming their own stress tests. i would love to hear a little bit about the strength of the european banking system at the moment, whether you can they're better capitalized, less of a risk to the world's financial system than they were? >> i think they're making progress. i'm delighted to see that the e.c.b. will be doing quality review now, so they're taking that stress testing process over and they're already seeing results. banks are starting to clean up balance sheets already before the review takes place. that's all positive. i think there are several very large, complex injure peen -- european institutions, big trading operations, that have been operating at like levels of capital. excuse me, very high levels of leverage, low levels of capital. part of that the rules need to be strengthened, the capitals need to be strengthen in europe. they don't have regulations. y rely on risk-based measures. if you have large trading operations, you can really lowball your capital with the complex modeling that is going on to determine the riskyness of your trading assets. i do this -- i do think this has been a problem. they are improving. it's been a drag on the european economy. well capitalized banks with doyle more lending than more leveraged ones. i will say, you see the same dynamic in the u.s. if you have a bank primarily in the business of making loans as opposed to trading operations, they'll have, if you look at their capital on a leverage basis, equity to foe total assets, they'll have much higher levels of capital. that's the way it works now. if you've got a big trading book, you can have high levels of leverage. if you make loan the rules are tough. >> when you look at the exposure of the u.s. to the european banking system what do you see? are we better protected now than we were? >> i think -- i'm strongly supportive of the foreign banking organization rules that the fed recently finalized. you look at the very thin capital levels of some of the larger institutions in europe and you have to question what ability would they have to serve as a source of strength if we got into another situation. in point of fact, their operations in the u.s. and the fed in particular was operating as a source of strength for them, the money was going that way, not coming into the u.s. the reality is, you get into a stress situation, the likelihood is assets will be there. if european bank a is in trouble in europe, to think that the fed will convince the foreign regulators of that bank to send money here, it's not going to happen. so requiring that they have, again, their own stand alone capital and liquidity, this is a model some banks follow already. their own capital and liquidity here in the u.s., regulated by a company with its own board in the u.s., that makes for a more stable financial system and provides an additional level of protection if europe has problems. if it goes the other -- it goes the other way too, if the u.s. subsidiary starts having trouble, its segregation from the company in europe prevents these problems from going to europe. >> you need all regulatory regimes to be on the same page and doing similar resolution planning and similar plans? >> optimally you will. last lot of that that goes on already. not as explicit as what the fed did. but it's a reality if you get into a stress situation that's what's going to happen anyway. it's not quite formal. i would like to see the global financial system migrate to that kind of structure. it would make the -- they want to be large for the diversify case that brings but make them have subsidiaries. >> one of the thing this is a triggered financial reform was not a bank, but an insurer, ample i.g. it was if not the impetus, one of the impetuses for dodd-frank. there was a gap, these large insurers had become more than insurers and nobody was policing them you said a.i.g. had not been designated an important financial institution, it now has which gives the government the right to regulate the company. but there's a huge lobbying in the works by the industry to try to get the fed to go easy on them, to not apply the same capital rules and other rules to insurers. they're saying we're different than banks, don't regulate us as such. there's a lot of support for that on the hill. janet yellen says they're sympathetic to that but their hands are tied by the law. you wrote a letter that said congress should stay out of it. what's your thoughts on this? >> for the regulated part of the insurance, we're talking about big insurance conglomerates. that's what people are worried about. for the pieces of those conglomerates that are subject to robust state insurance regulatory regime, that should and already does have discretion to defer to that capital regulatory regime but if they're doing things outside of that regulated insurance, like credit default swaps in london, for example, then they absolutely should be subject to the same capital rules and other standards that banking conglomerates doing the same activity are subject to. and even insurance companies,ic the fed should have discretion and does to defer to a state regulatory regime it deems adequate but where do you think insurance companies put their dollars? they have mortgagebacked securities, bonds, sovereign debt, corporate debt, commercial loans, real estate loans. these are things, this is where they put their money. so the risk, whether it's a bank making a loan or an insurance company the risks are the same. to suggest that oh, we -- because we're an insurance company we don't need capital rules, that's just not right. we need a more thoughtful dialogue. i worry that so often, these deregulatory movements can get started with sound bites. now the sound bite is, oh, we can't have bank-cent rick rules applied to -- bank-centric rules aplied to insurance companies. whether you're a bank or an asset manager, you can expose your stake holders, whether it's policyholders or depositors to harm if you're overleveraged and get yourself in trouble. if you're systemic you can expose the rest of us to harm. it needs to be dealt with. just because they're an insurance company doesn't mean we don't need additional protections. >> i'm not going to get to my next question because we're going to q&a. if folks have questions out there. think there's a mike. >> given your experience at fdic and what you were just talking about with the mega financial institutions, how would you feel about putting up an insurance program like fdic that applied to the mega financial investment institutional companies, maybe the mfiic, that requires home to pay premium based on their size and degrees of leverage so that when a crisis comes up, and they have to be build out by the public, much more of it is covered by insurance than just by this public. today they're essentially getting free insurance as they have been for decades and there have been hundreds of billions of dollars spent bailing out financial institution this is a took excessive risks and they didn't pay anything for it and they got brought back and made more profits until they caused the next crisis. how would you feel about having a much broader financial institution insurance program that they had to participate? >> well, i actually would go the opposite way. i think we need more market discipline. i have not given up on market discipline. i think clear rules, this is what the long-term debt requirement we're talking about that says, shareholders, bobbed holders, in this institution, or uninsured depositors going as far down as you need to to impose lesses so that their stake holders, their creditors will be subject to laws. and taxpayers will get involved. if that money still falls short, the rest of the industry will be assessed. that said, we had tried to get a fund a prefunded reserve through dodd-frank. we got it passed through the house. $150 billion fund. the idea was not to provide insurance but working capital. you need to provide liquidity support to these institutions as you unwind them system of this fund would have been there to provide that liquidity support while any ultimate losses would have been imposed on the stake holders this d, the shareholders of the institution. we got that through the house. we couldn't get it through in the senate. i go into detail in my book as to why. quite disappointing. the administration did not support us. secretary geithner worked with several republicans actually to kill it. it was called, ironically, it was called a bailout fund system of this is an assessment i wanted to impose on institutions above $50 billion. it would be risk-based, got a lot of leverage, short-term funding, you'd pay a higher fee. it died in the senate. they called ate bailout fund and replaced wit a line of credit for treasury to provide the working capital, which is kind of silly, so there's washington for you. i would provide working capital. we've got safety nets too big for them already. what i've been looking for and what i think we successfully got into dodd-frank, even though it's not a prefunded reserve, is to make sure the creditors of the institution know they're on the hook for losses and get more market discipline on them. and there are harsh rules in terms of firing boards and managers and three years compensation which will discipline management a bit. >> i'm a medical and social science researcher and i reviewed your book and i highly recommend it, it's a wonderful guide for explaining these complex issues as well as activism. i have three question, can you comment on senator warren's 21st -century grast-steagall act and the efforts to restructure fannie and freddie and i don't know if you can say anything about ed demarco, i've heard that he's a hero in a sense, doing this job, trying to protect our money, whereas he was vilified by senator barbara boxer. and the last question is, one of our gubernatorial candidates in maryland is trying to few forth a foreclosure moratorium bill. is that something you think is a good idea? how might you craft it? and is there any way of going back in the last four or five years to try to help people who didn't get help but were swindled? thank you. >> a lot of questions. so warren-mccain a bipartisan bill i have suggested in my book that we accomplish that through a press process that requires market making, securities banking activity, all be separated in stand-alone subsidiaries, autonomous from each other that have their own specialized boards and management. i would be happy to support the bill but i don't think it has traction. on g.s.e. reform, look, i think we subsidize housing too much. i would like to -- i know what i want is unrealistic. this town loves housing and we're going to throw housing subsidies to that sector until the day i die. i would like to see, just withdraw. let the mark decide how much capital to allocate to home finance. i think we skew too many resources in that direction. there are other areas of our economy that have been hurt in the process. that said, if they're not going to do that, i think the approach built on the warner-corker bill, to have at least if you're going to have a government guarantee, make it explicit, charge for it, don't have the g.s.e. model where you're backing a for-profit, publicly traded entity, that was a bad model and one we should not revive. ed demarco used to work for me at treasury, your description is correct. i think he was unfairly vilified some of the things he did. he was following statutory mandates. he didn't have agendas. he had certain obligations as conservator of fannie and freddie, he did great work there and was pretty harshly criticized. i think we do owe him a debt. the foreclosure moratorium, that conversation would take a lot longer than we have. it's sad we've never effectively dealt with that problem and i think that's dragging our economy. the housing market is not really recovering the way it should and that's frankly because we never dealt with those under water mortgage, the distressed boar erowers, never dealt with that. >> time for one more question. anybody? >> hello. my name is michael, i'm an economic historian with "e.i.r." magazine. the fdic, this last week, announced that it's going to sue the 16 largest banks for the libor. i think that's great. you're not the chairman -- chairwoman now but very happy to see that. does this indicate that the federal government's finally able to defend its interests with as much aggressiveness as j.p. morgan and wall street have tried to defend their interests? second main question though is, on this issue that thomas honig, as you said, on february 24 of this month, he put out his latest warning saying the derivatives bubble is grow, banks only have 4% of equity ratio to their total assets and even with the decline in the value occurs that much you'll have a wipeout of everything and he said that bailing won't secure a banking system in a crisis because it's not going to be just one bank you can resolve. he was on a panel with you about six months ago in congress and michael capuano from massachusetts said, if you were in our shoes would you reinstate glas-steagall? he said yes, that's what i'm trying to tell you. what gives? how come it's taking so long to get this through? why as he just said is the elizabeth warren-mccain bill going to take place? we can't wait until the next crisis, it's going to be too late. as honig said in that address, you'll be bum rushed into another bailout if you don't put this in place. and lastly, he definitely should be on the federal reserve board. i'd vote for him for president, thomas honig. >> so the libor suit, i think it's important to understand what that's about. i think -- i also applaud the fdic's courage in bringing that but they're acting as receiver. the fdic is not the regulator of large banks that do this. the fed on the u.s. side, these are not done inside insured banks, they were done in holding companies, outside insured banks but that's their primary regulator. the fdic found a hook to come in as receiver because under the theory that by manipulating the libor rate some of the bank this is a failed had losses, lost money on their loans because if the interest -- if you manipulate the interest rate down, you're charging lower rates on your loans, if you are on the losing side of an interest rate swap it would cost you money too. but their authority is limited to recovering what they can show the libor manipulation cost those failed banks. it is one additional tool that's used and should be used, and i applaud them. but they are constrained, they're acting as receiver, they're not enforcing the law, but claiming damages for failed banks that were insured by the fdic. tom honig, i think he's great, he's a great public servant, smart, understands the financial sector, committed. again, i think -- you want him as president, i'll settle for getting him over at the fed. we need more people like that in area, you need people making the arguments, driving things forward, inertia can take this over. i think there's been a delay game here thinking that the longer dewe delay rules, the public will lose heart, people will get frustrated and go to other things and leave them alone. and they have tremendous power. look what they're doing to poor dave camp. you can agree with that tax or not but this is unseemly, all these bullies piling on him and why -- there's nobody on the democratic side defending him. at least he stepped up. i don't get it. it's unseemly. but there are, you know, members of congress who sign their names to letters aligning with him and it doesn't seem to have any repercussion in their home district so this is one of the reasons i wrote my book, people need to take notice when this kind of thing goes on, find out who is doing it, tell them you don't like it, you're not going to vote for them if you see them doing it. otherwise all the money in new york, the financial sector, comes in and influence -- exercises influence. if voters don't provide a counterbalance, you'll get what you have now. >> thank you. we squeezed a lot into that. >> the health care problem in the united states is going to continue and it's not going to go anywhere. if we do not deal with the issue of innovation, if we do not translate all those findings that occur at the university level, into health care products which are affordable and that treat disease and cures them and as long as we do not understand diseases, their causes and how to treat or cure them, there's no point in talking about the solution of the health care problem because health insurance coverage is going to provide health insurance but then when it comes to drugs, when it comes to the premiums, when it comes to subsidies, where are the subsidies going to come from? from taxpayers' money. it's not that people are going to just get the dollars out of the trees. people have to pay for that. and there's a limit. the economy is basically the science of limitations system of if we don't deal with a better system of working on prevention, of working on understanding, how we could take care of our own health, then there is no point in just having health insurance because what is going to happen is what happens in colombia right now, people are covered, like what happens in panama. everybody can have access to health care or what happens in europe too in which people are covered but when it comes to medications and when it comes to drugs, governments are having problems affording them. >> the future of health care, sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's "q&a." >> c-span, for 35 years bringing public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences and offering complete, gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a public service of private industry. we're c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in h.d., like us on facebook >> microsoft founder bill gates poverty.ut global president obama announces new economic sanctions against russia. then a preview of the president's upcoming trip to the european union summit. later, the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction on the problem of corruption in afghanistan. next, former microsoft ceo bill povertylks about global and the bill and melinda gates foundation, which funds health care and education efforts in developing countries. forbes magazine estimates bill gates net worth
i'm ali velshi, than is "real money." >> this is real money. you are the most important part of the show. join our live conversation for the next half hour on twitter and also facebook. 6,226,000. that's the total number of vehicles general motors has recalled this year alone. today america demanded answers from g.m. over ignition switches linked to 13 traffic deaths over a decade. and america got virtually nothing. when members of the house panel one after another pressed g.m. ceo mary barra over what g.m. knew and when, she simply repeated we're reviewing that. she later told reporters we hired tony velucas. tony vel ucas is a lawyer. talk to our lawyer. we're still left hanging. 2.6 million vehicles recalled in february and march over faulty ignition switches going back to the year 2000. that can suddenly move to the off position and shut down a vehicle's electrical system. in an instant you could lose your steering and brakes. in an instant you could lose your ability to deploy the vehicle's airbag. in an instant you could lose your life. at least 13 people did. to be fair g.m.'s new ceo is clearly not familiar with the 2,000 plus documents turned over even though she has worked at g.m. for 34 years. g.m. only exists today because of the good graces of the american taxpayer. a $49.5 billion taxpayer bailout saved the company from collapse during the darkest days of the recession. most of it was paid back but still taxpayers are still in the hole for $10.5 billion. i along with many others supported g.m.'s bailout strenuously because the damage of letting it fail would have been too grate. from the ashes we were told a new g.m. would emerge. what we got today from mary barra is more of the old g.m. >> as far as what g.m. knew about the ignition switches in 2001, 13 years before the recall, correct? >> yes or no will work. >> the investigation will tell us that. >> you conclude from my opening statement that the tooling cost and price piece pieces are too , what does that mean? >> i find that statement to be very disturbing as we do this investigation and understanding the context of the whole timeline, if that's the reason why the decision is made that is unacceptable. >> do you take responsibility? is the company responsible? the new g.m. is it responsible? >> we will make the best decisions for our customers, recognizing that we have legal obligations and responsibilities as well as moral obligations. >> right now how many parts are being used in general motors' product that don't meet your own company's specifications? >> i don't have that except number but i can tell you the parts that we're using today meet the performance and the reliability, the safety that they need to if we find we have a part that is defective that doesn't meet the requirements, we then do a recall. >> what's changed at g.m.? isn't it true that throughout it's corporate history g.m. has represented to the driving public that safety has always been there their number one priority? >> i can't speak to the statements made in the past, i can only tell you that we've changed our core values and we're leading by example. >> that's your job now as ceo but you need to fix it, and fix it as quick as you can because it's going to cause us problems, obviously. >> i agree with you, it is completely my responsibility, and i will workday and night. we've already made tremendous change, and i recognize that it's my responsibility. >> there you have it, and there were several more hours that have. it doesn't sound like it went too well for g.m. and libby casey is covering the hearings for us at capitol hill. libby, you've seen lots of these hearings. how did it look from your perspective? 7. >> it'it was an intense line of questioning. you don't want to say that she was held in the hot seat or grilled but she really was questioned. what we kept hearing from ms. barra is that they'll have to wait for the investigation to see how it plays out. in the documentation that you supplied, she said in that case, yes, otherwise we have to wait for this investigation to play out. it was a heated hearing, and there are a lot of concerns. it's not just the fact that there were these faulty ignition switches, but as you said, the company did have some knowledge and they did change the switches over time but they didn't let the public know. they got these switches. they weren't up to specs, but they installed them any way. barton called mary barra's responses gobble di gook at one point in the hearing then they got the switches switched with the same part number. now that will cause them headaches because they can't tell which ones are faulty and which ones aren't because they all have the same spec. >> the issue is by not changing the part number you don't have to tell anybody about the part. if "t" now sees that it's an easy fix. but now with all these cars recalled, you can't tell which ones feed to be fix. >> mary barra said that is not standard procedure and that should not have been done. she was asked are there employees that oversaw the ignition starter starters stilld and it sounds like they're still there. >> as a financial journalist i thought a very strange dig when they decided after the resurrection, after the bankruptcy. they refer to themselves as the new g.m. mary barra has been there for 34 years and many of the senior executives have been there for years, too. >> she's a second generation g.m. even though she has been in the ceo chair since january, but she has been at the company for a long time. congress is asking who will ultimately be held responsible? they want to know names, personnel, they want to hear that from her. now she's giving us a timeline on a couple of issues. something else that congress wants to see happen, compensation. you mentioned the bankruptcy. this is a big part of the story. when g.m. declared bankruptcy in 2009 it wiped the slate clean. accidents that happened prior to 2009, ignition switches that from faulty and install before 2009 that is under the old g.m. and the company may not be held responsible. they are asked will you step up and compensate victims and families of those now dead victims, at least 13 people. mary barra said they have appointed ken feinberg, he worked on the compensation packages of 9/11 attacks and the bt oil spill. barra did not say that they will do compensation packages. >> to see the families of victims, holding their pictures in their arms, thank you. libby casey, from capitol hill. >> was g.m. worth saving with taxpayer money? john said on facebook, i don't trust g.m. to make safe cars. waiting over ten years. another tweet, why is g.m. taking more heat than any other company. now here's the thing to remember about g.m. this isn't just any company accused of doing something wrong. it's a big force in our economy, and without your tax dollars it probably wouldn't be here today. i'll explain coming up. plus the secret to a more fulfilling life, it may mean replacing this with something more like this. ariana huffington explains more. keep it right here. >> u.s. automakers enjoying a spring thaw after a harsh winter kept people from car show floors. sales climbing a whooping 13%, nissan posted an 8.3% increase. ford was up 3.3%. general motors in the spotlight today with the ceo testifying before congress over that recall mess still did pretty well of 4% sails gain and g.m.'s numbers were delayed for hours by a computer glitch. now the recall playing g.m. is just the latest championship. at its peak in 1979 general motors employed 618,000 people making it the largest private employer in the united states. only the government was a bigger employer. competition from japan, bankruptcy other head wins have reduced g.m.'s size and importance. but as mary snow reports the company's performance still matters to a small arm of workers, dealers, investors, and you, the consumer. >> reporter: launched in 1908, g.m. motors gobbled up competitors to become a dominant player in the automobile industry. it hit the peak of its power in 1962 claiming 50% share of the u.s. market. and it went global in the 80's and 90's with 8 million g.m. vehicles sold worldwide in 1995. those numbers were in decline when g.m. filed bankruptcy the company that emerged may be smaller and leaner, but make no mistake, g.m. remains a powerful force in the global economy. today the company employs 219,000 workers and network of dealers worldwide. with 70% of sales now coming outside of the u.s. gal brought in revenues of $155.4 billion in 2014. it's stock remains widely held including banks, pension plans, mutual fund owners an. bad news for g.m. could spell band news around the world. >> mickey has been covering car companies for two decades. she said the bailout did not fix the fundamental problems at g.m. which is it's culture. they predicted the collapse of the america's car makers and is editor and exploring the changing car industry. mickey, it doesn't matter what one thinks of g.m. as mary snow just pointed out, it is important. it's central and part of the american fabric. you're either an investor in this company or you know somebody who works for it or you work for someone who supplies it. we can't have g.m. getting into these kinds of pickles. >> that was exactly the rationale for the bailout. if you think back to 2009, 2008, we were in a financial crisis, we had lehmann brothers go down. when president obama came in to office the sense was we can't lose the two detroit car makers that are in the most trouble, and clearly g.m. got the lyon share of the bailout. they got $50 billion and the treasury owned a good part of general motors until earlier this year. >> the issue is as mary barra and general motors would have you see t the problems are the old g.m. the pre-recession g.m. it's pre-bailout g.m. the pre-bankruptcy g.m. this is the new g.m. even though many of its leaders have worked there for a long time, what is the new culture at general motors. >> you have a company that is used to being the largest company in the united states. it no longer is, but it is still the largest u.s. automaker. it is still in detroit, which is like the pentagon in washington, or hollywood in california. they are very proud of their company and as general motors goes, so should go the rest of the auto industry. but the problem is the rest of the world has changed. they have gone from half of the car market to 18% of the car market. they have to fight for every sale they get. the treasury shrank them. you have the old attitude of general motors bumping up against the new reality of the car market and american marketplace in general. >> will this do it? i looked back at toyota when it had its issue with the brake peddles, and toyota is back. when you think of toyota, you think of a good car, not of that. and then ford had bigger problems and no one thinks of the recall at ford. does this change g.m. or do they bounce back because everyone bounces back. >> this could be a very big moment for mary barra in her t tenure as ceo. this was the year that g.m. was supposed to get a fresh start, no longer owned by the u.s. government, and the problems of the past are dogging it. they really have to shake it off and prove to the american public that the investment was a good investment. >> does mary barra survive this? >> i think she will. it's so easterly and it's clear she's just getting her hands around this issue that at the moment i don't think anybody should be concerned about that. but look at this. you've had a 750 million charge amounts for the first quarter. basically wiping out their earnings for the first quarter. if we were to get a billion dollar charge or another half million dollar charge that's real money. we have to think about the prospects of what happens to a ceo with charges like that. >> thank you for coming on the show. good to see you. >> thank you. >> editor of curb and cars. carl levin of michigan said the construction manufacturer caterpillar shifted profits to a subsidiary in switzerland which had no employees or real business activity. caterpillar said the company's actions were legal and appropriate. what i'm about to say is not an april fool's joke. more than 7 million people have signed up for health insurance under obamacare. that's what the administration hoped for. not many people thought that would happen back in october when the website launched with more problems than g.m.'s ceo mary barra has. if you missed the deadline. there may be time. the government is giving people who had website problems a few extra weeks to sign up for the healthcare plan. ariana huffington will tell us how having an accident helped her discover the third metric, and the low cost that could have been the difference between life and death in the g.m. recall crisis. >> lisa fletcher with me now. you have a great show coming up. some of the common ailments made more serious because of the drugs they're take going new research said 9 million are at risk of serious drug interaction that even their doctors are not even aware of. >> are doctors being negligent. >> no, it's more of a disconne disconnect. >> i've got topnotch guests tonight p that is "the stream" tonight. >> ariana huffington knows plenty about success. she sold the website she cofounded for $15 million. she still runs the business and the huffington post is one of the most popular news and information sites in the world. with 90 million global visitors a month. when it comes to money and power ariana huffington knows what she's talking about. but her latest book called "thrive" she said a successful life needs something else, something she calls the third metric. she said she found herself lying on the floor in a pool of blood. sorry about the graphic nature of the introduction but it was a turning point for. >> you it was, and i can't blame you. in april of 2007 i collapsed from exhaustion, sleep deprivation, two years after founding the huffington post. literally there i was in a pool of blood beginning to ask myself the question is this success? if we define success by the convention terms of money and power, we are successful. but if you define success by any sane definition, lying in a pool of blood is not success. >> not sleeping, skipping meals, being all over the world on planes sounds like success to a lot of people. >> exactly. that is really why i wrote the book. it's part of my personal journey, but more to the point i see the collective there now all around. i feel its time for the sake of our individual lives and the sake of businesses to realize that this is a collective delusion. in order for the business to succeed, and people are praised in a corporation often for working 24/7. the language being used, killing it, crashing t the language of war which makes it hard for us to take care of our well-being. that's why this consists of four pillars. our well-being, if we sacrifice our health, clearly not worth it. wisdom. you see so many leaders making terrible decisions. they are not smart, they're not wise. then our ability to bring joy and wonder in our lives, and to make giving part of our lives. >> you and i have had this conversation elsewhere, and you mentioned that we should all trade in our phones, which is what i used a my alarm clock, and because it's my alarm clock it has to live next to my bed. you say keep the phone in another room and invest in an old fashioned alarm clock to move your phone from your bed. >> i have scientific evidence if you look up in the middle of the night and look at your data your sleep is not recharging. don't allow your day life to intrude in your nightlife. at the end of each section i have three tapes because my hope is that people are not just going to agree with me, but make living microscopic changes in their lives. >> but our bosses have to change. how do you manage this? you could come in within day and say i read the book, i'm going to put wonder in my life, joy, and get twice as much sleep in my life than you normally do, and then the boss feels like he's going to suffer. >> i'm not saying don't get responsible, don't get the job done. but when we're recharged we'll get the job done faster and better. in my own life i've been much sore effective since my collapse since i prioritized getting enough sleep and recharging. we pay people for their judgment, not their stamina. >> did you know you were exhau exhausted before you collapsed of exhaustion? >> no. >> many of us sleep very few hours, you had to recharge yourself. >> i don't remember the last time i wasn't tired. so we don't even remember what it's like to be completely recharged, and ready to go. which when i have my best ideas and i thought now a lot of ceos, a lot of people who i admire including steve jobs and the ceo of bridge water, who meditates. they create quiet times in their lives. you can call it prayer, contemplation, fly fishing, just some quiet time when you're not tethered to your smart phone, and we actually get our best inside. >> i'm going to try it. i said i'm going to try it. i said the last time you and i talked that i was going to try it. i'm going to try it. thank you for writing the book. it gives us a new way of think about lives. >> thank you very much. >> ariana huffington, author of "thrive." i spent a lot of time on this show on numbers as they relate to general motors. i got one more number for you, 57. that's how many cents per car it would have cost general motors to fix the ignition switches and prevented 13 traffic deaths. $0.57 to fix. take a look at what we're talking about. >> a spring inside the switch, a piece that costs pennies. you failed to provide enough force i just want to show how easy it is to turn this key in this switch. >> even nor disturbing than that g.m. new it would only cost $0.57 to fix. it shows an unacceptable business case. you want to hear what i think the real unacceptable business case, g.m.'s apparent unwillingness to put its customers ove safety first for r a decade. >> evey saturday, join us for exclusive, revealing, and suprizing talks with the most interesting people of our time. >> thinking differently is actualy punished... >> this saturday, is public education actually failing america? >> education is the biggest investment we make in our futures. >> but what are we really teaching our kids? >> i think it's a catastrophe that so many school disticts have cut arts programs back... >> could his reforms lead to happier, more fufilled lives. >> schools need to encourage the development of imagination... >> sir ken robinson talk to al jazeera only on al jazeera america >> hi, i'm lisa fletcher and you're in "the stream." 9 million americans are taking prescription drugs that may have dangerous interaction. are you one of them? find out in the next 30 minutes. if you're like nearly 70% of americans, you're taking at least one prescription medication, and as you age, that number is likely to go up. >> people are receiving this number of prescriptions, and as you get older, you get more and more prescriptions, and women tend to get more prescriptions than
it took g.m. so long to fix cars in spite of red flags. >> the short time ago the president announced more than 7 million people have signed up for the online exchanges. he also said the controversial law is not going anywhere. we're at the white house. randall, the president spoke passionately about the healthcare law, which he described as a success. >> reporter: richelle, it is a red-letter day for the president and democrats who all supported and fought hard to get the affordable care act passed and acted. we could hear the cheers on the north lawn and the president and vice president joe biden came out to speak. the presidentry counting the difficulties to the website and delayed enrollment, and he spoke of the republican opponents who tried to stop the law and repeal it, and even took it to the supreme court. in the end the president said this is an important moment for america and a big step forward. >> this law is helping millions of americans. in the coming years it will help millions more. i said before, i will always work with anyone whose willing to make this law work even better. but the debate over repealing in law is over. the affordable care act is here to stay. >> and the president said it's not just about the 7.1 million people who signed up before the deadline but about the 3 million young people who are under the age of 26 who are on their parents' insurance plan, and the numbers of others who have signed up in the medicaid expansion around the country. it's just the beginning for the obama administration and the affordable care act. >> what are the republicans saying about these numbers. >> the numbers don't really matter. what is at issue is the fundamental issue of the law. we have a statement on what have of house speaker john boehner who has been a loyal opponent from the affordable care act from the beginning. this is what he had to say: >> david shuster joins us now with a further break down from what the president had to say. this is really a victory for the president of the administration. >> yes, it certainly is. one of the things you did not hear the president talk about. for example, we don't know whether people have paid their premiums or not, we don't know what the ratio is from young to old, and that ultimately determine if premiums will rise. but at least they have made projections. for that reason alone the white house can declare victory. >> what does this mean for democrats running for re-election. there have been lafayette democrats who have not really wanted to campaign on obamacare. >> especially democrats from swing districts or states. in a statement there is great promise but she wants to continue to try to fix some of the problems. she's trying to thread the needle and say yes, we've made progress but yet there is more to be done. >> what can or will this do for the president's approval rating, any way to know yet? >> that's the interesting thing even folks at the white house say the political reality is set in stone. if you're republican, you hate it. if you're democrat, you don't. but it got president obama elected. democrats in order to maintain control of the senate or even have a chance at the house they need those energid progressives, and talking about the affordable care act, they believe they will thereby. >> democrats often point out that other programs that are popular now were not popular in the beginning. when you look fondly at these things now, but it took years for social security and other programs to be popular. is that what they're going to say going forward? >> the next challenge is two weeks before the election when insurance companies will set their premiums for 2015. based on what their ratio is from young to old people i think there could be sticker shock, that premiums could go up double digits but that's is not good news for democrats. democrats try to provide some immunity about what may be coming and at the same time we said all along that the premiums were going to rise, but they're not rising as quickly as they were before. >> so a lot of kinks to work out. >> if they can't get young people to be part of this program, the premium also skyrocket. >> thank you very much. secretary of state john kerry suggested today that he will not return to the middle east to meet with palestinian president mahmood abbas, but kerry said it's completely premature to write off the peace process. it could jeopardize the effort in the deadlock between the two sides. this does not signal an end to the talks, but does a response from abbas signal something entirely different? >> i think if you ask most palestinians they'll say these talks are dead, and they're dead because they say the israelis are the one the to renig reason the release of palestinian prisoners over the weekend. but what president mahmood abbas has done to respond is de facto citizenship and what he has asked for is a membership in four geneva conventions, five conventions, anti-torture conventions, anti-corruption conventions. again, these are things that he promised not to do so long as the talks were going on. does this mean that the talks are dead? he says no, we're still willing to talk, and we're not walking away from these talks. let's take a listen. >> we will continue in our efforts to reach a peaceful solution through the negotiations. the solution that gives us a state, a 1967 borders and jerusalem as a capitol as well as a fair solution agreed on to the refugees case. >> now abbas wants to continue talking. the u.s. wants everyone to continue talking. the question is, is israel willing to continue talking after this step that abbas promised nod to do. >> what are the incentives for reigniting the peace process is release, why is the possible release such a critical issue? >> reporter: this is pretty extraordinary. for the last 25 years the c.i.a. chief senior defense department officials all threatened to resign if jonathan pallard were release: before the days of edward snowden, jonathan pallard was one of the worst leakers in history. he took thousands of documents and walked out the front door with suit case full of documents and handed it over to the israelis. the u.s. accused him of trying to sell it to the highest bidder, not only the israelis. the u.s. said for the last 25 years you cannot release an american city who spied on his own country. the fact that john kerry and president barack obama have considered releasing pallard is extraordinary, and shows how desperate they are to keep these peace talks going. we talked about all day about this possible deal, and now president mahmood abbas came forward and said we're going to the international organizations. we don't even know if these talks are going to keep going. the possible deal between israel and u.s. really depends now on what israel plans to do. >> really a remarkable development and it remains to be seen to really make a difference. nick schifrin, live in jerusalem. thank you so much. new revelation from the final words of malaysian government about m malaysian 37. thes a ship with a fit kateed black box locater will be arriving. >> we've been hearing all week long that you don't understand the scope of this thing until you see it yourself. that's true. what search and rescue crews have been saying is dead on. we're on a hillside on the sou h side of this slide. you see the debris field. this is one small portion of this debris field where they've been working non-stop. if you pan to the right you can see the extent of it. up at the top of the hill you can see where the hillside blue out. apparently just exploded out at the base of that hill, it came down across the valley and we're sitting on top that have hill slumped down on top of that. it was a double event here. stunning to see and what you understand when you look at this is not just natural fury that was unleashed here, but the human lives that it exacted. there could be 50 people dead when this is over, and the work that has gone on, volunteers has been extraordinary. in many cases people searching for and find thinking own friends, their own relatives down in that debris. it's amazing to see this in person. in oso, al jazeera. >> asking ceo of g.m. why it took so long fo to fix the swit. >> as soon as we heard about the problem we acted without hesitation. we told the world we would make the fix. whatever mistakes were made in the past we will not shirk from our responsibilities now or in the future. today's g.m. will do the right thing. >> libby casey is following the story on capitol hill. give us breakdown of what happened today. really a big day. >> reporter: yes, good evening, richelle. mary barra did what was expected of her. she apologized for a decade of accidents and problems due to the ignition switch. she talked about some of the steps the company has taken in the last couple of months including appointening someone to overlook standard and safeties. they've hired ar a former prosecutor of who knew what, and why no one acted sooner. she also said there would be a process to review whether or not there should be compensation for the victims. so that was a little bit of a new news. members of congress by and large were quite frustrated because mary barra did not answer a lot of questions. instead she kept saying i'll have to wait until the investigation that the company is conducting moves forward. then we'll have answers. joe barton of texas called her testimony gobble dide-gook. another frustrated member, jan shykowski, a democrat from illinois. >> does g.m. accept responsibility for the accidents caused by the company's defective vehicles? >> first of all, i want to reiterate that we think that the situation is tragic, we apologize for what has happened, and we're undergoing a full investigation. >> i'm talking about responsibility and liability. >> responsibility, i don't understand. >> and even liability. you take responsibility? is the company responsible? the new g.m. is it responsible? >> we will make the best decisions for our customers recognizing we have leib obligations and responsibilities as well as moral obligations. >> mary barra kept talking about the new g.m. how the culture has changed from a cross culture to customer or service culture, but that was not enough for congre congress. g.m. declared bankruptcy in 2009, and the question is if they can be held liable for accidents that happened before the bankruptcy. now that's what representative schakowsky and other members of congress so concerned. >> tell us more about what lawmakers want to know from ntsa? >> they oversee things like this. they deal with vehicular recalls, and the acting administration. iit looks like ntsa got word of the problems with the key ignition twice but did not move forward or acton. was it g.m. holding up the flow of information or was it ntsa acting irresponsebly and not moving forward in what would have been a very expensive recall process for g.m. now it's going to cost more because when g.m. replaced the faulty ignition switch. they did not change the part number. now it means if g.m. goes in to find the faulty ignition, they can't tell the good ones from the bad ones. it was not just mary barra in the room, but also the families. they did not testify before congress but they're here in force, and their presence is felt heavily by everyone. they're watching very closely to see how things go. >> thank you very much. we'll have more on that testimony with real money "real" ali velshi. shthey september asking, are you responsible. it seems like we really didn't get any real answers yet. >> there was real lawyering up going on. as mary barra left the room where she was testifying some reporters got her there and were asking questions that were not legally pointed as the one that jan shykowski asked. and mary barra said this is why we hired jerry lucas who was fired from the law enforcement. there were a lot of allegations that surprised me. they were not answers. it became a little ridiculous to be in front of a congressional panel if you have such little information to share. it was a little unsatisfying to watch it, and mary barra needs to be careful about the dysfunction that they're making between the pre-bailout gm and mary barra has been at g.m. for 34 years. it's the only place she has ever worked with. that's the case for a number of senior general motors executive. she said she and this group did not know about the depth of these things. but there are 2,000 pages sent to congress which indicates that in 2005, 2007, and 10 g.m. had an opportunity to deal with these ignition switch problems, but chose not to do that. there is work to be done. >> ali, there are companies that recover from things like this, and there are companies that we never hear from again. how much damage could they potentially do to the g.m. brand? >> i got to tell you, i've been thinking about this a lot. i was thinking about ford with the gas tanks, and ford with the fire problem, and toyota, the conversations are very similar. why didn't you tell us, who knew who. and it looked disastrous twice. tight at a that not only gained all the sales that it lost but more. in the end i we'll bounce back. this is general motors' opportunity to win people back for doing the right thing and not for sitting around and doing as little as possible. >> that's right. what else is coming up on your show. >> i'm speaking with aryan huffington, she has a great new book out. >> good stuff, ali, thank you. >> coming up on al jazeera america. the new law that will allow florida to keep people in prison long after they have served their sentences. >> as part of efforts, the former u.s. intelligence officer convicted of spying. why pallard is such a lightening rod. >> reporter: jonathan jay pallard is a hero, to many others he is a traitor. he was sent to prison for life for selling u.s. intelligence secrets to israel. pallard said he was trying to protect his spiritual homeland from attacks. but prosecutors said some of the materials ended up at the kremlin putting u.s. national security at risk. the government lawyer who conducted the damage assessment calls the pallo pallard case asf the worst and that he should not be released. >> hpallard supporters in u.s. and israel said that he acted out of love for israel. and the 29 years that he has served is more than enough punishment. >> nobody has excused his crimes. what he did was wrong, and he made a plea bargain with the government. >> reporter: now pallard who is slated for parole role coul coue released sooner. the question is whether in doing so the u.s. undermines it's commitment to the rule of law. >> joining us now is robert o'brien, former delegate to the united nations. thank you for your time, mr. o'brien, why release pallard now? >> they may have to play this card. it's something that the president has the authority to do whether it's good or bad for the united states or the process is another question. >> they have a lot of riding on it, in other words. is it a sign of weakness to consider this? >> look, pallard is up for parole next year, and he has already served a long sentence. now he's traitor, he committed treason against the united states. he's properly in jail and is being punished. the perception of weakness comes in really two parts. number one, if the release of prisoners that have gone through the u.s. justice system in dealings with foreign countries that undermines the american system. if we start trading terrorists and spies for foreign primarily goals that's a road that america really has never gone down and shouldn't go down with some minor exceptions in the cold war in trading folks with the soviet union. the fact that we have to lean on an ally as close to israel and free a prisoner to get an ally to do something that is in their best interest is not strong. >> you're deeply concerned about the precedent this might set with u.s. relations with other countries? >> absolutely. if americans were convicted of treason, spying and violating american national security, or for that matter if terrorists are hijackers who have gone to trial in america and are in american prisons. if they'r they believe that maka deal with the american president to get a deal signed, they're going to start an asking for those releases and that's a dangerous step to take. >> having said that if something were on the line more than an extension of talks, if it were more substantial than that, would this be something to be considered in your opinion? >> i think it was considered before with president clinton. >> indeed, it was in 1998. >> where there was a chance for global settlement. the fact that pallard will be released on parole next year lessens the value of this. i can see why prime minister netanyahu would want pallard to be released. in some ways it's inconsequential in the big scheme of things, but it's a bad step down a slippery slope. >> robert o'brien, former u.s. delegate to the united nations. thank you very much. >> the first ebola outbreak in years and it is spreading. we'll look at how infectious disease experts are hoping to control this. also migrating birds and flooding in their fields. that's next. >> a deadly ebola outbreak in west africa. 70 people have died from the virus and now reports say it has spread. in senegal they have closed their borders. we have more. >> reporter: one of the world's most deadly infectious disease citizen spreading across urban and remote parts of west africa. it's movement across guinea is the biggest they have dealt with. >> we're facing an epidemic to the extent never seen especially as far as distribution of the cases in the area. >> reporter: the symptoms are vomiting, diarrhea and external bleeding. it's the most dangerous strain detected in guinea. >> we're facing the most aggressive strain of ebola. this is the train that has killed nine people out of ten. >> reporter: doctors without borders have sent 40 tons of equipment as well as 60 field workers including doctors, nurses, epidemiologists and water experts to guinea. but there are no medicines or vaccinations to treat ebola. all doctors can do is boost the immune system of patients. it's crucial to stop the virus from spreading any further. senegal has closed it's border, but sierra leone has a number of suspects cases. >> groups are deeply concerned about this ebola outbreak. there is no vaccine or cure, and it's spreading fast. there are infections fro infectn outbreaks since the 1990's an and 2000 in uganda. monkeys and pigs can carry it, too, but the fruit bat is the animal that carries it. that's why there is concern that this could spread beyond africa. robert, the cdc is stepping in to help. what can they do at this point? >> good evening, richelle, the cdc can do a lot. they study all of these viruses and diseases around the world. over the weekend pepper asked to send a team over to guinea, which they did. they arrived late last night. today they arrived at the ministry of health and the world health organization. they're going into clinics, hospitals and explain the severity of the situation. that part of africa has not seen an outbreak of ebola in nearly 20 years, and it was not that significant at that time. so the cdc is going to explain to everyone that no this is not an airborne virus, but it can transmitted from saliva, blood, mucus. they want to make sure that folks on the ground understand the severity and communicate with the public that the spread of this does not go further. >> the "world health organization" is hesitant to call this a serious health crisis, why so? >> well, it's interesting. the doctors without borders earlier said this is an epidemic, this is unprecedented, well, the numbers don't necessarily back that up. the reason for saying that is because of the fact that this went into west africa, again, this has not been that precedented in that part of the continent. but the cdc and the who are trying to tone down the rhetoric. earlier today this is hear what one person from the who had to say. >> in terms of size of ebola outbreaks there have been outbreaks larger than this one. this is quite relatively small still. it's a question of controlling infection in hospitals. it's a question of controlling transmission among the people who might have been infected and don't know that they've been infected yet or are not in hospitals. >> it is important to note, richelle, that there is an one-week incubation period where it festers in a person's body, thin it will take two weeks to come to fruition. so there is no vaccine as you noted earlier. there is no cure, and communication is the key at this point in making sure that people are taking care of themselves and staying away from any possibility of becoming infected. richelle? >> robert ray in atlanta. thank you so much. joining me now is a senior fellow for global health at the council of formulations and specializes in infectious diseases and bio terrorism. we appreciate your time. thank you very much. as he described this is now a small outbreak but the wordy bowl la strikes fear in people. is it because it could change so quickly? >> it's because ebola is a very deadly and frightening disease. when i was in an ebola epidemic i saw what it looked like and how people respond. it's not proportionate to the number of people infected. it's proportionate to something that is very new, very scary. people become deranged and hallucinate as blood starts flowing into their brain inappropriately, and it can terrify people in the community who see it. >> and to see this happen to people you love and care about just has to be awful. >> they bleed tears. tears comes from--floody fluids come from all over the body. >> if it has been 20 years since there has been an outbreak, what have we been doing right? >> there have been plenty of outbreaks in the last 20 years. in between we've had outbreaks in uganda, in central african republic, congo, a number of locations. >> why has there been so little progress in finding a cure for this? >> well, we don't have any clue about how go about curing it. it's from a whole class of viruses we don't have curative treatment for. vaccine is another matter. while there have been innovations in possibly developing a vaccine the problem is there is no financial incentive for anyone in industry to make a vaccine that affects so few people who are poor people who can't afford to buy the product. >> wow, that's a powerful thing that you've just said. do you really believe that? >> absolutely. >> i the threat is very small, but the u.s. does make an investment in trying to find a cure. why is that? >> well, ebola was classified as the top pathogens that are potential bio terrorist agents. after the anthrax mail negotiation 2001 an 2001, theres something called project bio shield. quite a lot of money went in to try to come up with a cure a vaccine, but it's a tough problem. no great problem came out and industry was not interested in carrying it forward because there just isn't a marketplace. >> back to what you said perhaps it's not the victims that the world cares about enough. how do you make the world care? >> well, if some american came down with ebola there might an shift. let's hope that that never happens. >> it's really moving work that you do. are you seeing some powerful things that maybe the world needs to see more of that. we appreciate you coming in and bringing your insight very much. thank you. >> thank you. >> in cairo three and three other egyptian cities, 45 people were injured in clashes between police and university students. students threw rocks at police in this protest. it has been daily violence since president morsi was thrown out. in japan, the government said radiation levels are low enough for 350 people to return to the area around the nuclear plant, but some are hesitant because of contamination concerns. 100,000 people were displaced three years ago when the plant was damaged by a huge earthquake and tsunami. in mexico government officials say one of the two remaining leaders of the knight templar cartel was killed in a shootout. the suspected cartel leader refused to surrender last night. security forces have been hunting the knight templar leadership, killing and arresting in the last several weeks. nearly half of all states have laws to allow a person to be held indefinitely for a crime they have not committed. we have more on these new laws. tell us more about this. >> richelle, not very many people know about civil commitment even though 20 states, washington, d.c. and the federal government has a law on the books. ngo agency tougher law was passed after an eight-year-old girl was murdered by a registered sex offender with a long criminal record. >> reporter: it's wrapped in sky-high barbed wire. this is not a prison. david who has spent four and a half years here said its worse. >> it's like a living death sentence. a lot of people try to take themselves out while in there. >> reporter: this is where violent predators go. the men are here because the state deems them too dangerous to walk the streets. >> the people we've kept at that center are likely to have committed any number crimes against victims. therif this saves one victim, gg them the treatment they badly need. >> once terms end a team of evaluators determines if they meet a specific criteria, that it if they meet abnormality, and they are kept indefinitely until a judge or jury decides they are no longer a danger to evaluate. >> a register sex offender committing crimes that date back for decades. last june just three weeks after smith walked out of a jail he raped and strangled eight-year-old cherish per winkle. >> an eight-year-old girl is dead, we want to know why. >> reporter: through her organization, lauren's kids, she pushed for tougher laws. and with it all sexual predators will be evaluated. >> i fight every day to make it so that these monsters, these sexually deviant behaving individuals are as far away from our children as humanly possible. >> reporter: so far the state said it has released 300 offenders from its civil commitment program, but the design iprogram is designed to p people from getting out. of 650 men at the facility, 72 are awaiting their commitment hearing. >> this is crazy. everything that they're doing as far as i'm concerned based on what i know about the law violates every constitutional right. >> residents wait for their civil trials because mounting a defense takes time. she adds any delays are not the program's fault. it's estimated since the state began to committing violent sexual predators 15 years ago they have saved thousands of people from being their victims, even though it was not enough to save cherish periwinkle. >> the state plans to ex-fond house more sex offenders and the hope is that it will prevent more tragedies. >> you say this is a civil process, but they are still in lock up. how does this work. >> the state said this is civil because this is therapeutic. keep in mind sex offenders are getting intense psychiatric treatment, and if they complete the program the hope is they'll be given preparation for life outside in the railed world. real world. >> natasha, thank you. new charges about the driver who killed people at a festival. >> there are new charges against the man accused in the deadly crash at south by southwest. rashad owens had already been charged with one count of capitol murder. now he faces 20 charges of aggravated assault. he was accused of accelerating through a crowd at a festival. four people died and 17 were injured. >> suing glenn beck for definition. the man was injured in an attack and questioned by investigators. beck at one point called him the money man but he was cleared of any involvement. he said that beck's comments damaged his reputation. tiger woods will miss the masters for the first time of his career. he had surgery on his back to fix a pinch nerve. woods said the surgery went well but he needs several weeks to recover. the masters gets under way next week. and former red sox could be worth millions in new york. a norman rockwell painting will be auctioned next month. it's called "the rookie: red sox locker room." it features many players and could sell up to $30 million. >> that is beautiful. i'll start saving now. millions of birds migrate to california in early spring but this year many of the wetlands they rely on have dried up. now farmers are working to make the trip a bit easier. jennifer london has more. >> an hour or so north of sacramento, in california's central valley the landscape is a patchwork of farm field. this is the state's breadbasket. it's also home to one of the most important resting stops for millions of migratory birds traveling the fly way. a migration route stretching from the arctic to south america. 230 species depend on this water for its survival. but hungry and exhausted for flying for thousands of miles are finding that the wetland is largely dry thanks to farming and the state's history drought. once upon a time there were 400 million acres now only 250,000 acres remain thanks to farmland that is drying up. >> the loss of habitat, we've oh gone from 40 million birds on the pacific fly way to somewhere around 5 million to 6 million birds. >> the loss of birds is not only a concern for conservations. farmers who have been growing rice here for more than 50 years need the birds to naturally work the fields. >> the birds do a lot of tillage as you can see out here in the field. they stomp the rice in the ground and they're pecking. it kind of mixes everything up. >> to brings the birds back you got to bring the wetlands back. that's what the conservancy is doing with the help of stone and others farmers. and new pilot programs the farmers have agreed to keep their rice fields flooded a few months longer in the wetland where the birds need it most. >> we have an obligation to and a role to play from the pacific fly away in supporting the birds. it will be better for the birds as well as the farmers. >> the irony is that scientists who in large part are responsible for the disappearance of the whet lands are now helping to bring them back. >> this project is a good example of the nature conservancy really thinking about our work and what our farmers do very differently. instead of thinking of these farmers adversaries, we're making them partners in the solution. >> it's a win-win situation. >> later in april stones' fields will be dry and the birds, rested and fed, will be able to continue their long journey north with the hope that next year they'll be back. al jazeera, california. >> coming up on al jazeera america. >> you are embarrassing our city. >> the vote for anyone but rob ford, canada's mayor with a huge campaign against him >> al jazeera america. there's more to it. >> toronto's embattled mayor rob ford is running for election and the election has gotten strange. john terrett has a mystery for us. >> reporter: thank you. you remember rob ford. >> oh, yes. >> reporter: you know who he is. toronto's portly man. i'm sorry, he's just portly. he just is. he admitted to smoking crack cocaine probably in a drunken stupor, not the best things to do. to our neighbors in the north he is a nightmare and they want it to end. so much so that three posters in the "anyone is better than rob ford" campaign turned up at trinity bell woods park. it says vote jeff mcilroy. promised to just smoke pot as mayor. and the second one. if elected, i will just get publicly drunk. and number three vote where it says when i urinate in public i won't get caught. now if you're having dinner now i'm very sorry about this. it's a mystery about who is putting these posters up. there is a website but it gives very little clue. they started tv debates even though polling is seven months away. 40 people are running for the mayor's job. but the major rival candidate. >> you know, we've had it with the scandals and the half-truths. you are embarrassing our city. >> well, you know, don't write rob ford off just yet. i've been saying that a lot. i've been saying that about chris christie, too. but it's true. rob ford's numbers are holding up. they're pretty good. if the anti--ford vote splits too widely than the mayor on crack could be back, giving him, richelle, the last laugh over the poster makers. follow that if you can. >> is that a campaign slogan? >> the mayor on crack could soon be back. i made that up, but it's pretty good. >> you have had too much fun with this. >> i think i have a new career waiting. >> john terrett, ladies and gentlemen. and it is april fool's and pranks are popping up. >> people are having a lot of fun with april fool's this year. starting with google hangout. where you can post pictures and then you'll get david hasselhoff to photo bomb your picture. hundreds of people have posted pictures of themselves, their families. this one says, oh, man, look who snuck in behind me. that guy, just can't get out of my house. this one says there i was, having dinner with my lovely wife, and bam, david hasselhoff photo bombed it. and another party that is having a lot of fun with this is the baltimore police, our s.w.a.t. team, april fool's day. now richelle you'll recall that hillary clinton has this picture on her twitter page. a famous picture where she's got the glasses and she's texting. and that started the #text by hillary. president bill clinton got in on this joke. he has a picture of himself saying i'll follow my leader. hillary had a joke back. she tweeted back, well, that explains what happened to my ipad. and some companies have been getting in on the joke. ticktack introducing this shakeless ticktack. this has bubble wrap here. this is a selfie put on youtube. it roams around you and takes selfies of you. and then we have some from virgin atlantic and cheetos. >> collect cancun afternoon and soak it all in. >> or if you run a little hot like me and desire cooler ride, well that's no problem. just select chicago polar vortex and feel the chill. >> pervasive, passion unexpected yet undeniable. >> some of the more ridiculous products that are out there, richelle. >> happy april fool's. we have an update on the day's stop stories next. >> scared as hell... >> as american troops prepare to leave afghanistan get a first hand look at what life is really like under the taliban. >> we're going to be taken to a place, where they're going to make plans for an attack. >> the only thing i know is, that they say they're not going to withdraw. >> then, immediately after, an america tonight special edition for more inside and analysis. >> why did you decide to go... >> it's extremly important for the western audience to know why these people keep on fighting... ...it's so seldom you get that access to the other side. >> faultlines: on the front lines with the taliban then an america tonight: special edition, only on al jazeera america >> this is al jazeera america live from new york city. i'm richelle carey with a look at today's top stories. this afternoon president obama defended the affordable care act one day after the deadline to enroll. obama said nearly 7.1 people signed up for health insurance that is here to stay. folks who did not finish their application also have a grace period to do so. the ceo of general motors dogged questions about why it took g.m. a decade to address the ignition problem. secretary of state john kerry suggests he would not return to the middle east to meet with palestinian president mahmood abbas. he said it's premature to write off the peace process despite moves to break the dead look. an ebola outbreabreak in gu. we're getting a firsthand look at the devastation left behind by last month's mudslide in washington state. 27 people have died. crews are still picking through debris searching for more victims. they're also trying to reopen a major road. i'm richelle carey. "real money with ali velshi" is next. stay right here. >> she had her chance. the boss at g.m. could have told the world what went wrong but we didn't get any good answers from a company that you bailed out with your hard-earned taxpayer dollars. i'll give you my take. g.m. is not the huge company that it used to be, but it's still a part of our economy. i'll tell you how big. money, power and an old fashioned alarm clock. ariana huffington with her three-prong idea
join one of the leading contenders for the afghan presidency, days ahead of the election. first to kenya where security forces are cracking down on somali refugees. following the news that the kenyan government wants to send all somalis to two designated camps. a prominent cleric shot dead has been buried. there were angry scenes outside the police station where his body was taken. the cleric's mosque appealed for calm. >> tania page is in mombasa. she joins us live. tell us about the mood in mombasa today. >> so far it appears as most of the followers of this controversial cleric has been heeding the calls for calm. we are outside a mortuary where a short service has been held for victims of recent attacks in kenya. a week ago now six people were gunned down at a church service. bodies have been mourned by family members, and there has been calls for calm by religious leaders. one stepped outside to talk to us. this is the chairman of the national advisory of kenya. >> what is your message for the young people that will be angrily that someone who inspired them, although controversial to many, has been shot dead? >> my message to the youth is keep calm. not to go on the street and be violent. what we need no mombasa is peace, and prayers for the leader abubakar. what is important it that they come together for peace. >> what role do you think sheikh abubakar shariff played towards the muslim community, what was his role. >> he was a normal muslim. we were having dialogue two weeks ago with him and the youth. we were to go to the mosque with his youth. i was very sad yesterday when i heard he was shot dead. he was contributing in a very good way. in fact, he will come and urge aum muslims to peace. i don't know the killers, where they come from. we strongly condemn the killers, and urge the government to conduct an investigation. he was cooperating with the police. he used to go to the police two times a week. so totally amazed by the killers. >> thank you very much for being with us. we appreciate your insight. >> i want to ask you about the situation in the country. we know the kenyan government has been cracking down on refugees in nairobi, trying to push them into the refugee camp, pushing them back. how has this gone down with the different communities. how much support does the government initiative have? >> well, it's - this location is important to that, because the killing of these six people in mombasa a week ago is what sparked the crackdown, when the government said it want all refugees, not just somali, to go back to the refugee camps. if you go to eastly, where we understand there is a crackdown going on, and where hundreds of people have been arrested over the last week or so, there are mixed opinions. many of the rev -- refugees feel persecuted. the government says it's a justification to round people up, saying some of the assailants were refugees. it says that is the reason it wants these people to go back to the refugee case. we spoke to kenyan somalis, because there's a huge kenyan somali population, and they feel that this is a good idea, that the presence of so many refugees who fled the violence years and years of violence in nairobi adds to friction between different parts of the community here. >> that's tania paige reporting live from mombasa. in other world news a powerful earth quick hit northern chile, five have been killed. the 8.2 magnitude quake struck off the coast near the border with peru. lucia newman has the latest. >> the powerful earthquake struck late tuesday night. within australian hour the first tsunami wage hit the chile coast. there has been a tsunami warning for chile, ecuador and peru. they are the closest countries to the epicentre, and the other ones, and there was a tsunami watch that was posted for columbia, panama and costa rico. >> the chilean mining port of iquique was the most impacted. an area that in the last month had been rocked by hundreds of less powerful tremors. following the quake there was reports of fires and several dying from heart attacks. >> chile's president michelle bachelet declared a state of kat as trophy in the regions allowing her to send out the army to secure property and the prevent looting much. >> translation: the tsunami was issued promptly, e have learnt of the deaths of some whose identities are being confirmed. >> tuesday's earthquake was shallow, 20km below the seabed, but the force send across south america, including the bolivian city. >> it was strong and moved when i sat down. the curtains shook. this left cracks on buildings. there are lots. i just went into my apartment to check. neighbouring peru was affected >> translation: it scared me. i realised it was shaking. >> the area in danger is the chilean coast. the chile government issued a nation-wide alert, hoping to alert the same type of damage when an 8.8 magnitude quast killed thousands of people. this time the authorities were prepared. there'd been a number of tsunami rehearsals in the port city, showing that unlike most aeth quakes, this is one people expected. >> german airline loouthansa cancelled thousands of flights because of pilots who are on strike. the 3-day work out is about cuts to pensions. half a million passengers will be affected. it will cost tens of millions. >> thousands of creeks protested as european financiers signed a bail out. greek was forced to cut spending and open the economy to foreign contribution. unemployment is at 27%. >> there has been violence and venezuela as protesters rallied in support. security forces fired tear gas. this report was sent from the rally. >> the center of caracas as hundreds of police fired tear gas and rubber bullets at protesters. many demonstrators were students, and they protected themselves building barricades and attacked plus for self horse. the latest episode in a series of anti-government protests beginning in february. >> the national guard should be defending people. it is not doing that. it is defending a corrupt go. . >> protesters were detained. >> what little truth there was in venezuela is over. police have been here 15 minutes. it was over when they started firing tear gas at protesters. >> people have gathered at a nearby plaza. wrapped in a venezuelan flag she told the crowd of her determination to reclaim her seat in congress. the supreme court ratified the decision to remove her from office, the venezuelan authorities insisting she vial aid the constitution. she will not be silenced. >> translation: the most important ideal in history in the life of any human being is dignity, sovereignty, and that is our cause. >> her supporters call her brave, and say they want the same in the government. >> we are here to defend venezuela. it's her life. >> escorted by politicians student representatives and union leaders until they tried to reach the assembly. government supporters demanded that she leave. >> we defend the revolution from a traitor who sold out the country. >> they were shuttled away. her fight is not over. she will use a constitutional appeal to get the seat back. inside the national assembly government legislators prevented the congress woman from returning to parliament. people were dancing. outside in the center of caracas protesters clashed for hours after two months of protests. there's no sign that they will stop. hundreds of families have been left homeless in peru after the river burst its banks. the area has seen days of rain fall and there's been flooding. people were forced to use cann use to navigate around the streets. more ahead this half hour, including factory shutdown. we meet the bangladeshi garment workers. >> afghanistan on the campaign trail with dr abdullah abdullah, one of the frontrunners in the presidential election. >> welcome back. our top stories on al jazeera. about 600 people have been arrested in a crackdown on refugees in the kenyan capital nairobi. in mombasa, a prominent muslim cleric shot dead by unknown gunmen has been buried. >> five have been killed in chile after an 8.9 magnitude earthquake struck the region, it triggered a tsunami. >> protesters rallied in support of a congress woman removed from office in venezuela. >> u.s. secretary of state john kerry cancelled a planned trip to the middle east to mediate ongoing talks, coming after the palestine president signed treaties pushing for international recognition. people in bethlehem welcomed the move. israel want a delay until talks had happened. mahmoud abbas said he made the decision after israel failed to carry out a promised release of palestine prisoners. >> live to stefanie dekker, from ramallah in the occupied west bank. tell us about the reactions, and what precisely the palestinians have signed up to. >> well, a general feeling here is that president mahmoud abbas has down a good thing, the fact that he has been defiant, saying he's not happy with the way the talks are going, the palestinians are not getting what they want and israel has not adhered to what they want. the conventions signed - it's a complicated issue. 15 convention, part is the geneva. what this translates to is the palestinians can then try israeli generals, whoever they want to accuse of of something in court. by signing 15 conventions, and these cover things from economic, civil rights, torture - all these things - the palestinians need to implement it and report back to various bodies to bring it. they are saying - it's a huge task, it's impossible for the pa to manage all of that at the moment. that's why it's seen as a political step, pressure on the americans and the israelis to try to get something more out of the talks as we have heard from president abbas. he wants the talks to go ahead. the only way to find a solution, peace, is through talks. we have not heard from the israelies, they are keeping quiet. all cards on the table. we have a few weeks to go before the talks finish. >> thank you stefanie dekker, live for us in ramallah. >> a short while ago i spoke to a spokesperson from the palestine commission for human rights, and she says it's a positive step to give palestinians more human rights. >> after the upgrading of palestine in the united nations to an observer state, the palestine state could sign and ratify all human rights instruments including the convention against ilim nation against women and others. having said that, i think this entails legal obligations on the state of palestine to report on the don essentials, this should not exclude or take away the legal obligation. we find the conventions to the territories. it brings legal obligations on palestine, but does not take away the legal obligations of the occupying authority towards the occupied territories of 1967. >> government attacks on rebel held areas killed nine people. it suggested people have died after a barrel bomb was dropped. activists say five others were kill killed as a result of government sites. >> four people have been killed in battles between government soldiers and rb else in yemen, it happened in the western province. the yemen government said two dead were soldiers. >> al jazeera demands the immediate release of three journalists held in prison in egypt for 95 address. the trial of peter greste, mohamed fadel fahmy, and mohammed badr has been adjourned until april 10th. they are falsely accused of providing a platform for the muslim brotherhood, and spreading false news. a fourth, al jazeera arabic has been detained without trial since late august. >> the united states centred the need for better energy security at a meeting with e.u. leaders in brussels. the secretary of state john kerry comments came after russian gas giant gaz prom announced a 40% hike in the cost of gas to ukraine. america's gas industry is growing and hopes to provide europe with the resources from next year. >> no nation should use energy to sometimy a people's aspirations. it should not be used as a weapon. it's in the interests of all of us to have good energy supplies critical to the economy, security and prosperity of our people. we can't allow it to be used as a political weapon or instrument of abregs. we are taking steps to make it difficult for people to deploy that tool. we are working in lock step to help ukraine bring natural gas in from poland and hungary and develop a route through. >> more than a million personnel are deployed around india. maoist rebels have been at war with the government for years. they are threatening to disrupt the vote. >> on alert, on guard and vigilant, whether in the city, countryside. hundreds of thousands of guards as the general lcked gathered speed. the state is on high security alert. the outgoing chief of police is confident the region will be secured during the vote. >> the state government - they are joined together with the direction of the election commission, and they are doing the best to find and conduct the elections peacefully. >> the state has been at war with left-wing mouists for decades. it has killed thousands. seller policeman in march. this man is no stranger. two of his brothers were killed, punishment for his decision to become a police officer. he and his wife were threatened and they had to flee their home and seek refuge in a camp hundreds of miles away. >> we had land and property. we had to leave it behind. i want the next government to bring peace to the region. >> india's prime minister said the problem is internal security so operations could continue. small teams especially trained security personnel are searching the dense forest area. hundreds of square kilometres are under the radar. authorities are saying they'll take no chances in the lead-up to and during the general election. >> this derailed a goods train, which caused havoc. a reminder of the ability to strike anywhere, at any time. despite assurances that the hiltry are in control. over a million troops have been deployed nationwide. as many as 100,000 will guard it. the hope is people displaced will be free to vote. >> activists in the philippines rallied outside the chinese embassy in manila. protestors say chinese coast cards tried to stop a filipino boat from getting to a disputed outcrop on saturday. they say the boat was trying to deliver food supplies to filipino marines stuck on a worship. both counties claimed ownership. >> in bangladesh, a garment factory has been forced to close after an international team of inspectors decided the building was unsafe. the inspections began last year after the factory blast that killed more than 100 workers. workers relying on an income are now facing a difficult future. >> this woman and her husband worked at the same factory. they lived in a tin shack and worked hard to build up a life for them and their 7-year-old daughter who is severely disabled. last week the factory was declared unsafe. without notice both lost their jobs. >> my daughter is never well. she always needs medication and treatment. it's very expensive. even if we don't eat, she needs to eat. now that we don't have work, i don't know how we'll take care of her. >> this is a building where safety inspectors found structural flaws, and ordered that several floors be evacuated until the problem is fixed. the company shut down, leaving thousands of workers unemployed. >> the other companies in the building suspended their operations while repairs are made. the manager says it's a big blow for everyone involved. it's a problem for the opener. for us and the workers, of course. now that we are closed, it's hurting our business, and that's not good for our workers. >> the inspections are taking place for a reason. unsafe buildings hike this have been the cause of some of the worst industrial disasters in bangladesh. last april the building collapse kaled a thousand garment workers. we inspected 100 factories. we have had a few cases were there had to have been significant weight reduction. this is the only one that has involved part of the workforce not being able to work because all production had to cease on a certain number of flaws. >> the inspection agreement required openers to pay workers while rep faces took place. they have no idea in that will happen to her. what happened to the family in the troubled garment industry is not going to e about easy. >> nine people, including an election candidate have been killed in northern afghanistan. they were abducted in the remote prove joints by suspected taliban gunman three days ago. the local governor said some bodies had been recovered, including two people. it's the last day of campaigning before afghanistan's presidential election. a front runner is abdullah abdullah. bernard smith joined him on the campaign trail in western afl g afghanistan. >> it was chaotic, crowded. that seems to be how abdullah abdullah likes it. thousands turned out to see abdullah abdullah rally support in his second attempt at the presidency. >> the size of the crowd is not necessarily indicative of the support for abdullah abdullah, but it shows the enthusiasm for the election process in afghanistan. >> abdullah crisscrossed the country on a mission to right the wrongs that many felt was committed in 2009. it was a poll marred by widespread ballot stuffing. >> this time around the citizens will monitor the elections. voters are much more aware of air rights, it's better conscious decision than it used to be. they are asking about the outcome. abdullah abdullah needs to get 50% of the vote to wib outright. to help his chances he's chosen two running mates once fought against. the parties they belonged to ended up destroying kabul. without a winner the election goes to a run off between the candidates. here abdullah abdullah has a warning for the election organizers. >> if it goes to a run-off based on the books we are prepared. if it goes to the run off based on fraud, then that will become difficult. that will create an uncertain situation. i hope that's not the case. >> ethnicity matters in afghanistan. abdullah abdullah is half pashtun, hav -- half tagic the. abdullah abdullah will need to attract broad-based support. >> a reminder that you can keep up to date with all the news all the time on the website, aljazeera.com. a company that you bailed out with your hard-earned taxpayer dollars. i'll give you my take. g.m. is not the huge company that it used to be, but it's still a part of our economy. i'll tell you how big. money, power and an old fashioned alarm clock. ariana huffington with her three-prong idea for success. m
money." >> this is real money. you are the most important part of the show. join our live conversation for the next half hour on twitter and also facebook. 6,226,000. that's the total number of vehicles general motors has recalled this year alone. today america demanded answers from g.m. over ignition switches linked to 13 traffic deaths over a decade. and america got virtually nothing. when members of the house panel one after another pressed g.m. ceo mary barra over what g.m. knew and when, she simply repeated we're reviewing that. she later told reporters we hired tony velucas. tony vel ucas is a lawyer. talk to our lawyer. we're still left hanging. 2.6 million vehicles recalled in february and march over faulty ignition switches going back to the year 2000. that can suddenly move to the off position and shut down a vehicle's electrical system. in an instant you could lose your steering and brakes. in an instant you could lose your ability to deploy the vehicle's airbag. in an instant you could lose your life. at least 13 people did. to be fair g.m.'s new ceo is clearly not familiar with the 2,000 plus documents turned over even though she has worked at g.m. for 34 years. g.m. only exists today because of the good graces of the american taxpayer. a $49.5 billion taxpayer bailout saved the company from collapse during the darkest days of the recession. most of it was paid back but still taxpayers are still in the hole for $10.5 billion. i along with many others supported g.m.'s bailout strenuously because the damage of letting it fail would have been too grate. from the ashes we were told a new g.m. would emerge. what we got today from mary barra is more of the old g.m. >> as far as what g.m. knew about the ignition switches in 2001, 13 years before the recall, correct? >> yes or no will work. >> the investigation will tell us that. >> you conclude from my opening statement that the tooling cost and price piece pieces are too , what does that mean? >> i find that statement to be very disturbing as we do this investigation and understanding the context of the whole timeline, if that's the reason why the decision is made that is unacceptable. >> do you take responsibility? is the company responsible? the new g.m. is it responsible? >> we will make the best decisions for our customers, recognizing that we have legal obligations and responsibilities as well as moral obligations. >> right now how many parts are being used in general motors' product that don't meet your own company's specifications? >> i don't have that except number but i can tell you the parts that we're using today meet the performance and the reliability, the safety that they need to if we find we have a part that is defective that doesn't meet the requirements, we then do a recall. >> what's changed at g.m.? isn't it true that throughout it's corporate history g.m. has represented to the driving public that safety has always been there their number one priority? >> i can't speak to the statements made in the past, i can only tell you that we've changed our core values and we're leading by example. >> that's your job now as ceo but you need to fix it, and fix it as quick as you can because it's going to cause us problems, obviously. >> i agree with you, it is completely my responsibility, and i will workday and night. we've already made tremendous change, and i recognize that it's my responsibility. >> there you have it, and there were several more hours that have. it doesn't sound like it went too well for g.m. and libby casey is covering the hearings for us at capitol hill. libby, you've seen lots of these hearings. how did it look from your perspective? 7. >> it' it was an intense line of questioning. you don't want to say that she was held in the hot seat or grilled but she really was questioned. what we kept hearing from ms. barra is that they'll have to wait for the investigation to see how it plays out. in the documentation that you supplied, she said in that case, yes, otherwise we have to wait for this investigation to play out. it was a heated hearing, and there are a lot of concerns. it's not just the fact that there were these faulty ignition switches, but as you said, the company did have some knowledge and they did change the switches over time but they didn't let the public know. they got these switches. they weren't up to specs, but they installed them any way. barton called mary barra's responses gobble di gook at one point in the hearing then they got the switches switched with the same part number. now that will cause them headaches because they can't tell which ones are faulty and which ones aren't because they all have the same spec. >> the issue is by not changing the part number you don't have to tell anybody about the part. if "t" now sees that it's an easy fix. but now with all these cars recalled, you can't tell which ones feed to be fix. >> mary barra said that is not standard procedure and that should not have been done. she was asked are there employees that oversaw the ignition starter starters still butted and it sounds like they're still there. >> as a financial journalist i thought a very strange dig when they decided after the resurrection, after the bankruptcy. they refer to themselves as the new g.m. mary barra has been there for 34 years and many of the senior executives have been there for years, too. >> she's a second generation g.m. even though she has been in the ceo chair since january, but she has been at the company for a long time. congress is asking who will ultimately be held responsible? they want to know names, personnel, they want to hear that from her. now she's giving us a timeline on a couple of issues. something else that congress wants to see happen, compensation. you mentioned the bankruptcy. this is a big part of the story. when g.m. declared bankruptcy in 2009 it wiped the slate clean. accidents that happened prior to 2009, ignition switches that from faulty and install before 2009 that is under the old g.m. and the company may not be held responsible. they are asked will you step up and compensate victims and families of those now dead victims, at least 13 people. mary barra said they have appointed ken feinberg, he worked on the compensation packages of 9/11 attacks and the bt oil spill. barra did not say that they will do compensation packages. >> to see the families of victims, holding their pictures in their arms, thank you . libby casey, from capitol hill. >> was g.m. worth saving with taxpayer money? john said on facebook, i don't trust g.m. to make safe cars. waiting over ten years . another tweet, why is g.m. taking more heat than any other company. now here's the thing to remember about g.m. this isn't just any company accused of doing something wrong. it's a big force in our economy, and without your tax dollars it probably wouldn't be here today. i'll explain coming up. plus the secret to a more fulfilling life, it may mean replacing this with something more like this. ariana huffington explains more. >> scared as hell... >> as american troops prepare to leave afghanistan get a first hand look at what life is really like under the taliban. >> we're going to be taken to a place, where they're going to make plans for an attack. >> the only thing i know is, that they say they're not going to withdraw. >> then, immediately after, an america tonight special edition for more inside and analysis. >> why did you decide to go... >> it's extremly important for the western audience to know why these people keep on fighting... ...it's so seldom you get that access to the other side. >> faultlines: on the front lines with the taliban then an america tonight: special edition, only on al jazeera america >> u.s. automakers enjoying a spring thaw after a harsh winter kept people from car show floors. sales climbing a whooping 13%, nissan posted an 8.3% increase. ford was up 3.3%. general motors in the spotlight today with the ceo testifying before congress over that recall mess still did pretty well of 4% sails gain and g.m.'s numbers were delayed for hours by a computer glitch. now the recall playing g.m. is just the latest championship. at its peak in 1979 general motors employed 618,000 people making it the largest private employer in the united states. only the government was a bigger employer. competition from japan, bankruptcy other head wins have reduced g.m.'s size and importance. but as mary snow reports the company's performance still matters to a small arm of workers, dealers, investors, and you, the consumer. >> reporter: launched in 1908, g.m. motors gobbled up competitors to become a dominant player in the automobile industry. it hit the peak of its power in 1962 claiming 50% share of the u.s. market. and it went global in the 80's and 90's with 8 million g.m. vehicles sold worldwide in 1995. those numbers were in decline when g.m. filed bankruptcy the company that emerged may be smaller and leaner, but make no mistake, g.m. remains a powerful force in the global economy. today the company employs 219,000 workers and network of dealers worldwide. with 70% of sales now coming outside of the u.s. gal brought in revenues of $155.4 billion in in 2014. it's stock remains widely held including banks, pension plans, mutual fund owners an . bad news for g.m. could spell band news around the world. >> mickey has been covering car companies for two decades. she said the bailout did not fix the fundamental problems at g.m. which is it's culture. they predicted the collapse of the america's car makers and is edit or and exploring the changing car industry. mickey, it doesn't matter what one thinks of g.m. as mary snow just pointed out, it is important. it's central and part of the american fabric. you're either an investor in this company or you know somebody who works for it or you work for someone who supplies it. we can't have g.m. getting into these kinds of pickles. >> that was exactly the rationale for the bailout. if you think back to 2009, 2008, we were in a financial crisis, we had lehmann brothers go down. when president obama came in to office the sense was we can't lose the two detroit car makers that are in the most trouble, and clearly g.m. got the lyon share of the bailout. they got $50 billion and the treasury owned a good part of general motors until earlier this year. >> the issue is as mary barra and general motors would have you see t the problems are the old g.m. the pre-recession g.m. it's pre-bailout g.m. the pre-bankruptcy g.m. this is the new g.m. even though many of its leaders have worked there for a long time, what is the new culture at general motors. >> you have a company that is used to being the largest company in the united states. it no longer is, but it is still the largest u.s. automaker. it is still in detroit, which is like the pentagon in washington, or hollywood in california. they are very proud of their company and as general motors goes, so should go the rest of the auto industry. but the problem is the rest of the world has changed. they have gone from half of the car market to 18% of the car market. they have to fight for every sale they get. the treasury shrank them. you have the old attitude of general motors bumping up against the new reality of the car market and american marketplace in general. >> will this do it? i looked back at toyota when it had its issue with the brake peddles, and toyota is back. when you think of toyota, you think of a good car, not of that. and then ford had bigger problems and no one thinks of the recall at ford. does this change g.m. or do they bounce back because everyone bounces back. >> this could be a very big moment for mary barra in her ten tenure as ceo. this was the year that g.m. was supposed to get a fresh start, no longer owned by the u.s. government, and the problems of the past are dogging it. they really have to shake it off and prove to the american public that the investment was a good investment. >> does mary barra survive this? >> i think she will. it's so easterly and it's clear she's just getting her hands around this issue that at the moment i don't think anybody should be concerned about that. but look at this. you've had a 750 million charge amounts for the first quarter. basically wiping out their earnings for the first quarter. if we were to get a billion dollar charge or another half million dollar charge that's real money. we have to think about the prospects of what happens to a ceo with charges like that. >> thank you for coming on the show. good to see you. >> thank you. >> editor of curb and cars. carl levin of michigan said the construction manufacturer caterpillar shifted profits to a subsidiary in switzerland which had no employees or real business activity. caterpillar said the company's actions were legal and appropriate. what i'm about to say is not an april fool's joke. more than 7 million people have signed up for health insurance under obamacare. that's what the administration hoped for. not many people thought that would happen back in october when the website launched with more problems than g.m.'s ceo mary barra has. if you missed the deadline. there may be time. the government is giving people who had website problems a few extra weeks to sign up for the healthcare plan. ariana huffington will tell us how having an accident helped her discover the third metric, and the low cost that could have been the difference between life and death in the g.m. recall crisis. google and the world brain >> it would be the worlds greatest library, under one digital roof. but at what cost? >> google could hold the whole word hostage... al jazeera america, take a new look at news. >> evey saturday, join us for exclusive, revealing, and suprizing talks with the most interesting people of our time. >> thinking differently is actualy punished... >> this saturday, is public education actually failing america? >> education is the biggest investment we make in our futures. >> but what are we really teaching our kids? >> i think it's a catastrophe that so many school disticts have cut arts programs back... >> could his reforms lead to happier, more fufilled lives. >> schools need to encourage the development of imagination... >> sir ken robinson talk to al jazeera only on al jazeera america >> ariana huffington knows plenty about success. she sold the website she cofounded for $15 million. she still runs the business and the huffington post is one of the most popular news and information sites in the world. with 90 million global visitors a month. when it comes to money and power ariana huffington knows what she's talking about. but her latest book called " "thrive" she said a successful life needs something else, something she calls the third metric. she said she found herself lying on the floor in a pool of blood. sorry about the graphic nature of the introduction but it was a turning point for. >> you it was, and i can't blame you. in april of 2007 i collapsed from exhaustion, sleep deprivation, two years after founding the huffington post. literally there i was in a pool of blood beginning to ask myself the question is this success? if we define success by the convention terms of money and power, we are successful. but if you define success by any sane definition, lying in a pool of blood is not success. >> not sleeping, skipping meals, being all over the world on planes sounds like success to a lot of people. >> exactly. that is really why i wrote the book. it's part of my personal journey, but more to the point i see the collective there now all around. i feel its time for the sake of our individual lives and the sake of businesses to realize that this is a collective delusion. in order for the business to succeed, and people are praised in a corporation often for working 24/7. the language being used, killing it, crashing t the language of war which makes it hard for us to take care of our well-being. that's why this consists of four pillars. our well-being, if we sacrifice our health, clearly not worth it. wisdom. you see so many leaders making terrible decisions. they are not smart, they're not wise. then our ability to bring joy and wonder in our lives, and to make giving part of our lives. >> you and i have had this conversation elsewhere, and you mentioned that we should all trade in our phones, which is what i used a my alarm clock, and because it's my alarm clock it has to live next to my bed. you say keep the phone in another room and invest in an old fashioned alarm clock to move your phone from your bed. >> i have scientific evidence if you look up in the middle of the night and look at your data your sleep is not recharging. don't allow your day life to intrude in your nightlife. at the end of each section i have three tapes because my hope is that people are not just going to agree with me, but make living microscopic changes in their lives. >> but our bosses have to change. how do you manage this? you could come in within day and say i read the book, i'm going to put wonder in my life, joy, and get twice as much sleep in my life than you normally do, and then the boss feels like he's going to suffer. >> i'm not saying don't get responsible, don't get the job done. but when we're recharged we'll get the job done faster and better. in my own life i've been much sore effective since my collapse since i prioritized getting enough sleep and recharging. we pay people for their judgment, not their stamina. >> did you know you were exhau exhausted before you collapsed of exhaustion? >> no. >> many of us sleep very few hours, you had to recharge yourself. >> i don't remember the last time i wasn't tired. so we don't even remember what it's like to be completely recharged, and ready to go. which when i have my best ideas and i thought now a lot of ceos, a lot of people who i admire including steve jobs and the ceo of bridge water, who meditates. they create quiet times in their lives. you can call it prayer, contemplation, fly fishing, just some quiet time when you're not tethered to your smart phone, and we actually get our best inside. >> i'm going to try it. i said i'm going to try it. i said the last time you and i talked that i was going to try it. i'm going to try it. thank you for writing the book. it gives us a new way of think about lives. >> thank you very much. >> ariana huffington, author of "thrive." i spent a lot of time on this show on numbers as they relate to general motors. i got one more number for you, 57. that's how many cents per car it would have cost general motors to fix the ignition switches and prevented 13 traffic deaths. $0.57 to fix. take a look at what we're talking about. >> a spring inside the switch, a piece that costs pennies. you failed to provide enough force i just want to show how easy it is to turn this key in this switch. >> even nor disturbing than that g.m. new it would only cost $0.57 to fix. it shows an unacceptable business case. you want to hear what i think the real unacceptable business case, g.m.'s apparent unwillingness to put its customers ove safety first for over a decade. >> on al jazeera america when science intersects with hope. >> i'm hoping to give someone a prosthetic arm for under $1000 >> inovation finds oppurtunity >> a large earthquake would be an inconvenience rather than a disaster... >> and hardware meets humanity >> this is some of the best driving i've ever done >> eventhough i can't see... >> techknow our experts take you beyond the lab >> we're here in the vortex... >> and explore the technology changing our world. only on al jazeera america >> chile rocked by a massive 8.2 magnitude earthquake, sparking fears of a tsunami. sending hundreds of thousands fleeing for higher ground. >> protesters and police go head to head in greece. mobs of people willing to take tear gas and stun grenades. >> an up-close look at
this is "real money" you are the most importantly part of the show oso -- important part of the show. we really do read your responses. hey, america's economy picked up some heat after a bitterly cold winter. 192,000 net new jobs were created in march. and whiling figures for the prior two months always revise the prior two months ended up being up by 37,000. now averages 183,000 per month. not too shabby. 150,000 or plus is okay. 200,000 plus is better. both president obama and mitt romney promised 250,000 plus when they were running for reelection. what's more the recent job gains we're seeing is largely from the private sector. private companies, health care and even construction. that's always a healthy sign of recovery. the unemployment rate which you know i don't like talking about remained unchanged, 6.7%, that was because americans felt confident enough to seek work last month and that pushed up the labor force participation rate by 2/10 of a percent. the labor force participation is the percentage of people of work. you can't be in jail, for instance. the percentage of all people available to work who either had a job or who are actively seeking a job over the last four weeks. so the unemployment rate is no lower but the more meaningful number here to watch is the uptick we've seen in the size of the workforce this last month. it's not all rosy. fed chief janet yellen said, we found confirmation of that in friday's report. 7.5 million workers don't feel very lucky baw because they are forced to take part time work instead of full time. the problem is that more than a third of the unemployed, 3.7 million, have been out of work for six months or more. i talked to labor secretary tom perez and he told me one of the ways the labor department is facing this is to talk to the trained job workers in the jobs people really need. community college and community training taacct or tact for short. >> everything we do has to be demand-driven and by that i mean people who are partners who are putting grants forth, have to make sure that we are training people for occupations that are in demand. and what this program has done is catalyze partnerships between the country, community colleges, employers, job seekers, other nonprofits, and that's what the taacct program, albeit a horrible acronym does for them. >> every citizen gets one vote in america but now the very rich get something else, the chance to spend huge amounts of money on political campaigns. the supreme court on a decision struck down the overall amount an individual the contribute. it's capped at $2600 per candidate, but the ruling says americans now have the right to donate that maximum contribution to as many candidates, parties and political action committees as they want. so there's nothing to stop some of america's top political donors like larry ellison and steven spielberg from each spending millions on this year's campaigns. the one silver hiens is they will have -- lining is they have to report it to the federal elections commission. lisa rosenberg speaks. >> we will have a bifurcated system. the secret donors will use those 501 (c) 4 organizations who will funnel millions or billions of dollars anonymously into our air waves. meanwhile we'll have just a handful of individuals, maybe a thousand individuals, who can and will give a million dollar or $2 million check to the political candidates. we'll have more money and more pressure to raise money. meanwhile the vast, vast majority of us will have our voices completely drown out by all of this money. we're going to be buried under this money. >> but when you walk out on the street most people think their voices are drown out except every couple of years when they're asked to vote. i'm not belittling that, that's major, will it have any practical effect? >> it is major, it will have a practical effect in exacerbating the cynicism that we're all feeling. depress those small donors who have had a small effect, $25, $50 contributions, why do they bother to give when one individual can write a $1 million check? it is very, very bad for address. >> the sunlight organization advocate for punl sized online within 48 hours, tell me how you think that would help. >> we have just had a bill introduced from senator cane from maine and expect to have one from congressman o'rourke next week. the supreme court struck down the last pillar, or almost the last pillar of our campaign finance reform system. it struck down contribution limits today. all that is left of our campaign finance reform system is disclosure. so we need to enhance disclosure to make sure that the public does have access to that information, in real time. before there's a vote. before there's an election. so that they can at least do whatever is within their means to counteract that, counteract that contribution, whether that means you know, bringing together a lot of people, to make more contributions, smaller contributions, whether it means lobbying, whether it mines flooding the members of congress office with phone calls, whatever it is to try to combat that large contribution. if the members of congress knows within conditions who is getting them a million dollar check their constituents should too. >> lisa, thank you. more than 7 million people signed up for health insurance under obama. that's what the administration hoped for. not many thought that would happen back in october with all those problems but after the march 31st signup deadline last week president obama got to say the health care law is here to stay. if you missed that deadline there may still be time for you. the government is giving people who had website problems a few extra weeks to sign up for health plans. for all the changes happening under obamacare, there is a shift underway, those of us who get covered through work are increasingly getting pushed into these private exchanges. as health care costs soar aksen ak cen a accenture set: >> one part of the it is employers saying to worker heeshes your plans. if you want a good health plan you can pay more money. if you want an average health plan you can get it cheaper. putting that decision onto individuals. but that could result in shift of cost to individuals. we have to understand that in the context of job based coverage has been falling by a% a% sent point a year. and we've seen a significant shift over this period of greater cost for individuals. higher premiums, could-pays and deductibles. >> there are a lot of advanced economies, canada, northern europe and much of western europe where it is a sing payor system -- single payor system. nobody gets their insurance through their employer. as more people share the system does it bring the cost of health care lower, or are workers just going to pay more of their health care in the next few years? >> well i'd say overall if we look at the rest of the world there are quite a few different forms of health care. and how health care is financed from a single payor system in canada to very different systems say in germany and the nernld nenders an netherlands and france. >> if we look out five years or ten years, is the idea of going to work for the company because of the benefits they offer you? is that going to be a smaller part of one's decision? >> i think it is going to be a smaller part. i mean overall because health care costs have gone up so sharply in the united states and we're seeing this push back and shift in costs something is going to have to gin give in terms of saving on health care cost. either we'll see an increasing cost.onto individuals and that will be less of what people look for in a job or we'll see a better effort to change how we're financing health care, change our delivery system, we save more money. >> ken jacobs is the chair of u.c. berkeley center of labor and education. ariana huffington, angry lawmakers talking about a criminal coverup, that story and more as "real money" continues. keep it right here. consider this: the news of the day plus so much more. >> we begin with the government shutdown. >> answers to the questions no one else will ask. >> it seems like they can't agree to anything in washington no matter what. >> antonio mora, award winning and hard hitting. >> we've heard you talk about the history of suicide in your family. >> there's no status quo, just the bottom line. >> but, what about buying shares in a professional athlete? real perspective, consider this on al jazeera america >> the recall mess plaguing general motors is just the latest chapter in a story that spans more than a century. i'll get to mary barra's heated congressional testimony in just a second. but at its peak in 1979 general motors employed more than 618,000 people making it the largest private employer in the united states. competition from japan and then bankruptcy and other head winds have far reduced gm' gm's size d important but as mary barra reports, it still is important to consumers. >> general motors quickly expanded gobbling up competitors like oldsmobile, pontiac and cad cadillac. in 1962, it gobbled up the majority of the market. numbers were in decline long before gm filed for bankruptcy in june 2009. prompting a 49.5 billion taxpayer bailout. the company that emerged may be smaller and leaner but make no mistake: gm remains a powerful force in the global economy. it employs 219,000 workers and a network of 4500 dealers worldwide. with 70% of sales now coming from outside the u.s. in china, brazil, u.k. and germany, gm brought in revenues of $154.2 billion in 2013. and its stock remains widely peld with -- hell with nearly a thousand institutional investors, banks and insurance companies, in short bad news for gm to expel bad news for millions -- spell bad news for millions around the world. mary snowy, al jazeera. >> we have hired tony lucas, that's what gm exec mary barra said time after time. the next day the senate panel pushed that conversation much further, raising the issue of criminal liability for failure to act. a gm engineer named ray de georgio, requested in terms of a georgia woman killed in a chevy co-bald accident in 2010. he said he never signed off on changes of the ignition. but senator claire mccaskell held up papers that said he approved of the change. >> has mr. de georgio been fired? >> as i return to the office we will look at the people implications. >> he has not been fired? >> no he has not. >> have there been any instances where gm is actually changing a part and fixing a defect and keeps the part number the same? because this -- this, to me, is not a matter of acceptibilty, this is criminal deception. >> i am not aware of any and it is not an appropriate practice to do. it is not acceptable. >> i am very disappointed really as a woman, to woman, i am very disappointed because the culture that you are representing here today is a culture of the status quo. >> the more i hear and see in the these documents the more i learn about what happened before the rye organization, and in connection with the reorganization the more convinced i am that gm has a real exposure to criminal liability. >> the senate isn't buying mary barra's apology and neither heidi moore. heidi joined me after the senate hearing on wednesday. >> the senate came out swinging against gm. i mean they really were working as advocates of the american people and very clear about that. what clear is bloomenthal has experience with former -- he was an ag of connecticut. >> a fairly aggressive one of connecticut. >> yes, he specifically tried to get gm to stop avoiding liability for car crashes. to so gm in its bankruptcy managed to push to avoid liability for any crash happening before 2009. so if anyone died in a crash of a gm car before 2009 they couldn't sue the company. >> because of the bankruptcy. >> because of the bankruptcy. >> right. >> and in 2009 bloomenthal was one advocating with eight other attorneys general for this. >> at this opinion i almost worry about the hiebility, this is a big -- liability, this is a big company and has a lot of money. i'm wondering that the financial responsibility is not that horrible but gm is not looking that good. >> the size of the monetary liability and bloomenthal for instance has suggested a fund for victims between $3 billion and $8 billion which actually seems small considering the about. a 6 million vehicle recall, 13 deaths that we know about and the investigation isn't even over and there could be collateral deaths from the basic ignition switch not working and that causing air bags not to work, there are issues with transmission lines, with power steering, it is really vast and goes across the whole landscape of auto manufacturing. you can't believe that we know the complete scale of what's going on at gm and if the scale is anything like one could package, it would go far above 3 or $8 billion. >> there have been other recalls that we look at toyota in the breaks, we look at ford and the broncos and the bridge stone firestone. this all look hard when we see them but we get past them. but there is a culture of confidence. people try to tell you this is a new gm and it is unclear it is. >> it is totally imapplaus imimplausible. to wake up one day and turn over a new leaf because of this crisis, you could tell from barra's testimony that that wasn't going to happen. she was really reluctant to hold the old gm fully responsible for what happened. and as you know they're not going to be able to move forward until they decide that what happened in the past was really wrong. >> heidi good to see you. heidi moo moore , moore@hn. >> ariana huffington explains what a bad accident helped her describe what she calls the third metric. >> on al jazeera america >> techknow our experts take you beyond the lab >> there's about five million points of data >> and explore the technology changing our world. [ male announcer ] it's here -- xfinity watchathon week, your chance to watch full seasons of tv's hottest shows for free with xfinity on demand. there's romance, face slaps, whatever that is, pirates, helicopters, pirate-copters... argh! hmm. it's so huge, it's being broadcast on mars. heroes...bad guys... asteroids. available only on mars. there's watching. then there's watchathoning. ♪ >> they were driven to find a better life. >> i am citizen of this country... i am the top of the world... >> now they drive to live >> everyone should drive a cab in new york city once. >> finding peace, security and success. >> you can work, you can do anything you want to. >> hop in as these courageous drivers take you on an inspiring journey. >> you don't like this country, get the hell out of here. >> driven an america tonight special series and don't miss the premiere of borderland, a ground breaking television event on al jazeera america >> arian ah huffington, sold her newspaper to america online for $350 billion. with 90 million global visitors a month, so when it comes to money and power ariana huffington knows what she's talking about. but her latest book called thrive makes the case that in addition to money and power a successful life needs something else, something she calls the third metric. i asked her how this all came about. >> on april 6th, 2007 i collapsed from exhaustion, two years after founding the huffington post and literally there i was coming to in a pool of blood beginning to ask myself the question, is this success? you know, because if we define success by the conventional terms of money and power, i'm successful but if we define success by any sane definition, lying in a pool of blood is not success. >> being all over the world on planes sounds like success to a >> exactly. and that is really why i wrote the book. it is part of my personal join but more to the point, i -- adjourn but i see the collective -- journey for the sake of businesses. to realize that this is a collective delusion, that in order for a business to succeed we need to actually work 24/7. you know ali people are praised nona corporation for working 24/7. the language we are using is a language of war which often makes it very hard for us to take care of our well-being. that is why this third metric activities of four pillars, our well-being, if we sacrifice our health clearly not worth it. wisdom, you see so many leaders in business and politics making terrible decisions. instead of they are not smart and not wise and then our ability to bring joy and wonder into our lives and to make giving into our lives. >> you and i have had this conversation elsewhere and you mentioned we should all trade in our phones which i use as my alarm clock. because i use my phone as my alarm clock it has to live near my bed. you can't use the excuse to use your phone to wake up. >> i have a lot of scientific evidence if you wake up in the middle of the night and look at your data, your clean is not as re-- sleep is not as recharging. book. at the end of each section i have three little tips because my hope is that people are not just going to agree with me, but make little microscopic changes in their lives. that will make them thrive and not just succeed. change. in other words we have to -- how do you manage this? can you come in one day and say hey, i read the book, i'm going to take it easy and get twice as much sleep as i normally do and somehow my boss thinks he's going to suffer. >> first of all i'm not saying don't be responsible, don't get the job done. very often when we actually are recharged, we get the job done faster and better. i know in my own life i've been much more effective since my collapse when i prioritize getting enough sleep and recharging. because you know we pay people stamina. >> did you know you were exhausted before you collapsed from exhaustion? you had to reprogram yourself. >> that is fascinating that question because i'd been on book tour and i hear from a lot of people the same thing that i felt. which is i don't remember the last time i wasn't tired. so we kind of don't even remember what it's like to be completely recharged. you know and ready to go. which is when i had my best ideas. and i quote now a lot of ceos, a lot of people who i admire including steve jobs and ray meditate. who create some quiet times in their life. prayer, contemplation, fly fishing when you're not tethered to your smartphone where we often get our best ideas. >> i'm going to try it. i said it last time we were together, i'm going to try it. this time iements going to. ariana huffington is president and editor in chief of the huffington group. author of thrive. the week ahead is a busy one on this show. i'm heading to washington where issues affecting the global economy and policies to proat promote global equality will be front and center. these institutions are ton front line of promoting economic stability and global development. i'll speak with world bank president jim young kim and christine la garde. climate change, the challenges as iing the global middle class and slowing global growth. i'll cover all these topics with kim and la garde. 7 p.m. eastern time, 4:00 pacific. on "real money." i'm ali velshi. >> hello, you're at the listening . this week, presidential elections are less than two months away in egypt. are the media equipped or in the mood to cover the story? journalists shot at in pakistan, released by kidnapper is syria and warned by the prime minister in
this is "real money" you are the most importantly part of the show oso -- important part of the show. we really do read your responses. hey, america's economy picked up some heat after a bitterly cold winter. 192,000 net new jobs were created in march. and whiling figures for the prior two months always revise the prior two months ended up being up by 37,000. now averages 183,000 per month. not too shabby. 150,000 or plus is okay. 200,000 plus is better. both president obama and mitt romney promised 250,000 plus when they were running for reelection. what's more the recent job gains we're seeing is largely from the private sector. private companies, health care and even construction. that's always a healthy sign of recovery. the unemployment rate which you know i don't like talking about remained unchanged, 6.7%, that was because americans felt confident enough to seek work last month and that pushed up the labor force participation rate by 2/10 of a percent. the labor force participation is the percentage of people of working age who are available to work. you can't be in jail, for instance. the percentage of all people available to work who either had a job or who are actively seeking a job over the last four weeks. so the unemployment rate is no lower but the more meaningful number here to watch is the uptick we've seen in the size of the workforce this last month. it's not all rosy. fed chief janet yellen said, we found confirmation of that in friday's report. 7.5 million workers don't feel very lucky baw because they are forced to take part time work instead of full time. the problem is that more than a third of the unemployed, 3.7 million, have been out of work for six months or more. i talked to labor secretary tom perez and he told me one of the ways the labor department is facing this is to talk to the trained job workers in the jobs people really need. community college and community training taacct or tact for short. >> everything we do has to be demand-driven and by that i mean people who are partners who are putting grants forth, have to make sure that we are training people for occupations that are in demand. and what this program has done is catalyze partnerships between the country, community colleges, employers, job seekers, other nonprofits, and that's what the taacct program, albeit a horrible acronym does for them. >> every citizen gets one vote in america but now the very rich get something else, the chance to spend huge amounts of money on political campaigns. the supreme court on a decision struck down the overall amount an individual the contribute. it's capped at $2600 per candidate, but the ruling says americans now have the right to donate that maximum contribution to as many candidates, parties and political action committees as they want. so there's nothing to stop some of america's top political donors like larry ellison and steven spielberg from each spending millions on this year's campaigns. the one silver hiens is they will have -- lining is they have to report it to the federal elections commission. lisa rosenberg speaks. >> we will have a bifurcated system. the secret donors will use those 501 (c) 4 organizations who will funnel millions or billions of dollars anonymously into our air waves. meanwhile we'll have just a handful of individuals, maybe a thousand individuals, who can and will give a million dollar or $2 million check to the political candidates. we'll have more money and more pressure to raise money. meanwhile the vast, vast majority of us will have our voices completely drown out by all of this money. we're going to be buried under this money. >> but when you walk out on the street most people think their voices are drown out except every couple of years when they're asked to vote. i'm not belittling that, that's major, will it have any practical effect? >> it is major, it will have a practical effect in exacerbating the cynicism that we're all feeling. depress those small donors who have had a small effect, $25, $50 contributions, why do they bother to give when one individual can write a $1 million check? it is very, very bad for address. >> the sunlight organization advocate for punl sized online within 48 hours, tell me how you think that would help. >> we have just had a bill introduced from senator cane from maine and expect to have one from congressman o'rourke next week. the supreme court struck down the last pillar, or almost the last pillar of our campaign finance reform system. it struck down contribution limits today. all that is left of our campaign finance reform system is disclosure. so we need to enhance disclosure to make sure that the public does have access to that information, in real time. before there's a vote. before there's an election. so that they can at least do whatever is within their means to counteract that, counteract that contribution, whether that means you know, bringing together a lot of people, to make more contributions, smaller contributions, whether it means lobbying, whether it mines flooding the members of congress office with phone calls, whatever it is to try to combat that large contribution. if the members of congress knows within conditions who is getting them a million dollar check their constituents should too. >> lisa, thank you. more than 7 million people signed up for health insurance under obama. that's what the administration hoped for. not many thought that would happen back in october with all those problems but after the march 31st signup deadline last week president obama got to say the health care law is here to stay. if you missed that deadline there may still be time for you. the government is giving people who had website problems a few extra weeks to sign up for health plans. for all the changes happening under obamacare, there is a shift underway, those of us who get covered through work are increasingly getting pushed into these private exchanges. as health care costs soar aksenk cenak accenture set: >> one part of the it is employers saying to worker heeshes your chance of health plans. if you want a good health plan you can pay more money. if you want an average health plan you can get it cheaper. putting that decision onto individuals. but that could result in shift of cost to individuals. we have to understand that in the context of job based coverage has been falling by a%% sent point a year. and we've seen a significant shift over this period of greater cost for individuals. higher premiums, could-pays and deductibles. >> there are a lot of advanced economies, canada, northern europe and much of western europe where it is a sing payor system -- single payor system. nobody gets their insurance through their employer. as more people share the system does it bring the cost of health care lower, or are workers just going to pay more of their health care in the next few years? >> well i'd say overall if we look at the rest of the world there are quite a few different forms of health care. and how health care is financed from a single payor system in canada to very different systems say in germany and the nernld ns annetherlands and france. >> if we look out five years or ten years, is the idea of going to work for the company because of the benefits they offer you? is that going to be a smaller part of one's decision? >> i think it is going to be a smaller part. i mean overall because health care costs have gone up so sharply in the united states and we're seeing this push back and shift in costs something is going to have to gin give in terms of saving on health care cost. either we'll see an increasing cost.onto individuals and that will be less of what people look for in a job or we'll see a better effort to change how we're financing health care, change our delivery system, we save more money. >> ken jacobs is the chair of u.c. berkeley center of labor and education. ariana huffington, angry lawmakers talking about a criminal coverup, that story and more as "real money" continues. keep it right here. google and the world brain >> it would be the worlds greatest library, under one digital roof. but at what cost? >> google could hold the whole word hostage... google and the world brain only on aljazeera ameria >> start with one issue ad guests on all sides of the debate. and a host willing to ask the tough questions and you'll get... the inside story ray suarez hosts inside story weekdays at 5pm et / 2pm pt only on al jazeera america >> the recall mess plaguing general motors is just the latest chapter in a story that spans more than a century. i'll get to mary barra's heated congressional testimony in just a second. but at its peak in 1979 general motors employed more than 618,000 people making it the largest private employer in the united states. competition from japan and then bankruptcy and other head winds have far reduced gm' gm's size d important but as mary barra reports, it still is important to consumers. >> general motors quickly expanded gobbling up competitors like oldsmobile, pontiac and cad cadillac. in 1962, it gobbled up the majority of the market. numbers were in decline long before gm filed for bankruptcy in june 2009. prompting a 49.5 billion taxpayer bailout. the company that emerged may be smaller and leaner but make no mistake: gm remains a powerful force in the global economy. it employs 219,000 workers and a network of 4500 dealers worldwide. with 70% of sales now coming from outside the u.s. in china, brazil, u.k. and germany, gm brought in revenues of $154.2 billion in 2013. and its stock remains widely peld with -- hell with nearly a thousand institutional investors, banks and insurance companies, in short bad news for gm to expel bad news for millions -- spell bad news for millions around the world. mary snowy, al jazeera. >> we have hired tony lucas, that's what gm exec mary barra said time after time. the next day the senate panel pushed that conversation much further, raising the issue of criminal liability for failure to act. a gm engineer named ray de georgio, requested in terms of a georgia woman killed in a chevy co-bald accident in 2010. he said he never signed off on changes of the ignition. but senator claire mccaskell held up papers that said he approved of the change. >> has mr. de georgio been fired? >> as i return to the office we will look at the people implications. >> he has not been fired? >> no he has not. >> have there been any instances where gm is actually changing a part and fixing a defect and keeps the part number the same? because this -- this, to me, is not a matter of acceptibilty, this is criminal deception. >> i am not aware of any and it is not an appropriate practice to do. it is not acceptable. >> i am very disappointed really as a woman, to woman, i am very disappointed because the culture that you are representing here today is a culture of the status quo. >> the more i hear and see in the these documents the more i learn about what happened before the rye organization, and in connection with the reorganization the more convinced i am that gm has a real exposure to criminal liability. >> the senate isn't buying mary barra's apology and neither heidi moore. heidi joined me after the senate hearing on wednesday. >> the senate came out swinging against gm. i mean they really were working as advocates of the american people and very clear about that. what clear is bloomenthal has experience with former -- he was an ag of connecticut. >> a fairly aggressive one of connecticut. >> yes, he specifically tried to get gm to stop avoiding liability for car crashes. to so gm in its bankruptcy managed to push to avoid liability for any crash happening before 2009. so if anyone died in a crash of a gm car before 2009 they couldn't sue the company. >> because of the bankruptcy. >> because of the bankruptcy. >> right. >> and in 2009 bloomenthal was one advocating with eight other attorneys general for this. >> at this opinion i almost worry about the hiebility, this is a big -- liability, this is a big company and has a lot of money. i'm wondering that the financial responsibility is not that horrible but gm is not looking that good. >> the size of the monetary liability and bloomenthal for instance has suggested a fund for victims between $3 billion and $8 billion which actually seems small considering the scope of what we're talking about. a 6 million vehicle recall, 13 deaths that we know about and the investigation isn't even over and there could be collateral deaths from the basic ignition switch not working and that causing air bags not to work, there are issues with transmission lines, with power steering, it is really vast and goes across the whole landscape of auto manufacturing. you can't believe that we know the complete scale of what's going on at gm and if the scale is anything like one could package, it would go far above 3 or $8 billion. >> there have been other recalls that we look at toyota in the breaks, we look at ford and the broncos and the bridge stone firestone. this all look hard when we see them but we get past them. but there is a culture of confidence. people try to tell you this is a new gm and it is unclear it is. >> it is totally imapplaus imim. to wake up one day and turn over a new leaf because of this crisis, you could tell from barra's testimony that that wasn't going to happen. she was really reluctant to hold the old gm fully responsible for what happened. and as you know they're not going to be able to move forward until they decide that what happened in the past was really wrong. >> heidi good to see you. heidi moo moore, moore@hn. >> ariana huffington explains what a bad accident helped her describe what she calls the third metric. >> arian ah huffington, sold her newspaper to america online for $350 billion. with 90 million global visitors a month, so when it comes to money and power ariana huffington knows what she's talking about. but her latest book called thrive makes the case that in addition to money and power a successful life needs something else, something she calls the third metric. i asked her how this all came about. >> on april 6th, 2007 i collapsed from exhaustion, two years after founding the huffington post and literally there i was coming to in a pool of blood beginning to ask myself the question, is this sucss? you know, because if we define success by the conventional terms of money and power, i'm successful but if we define success by any sane definition, lying in a pool of blood is not success. >> being all over the world on planes sounds like success to a lot of people. >> exactly. and that is really why i wrote the book. it is part of my personal join but more to the point, i -- adjourn but i see the collective -- journey for the sake of businesses. to realize that this is a collective delusion, that in order for a business to succeed we need to actually work 24/7. you know ali people are praised nona corporation for working 24/7. the language we are using is a language of war which often makes it very hard for us to take care of our well-being. that is why this third metric activities of four pillars, our well-being, if we sacrifice our health clearly not worth it. wisdom, you see so many leaders in business and politics making terrible decisions. instead of they are not smart and not wise and then our ability to bring joy and wonder into our lives and to make giving into our lives. >> you and i have had this conversation elsewhere and you mentioned we should all trade in our phones which i use as my alarm clock. because i use my phone as my alarm clock it has to live near my bed. you can't use the excuse to use your phone to wake up. >> i have a lot of scientific evidence if you wake up in the middle of the night and look at your data, your clean is not as re-- sleep is not as recharging. this is one of the tips in the book. at the end of each section i have three little tips because my hope is that people are not just going to agree with me, but make little microscopic changes in their lives. that will make them thrive and not just succeed. >> but our bosses have to change. in other words we have to -- how do you manage this? can you come in one day and say hey, i read the book, i'm going to take it easy and get twice as much sleep as i normally do and somehow my boss thinks he's going to suffer. >> first of all i'm not saying don't be responsible, don't get the job done. very often when we actually are recharged, we get the job done faster and better. i know in my own life i've been much more effective since my collapse when i prioritize getting enough sleep and recharging. because you know we pay people for the judgment, not the stamina. >> did you know you were exhausted before you collapsed from exhaustion? you had to reprogram yourself. >> that is fascinating that question because i'd been on book tour and i hear from a lot of people the same thing that i felt. which is i don't remember the last time i wasn't tired. so we kind of don't even remember what it's like to be completely recharged. you know and ready to go. which is when i had my best ideas. and i quote now a lot of ceos, a lot of people who i admire including steve jobs and ray dalia, ceo of bridgewater who meditate. who create some quiet times in their life. prayer, contemplation, fly fishing when you're not tethered to your smartphone where we often get our best ideas. >> i'm going to try it. i said it last time we were together, i'm going to try it. this time iements going to. ariana huffington is president and editor in chief of the huffington group. author of thrive. the week ahead is a busy one on this show. i'm heading to washington where issues affecting the global economy and policies to proat promote global equality will be front and center. these institutions are ton front line of promoting economic stability and global development. i'll speak with world bank president jim young kim and christine la garde. climate change, the challenges as iing the global middle class and slowing global growth. i'll cover all these topics with kim and la garde. 7 p.m. eastern time, 4:00 pacific. on "real money." i'm ali velshi. havthanks for joining us. have a graik weekend. -- great weekend. >> welcome to the news hour in dohh the world's top news stories. riots at jordan's biggest refugee camp, police fire tear gas and one person is killed. >> large parts of ben gassy have come to a standstill because of a