MY NAME IS ANGELA DILLARD AND IT IS AN HONOR TO BE HERE TO HONOR "WE LISTEN" AND INTRODUCE THIS AFTERNOON'S KEYNOTE PANEL. AS THE ASSOCIATE DEAN OF UNDERGRADUATE AND THE LARGEST UNDER GRADUATE COLLEGE, THE COLLEGE OF LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND THE ARTS, I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO THINK DEEPLY ABOUT THE NEW AND DEVELOPING TRENDS ON CAMPUSES LIKE OUR OWN. I AM MOST STRUCK BY TWO THINGS. THE FIRST IS A SENSE OF POSSIBILITY TO BE A PARTNERSHIP WITH STUDENTS, REAL AND AUTHENTIC PARTNERSHIPS, THE ONES THAT ALLOW US TO PUT OURSELVES IN A POSITION NOT ONLY TO TEACH YOUNG ADULTS, BUT TO LEARN FROM THEM AND LEARN WITH THEM. "WE LISTEN" EMBODIES THIS POSSIBILITY. THE SECOND THING WE HAVE BEEN STRUCK BY IS THE POTENTIAL CAMPUSES ESPECIALLY PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS TO BE THE TRAINING GROUND OF DEMOCRATIC ENGAGEMENT AND CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY, AND WHAT SOME PEOPLE CALL INNER CULTURAL MATURITY. AN IDEA THAT HAS DIVERSITY OF THOUGHT AND IDENTITY AND ACCEPTS THE FACT THAT THERE ARE WHAT WE POLITELY REFER TO AS CLIMATE ISSUES ESPECIALLY AROUND RACE, GENDER, FALL ORIGIN WHILE CREATING ADORABLE APPARATUS FOR WEATHERING THE INEVITABLE CONFLICT. THERE IS A BIG PUBLIC NARRATIVE THAT THEY ARE INSULAR AND PROTECTIVE TO THE POINT OF COD -- CODDLING. FREE SPEECH AND FREE SPEECH IDEAS CRIPPLED BY POLITICS AND INUNDATED BY SMUG LIBERALISM. THE IDENTITY I WITNESSED ON THE GROUND IS QUITE DIFFERENT AS WE STRUGGLED WITH AN ENVIRONMENT THAT YEAR AFTER YEAR BRINGS YOUNG PEOPLE TOGETHER FROM REVERSE IDENTITIES AND BACKGROUNDS, BACKGROUNDS THAT ARE OFTEN CULTURALLY AND ETHNICALLY AND SOCIOECONOMICALLY DISTANT AND DISTINCT FROM ONE ANOTHER BECAUSE OF THE REALITIES OF RESIDENTIAL SEGREGATION IN OUR COUNTRY. OFTEN EDUCATEDY AND 0 TOLERANCE HIGH SCHOOLS THAT COME WITHOUT A STRONG SET OF SKILLS THAT NAVIGATES THIS DIVERSE AND VIBRANT EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT, AND WITHOUT MODELS TO DO SO WELL, CERTAINLY NOT IN MUCH OF OUR MEDIA AND SOCIAL MEDIA OR SADLY IN TODAY'S INCREASINGLY PARTISAN AND RANKEROUS POLITICAL UH RENNE PHO. AS A NATION WE ARE INCREASINGLY DIVIDED BY COMMON LANGUAGE. ENTER "WE LISTEN." TO QUOTE THE VICE PRESIDENT OF MARKETING FOR "WE LISTEN," QUOTE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO BRING TOGETHER PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT IDEOLOGIES BECAUSE" WE LISTEN" IS CHANGING THE NARRATIVE THAT COLLEGE STUDENTS CAN'T ENGAGE IN CONVERSATION WITH THOSE WHO HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS FROM THEM. INSTEAD OF DEBATING OR TRYING TO CONVINCE OTHERS WHY YOUR VIEW IS RIGHT, WE INSTEAD ARE ENCOURAGING STUDENTS TO FIND COMMON GROUND DESPITE OUR DIFFERENCES. AND TO GAIN A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE VALUES THAT SHAPE OTHERS. THIS IS AN APPROACH THAT CAN'T BE LEGISLATED OR MANDATED IN A TOP DOWN WAY. AND IT IS NOT SURPRISING THAT THEM IMPRESSIVE STUDENT ORGANIZATION HAS SPAWNED A "WE LISTEN" STAFF EDITION. IT IS LIKE A MUSCLE THAT NEEDS TO BE TRAINED AND EXERCISED TO GROW IN STRENGTH AND FLEXIBILITY. IT IT TAKES A PLACE LIKE THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN WHERE WE ASPIRE TO TEACH WHAT CAN'T BE GOOGLED AND THE PROPOSITION THAT INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS AND TO TRAIN STUDENTS IN A TRANSFERABLE SOFT SKILLS, DARE I SAY LIBERAL ART SKILLS LIKE INNER CULTURAL COMMUNICATION AND LEADERSHIP AND EMPATHY AMONG OTHERS. IT WILL SERVE THEM WELL AS THEY ENTER THE WORKPLACES AND THE COMMUNITIES IN THE FUTURE. WE ARE DOING THIS LIKE INNER GROUP RELATIONS AND WE LISTEN FOR OUR STUDENTS AND STAFF, AND IN THE SCHOOL'S CONVERSATIONS ACROSS DIFFERENT INITIATIVE THAT LAUNCHES THIS FALL AND OF WHICH TODAY'S POLITICALLY AMBIDEXTROUS PANEL IS REALLY INDICATIVE. I AM DEEPLY INSPIRED BY THE COMMON MISSION THAT BRINGS THE FORD POOL AND AND LSA TOGETHER AND SPONSORING "WE LISTEN" IN TODAY'S CONFERENCE, AND IT ASSEMBLES ALL OF US THIS AFTERNOON FOR THIS KEYNOTE EVENT. WE ARE HONORED TO BE JOINED THIS AFTERNOON BY UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT WHO WILL BE MAKING CLOSING REMARKS AS WELL AS BY UM REGENT ANDREA FISHER-NEWMAN -- I'M SORRY, GOSH, ANDREA AND VICE PRESIDENT TIM LYNCH WHO SERVES AS OUR GENERAL COUNCIL AND OF COURSE BY ALL OF YOU. FINALLY IT IS MY PLEASURE TO GIVE A TIP OF THE HAT TO OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE GERALD R FORD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US IN THE LSA DEAN'S OFFICE AND AROUND THE COLLEGE ESPECIALLY OUR INTERIM DEAN, ELIZABETH COLE. AND TO INTRODUCE VERY BRIEFLY TODAY'S PANELISTS. AND FOR WHOM YOU CAN FIND LARGER BIOS IN THE PRINTED PROGRAM. FIRST WE ARE PLACED TO WELCOME WILLIAM CRISTAL WHO IS THE EDITOR OF THE WEEKLY STANDARD WHO APPEARS FREQUENTLY IN THE LEADING MACHINE TERRY SHOW -- COMMENTARY SHOWS BEFORE STARTING AT THE WEEKLY STANDARD HE LEAD THE PROJECT FOR THE REPUBLICAN FUTURE WHERE HE HELPED TO SHAPE THE STRATEGY THAT PRODUCED THE VICTORY. WE ARE PLEASED TO WELCOME NERA WHO IS PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS AND THE CEO OF THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND. BEFORE JOINING THE ORGANIZATIONS SHE WORKED AS A KEY MEMBER OF THE HEALTH AND REFORM TEAM FOR FORMER PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA WHERE SHE HELPED TO DEVELOP AND PASS THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. AND THEN FINALLY TODAY'S PANEL WILL BE MODERATED BY MICHAEL BARR WHO PROBABLY MOST KNOW AS THE JOHN AND STANFORD WHEEL -- WHILE -- DEAN OF PUBLIC POLICY AT THE GERALD R FORD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY AND THE FRANK MURPHY CAN YOULY JET PROFESSOR OF PUBLIC POLICY AND THE ROY F AND GENE HUMPHREY PROPHET PROFESSOR OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LAWSUIT MITCH -- MICHIGAN LAWSUIT HE SERVES ON FINANCIAL LAW AND POLICY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. IT IS MY PLEASURE TO TURN THINGS OVER TO DEAN BARR TO GET US STARTED. THANK YOU SO MUCH. [APPLAUSE]. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ANGELA, FOR THAT TERRIFIC FRAMING OF OUR CONVERSATION TODAY, AND THANKS FOR ALL OF YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY FOR THIS TERRIFIC CONFERENCE IN THIS KEYNOTE EVENT. LET ME ALSO THANK OUR DISTINGUISHED GUESTS FROM THE REGENT'S EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND PRESIDENT FOR BEING HERE. I WANTED TO THANK OUR PROBOST WHO COULDN'T BE HERE, BUT I WANT TO THANK HIM FOR HIS VISION AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR THIS TERRIFIC SERIES. AND ALSO A BIBBING -- A BIG THANKS TO OUR COMMITTEE MEMBER FOR SPONSORING AND SUPPORTING "WE LISTEN" WORK INCLUDING THIS CONFERENCE TODAY. AS ANGELA SAID, THIS IS A KICKOFF EVENT FOR US AND A PROGRAM WE ARE CALLING "CONVERSATIONS ACROSS DIFFERENCE" AND PART IS ABOUT HAVING THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE ARE GOING TO HEAR TODAY. TELL US ABOUT WORKING WITH OUR STUDENTS AND WITH GROUPS LIKE "WE LISTEN" TO HELP TRAIN AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITY GOING ON ON CAMPUS THAT HELPS STUDENTS AND FACULTY, ALL OF US, LEARN HOW TO LISTEN BETTER TO EACH OTHER AND HOW TO TALK ACROSS OUR DIFFERENCES. AND TO WORK TOGETHER ON TRUST BUILDING AND ACTUALLY DOING PROJECTS IN THE WORLD TO BUILD TRUST. AND LASTLY AN IMPORTANT PORT -- PART OF THE CONVERSATION ACROSS DIFFERENCES INITIATIVE IS ABOUT FOSTERING A REAL GENEROUS SENSE OF BELONGING. NOT TRYING TO DRAW NARROW BOUNDARIES AROUND EACH OTHER, BUT TO REALLY BRING EVERYBODY INSIDE. LET ME THANK BARRY RAIB WHO IS OUR PHAK -- FACULTY LEAD ACROSS CONFERENCE INITIATIVES FOR HIS WORK IN THIS, AND OF COURSE LET ME GIVE A SPECIAL THANKS TO ALLIE AND TO NICK FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP OF "WE LISTEN" DOING PHENOMENAL WORK LAST YEAR AND NOW THIS YEAR IN THE LEADERSHIP CHAIR ROLES. YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THEIR TALENTS ASKING QUESTIONS IN JUST A MOMENT. SO AFTER THE INITIAL CONVERSATION THAT I AM GOING TO GUIDE FOR AWHILE WE WILL TURN THINGS OVER TO ALL OF YOU. YOU ALL HAVE INDEX CARDS TO FILL OUT. THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING ON-LINE CAP SEND US REQUESTIES ON -- CAN SEND US QUESTIONS ON TWITTER. NICK AND ALLIE WILL BE GATHERING YOUR QUESTIONS AND BRINGING THEM TO A FORMAT THAT WE CAN ASK OUR PANELISTS TOGETHER. SO WITH THAT LET ME JUST BEGIN OUR DISCUSSION BY THANKING BILL AND NERA FOR BEING HERE. THEY ARE UNBELIEVABLY BUSY PEOPLE AND FLYING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO DO THIS, BUT AS SOON AS I ASKED THEM TO COME TO THIS EVENT THEY BOTH SAID YES RIGHT AWAY. IT WASN'T BECAUSE I ASKED, LET ME ASSURE YOU. IT WAS BECAUSE OF ALL OF YOU. IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE WORK THAT "WE LISTEN" IS DOING, BRINGING PEOPLE TOGETHER AROUND CAMPUS AND AROUND THE COUNTRY. IT IS A POWERFUL, POWERFUL MODEL FOR OUR STUDENTS. SO LET ME GIST START WITH MAYBE AN OPEN-ENDED -- WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS VERY INFORMALLY. AN OPEN-ENDED CONVERSATION. SO YOU BOTH COME FROM VERY DIFFERENT POLITICAL TRADITIONS AND BACK GROINED -- BACKGROUNDS. I WILL ASK NERA TO START SINCE BILL IS TRYING TO GET A LITTLE WATER. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT BILL, WHAT DO YOU -- YOU REALLY WANT TO GO THERE? WHAT DO YOU -- WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT BILL, WHAT ARE THE AREAS AND COMMON VALUES YOU THEN ABOUT OR COMMON AREAS OF AGREEMENT THAT YOU USE AS A BRIDGE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH EACH OTHER? I THINK I FIND THAT NOT HARD TO ANSWER, ACTUALLY, WHICH IS I THINK THAT THERE ARE REALLY TWO AREAS THAT I HOPE WE HAVE AREAS OF COMMON GROUND AND ONE IS A BELIEF IN THE CORE VALUES OF THE DEMOCRACY. MEANING RULE OF LAW, FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND SUPPORTING HUMAN RIGHTS. THESE ARE ISSUES THAT ARE IN BIG DEBATE AND ARE IN REAL DEBATE IN OUR COUNTRY AND REAL DEBATE IN WASHINGTON POLITICS. AND SO I HAVE HUGE RESPECT FOR PEOPLE. HIS ADHERENCE TO THE PRINCIPALS ARE CALLING ON HIM TO SOMETIMES DISAGREE WITH HIS PARTY. YEN THAT IS SOMETHING -- YEN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT PROGRESSES -- PROGRESSIVES SHOULD AND DO VALUE AND RESPECT. I THINK THAT'S A PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT ARENA THAT I THINK ON ISSUES AROUND -- SOME ISSUES AROUND NATIONAL SECURITY AND BELIEVING AND DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPALS AS THEY RELATE TO FOREIGN POLICY AND OPPOSING AUTHORIZE TEAR YENISM AND CREEPING POPULISM THAT UNDERMINDS DEMOCRACY ITSELF, THOSE ARE TWO AREAS WHERE I SEE I SIT AND THERE IS A COMMON GROUND. FINAL AREA, AND THIS IS RELATED TO THE DEMOCRACY POINT, BUT I THINK THERE IS A NATURE TO POLITICS THAT IS REALLY VISIONS OF POLITICS AT PLAY TODAY. ONE VISION OF POLITICS IS BASED ON DIVIDING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER. SEWING POLITICAL VICTORY THROUGH THE INTENSE DIVISION. YOU KNOW, YEN ALL OF US -- I THINK ALL OF US HAVE ENGAGED IN POLITICAL FIGHTS AS FAR AS DEFINING SOME GROUP OF PEOPLE AS NOT AMERICAN IS A DANGER FOR DEMOCRACY ITSELF. I THINK BILL HAS BEEN GREAT IN STANDING UP FOR DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPALS, BUT AGAINST THE POLITICS THAT TRIES TO TURN US AGAINST EACH OTHER. I THINK THAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY THE MOST CENTRAL QUESTION IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY WHICH IS WHETHER OUR POLITICS WILL CONTINUE DOWN A PATH OF THE FABRIC OF THE COUNTRY AND THERE ARE THINGS [INAUDIBLE] AS WE SPEAK. THANK YOU AND I REY SIP PRO INDICATE THEM -- AND I RECIPROCATE THEM ALL. THEY ARE UNDERSTOOD ON MY BEHALF AND I WANT TO CONGRATULATE YOU ALL ON YOUR BIG VICTORY ON NORTHWESTERN. I LEFT AUSTIN AND TOLD SOMEBODY I WAS A GOOD LUCK CHARM. THEY LOST FIVE TIMES IN A ROW TO KANSAS STATE AND THEY WON. SURE ENOUGH I LANDED HERE AND MICHIGAN WON. I AM OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THAT MICHIGAN WOULD HAVE REGARDED A GAME AT NORTHWESTERN AS A JOKE GAME. A TINY PRIVATE SCHOOL IN THE BIG 10 BY ACCIDENT. IT IS OKAY. TIMES CHANGE AND NORTHWESTERN HAS BECOME I GUESS A PRETTY BIG FOOTBALL SCHOOL. THE IMPORTANT RESULTS OF THE WEEKEND IS HARVARD'S TRAGIC LOST TO RHODE ISLAND ON FRIDAY. A NEARLY UNDEFEATED SEASON IN THE THIRD GAME. I THINK ALL THREE OF US HAVE THIS IN COMMON IS WE ALL SERVE IN GOVERNMENT, AND I DO THINK IF YOU SERVED IN GOVERNMENT -- THIS IS NOT YOU ARE REVERSABLY TRUE, BUT YOU HAVE A SENSE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THINGS AND MANY OF THE DECISIONS ARE NOT BLACK AND WHITE IN TERMS OF PUBLIC POLICY. THERE ARE PLUSES AND MINUSES TO POLICIES AND AUTHENTIC DIS -- DISAGREEMENTS ABOUT VALUES AND HOW THINGS ARE GOING TO WORK AND NOT WORK, AND SO I THINK IT -- PERSONALLY THAT'S WHY I CAME TO WASHINGTON. I WAS MUCH LESS CERTAIN OF -- NOT SO MUCH WHAT I BELIEVED, BUT MY ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND HOW WELL CERTAIN POLICIES WORK ONCE I HAD BEEN IN GOVERNMENT FOR SEVEN YEARS OR SO IN THE REAGAN AND FIRST BUSH ADMINISTRATION. YEN THAT'S -- I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT ADDS HUMILITIY TO ONE'S CONFIDENCE THAT ONE IS CONFIDENT ABOUT EVERYTHING. AT THE GRADUATE LEVEL AND UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS PEOPLE CAN TEACH. I TAUGHT AT THE KENNEDY SCHOOL AND SOMETIMES STUDENTS WOULD SAY I HOPE YOU LEAVE THIS SCHOOL LESS CONFIDENT IN A SENSE THAT YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO AND NOT MORE CONFIDENT WHICH IS IN A WAY CONTRARY TO WHY PEOPLE ARE PAYING THESE EXCESSIVE TUITIONS. NOT HERE, OF COURSE. JUST AT THE KENNEDY SCHOOL. BUT YEN THAT IS -- YEN THAT IS AN IMPORTANT ASPECT. THERE IS A CERTAIN LIBERAL HOME AND PRESERVING THE LIBERAL ORDER AND IN MANY RESPECTS AND RESPECT FOR THE FORMS AND PROCESSES OF GOVERNMENT AND CIVILIZED SOCIETY. THEY CAN BE FRUSTRATING AND THEY CAN BE OVER DONE AND TOO BUREAUCRATIC AND TOO WHATEVER, BUT REALLY YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD AND YOU APPRECIATE A LOT OF THESE KIND OF BORING DUE PROCESS, RULE OF LAW, YOU KNOW, BASIC THINGS THAT ONE TAKES FOR GRANTED AND QUIBBLES ABOUT HERE ON THE MARGINS. BUT A COUNTRY WHO DOESN'T HAVE THOSE THINGS AND RESPECTS THOSE THINGS CAN GET INTO TROUBLE QUITE QUICKLY. I AM GOING TO COME BACK TO THAT THEME AT THE END. I THINK IT IS QUITE IMPORTANT. I THOUGHT I MIGHT SPEND A LITTLE TIME TEASING OUT SOME POTENTIAL DIFFERENCES OR AREAS OF AGREEMENT IN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT AREAS JUST TO LEAD US OFF. MAYBE WE WILL START WITH IMMIGRATION. I'M GOING TO FOLLOW "WE LISTEN"'S LEAD AND ONLY ASK ABOUT AREAS OF EXTREME DEBATE. AND WORK TO IT. IMMIGRATION, BILL, YOU HAVE WRITTEN A LOT ABOUT IMMIGRATION OVER YOUR CAREER. YOU HAVE EVOLVED QUITE A BIT OVER YOUR CAREER. I WONDER IF YOU CAN SAY A LITTLE ABOUT THE EVOLUTION AND HOW YOU THINK ABOUT SAY THE DACA ISSUES TODAY? IT WAS NEVER AN ISSUE I WAS THAT INVOLVED IN. I JUST WASN'T THE -- IT WASN'T THE PART OF GOVERNMENT I WORKED WITH. WHEN I WAS IN GOVERNMENT REAGAN SIGNED THE 86 BILL AND GEORGE H.W. BUSH ADMINISTRATION, I DON'T RECALL IT BEING A HUGE -- HUGELY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE. IT WAS NOT SOMETHING I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF HUGE FIGHTS OVER. IN 06 AND 07 WHEN THERE WERE BIG FIGHTS IN CONGRESS I WAS WITH BUSH AND McCAIN AND THE ATTEMPT TO GET A BIPARTISAN BILL THROUGH. I SAW PARTLIY THERE WERE -- PARTLY THERE WAS PROBLEMS WITH THE BILL. IN THIS RESPECT I WAS RIGHT TO BE WORRIED ABOUT SOMETHING THAT TRUMP THEN EXPLOITED THAT THERE WAS DOWNWARD PRESSURE ON WORKING CLASS WAGES. THAT SOME OF THAT PRESSURE DID COME FROM A LOT OF LOW-WAGE IMMIGRANTS COMING IN. I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH OF AN ECONOMIC FACT, ALMOST. GLOBALIZATION PLUS MASS IMMIGRATION PUTS A LOT OF PRESIDENT BUSHER ON WORKING PUTS A LOT OF PRESSURE ON WORKING CLASS WAGES AND I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THAT AND WORRIED ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL ECONOMICS AND THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THAT. HAVING SAID THAT I MYSELF HAVE BEEN RADICALIZED TO THE LEFT ON IMMIGRATION IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. WHATEVER DISPUTES YOU CAN HAVE, THERE IS NO MAGIC NUMBER THAT SAYS 1.5 OR 1.7 OR 1.2 IS THE RIGHT NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS TO HAVE. THERE IS NO MAGIC NUMBER THAT SAYS HOW THEY SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED AND FAMILY UNIFICATION AND SKILLS OR OTHER METRICS YOU SHOULD DRY TO RUN YOUR IMMIGRATION SYSTEM BY. I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT AND I BELIEVE THIS, BUT I FELT THIS, BUT ONE HAS TO RALLY THAT THE PRINCIPAL OF WE ARE ALL EQUAL AS LINCOLN SAID, AND IF YOU ARE THE GRANDSON AND GRANDDAUGHTER AND IN OUR CASE THE THE GREAT-GREAT-GREAT GRANDSON OR GRANDDAUGHTER OF THOSE WHO SIGNED THE DECLARATION OR WHETHER YOU CAME OVER -- OR YOU ARE THE SON OR DAUGHTER OF IMMIGRANTS OR CAME OVER AS AN IMMIGRANT TO BE A CITIZEN THAT WE ARE ALL EQUAL AND ALL EQUALLY, AS LINCOLN PUT IT, BLOOD OF THE BLOOD OF THOSE WHO SIGNED THE DECLARATION. AND IN THAT PRINCIPAL IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT. FOR TRUMP -- THE POW COMMENT ABOUT McCAIN WAS ONE OF THE WORST MOMENTS FOR ME FOR TRUMP AND THE MEXICAN JUDGE COMMENT WAS IN A WAY THE MOST OFFENSIVE AND CUTS MOST FUNDAMENTALLY AGAINST AMERICAN PRINCIPAL AS. THE FACT HE DIDN'T PAY MUCH OF A PRICE FOR THAT UNNERVED ME AMONG REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS AND I HAVE BECOME MORE, AS THEY SAY, INSISTENT ON, AGAIN, WHATEVER POLICY DISPUTE WE CAN HAVE DOWN THE ROAD ABOUT NUMBERS AND SO FORTH. ONE HAS TO HAVE THE PRINCIPAL OF BEING EQUAL RESPECT FOR ALL-AMERICANS, IMMIGRANTS OR NOT. AND AS A PRACTICAL MATTER I HAVE BEEN MOVED BY THE ARGUMENTS BY SOME PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY IT IS AN EMPIRICAL MATTER. IMMIGRANTS ARE DOING -- THE WAGES IS A SLIGHT NEGATIVE, BUT THERE IS A HUGE NUMBER OF POSITIVES THAT IMMIGRANTS BRING. WITH DACA THERE NEEDS TO BE AN OBVIOUS FAIRNESS ISSUE AND IT IS CRAZY NOT TO LEGALIZE AND GIVE A PATH OF CITIZENSHIP TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR SO JUST TO SAY A FEW WORDS IN RESPONSE AND I THINK THERE ARE PROGRESSIVES WHO HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT DOWNWARD PRESSURE ON WAGES AND IT HAPPENED ON A WHOLE GLOBALIZATION TECHNOLOGY AND WE SHOULD BE TRULY ANALYTIC ABOUT IMMIGRATION AND WHAT THAT MEANS AND I THINK THE DATA IS CHANGING ON SOME OF THESE POINTS. I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF ISSUES AROUND RHETORIC THAT BILL REFERENCED, BUT I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE POLICY OVER THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF, WHAT IS CONCERNING IS A REAL EFFORT TO LIMIT LEGAL IMMIGRATION. THIS ADMINISTRATION, I THINK IT HAS BEEN CLARIFYING THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WHICH HAD A LOT OF RHETORIC ABOUT, QUOTE, UNQUOTE, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND MEXICAN GANGS AND ALL THAT STUFF IS ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW X ADOPTING A POLICY TO REDRESS AND FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE LEGAL IMMIGRATION AND TO BE SEEMINGLY MORE HOSTILE TO IMMIGRANTS FROM COUNTRIES THAT TEND TO BE PEOPLE OF COLOR AND MORE POSITIVE TOWARD IMMIGRANTS THAT TEND TO BE FROM COUNTRIES THAT ARE MOSTLY WHITE. AND I THINK THAT HAS TO SOME DEGREE UNMASKED THE RACIAL LIESED NATURE OF THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE AND FOR SOME PEOPLE IT WAS ALWAYS UNMASKED. I THINK THE WEIRD THING ABOUT THE DEBATES WE HAVE IN WASHINGTON IS THERE COULD BE AN OBVIOUS POINT AND YOU GO TO CABLE TV AND SOMEONE WILL ARGUES -- ARGUE THE POINT AND THE FACT THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN PUSHING TOWARD BASICALLY AN IMMIGRATION POLICY IS IT SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT -- AND THE RHETORIC TOO SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE JUST NOT AS WELCOME. I HAVE BEEN IN POLITICS FOR A REALLY LONGTIME. I HAVE BEEN IN LOTS OF PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN AND I FOUGHT WITH BILL CRYSTAL MANY TIMES. I HAVE BEEN ON-LINE AND I TWEET PROBABLY WAY TOO MUCH. I NEVER HAD THE EXPERIENCE THAT I HAD IN 2016 WHICH IS LIKE PEOPLE WOULD GO ON-LINE AND BASICALLY SAY THAT I SHOULD GO BACK TO INDIA OR BASICALLY COMMUNICATE OR SOME FORM OR ANOTHER THAT I AM NOT TRULY AMERICAN BECAUSE I AM INDIAN OR BROWN. THAT NEVER HAPPENED TO ME UNTIL THE 2016 CAMPAIGN. IT NEVER HAPPENED REALLY. I THINK THAT IS A -- YEN THAT I THINK THE COUNTRY IS STRUGGLING MORE THAN EVER BEFORE. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS WHO IS TRULY AMERICAN? THERE IS AN EXPANSIVE VISION OF THAT OR AN INCLUSIVE VISION OF THAT, OR I THINK IN INCON -- INCONTENSION IS A VISION OF THAT. THAT'S ONE OF THE CORE DEBATES AND WHY I THINK THIS MOMENT IN TIME IN POLITICS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANY MOMENT OF TIME THAT I HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN, AND WHY THESE DEBATES ARE SO CENTRAL AND WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO TRY AND BRIDGE THESE DEBATES, BUT ALSO RECOGNIZE THERE ARE CORE VALUES WE ARE FIGHTING FOR. BILL, WHAT'S YOUR VIEW ON THAT? DO WE HAVE A CHANCE OF HAVING THE KIND OF DEBATE THAT WOULD LET US SEE OUR COMMON HUMANITY IN WHAT WE HAVE DESCRIBED? IS THERE A CHANCE FOR REPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS TO COME AROUND DREAMER LEGISLATION? HOW DO YOU SEE THIS MOMENT WE ARE IN RIGHT NOW? YOU KNOW, I THINK IT IS MORE THAN WHAT PEOPLE WOULD SUSPECT. LOOKING AT WASHINGTON WITH SOME COMPROMISES, I SEE SCENARIOS WHERE LEADERSHIP DOESN'T WANT TO, BUT WHERE BACK VENTURES DECIDE I DIDN'T COME FOR A PARTY LEADERSHIP OR INEFFECTUAL PROTESTS AGAINST PARTY LEADERSHIP. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS ENOUGH COMMON GROINED IN THESE AREAS LIKE DREAMERS, IT WOULDN'T BE HARD IN A SENSE THAT IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO WRITE THE LEGISLATION. IT IS A QUESTION OF GETTING THE VOTES AND GETTING THE SIGNATURE AND TRUMP MIGHT SIGN THINGS NEXT YEAR THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE HE WOULD SIGN TODAY AFTER A DIFFERENT ELECTION RESULT. I ADMIRE WHAT YOU HAVE ALL DONE HERE IN TERMS OF SEEKING FOR COMMON GROUND AND HAVING CIVIL AND RATIONAL DISCUSSIONS ON CROSS ISSUES. I WILL SAY WE ARE ASKED TO RULE -- I WON'T SAY RULE THINGS OUT OF BOUNDS, BUT ONE HAS TO BE TOUGH AGAINST CERTAIN THINGS. I AM NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN GOING ON TUCKER CARLSON -- HE STARTED AS A 23-YEAR-OLD AS AN EXTREMELY TALENTED JOURNALIST. YOU GOING AND LOOK AT WONDERFUL, COLORFUL SET PIECES ABOUT THE CIRCUS OF POLITICS AND SO FORTH. HE ALWAYS HAD AN IRONIC EYE. HE HAD A TOUCH OF PALE YOKON SERVE -- PALEO-CONSERVATISM. NOT A PERSON THAT SAT DOWN AT THE WEEKLY STANDARD OFFICE AND SOME KIND OF ETHNO-NATIONALIST AND EXPRESSING ETHNO-NATIONALIST CONVERSATION. ON THE EVENING FOX NEWS IT IS MAKING IT WORSE. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE AND ALWAYS THESE SENTIMENTS. PEOPLE ASKING ME WAS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ALWAYS THIS WAY AND TRUMP IS EXPOSING STUFF THAT WAS ALWAYS THERE? IT WAS THERE AND IT WAS SUPPRESSED. BUCHANAN GOT THE VOTE AND THEN FADED AWAY AND THEN LEFT THE PARTY AND BUSH SORT OF DROVE HIM OUT OF THE A -- PARTY. RON PAUL GOT HIS VOTES IN 08 AND WENT NO WHERE. WHEN TRUMP WAS A BIRTHER, RON DID ACCEPT HIS ENDORSEMENT ON STAGE. BUT IT WAS LIKE EIGHT MINUTES AND THEY DID IT AS QUICKLY AS THEY COULD AND ON STAGE. I WAS ON FOX. I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS THAT NIGHT OR SUNDAY -- YEN IT WAS SUNDAY. HE SAID THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE GIVEN THEM THAT MUCH. ROMNEY SHOULD HAVE REFUSED TO APPEAR WITH HIM. NO ONE IS PUSHING -- THAT IS A TACTILE QUESTION. THE FACT THAT THE EQUIVALENT ARGUMENTS TODAY ARE RESPECTABLE AMONG A CHUNK OF THE MEDIA AND THEN SOCIAL MEDIA HAS CHANGED THE DYNAMICS AND THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ENFORCE ENFORCES THAT. SOME CAN BE UNPLEASANT RECESSIVE GENES IN A A POPULATION AND IN A POLITICAL SYSTEM. IT WILL ALWAYS BE THERE. NOT EVERYBODY WILL BE WONDERFUL AND TOLERANT AND FORWARD LOOKING. EXCEPT THE FORD SCHOOL AREA. BUT THOSE WHO REINFORCE THAT AND APPEALS TO PREJUDICE IS THE PRESIDENT AND IT MAKES IT WORSE. THAT'S ONE OF THE MOST ALARMING ABOUT TRUMP. STUFF THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE, BUT MARGINALIZED CAN BECOME CENTRAL AND VERY DAMAGING. HOW DO YOU THINK ABOUT DEALING WITH THAT FRINGE, WHAT USED TO BE A FRINGE ARGUMENT THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO THIS MEDIA AND REPUBLICAN CONVERSATION? HOW DO YOU POSITION YOURSELF -- HOW DO YOU THINK STRATEGICALLY ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF HOW YOU FIGHT AGAINST VIEWS THAT YOU THINK OR SHOULDN'T BE IN THAT CONVERSATION? THE WAY I THINK ABOUT THIS IS THERE IS POLICY DEBATES IN THE COUNTRY AND WE SHOULD DEFINITELY ENGAGE ON POLICY DEBATES IN THE COUNTRY. THE CORE ISSUES LIKE WHETHER WE ARE ALL-AMERICAN OR WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS LIKE A FREE PRESS IS A GOOD THING, I THINK YOU JUST -- I MEAN, MY TAKE IS WE HAVE TO DEFEAT THESE IDEAS AT THE BALLOT BOX. WE HAVE TO CREATE AN OBJECTION AND AN OPPOSITION. ONE INTERESTING THING ABOUT THE COUNTRY THAT I AM SOMEWHAT OPTIMISTIC ABOUT IS AFTER THE ELECTION OUR NATIONAL SECURITY TEAM LITERALLY LOOKED AT OUR BOND AND THERE IS A RIGHT WING POPULOUS WHO TOOK POWER AND REALLY A MASS POWER WENT AFTER THE JUDICIARY. IT IS EASIER FOR SURE WHEN YOU ARE IN A PARLIMENTARY SYSTEM TO OVER RUN THE OPPOSITION. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS INTERESTING IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED IN HUNGARY IS THE OPPOSITION WAS OVERWHELMED, SHOCKED, DEPRESSED, DIFFUSED. THERE WERE INTERNAL DEBATES. MOST WERE RECEDED UNTIL HE TOOK OVER AND STARTED WITH THE ATTACKS ON THE JUDICIARY AND THEN WENT AFTER THE PRESS. PASSED A LAW TO CHANGE THE VOTING STRUCTURE. IT WAS REALLY HARD TO GET HIM OUT NOW. AND SO WHAT HAPPENED IN THEIR COUNTRY WAS VERY DIFFERENT. YEN -- I THINK SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO THINK THROUGH. THE DAY AFTER DONALD TRUMP WAS ELECTED THERE WAS A MASS UPRISING, THE LARGEST PROTESTS IN OUR COUNTRY'S HISTORY. I WILL SAY AS A LEADER OF THE PROGRESSIVE CAUSE, THAT WAS A VERY GRASSROOTS ORIENTED PROTEST. THERE WERE THREE PROTESTS PLANNED IN JANUARY. ONE WAS AN IMMIGRATION MARCH AND ONE WAS A HEALTH CARE MARCH AND ONE WAS AWOMAN'S MARCH. WE CAN SEE ON-LINE, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, THE WOMEN'S MARCH IS REALLY GROWING AND GROWING. WOMEN'S MARCHES WERE GROWING AND GROWING IN INTENSITY. IF YOU STEP BACK IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF, SO MANY OF THE DEBATES WE ARE HAVING ARE HITTING CULTURAL TOUCH POINTS. THE FACT THAT WE ARE GOING TO GO INTO THE MID-TERMS, INTO -- WE ARE 37 DAYS FROM THE MID-TERMS? BUT WHO'S COUNTING? AND WE ARE NOW IN A BIG DEBATE ABOUT ESSENTIALLY SEXUAL ASSAULT AND THE TREATMENT OF WOMEN. I THINK THERE HAS BEEN A LARGE SCALE CULTURAL RESPONSE TO THIS MOMENT, AND HONESTLY THE WOMEN WHO ARE COMING INTO POLITICS, AND THE RESISTANCE IN THE COUNTRY IS REALLY BORN OF WOMEN. IT IS WOMEN -- THE NEW ACTIVISTS ARE COLLEGE EDUCATED WOMEN, BUT REALLY MOTHERS COME FOG POLITICS FOR THE -- COMING INTO POLITICS FOR THE FIRST TIME. IT IS A REACTION TO THE CORE ISSUES. PEOPLE FLOODING THE TOWN HALLS AND HEALTH CARE, WHERE WOMEN HAD HEALTH CARE. THEY ARE NOT LOSING HEALTH CARE, BUT THEY HAD HEALTH CARE. IT IS SO DECISIVE AND PUSHING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER AND REALLY DEFINING SOME GROUP AS ACCEPTABLE AND SOME GROUP AS NOT ACCEPTABLE. I THINK WE ARE STILL DEALING WITH THOSE ISSUES AND MAY WELL SEE THE LARGEST -- I THINK WE WILL SEE THE LARGEST GENDER GAP AT THE MID-TERM. I WOULD BE SHOCKED IF WE DIDN'T. I THINK THAT HAS BEEN TRANSFORMING OUR POLITICS IN FUNDAMENTAL WAYS. SO MAYBE WE WILL JUST USE THAT AS A SEGUE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS PROBABLY ON A LOT OF PEOPLE'S MINDS. WE JUST HAD A REALLY RATHER EXTRAORDINARY HEARING IN THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ABOUT SUPREME COURT JUSTICE NOMINEE BRETT KAVANAUGH. YOU BOTH CAME INTO THIS LAST FEW WEEKS OF NEW INFORMATION WITH DIFFERENT POSITIONS ABOUT THE UNDERLING MERITS OF THE KAVANAUGH NOMINATION. BILL, YOU HAD WRITTEN QUITE FAVORABLY ABOUT KAVANAUGH BEFORE THESE SETS OF EVENTS AND THEY HAVE BEEN STRONG IN OPPOSITION. I AM WONDERING IF YOU CAN BOTH TELL US A LITTLE ABOUT WHAT THIS PROCESS HAS MEANT FOR YOUR VIEWS ABOUT KAVANAUGH, AND THEN MORE IMPORTANTLY ABOUT YOUR VIEWS ON THE SUPREME COURT AND ITS CREDIBILITY AND BROADERRISH -- BROADER ISSUES ON THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. YOU CAN START WITH BRETT KAVANAUGH AND MOVE OUTWARD FROM THERE. HAPPY TO HAVE YOU DIG IN. WELL, I WOULD FIRST WANT TO SAY A WORD ABOUT THE PROCESS IN THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. I MEAN, I THINK OVER THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF WE HAVE SEEN A LOT OF INSTANCES WHERE FUNDAMENTALLY THE SENATE IS BECOMING MUCH MORE LIKE THE HOUSE WHERE IT IS -- YOU KNOW, THEY GOT RID OF THE DOCTOR DASH MEAN DEMOCRATS GOT RID OF THE FILIBUSTER ON JUDGES AND McCONNELL GOT RID OF THE FILIBUSTER ON THE SUPREME COURT WITH A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE. THE WHOLE EFFORT TO JUST REALLY PUSH THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN FASCINATING TO ME. I WILL SAY THAT MY ENTRY INTO POLITICS REALLY STARTED IN HEARING. I WAS A COLLEGE SENIOR DURING THE ANITA HILL HEARINGS. I REMEMBER GOING TO PROTESTS. I STILL REMEMBER HOLDING THE SIGN "WE WILL REMEMBER NEXT NOVEMBER" AND I WAS REALLY TAKEN AND WAS SHOCKED BY HOW SHE WAS TREATED EVEN BY SOME DEMOCRATS. BUT IN THAT COMMITTEE PROCESS THERE WAS AN FBI INVESTIGATION. THERE WERE THREE DAYS OF TESTIMONY AND THERE WERE MULTIPLE PEOPLE TESTIFYING. TRUTHFULLY SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT A HARASSMENT CASE AND NOT AN ASSAULT CASE WHICH PEOPLE HAVE FORGOTTEN THE DIFFERENCES IN THE LEVEL OF SCOPE. TRUTHFULLY DIFFERENT TIMING. STILL, IN THIS CASE I HAVE BEEN REALLY SURPRISED. I KNOW -- I MEAN I SHOULDN'T BE SURPRISED BEING A YEAR AND A HALF IN WASHINGTON JUST NOT EVEN THE RHETORICAL INTEREST SAYING WE SHOULD GET TO THE FACTS AND LET'S OPEN AN FBI INVESTIGATION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS. A NORMAL THING WOULD HAVE BEEN THIS COMES FORWARD AND AN FBI INVESTIGATION WOULD HAVE HAPPENED AND THEN YOU HAVE THE HEARING AND MULTIPLE PEOPLE. INSTEAD THERE WAS A A NEGOTIATION ABOUT THE HEARING AND TWO PEOPLE SPOKE AND ONLY BECAUSE OF THE DAM BROKE AND WE WENT IN THIS DIRECTION. I AM SORT OF DEPRESSED ABOUT IN THIS MOMENT IS JUST THE WHOLE DEBATE IS ESSENTIALLY WINNING OR LOSING THIS NOMINATION, AND NOT REALLY ANYTHING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE GET TO THE FACTS OF WHAT HAPPENED? SHOULD WE TRY AND UNDERSTAND THE FULL PICTURE HERE? IT WAS ASSUMED ON ONE SIDE THAT SHE WAS -- THAT THERE COULDN'T BE ANYTHING TO THIS. ONLY I THINK HONESTLY AND THIS IS A MOMENT OF SOME IMPORT, I REALLY THINK IT IS THE FACT THAT TWO WOMEN JAMMED THEMSELVES IN AN ELEVATOR AND TALKED ABOUT THEIR OWN EXPERIENCE OF ASSAULT THAT MADE THEM ACTIVE TO CHANGE THE DYNAMIC SO WE HAVE AN FBI INVESTIGATION. I THINK HOPEFULLY WE GET BACK TO A PLACE WHERE WE WOULD -- YOU KNOW, YOU INVESTIGATE MATTERS AND DON'T JUST THINK ABOUT WINNING. I THINK THAT IS A HUGE CHALLENGE WHICH IS THAT IT IS JUST EVERYTHING HAS BECOME -- LIKE EVERYTHING IS SO TRIBAL. YOU LOSE AND I WIN. KAVANAUGH WENT INTO HIS TESTIMONY LIKE NO NOMINEE HAS EVER ACTED THAT WAY. IT WAS LIKE, I AM GOING TO GET EVERYONE TO HATE DEMOCRATS, AND THEN I WILL SHORE UP SUPPORT AMONG REPUBLICANS. HE CAN DO THAT BECAUSE IT IS A THAT'S WHAT IS DEEPLY UPSETTING AND DEPRESSING ABOUT IT. I HOPE WE CAN MOVE TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN GET RID OF -- GET OUT OF THAT. I HOPE WE LEARN FACTS OVER THE NEXT COMING WEEK THAT AS A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL SPECTATOR A PLACE THAT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THE COUNTRY IF PEOPLE COULD COME AND BEGIN CLEARING WHAT HAPPENED OR ONE OR THE OTHER WAS NOT TELLING THE TRUTH OR INADD VEN TENTLY -- INADVERTENTLY NOT TELLING THE TRUTH BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO RECOLLECTION. IT IS OBVIOUSLY BAD, BAD FOR THE COURT. I WOULD BUT I THINK AFTER WHAT KAVANAUGH SAID, IT IS HARD TO SEE HOW HE COULD BE VIEWED AS AN IMPARTIAL -- OR EVEN SOMEWHAT IMPARTIAL SUPREME COURT JUSTICE. WE HAVE HAD JUS ADVERTISES -- JUSTICES WHO WERE POLITICIANS AND RUTH GATORS BEGINS -- GINSBURG SAID THING AND THOMAS, THAT WAS A WRENCHING MOMENT FOR CULTURAL REASONS FOR MANY REASONS, BUT THOMAS DIDN'T ATTACK THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND DIDN'T ATTACK GEORGE MITCHELL. IT WAS A DEMOCRATIC JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. JOE BIDEN MADE THE RULES. HE DIDN'T ATTACK QUESTIONEERS. THOMAS WAS CONFIRMED WITH THAT WAS A BAD MOMENT FOR THE COUNTRY IF A SENSE THAT PEOPLE WERE LEFT UNHAPPY ABOUT AN OUTCOME AND FEELING THAT IT WAS UNFAIR OR WHATEVER, BUT HE GOT 11 DEMOCRATIC SENATORS TO VOTE WITH HIM THAT THREE DAYS OF HEARINGS WITH 18 ADDITIONAL WITNESSES, AND IT DIDN'T REALLY RESOLVE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. ONE FELT, OKAY, WE HAVE DONE OUR BEST TO GET THESE CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF WHAT HAPPENED A DECADE BEFORE. NO ONE FELT THAT WAY ON THURSDAY. THAT WAS THE KEY POINT. NOT THAT THE FBI WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING. THEY REPORT ON THEIR QUESTIONING. THEY DON'T RESOLVE THESE ISSUES. THEY DON'T HAVE A JUDGE AND JURY. THEY ARE INVESTIGATIVE. THE IDEA THAT MARK JUDGE WHO WAS SAID TO HAVE BEEN AT THIS PARTICULAR THING AND PARTICIPATED THEY THE ASSAULT AND WAS NEVER INTERROGATED BY ANYONE, THAT'S SOMETHING NUTS ABOUT THAT. IF THIS WERE THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, GOD FORBID SOMETHING BAD HAPPEN, BUT THERE THERE WAS AN HR COMPLAINT, BUT THERE WOULD BE AN INVESTIGATION AND PEOPLE WOULD TALK TO BOTH SIDES. ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ABOUT UNIVERSITIES IS THERE IS NOT ENOUGH DUE PROCESS AND THE COURTS HAVE FOUND THAT IN SOME CASES. YOU DO NEED TO TALK TO BOTH SIDES. SO TALK TO THEM AND IF YOU WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE -- STENOGRAPHERS AND LAWYERS PRESENT, THAT'S HOW YOU DISPUTE THIS KIND OF THING. THE IDEA YOU CAN GO AHEAD WITH THE HEARING AND YOU DON'T HAVE PEOPLE E-MAILING STATEMENTS FROM LAWYERS, AND THAT'S IT, THAT'S REALLY CRAZY. I DO THINK -- I THINK WE ARE IN A BAD PLACE IN A SENSE THAT WE COULD HAVE AN OUTCOME THAT THREATENS THE INSTITUTIONAL STANDING OF THE COURT IN A WAY. I DON'T THINK THOMAS HILL DID SOME DAMAGE -- WELL THOMAS HILL AND SINCE THEN WE HAD TWO CLINTON NOMINEES EASILY APPROVED WITH BIPARTISAN VOTES AND TWO BUSH MOM -- NOMINEES WITH NO HUGE RUCKUS. ONE WAS OPPOSED BY PEOPLE LIKE ME, CONSERVE ITSELF, BUT WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED BY VERY DISTINGUISHED JUDGE AND TWO OBAMA NOMINEES CONFIRMED UNPROBLEMATICLY AND GORSICH WAS CONFIRMED WITH SOME HEATED DEBATE, BUT NOTHING UNTOURED. I DON'T THINK ANYONE LOOKS AT THE BENCH AND SAYS JUSTICE GORSICH SHOULDN'T BE THERE. SOME PEOPLE PREFER IF YOU ARE ON THE LIBERAL SIDE AND SO FORTH, BUT THIS TO ME IS A BAD MOMENT. WE WERE JOKING ABOUT THIS -- WELL NOT JOKING, BUT TALKING ABOUT IT, THE INSTITUTIONS HAVE HELD UP WELL IN THE YEAR OF TRUMP. CONGRESS LESS SO BECAUSE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS BEEN SO EM PATHETIC, BUT THE OTHER INSTITUTIONS OF AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND FEDERALISM AND CIVIL SOCIETY AND YOU COULD ARGUE THIS IS WHY WE ARE NOT HUNGRY. WE DON'T DESERVE CREDIT FOR IT, ANY OF US IN THIS ROOM, BUT OUR ANCESTORS, PREVIOUS GENERATIONS CREATED INSTITUTIONS WITH QUITE A LOT OF DEPTH IN AMERICA AND THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND APPEALS TO NASTY ELEMENTS OF POPULISM. I THINK THE COURTS I I WOULD PUT IN INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE DOING WELL. LIBERALS DIDN'T LIKE TRUMP'S APPELLATE APPOINTMENTS AND REGRETTED GETTING RID OF THE FILIBUSTER, BUT MOST ARE DISTINGUISHED JUDGES AND LAW PROFESSORS AND NO ONE REALLY -- IT WAS A NORMAL OSCILLATION IN TERMS OF THE APPELLATE JUDGES AND DISTRICT COURT JUDGES. AND THEN SUDDENLY TO HAVE THIS -- IF THIS HAD GOTTEN RAN THROUGH YESTERDAY, I THINK IT WOULD HAVE DONE A LOT OF DAMAGE AND IT MAY STILL DO DAMAGE A WEEK FROM NOW. I WOULD SAY TWO THINGS ABOUT THIS WHICH IS TO MAKE THE POINT IT IS NOT JUST TRUMP. YEN A BIG CHALLENGE FOR THESE DEBATES GOING FORWARD IS THE FACT MAYOR GARLAND DIDN'T GET IT AND DIDN'T GET A HEARING OF ANY KIND. A RULE WAS JUST CREATED OF THE WHOLE CLASS WAS JUST BECAUSE HE WAS WITH OBAMA HE DIDN'T GET A VOTE. I THINK McCONNELL'S DOING THAT, REALLY THAT KIND OF -- ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WILL TO POWER AND I GET TO DO THIS BECAUSE I CONTROL THINGS REALLY MAKES -- I THINK THIS IS THE CHALLENGE OF THE SPIRAL. THERE IS A VIEW AMONG LOTS OF LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES AND DEMOCRATS THAT REPUBLICANS CHANGE THE RULES, AND THEY ADHERE -- DEMOCRATS ADHERE TO THE RULES WHEN REPUBLICANS CHANGE THE RULE AND THAT LEADS TO EXTREME ACTION. IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE CASE THAT ALTHOUGH OF COURSE GEORGETOWN PREP HAS A REMARKABLY EXPERIENCE TO BRETT KAVANAUGH AND IT WAS HANDLED DIFFERENTLY. I THINK WHAT HAPPENED IS NOT JUST TRUMP WHO IS DOING THESE KINDS OF THINGS. TO HAVE A MOMENT OF OPTIMISM IS ONE THING I DO THINK WAS INTERESTING ABOUT THIS MOMENT PARTICULARLY FOR ME IN POLITICS IS THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE RUNNING FOR OFFICE WHO ARE COMING FROM OUTSIDE THE POLITICAL PROCESS. THERE ARE IRAQ VETERANS OR SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS. THEY ARE NOT GOING THROUGH THE TRADITIONAL PATH. SOME ARE LIKE A STATE LEGISLATOR AND THEN RUNNING AS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS OR PEOPLE WHO HAD SERVICE IN THE COUNTRY, AND MANY PEOPLE WORKED AT THE PENTAGON OR THE STATE DEPARTMENT OR JUST TRADITIONAL VETERANS AND THEY ARE JUST -- THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF WOMEN ARE RUNNING. I DO THINK THOSE PEOPLE WHEN THEY GO TO CONGRESS ARE GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON TRYING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS. IT IS VERY MUCH PARTICULAR CAMPAIGNS THEY ARE COMING INTO POLITICS. IT IS TO TRY AND SOLVE PROBLEMS, SO I THINK THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITIES ON INFRASTRUCTURE OR OTHER AREAS WHERE AT LEAST YOU WILL SEE AN INTEREST IN PASSING BILLS THAT CAN GARNER SUPPORT, AND WHETHER TRUMP SUPPORTS THOSE OR NOT WILL BE AN INTERESTING PERIOD. IT WILL BE LIKE THE FIRST TIME IN MANY YEARS THAT IF YOU HAVE A DEMOCRATIC HOUSE THEY ARE FACING OR A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION, SO IT WILL BE A VERY INTERESTING DYNAMIC WHETHER PEOPLE WANT TO SOLVE PROBLEMS OR BE ON A CONTINUAL PATH OF JUST BITTER PARTISAN SHIP WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE SEEN SO FAR. I AM ACTUALLY BULLISH ON THE 9/11 GENERATION IN TERMS OF YOUNGER VETS AND OTHER ASPECTS OF GOVERNMENT SERVICE AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMING TO CONGRESS. THERE ARE MANY FROM BOTH PARTIES AND DEMOCRATS MAYBE MORE THIS YEAR. EASIER FOR DEMOCRATS TO RECRUIT PEOPLE AND TELL THEM THEY SHOULD TAKE A SHOT AND GO THROUGH WHAT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH RUNNING FOR OFFICE, BUT THAT'S FINE, AND I AM GLAD THEY HAVE. I THINK A LOT WILL BE GOOD MEMBERS. THERE IS A YOUNG WOMAN I KNOW WHO IS A VERY STAUNCH REPUBLICAN AND CONSERVATIVE AND BY ACCIDENT WENT TO A SESSION WHERE THERE WERE FOUR OR FIVE DEMOCRATIC WOMEN RUNNING FOR CONGRESS ON A PANEL. IT WASN'T A SECRET THING. IT WAS A PUBLIC THING. SHE WENT AND SHE WAS REALLY IMPRESSED BY THEM. SHE IS STILL A CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN AND DOESN'T AGREE ON MOST ISSUES, BUT THAT IS A GOOD SIGN. THERE ARE GOOD SIGNS, AND THIS IS A HARD YEAR FOR REPUBLICANS, BUT GOOD SIGNS ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE. ONE OF THE CRAZY THINGS ON THE KAVANAUGH THING FROM A STAND BACK AND LOOK AT, I CAN SEE WHY IT IS UPSETTING ON GARLAND. THAT SEAT WAS FILLED BY A REPUBLICAN APPOINTEE, A TRUMP APPOINTEE. IF KAVANAUGH WITHDREW TODAY, TRUMP WOULD NOMINATE JOAN LARSON ON TUESDAY OR BARRETT OR NOMINATE A WOMAN AND MAYBE WISE TO DO THAT THREE MONTHS AGO. SOME OF US URGED THAT AS A PRACTICAL AND POLITICAL MATTER. IT SEEMS NUTS THE REPUBLICANS ON THE CORRIDOR ARE MEN. HE HAS A GOOD CHANCE OF GETTING THAT PERSON THROUGH, MAYBE NOT BEFORE THE ELECTION, BUT IT IS NOT LIKE AS IF I DON'T THINK THEY WILL HOLD SOMEONE OFF WHO IS WELL QUALIFIED FOR TWO YEARS IF THERE ARE 48 AND 49 REPUBLICAN SENATORS. THAT'S TOUGH TO DO. HONESTLY WE ARE FIGHTING AND I DON'T MEAN -- JUDGE KAVANAUGH FEELS UNFAIRLY TREATED AND HE ISEN -- HE IS ENTITLED TO MAKE A CASE. IT IS FUNNY THAT IT IS NOT AS PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT IT THAT IF KAVANAUGH DOES NOT BECOME A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE THAT THE DEMOCRATS GET TO MAKE THE NEXT APPOINTMENT WHICH IS NOT THE CASE. WORST CASE IS YOU HAVE EIGHT PEOPLE FOR TWO YEARS. YOU HAVE TO BE SUPER CYNICAL, BUT JUDGE KAVANAUGH IS EXTRAORDINARY ON HIS VIEWS OF PRESIDENTIAL POWERS. UNUSUAL FOR -- UNUSUAL AMONG CONSERVATIVE JURISTS THAT A PRESIDENT CAN'T BE SUBPOENA -- SUBPOENAED. IT IS A DIFFERENT VIEW THAN JUDGE LARSON AND JUDGE BARRETT AND ON A PARTICULAR AND ODDLY ENOUGH -- THIS IS THE GUY WHO CHOSE IT -- PERSPECTIVE THAT A PRESIDENT WHO, I DON'T KNOW, FACING INDEPENDENT COUNCIL -- COUNSEL WOULD NOT NEED TO TESTIFY IS IMPERVIOUS TO ANY JUDICIAL RESTRAINT. IT IS UNUSUAL. ODDLY ENOUGH HE PICKED THAT GUY AND IS FIGHTING TOOTH AND NAIL FOR THAT GUY. OF COURSE IT MAKES NO SENSE. TWO WEEKS AGO THEY COULD HAVE PUT BARRETT UP AND SHE WOULD HAVE HAD MORE SUPPORT ON THE RIGHT THAN KAVANAUGH WHO IS, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IS UNPOPULAR FOR A NOMINEE. IT IS EXTRAORDINARY. THE LAST PERSON AS UNPOPULAR AS KAVANAUGH, EVEN BEFORE THIS, WAS HAIR -- HARRIET MYERS AND SHE WAS PULLED. I HATE TO BE CYNICAL, BUT THIS IS WHAT TRUMP REQUIRES WHICH IS FOR YOU TO THINK THROUGH PERHAPS THERE IS SOME EFFORT TO SAVE HIS OWN SKIN IN THIS DETERMINATION. THE NICER VERSION WAS HE WAS A GOOD FRIEND OF MCCANN'S AND HIGHLY RESPECTED IN THE DC LEGAL COMMUNITY. EVERY POLITICAL PERSON I TALKED TO IN THE WEEK OR TWO AFTER KENNEDY'S RETIREMENT WAS ANNOUNCED AND THE SPECULATION WAS GOING AROUND ABOUT THE PICK, EVERY POLITICAL PERSON SAID A WOMAN WOULD BE BETTER THAN A MAN. MAYBE THEY ARE NOT READY AND HAVEN'T BEEN ON THE BENCH LONG ENOUGH, FINE. TAKE A A CLOSE LOOK AT THE FEMALE CANDIDATES WHO ARE ON THE LIST, OR MAYBE NOT ON THE LIST. THAT'S AN ARTIFICIAL THING, BUT WHATEVER TRUMP HAD DECIDED TO DO THAT TO SIR COME CIRCUMSCRIBE HIMSELF. THERE ARE SEVERAL WELL QUALIFIED WOMEN. AND TWO, GIVEN THE EIGHT JUSTICES SITTING HAVE GONE TO HAIR -- TO HAIR REGARD AND YALE -- HARVARD AND YALE LAW SCHOOL. IT WOULD BE NICE FOR SOMEBODY FROM ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COUNTRY. THERE WERE MANY WELL REGARDED WHO WERE PUSHING FOR. McCONNELL PUSHED FOR SOMEBODY ELSE. McCONNELL PUSHED FOR A YOUNGER JUDGE. THERE WERE PLENTY OF PEOPLE. I WILL STICK TO YOUR THEORY THAT YOU HAD TO GO OUT OF YOUR WAY TO GET TO KAVANAUGH AS THE PICK. ASSUMING THEY ARE ALL QUALIFIED AND THEY WILL ALL BE DISTINGUISHED JUSTICES. MAYBE YOU ARE RIGHT. MAYBE THAT'S WHY TRUMP DID THAT. ON THAT NOTE I WILL ASK ALLIE AND NICK TO START COLLECTING AND ASKING THE QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE. THANK YOU BOTH SO MUCH. WE ARE GOING TO GET STARTED WITH A QUESTION THAT IS SALIENT TO US BEING ON A PUBLIC UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, AND THAT IS REGARDING THE ROLE OF UNIVERSITIES IN ESTABLISHING ROBUST CONVERSATIONS THAT BRING DIFFERENT I'D LOGICAL VIEW POINTS INTO THE CONVERSATION. HOW DO YOU VIEW THE ROLE OF THE UNIVERSITY IN THAT? I MEAN, I WOULD SAY I WAS NEVER A LIBERTARIAN AND WAS INTRIGUED BY MORE CONSERVATIVE LET'S SAY -- NOT JUST CONSERVATIVE, BUT OTHER ARGUMENTS ON THE LIMITS OF PURE LIBERTARIANISM. I HAVE BECOME MORE STRAIGHT FORWARD LIBERTARIAN. ONCE YOU GO DOWN THE SPEECH KS SEPTEMBER FOR THE OBVIOUS EXTREME CASES, IT REALLY IS A VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE. I GUESS I DON'T TRUST THE GUARDIANS OF OUR DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONS OR POLITICAL FIGURES OR ANY FIGURES REALLY. OBVIOUSLY PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS HAVE THEIR OWN RIGHTS WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AND COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ARE DIFFERENT FROM SOME BUSINESS THAT IS HAVING A CONFERENCE AND SO FORTH. I WOULD SAY EVEN PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES THOUGH I THINK LEGALLY THEY ARE UNDER A DIFFERENT STANDING, I AM AVERSE TO LIMITING SPEECH ACCEPTANCE IN EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES. I THINK IT IS DANGEROUS. I THINK IF YOU LOOK IMPERICALLY IF THEY DO MORE ON HATE SPEECH LEGISLATION IT HAS BACKFIRED. IF YOU LOOK AT EUROPE IT IS NOT A HAPPY STORY OF TOLERANCE AND LACK OF BIGOTRY. I AM SORT OF AN OLD-FASHIONED JUSTICE BRANDIZED LIBERAL ON THIS STUFF. I LOOK AT THE QUESTION MORE BROADLY. I AGREE AND ESSENTIALLY THE IMPORTANCE OF FREE SPEECH, I AM A A BELIEVER IS THE BEST RESPONSE TO INTEL -- INTOLERANT SPEECH IS MORE SPEECH. I THINK TWITTER'S -- TRUMP'S TWITTER FEED OVERWHELMS ME AT TIMES. THE BROADER QUESTION IS HOW IMPORTANT UNIVERSITY IN FACT THEY ARE AT THIS TIME. I WILL CONFESS THAT AFTER TRUMP WAS ELECTED I DEFINITELY HAD SOME EXSEW STEN SHALL MOMENTS OF THINK TANKS AND THE MOMENT OF FACT AND WHETHER IT ACTUALLY MATTERED IN THE DEBATE THAT THERE WERE FACTS ON ONE SIDE AND EMOTIONS ON ANOTHER. WHAT I FIND INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT FOR THE ROLE WE ALL PLAY IS TRUMP IS HIMSELF. HE IS UNTO HIMSELF, BUT IN TERMS OF THE DEBATES IN CONGRESS, FACTS ACTUALLY DO MATTER AND THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT HAS WORKED RELATIVELY STRENUOUSLY TO DEFEND THE ACA AND TRUMP AND -- AND MANY REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS SAID THERE RAY -- THERE ARE AVERSIONS OF THE BILL AND IT WOULD NOT REDUCE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. PEOPLE WOULD KEEP THEIR HEALTH CARE CINCH. IN FACT, HOUSE REPUBLICANS ATTACKED THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE WEEKS BEFORE THEY WERE COMING OUT WITH THEIR ANALYSIS THAT 23 MILLION PEOPLE LOSE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. IN THE END 65, 70 PERCENT OF AMERICANS BELIEVE PEOPLE LOSE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE BECAUSE THEY SEE FACTS AND FIGURES OF PEOPLE LOSING HEALTH CARE CINCH, AND THAT WAS A DRIVING FORCE AS TO WHY THE BILL WAS DEFEATED. DESPITE THE FACT THAT POLITICIANS SAY SOMETHING OVER AND OVER AGAIN, I MEAN THERE IS A REAL PROBLEM THAT PART OF TRUMP'S PHASE OR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY BELIEVES WHAT HE SAYS. FOR THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS I DO THINK FACTS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT. A UNIVERSITY WITH ADHERENCE TO FACTS AND WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR THE DATA MORE THAN EVER. I DO THINK ULTIMATELY HAVING A PERSUASIVE ARGUMENT AND GROUNDING IT IN REALITY, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUTWEIGHS WE CAN COMMUNICATE AND IT IS REALLY VITAL WE STAY THERE. I WILL MAKE SOME CONSERVATIVE POINTS SO WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT. I WENT TO HARVARD AFTER THE PRESIDENT WAS GOING TO BE INGNAWING RATED AND IT WAS ONE OF THESE PANELS AND THE CRISIS OF OUR TIMES AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? I COULDN'T RESIST WITHOUT SAYING TO PEOPLE AT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL SHOULD BE VERY PLEASED THEY HAVE BEEN TEACHING, OF COURSE, ABOUT THE LIVING CONSTITUTION, BUT NOT JUST THAT, TEACHING ABOUT HOW THE RULE OF LAW IS JUST A FICTION AND THE RULING CLASS PORTRAYS ABSTRACT OR NEUTRAL PRINCIPALS. THAT WAS LEFT BEHIND IN THE ALL OF THE HIP STUFF. MAYBE THEY WERE RIGHT, BILL [LAUGHTER]. TRUMP AGREES THAT THE RULE OF LAW AND EVERYTHING IS A MATTER OF POWER AND IT IS NOT A MATTER OF FACT AND EVIDENCE. I CONGRATULATED THE LITERATURE DEPARTMENT OF HARVARD WHO AGREED. THERE ARE NOTIONS OF TRUTH THAT ARE OUT OF DATE AND THERE IS A MODERN HISTORIAN. I AM OVER STATING OBVIOUSLY. YOU HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE DEEP STATE. THE DEEP STATE IS ONE OF THE POLITICAL SCIENTISTS WHO IS -- IT IS NOT A STUPID IDEA ABOUT COUNTRIES LIKE TURKEY AND INDONESIA WHICH IT WAS MEANT TO EXPLAIN. THEY WERE BEING UPBEAT AND I AM BEING UPBEAT ABOUT A CERTAIN RECOGNITION ON THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT. LET'S COOL IT A LITTLE BIT WITH THE SUPER CLEVER, YOU KNOW, DRIVE OF POST-MODERNISM AND CLEVERLY SHOWING THAT PEOPLE'S PERSPECTIVES ON EVERYTHING. LET'S REMEMBER, A, IT IS PROBABLY NOT CORRECT THEORETIC, BUT IF YOU WANT A DECENT SOCIETY WHERE PEOPLE CAN WORK TOGETHER AND LIVE TOGETHER, THERE IS SOMETHING TO BE SAID FOR MORE OLD-FASHIONED VIEW OF TRUTH AND FACTS AND EVIDENCE. I THINK YOU SEE SOME OF THAT ON BOTH SIDES. HERE IS WHERE I AM NOT AS COMPLAISANT, THE REACTION OF ME AND MY FRIENDS AGAINST TRUMP THERE IS AN INTELLECTUAL STRAIN ON THE RIGHT THAT GOES BEYOND BANNIN AND IT IS NOT IN A THEORETICAL WAY THAT IS FINE. YOU HAVE TO UNDER THE PRICE WE PAY FOR MODERN CAPITALISM AND ALIENATION. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A SOPHISTICATED CRITIQUE ON LEFT AND RIGHT AND LIMITATIONS ON MODERN DEMOCRACY, BUT GENERALLY WILLING TO GO THE NEXT STEP AND THE BABY WITH THE BATH WATER. YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH SOME THINKERS AND I WORRY THAT IS ATTRACTIVE AND WE COULD GET IN A SPIRAL WHERE THIS IS LIKE THE 20s AND 30s WHERE WHAT HAPPENED IN THE WORLD OF INTELLECT PARALLELLED WHAT HAPPENED IN REAL POLITICS. EVERYONE GOT SICK OF OLD-FASHIONED BORING LIBERALISM. LIBERALISM WITH A LITTLE L. EVERYBODY WAS ENTRANCED BY NARRATIVES BY WERE CON TESTIMONY FEW US WITH. DUE PROCESS AND RULE OF LAW, THAT WOULD BE A BAD PLACE TO GO. I WILL SAY BRIEFLY BECAUSE I KNOW WE WANT TO GET TO OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD THINK CONSCIOUSLY ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN OUR COUNTRY AND OTHER COUNTRIES. IT IS NOT THAT THESE FORCES ARE JUST HAPPENING IN THE UNITED STATES IN A VACUUM, NOT JUST HAPPENING INTELLECT -- INTEREST INTELLECTUALLY. AND THE ARGUMENTS YOU ARE SAYING ARE EVEN STRONGER IN EUROPE. THERE IS MUCH GREATER CONTENTIOUS BETWEEN -- I THINK TRUMP IS A WEIRD FIGURE OF HIS APPARENTLY BEING IN LOVE WITH KIM JONG-UN, AND REALLY IN REGARDS TO PUTIN AND THE SUPPORT FOR PUTINISM, BUT IN EUROPE THERE IS A MUCH BROADER AND MORE WITHIN THE PUBLIC IN TERMS OF THEIR SUPPORT FOR AUTHORITARIANISM AND RACISM AND GIST TO SAY THIS, LIKE WE USED TO THINK BURLESCONI WAS THE STRANGEST PERSON IN EUROPE, AND NOW THERE ARE LIBERAL FASCISTS IN THE GOVERNMENT OF ITALY. THERE IS NO REASON -- I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR ALL GENERATIONS TO RECOGNIZE IS THAT WE HAVE TWO OFTEN BELIEVED DEMOCRACY IS JUST STATUS QUO. IT WILL ALWAYS BE THIS WAY. I BELIEVE THE 21st CENTURY IS GOING TO BE A DEEP CON TNGS BETWEEN AUTHORIZE TEAR YENISM WHETHER IT IS FROM CHINA OR RUSSIA AND THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC NORMS WE BELIEVE IN. THE FACT THAT WE HAVE BEEN SORT OF LAZY ABOUT THESE THINGS FOR A GENERATION, REALLY SINCE THE COLD WAR, HAS ALLOWED PUTIN A LOT OF SUCCESS IN HIS EFFORTS TO DE-LEGIT MYSELF DEMOCRACY AROUND THE WORLD. JUST TO ADD -- REALLY THIS IS PERFECT FOR THE ACADEMIC ENVIRONMENT, BUT IN ADDITION TO THE NORMS, OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO HANG ON AND REITERATE AND DEFEND, GOING BACK AND THINKING MORE THE WAY THE FOUNDERS DID AND OTHER FOUNDERS OF OTHER LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES POST WORLD WAR II AND GERMANY AND ITALY, JAPAN, THINKING SERIOUS ABOUT THE INSTITUTIONS AND THE STRUCTURES. I THINK THERE ARE ASPECTS THAT FIT INTO MORE LIBERAL POLICIES IN TERMS OF -- AND OTHER AS SPECS -- ASPECTS LIBERAL POLICIES. THINKING ABOUT WHAT ARE THE INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES WE HAVE IN GOVERNMENT AND OUT OF GOVERNMENT IN TRMS OF THE FREE MARKET AND NOT FOR PROFIT INSTITUTIONS AND COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES THAT PROVIDE WORKS AGAINST A WAVE OF DEMIGOGARY SWEEPING OVER THE SECTOR FOR MAYBE A FEW YEARS OR MORE THAN A FEW YEARS AND OTHER COUNTRIES DON'T HAVE SUCH WORKS. IT IS PART OF THE ATTACHMENT TO THE NORM AND A MATTER OF THE INSTITUTIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE SO TO SPEAK WHICH WE ARE PRETTY FORTUNATE TO HAVE. NOT THAT WE SHOULD TAKE IT FOR GRANT -- GRANTED AND WHICH OR COUNTRIES -- I WOULD HAVE SAID I WAS SURPRISED HOW WEAK THEY TURNED OUT TO BE. THAT'S WORRISOME I THINK. SO THIS QUESTION ASKED ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE PRESS IN FOREIGN DEMOCRACY. SPEAK TOGETHER ROLE OF THE PRESS AND THE CURRENCY OF AFFAIRS DAVID FRENCH OF THE NATIONAL REVIEW WROTE, THE NEWS ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD ASSUME MAURY RESPONSIBILITY -- MORE RESPONSIBILITY FROM WHERE WE HAVE COME. WHAT IS YORE TAKE ON THIS IN LIGHT OF THE HEARING AND TODD AND FRENCH AGREE ON THE VALUE OF THE FREE PRESS IN SOCIETY, AND HOW STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY LEVEL SHOULD BEACON SUMMING -- BE CONSUMING NEWS IN THIS ERA OF, QUOTE, UNQUOTE, FAKE NEWS. SOCIAL MEDIA IS A BIG PHENOMENON. THE COMBINATION OF THE INTERNET AND THE MOBILE DEVICE AND THE INSTANTANEOUS INFORMATION TRANSMISSION OF INFORMATION AND OPINIONS AND THOSE OF THOSE BASED ON FAKE NEWS OR TO BE FAKE NEWS. THAT WAS A BIG CHANGE. I AM GENERALLY A SKEPTIC WHEN IT COMES TO PEOPLE SAYING EVERYTHING HAS CHANGED. I GREW UP IN THE 60s AND THE EVERYTHING IS MOVING SO MUCH FASTER THAN OUR PARENTS. THEY LIVED COMPLAISANT LIVES. WE ARE IN THIS TECHNOLOGY AND IT IS TOTAL NONSENSE. MY PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS WENT THROUGH INFINITELY MORE SOCIAL CHANGE THAN I DID. THEY MET MUCH GREATER CHALLENGES WITH THE DEPRESSION AND THE WAR HERE IN THE U.S. TO SAY NOTHING OF PEOPLE IN EUROPE AND ELSEWHERE. THERE WERE TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGES IN TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION. WEIRDLIY FROM 1955 TO 1995 YOU CAN SAY THERE WAS LITTLE CHANGE IN PEOPLE'S LIVES. PEOPLE CHUGGED ALONG. I THINK THE CHANGE OF THE -- THE CHANGE IN COMMUNICATIONS NOW IS AWFULLY BIG. LOOK, YOU CAN'T STOP IT, AND YOU DON'T WANT TO STOP IT. LIKE ALL CHANGES IT WILL GO THROUGH THOSE EFFECTS AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE CAUGHT UP THINKING THROUGH HOWING TO MAX -- MAXIMIZE THE GOODIE FECTS AND MINIMIZE THE BAD EFFECTS. I AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH SOME OF THE EFFORTS TO SHUTDOWN THINGS OR REALLY HAVE PRIVATE ACTORS OR PUBLIC ACTORS LIMIT THINGS IN SOME RADICAL WAYS, BUT I AM OPEN TO THERE IS A BIG PROBLEM. I SEE IT MYSELF AND PEOPLE ARE BELIEVING IN THINS. IN THINGS. PEOPLE FROM THE MIDDLE CLASS AND READERS OF THE WEEKLY STANDARD AND WANT TO SEE A WEEK SEEING A PART OF THE COUNTRY AND HAVE PANEL DISCUSSIONS WITH ED BARNES AND EVERYONE. [LAUGHTER]. IS THAT -- THAT IS A UNIQUE SUBSET OF PEOPLE. THAT'S WHY IT FREAKS ME OUT. THESE ARE NOT THE DISILLUSION ED WHITE WORKING CLASS VOTERS WHO DON'T KNOW ANYTHING AND ARE NOT IN TOUCH WITH WHATEVER AND WILL NEVER FALL FOR THIS PROPAGANDA. THESE ARE WELL EDUCATED PEOPLE WHO ARE PILLARS IN THEIR COMIENT, PHYSICIANS, LAWYERS, BUSINESSMEN AND WOMEN WHO TELL YOU SOMETHING AND THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE. THERE IS NOT MUCH CONTROVERSY IN THE FACT THAT THERE WERE THREE MILLION ILLEGAL VOTERS. NO, I SAW IT ON TV. A FRIEND OF MINE SENT ME AN ARTICLE ABOUT IT. THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO CUT AND PASTE FAKE NEWS ARTICLES AND FACEBOOK PROBLEMS AND SO FORTH. IT IS A REAL PROBLEM. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT, BUT WE CAN'T MINIMIZE IT. I THINK THE GREAT IRONY OF FAKE NEWS IS NOT PROMOTED -- THE RISE OF FAKE NEWS, THERE IS A LOT OF INSANE FAKE NEWS HAPPENING. WE ALL LAUGH AND JOKE ABOUT IT, BUT I WAS A LITTLE IN THE WIKILEAKS STUFF AND SO I WAS MONITORING WHAT HAPPENED EVERY DAY. THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE ELECTION , THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE ELECTION THERE IS A GIGANTIC BANNER BASICALLY ELUDING TO A SEX RING THAT IS LITERALLY SEVEN BLOCKS FROM MY HOUSE. THERE WAS AN E-MAIL TALKING ABOUT ORDERING A PIZZA AND THEY BUILT IN -- THERE WAS A NARRATIVE MOVING THAT THERE WAS A PEDOPHILE PIZZA RING THAT WAS CONNECTED TO HILLARY CLINTON. IT WAS INSANE. ALL OF THE CONVERSATIONS OF -- WE HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS WITH FACEBOOK IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF. I ASKED HOW MANY PEOPLE SAW THAT STORY VEE -- VIA FACEBOOK AND IT WAS MILLIONS OF PEOPLE THAT SEE A CRAZY LUNATIC STORY LIKE THAT. WHAT I FIND CONSTRUCTIVE IS IF DONALD TRUMP WOULD ATTACK ACTUAL FAKE NEWS. HE IS NOT ATTACKING THAT KIND OF LUNACY. HE IS ATTACKING NBC NEWS -- NOT THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" AS MUCH, BUT "NEW YORK TIMES" AND MAINSTREAM PILLARS OF INSTITUTION THAT GIVE US A COMMON SET OF FACTS. DO I AGREE WITH ALL OF THESE ALL THE TIME? IS THERE TOO MUCH OPINION IN NEWS? I WOULD EVEN SAY MYSELF THERE IS WAY TOO MUCH NEWS ANALYSIS AND NOT AS MUCH NEWS GATHERING. THE IDEA WE HAVE POLITICIANS WHO JUST LITERALLY ARGUE THE PRESS IS A CONSTITUENCY GROUP THAT THEY ARE ATTACKING OR THAT THEY DON'T FEEL IS PART OF THEIR -- WHAT THEY NEED TO DEAL WITH. IT IS A GIGANTIC RED FLAG FOR AMERICA. IT IS ANOTHER REASON WHY WE ARE LIVING IN DEEPLY PERILLESS TIMES. THE IDEA THAT WE FIND IT ACCEPTABLE THAT WE HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO JUST LITERALLY GOES TO RALLIES AND PEOPLE START SCREAMING ABOUT HOW CNN SHOULD BE IN JAIL OR BANNED. IF THAT HAPPENED IN ANOTHER COUNTRY WE WOULD BE LIKE, HELLO, WHERE IS THE -- WHY ARE WE SPENDING STATE DEPARTMENT DOLLARS? IT HAPPENED HERE AND WE ACCEPT IT. I WOULD ADD I DO THINK IT IS A MATTER OF ACTUAL PUBLIC POLICY. I THINK THE RIGHT ANSWER ON MOST OF THE ACTUAL MEED YOU ORGANIZATIONS IS A KIND OF FREE MARKET AND FREE PRESS KIND OF ANSWER. MAYBE WE CAN THINK ABOUT CHANGING THE ECONOMIC PLAYING FIELD TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE, FOR NEWSPAPERS TO SURVIVE AND MAGAZINES. AS AN EDITOR OF A MAGAZINE I WOULD BE HAPPY IF THAT'S THE CASE. I THINK THE SOCIAL MEDIA SITUATION IS ACTUALLY A VERY -- IT IS A GENUINE PUBLIC POLICY ISSUE. THERE HAS BEEN INTERESTING DEBATES AND HAVE BEGUN TO BE INTERESTING DEBATES, FACE -- FACEBOOK AND GOOGLE TO A LESSER DEGREE. IT IS UNNATURAL THAT SO MUCH HAPPENS ON ONE PARTICULAR PLATFORM WHICH BOTH WANTS TO SAY IT IS A PLATFORM, BUT IT IS NOT JUST A PLATFORM, OBVIOUSLY, BUT WANTS TO BE LEGALLY TREATED AS A PLATFORM WHEN IT IS TO ITS ADVANTAGE. WE ARE JUST A PLAT TOMORROW. ACTUALLY WE ARE FEEDING YOU STUFF THAT YOU SHOWED AN INTEREST IN. AND THEY ARE DECIDING WHAT THEY SEE. IT IS AN UNUSUAL SITUATION. IT IS NOT COMPARABLE TO NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS AND CNN ON COMCAST. YOU CAN WATCH WHAT YOU WANT TO WATCH AND THERE COULD BE PROBLEMS WITH FAKE NEWS AND DITTO READING COLUMNS FROM THE WEEKLY STANDARD OR FROM THE NATION, BUT THERE IS A GOOGLE ALGORITHM ISSUE AND YOU CAN FIND WHAT YOU WANT AND READ WHAT YOU WANT. FACEBOOK IS A LITTLE UNIQUE IN ITS PERVASIVENESS. IF WE CAME DOWN FROM MARS AND LOOKED AT IT WE WOULD SAY THIS IS SORT OF WEIRD IN A LIBERAL DEMOCRACY, THE DISPERSION OF POWER AND AUTHORITY AND DIVERSITY OF SOURCES OF OPINION. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT. THERE ARE A MILLION DIFFERENT INTERESTING ISSUES, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT PUBLIC POLICY. AND WE HAVE PROBLEMS HERE, BUT IN OTHER COUNTRIES PEOPLE HAVE BEEN BASICALLY MURDERED BY MOBS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE LITERALLY MOTIVATED BY A FACEBOOK -- A CRAZY FACEBOOK POSTING. IT IS SOMETHING TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT. IN THE INTEREST OF TIME THIS WILL BE THE SECOND TO LAST QUESTION. WE'LL TRY AND SPEED UP. THE LAST ONE IS A GOOD ONE. [LAUGHTER]. GIVEN THE FACT THAT SO MANY PEOPLE ARE NONVOTERS AND DISILLUSIONED WITH THE SYSTEM DO YOU THINK IN ADDITION TO PROMOTING BIPARTISAN SHIP WE SHOULD INVITE MORE PARTY MAINSTREAM IN THE DISCOURSE? DO YOU WANT ME TO START? GO AHEAD. I -- YOU KNOW, I THINK THE CHALLENGE OF THIS STRUCTURALLY AS WE LIVE IN ANY -- IF WE HAD A PARLIMENTARY SYSTEM, I BASICALLY SAY TO BE FAST ABOUT THIS, I BASICALLY WOULD BE FINE. I THINK THE CHALLENGE WE HAVE IS THAT IN THE SYSTEM WE HAVE NOW IT IS A LITTLE WINNER TAKE ALL. WE HAVE NOW GONE THROUGH TWO ELECTIONS WHERE THE VOTE TOTAL IN STATES, MICHIGAN, WISCONSIN AND PENNSYLVANIA, VOTES FOR JILL STEIN WERE LARGER THAN THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WIN OR LOSS BY. THE NUMBER WHO VOTED FORE RALPH NADER IN FLORIDA AND YOU CAN SAY THEY ARE VOTING OUTSIDE THE SYSTEM AND DIDN'T LIKE HILLARY OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY. IN THE SYSTEM WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, MY DEEP FEAR IS THAT PEOPLE ARE ESSENTIALLY VOTING THE OPPOSITE. AND NOT JUST DIFFERENT, BUT THE OPPOSITE OF THEIR INTEREST WHEN THAT HAPPENS. IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT A SYSTEM IN WHICH WE HAVE VIBRANT THIRD PARTIES THAT WOULD BE BASICALLY FINE TO ME AND PARTIES SHOULD BE TESTED. I THINK THE CHAT -- CHALLENGE IS WE HAVE TWO EXAMPLES OF THE CONS CONDITIONSES OF THAT DECISION -- CONSEQUENCES OF THAT DECISION. I WOULD SAY IT SERVED US WELL FOR ALMOST TWO CENTURIES AND HAS BECOME MORE PROBLEMATIC, AND I AM OPEN TO THE NOTION IN 2020 IF IT IS TRUMP AND BERNIE SANDERS WE SHOULD -- I WOULD TRY TO SUPPORT AN INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE WHO MAY WIN. I AM OPEN TO THE NOTION THAT THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM COULD GET ROCKY HERE AND RICKETY IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS. HAVING SAID THAT AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, I WOULD ADVISE PEOPLE TO FIGHT WITHIN THE PARTIES FOR NOW BECAUSE IT IS STILL WHERE 98 PERCENT OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE COMING FROM. THERE ARE REASONS WHY MORE EXTREME PEOPLE DO BETTER IN PRIMARIES FOR OBVIOUS REASONS AND THEY ARE MOTIVATED. THERE ARE A LOT OF NOMINEES IN I LIVE THAT ARE NOT THE MOST OBVIOUS CANDIDATE. THEY WANT WOMEN REPRESENTATIVES, BUT NOT LEFT WING REPRESENTATIVES. THEY ARE PRETTY MODERATE I WOULD SAY. I WOULD RECOMMEND TO PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN TELL THEM WHAT THEY WANT AND IN THE SHORT-TERM ONE REASON I AM FOCUSED AND THEY FAIL AND I MAY BE GOING BACK TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OR GOING TO START A PARTY LIKE SOME OF MY FRIENDS WANT TO DO. IT IS A CATCHY TERM. YOU DON'T WANT TO WRITE OFF ONE OF THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES. AMERICAN POLITICS HAS BENEFITED A LOT. WHATEVER YOU THINK OF THE PROBLEMS AND ET CETERA FROM HAVING TWO NATIONAL PARTIES THAT WERE NOT EUROPEAN STYLE OR AUTHORITARIAN RIGHT WING PARTIES OR AUTHORITARIAN LEFT WING PARTIES, BUT IT WAS THE ACTUAL SOCIAL SCIENCE TERM. IT IS USED BY POLITICAL SCIENTISTS. YOU DON'T WANT TO WRITE OFF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TO BECOME THAT KIND OF PARTY AND THAT WOULD BE BAD FOR THE COUNTRY. YOU DON'T WANT TO LET ONE BAD ELECTION SHAPE IT FOR THE FUTURE. I GENERALLY AM MORE IN THE MARKET AND IN THE BUSINESS OF ENCOURAGING THE MARKET TO TELL PEOPLE TO FIGHT IN BOTH PARTIES FOR THE TIME BEING. BRIEFLY ON THIS, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE U.S. AND EUROPEAN PARTS WHICH ARE A MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM BOTH THE DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTY ARE BASICALLY COALITION PARTIES. THE STRUCTURE IS NOT RADICALLY DIFFERENT AND IN FACT IF YOU LOOK AT FRANCE AND THEIR ELECTION IT IS BASICALLY LIKE TWO PARTIES IN ONE. THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. IT IS NOT LIKE VIEWS AREN'T REPRESENTED. OF COURSE THE PRIMARIES ARE THE PLACES TO DO THAT. I THINK THERE IS A HELP TO FORMING A BROAD COALITION TO GOVERN A COUNTRY AS DIVERSE AS OURS. GREAT. I AM GOING TO ASK THE LAST QUESTION. THE MUCH ANTICIPATED AND HYPED LAST QUESTION. [LAUGHTER]. NO PRESSURE. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CONVERSATION YOU BOTH ESTABLISHED A SHARED RESPECT FOR VALUES IN AND DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPALS. WHAT ADVICE DO YOU HAVE FROM HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS WITH THOSE WHO DON'T SEEM TO AGREE? STAY AWAY FROM FAKE NEWS. I WILL GIVE UH A COMMENT THAT I WAS JUST AT A DEBATE, A A PANEL IN AUSTIN, ACTUALLY TWO DAYS AGO AND THIS KIND OF A QUESTION CAME UP. SOMEONE ON THE PANEL -- MOSTLY CONSERVATIVES ARE ON THE PANEL. WHAT WE SEE NOW WILL GET WORSE AND WORSE. THIS IS THE FUTURE, TRUMP'S AMERICA, TRUMP'S POLL -- POLITICS. I DON'T BELIEVE IT AND I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE IT, I SUPPOSE. Y WE ARE GOING BACK AND FORTH. I SAID LET'S STEP AWAY FROM CONGRESS, I SAID, ABOUT POLITICAL ELITES AND THE STATES WHICH HAVE BEEN HEALTHIER IN SOMEWAYS AND GOING MORE IN THIS DIRECTION. CERTAINLY TEXAS WILL BE A CASE STUDY WITH MORE PARTISAN SHIP. I DON'T KNOW. I JUST LOOK AT MY KIDS WHO ARE IN THEIR EARLY 30s AND THEIR SPOUSES AND, I DON'T KNOW, IT DOESN'T FEEL TO ME LIKE THEY ARE LIVING IN A BITTERLY DIVIDED COUNTRY AND IT IS NOT THE PLACE AND PEOPLE IN VERY DIFFERENT BACK GROINEDS. BACK BACKGROUNDS. IT IS NOT THAT MY KIDS ARE PERFECTLY REPRESENTED SOCIOECONOMICALLY SO MAYBE I AM CAPTURING JUST A SLICE. IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THE COUNTRY IS AS DIVIDED OR AS BITTER OR AS WORRISOME IN ITS CONDITION AS OUR POLITICAL CLASS AND CERTAINLY AS WASHINGTON. YEN THE -- I THINK THE MORE THE COUNTRY CAN ASSERT A KIND OF COMMON SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND OF WILLINGNESS TO TALK TO ONE ANOTHER, WE CAN OVERCOME SOME OF THE HYPER PARTISAN SHIP OR HYPER POLARIZATION. IT WAS NOT JUST DUE TO TRUMP, BUT IT WAS DUE TO SOMEWHAT, I DON'T KNOW, ARTIFICIAL RULES IN THE GAME IN WASHINGTON THAT LEAD TO THIS DIRECTION. NOW, IF I AM WRONG AND THE COUNTRY ITSELF IS DEEPLY DIVIDED AND THERE ARE SOME SOCIO LOGICAL EVIDENCE THAT PEOPLE AGREE WITH SORTING AND ALL OF THAT KIND OF STUFF, THERE IS SOME TRUTH TO THAT. MAYBE I AM WRONG AND WE ARE IN WORSE TROUBLE THAN WE THINK. I WOULD NOT SAY TRAVELING AROUND AMERICA THAT THIS IS A COUNTRY THAT IS NEARLY AS BITTER OR DIVIDED AS YOU WOULD THINK BY LOOKING AT WASHINGTON. SO, I THINK, YOU KNOW, MY VIEW IS, AND I COULD BE TOTALLY WRONG AS WELL, BUT I THINK ESSENTIALLY PEOPLE -- THERE ARE LARGE SWABS OF PEOPLE WHO FEEL THEY AREN'T HARD. THEY FEEL [INAUDIBLE] AND INSTITUTIONS ARE NOT RESPONSIVE TO THAT. WE WILL SEE A TEST OF THIS. CONNOR LAMB WHO HAS RUN AS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FOR PENNSYLVANIA AT 18 AND ADVERTISED AS A CAP INTERN. I TALKED TO HIM A LOT ABOUT HIS RACE AND I THINK THIS IS A GENUINE QUESTION ABOUT HOW POLITICS ARE GOING IN THE FUTURE. HE BASICALLY KNOCKED ON HE SPENT ALL OF THIS TIME KNOCKING ON PEOPLE'S DOORS. HE SAW A LOT OF REPUBLICANS, A VERY BIG REPUBLICAN DISTRICT. HE GENUINELY BELIEVES HE WENT TO THOSE PEOPLE AND LISTENED TO THEM AND A PRETTY GOOD SWATH OF PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T VOTED FOR A DEMOCRAT IN A LONGTIME AND VOTED FOR HIM. IT IS A CAMPAIGN THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNED IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF AND HE IS GOING TO THE REDDEST PARTS OF THE STATE. HE IS GOING TO EVERY PART OF THE STATE, BUT A BIG PART OF WHAT HE DOES IS GOES TO RED PARTS OF THE STATE AND HE LISTENS TO PEOPLE AND HE HEARS FROM PEOPLE AND HE HAS HIS OWN VIEWS, BUT HE IS CONSCIOUSLY TRYING TO LISTEN TO THEM. I PERSONALLY THINK THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IN TWNT 20 WILL -- 2020 WILL HAVE TO HAVE THAT KIND OF TALENT. THE ABILITY TO GO TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T THINK LIKE YOU DO AND LISTEN TO THEM AND NOT JUST AGREE WITH THEM, BUT CONVINCE THEM THAT YOU MAY DISAGREE SUBSTANTIVELY, BUT WE ARE IN THIS COUNTRY TOGETHER. I THINK THERE ARE A WHOLE RANGE OF CANDIDATES RIGHT NOW, AND WE WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN 37 DAYS, BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE -- THE CANDIDATES ARE RUNNING IN PURPLE AND RED DISTRICTS WHO ARE DEMOCRATS AND COMING FROM OUTSIDE THE POLITICAL SYSTEM ARE TO THE RUNNING AS BITTER PARTISANS. THEY ARE RUNNING AS PEOPLE WHO ARE OUTSIDE THE POLITICAL PROCESS AND THEY ARE WILLING TO HEAR FROM ANYONE AND TRY TO ACTUALLY ADDRESS PROBLEMS. I ACTUALLY THINK WHEN THEY GO TO WASHINGTON THEY WILL REALLY FIGHT TO PUSH THESE BILLS. YOU KNOW, I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY A LOT OF PEOPLE FEEL LIKE POLITICS ISN'T PRODUCING RESULTS TO THEM. WE AS INSTITUTIONS HAVE TO ANSWER TO THAT. WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY DELIVER RESULTS FOR PEOPLE. AND THEY HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT OF CHANGE, AND THEY HAVEN'T SEEN IMPROVEMENT IN THEIR LIFE. THE NEXT PRESIDENT ACTUALLY HAS TO PRODUCE FOR THEM OR I THINK IT COULD GET WORSE. I DO THINK THAT THIS ACT OF LISTENING AND HEARING PEOPLE IS A VITAL ACT OF POLITICS. IT IS ONE THAT I THINK GOOD LEADERS GET. REALLY GOOD LEADERS GET THAT. BILL CLINTON, A LOT OF THAT WAS HE WAS GOING PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THAT HADN'T SEEN A DEMOCRAT IN A LONGTIME AND HE LISTENEDY TO THEM -- LISTENED TO THEM. THAT'S A GREAT NOTE TO END ON. JOIN ME IN THANKING THE PANEL. [UH -- APPLAUSE]. WE HAVE A SPECIAL TREAT NOW, AND I WANT TO INVITE PRESIDENT PRESIDENT UP TO THE PODIUM FOR SOME ADDITIONAL REMARRYINGS -- REMARKS. THANK YOU FOR THE INTRODUCTION. I WANT TO GIVE THANKS TO DEAN AND ANGELA DILLARD FORGIVING ME MEANING -- FOR GIVING ME MEANING IN LIFE. NOW I KNOW TO TEACH WHAT CAN'T BE GOOGLED. I WANT TO SHOUTOUT TO CONGRESSWOMAN DEBBIE D NIE GLE WHO SLIPPED IN THE BACK IN HER HUMBLE FASHION A LITTLE LATE. THANK YOU FOR COMING, DEBBIE. AND THE U OF M STUDENTS AND FACULTY AND STAFF AND ALONG WITH OUR SPECIAL GUESTS WHO JUST SEEM MUCH MORE PEACEFUL IN PERSON THAN ON TELEVISION. IT IS GREAT. REALLY FOR YOUR DEDICATION TO HAVING THESE KIND OF CONVERSATIONS ACROSS THE DIFFERENCE. IT IS HEARTENING THAT STUDENTS ARE HERE FROM ALL THREE CAMPUSES THAT SPEAKS TO THE TERRIFIC EFFORTS FOR EVERYONE AT "WE LISTEN" TO BE BROUGHT IN RECRUITING STUDENTS TO THE GROUP. THIS CONVERSATION IS NOT WHAT I EXPECTED. I EXPECTED IT TO BE PERHAPS A LITTLE MORE INCENDIARY AND PERHAPS TO BE MORE DISAGREEMENT. MAYBE I WAS PROJECTING MY SENSE OF THE PUBLIC SENSIBILITY RIGHT NOW, BUT THESE ARE REALLY PRE-EMINENT SPOKESPERSONS ON DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE SPECTRUM AND LISTEN TO WHAT WE HEARD. THERE WERE AREAS OF AGREEMENT AND AREAS WHERE THERE WAS RESPECTFUL DISAGREEMENT. THERE WERE NOT PEOPLE TALKING OVER ONE ANOTHER. WE DIDN'T HAVE A COMMENTATOR INSERTING THEIR OWN PREFERENCES AND PREJUDICES AND ALLOWED THE EXPERTS TO SPEAK. WAY MORE AGREEMENT THAN I THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE AND WAY BETTER THAN TELEVISION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AS A UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT -- HE SHOULD BE A MODERATOR. [LAUGHTER]. I LEARNED TO TAKE COMPLIMENTS WHERE YOU CAN. ALL-AROUND OUR NATION COLLEGE CAMPUSES ARE STRUGGLING WITH SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE SECOND NATURE AND THAT'S THE FREEDOM AND COMFORT TO DISCUSS CONTENTIOUS AND CHALLENGING TOPICS. PERHAPS IT IS A SIM -- SYMPTOM OF THE TIMES IN AN ERA OF GREAT POLARIZATION AND IN WHICH THE MEDIA OFFERS US THE ABILITY TO TUNE INTO NEWS WITH A DEFINED POLITICAL SLANT. MAYBE IT IS BECAUSE OF A MIXTURE OF POLITENESS AND FEAR NOT WANTING TO OFFEND FELLOW STUDENTS WITH IDEAS THAT GO AGAINST THE PERCEIVED MAINSTREAM ON CAMPUS, OR FEARING THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF DOING SO. I FIRST LEARNED THAT "WEE LISTEN" A STUDENT GROUP DOING SOME FIRE SIDE CHATS I HAVE WITH STUDENTS. ALLIE WHO IS HERE AND ANOTHER STUDENT CAME TO MY OFFICE HOURS LATER THAT SEMESTER AND SHARED THE PROGRESS THEY HAVE MADE WITH THEIR NEW ORGANIZATION. THEY BROUGHT TOGETHER STUDENTS OF DIFFERING POLITICAL PHILOSOPHIES NOT JUST FROM U OF M, BUT NOW FROM AROUND THE STATE AND I HEAR AROUND THE REGION AND HOPEFULLY AROUND THE COUNTRY. THEY SPONSOR DIFFICULT CONVERSATIONS ON GUN CONTROL AND ABORTION AND FREE SECH AND IMMIGRATION -- FREE SPEECH AND IMMIGRATION. THEY ARE TAKING THEIR MESSAGE TO THE NATION'S CAPITAL AND DEMONSTRATING THAT COLLEGE STUDENTS MOST CERTAINLY CAN ENGAGE IN HONEST AND THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION OF SOME OF SOCIETY'S TOUGHEST PROBLEMS AND THEY ARE WILLING TO STEP UP AND PROPOSE SOLUTIONS THROUGH THESE POLICY CREATION SEMINARS. I ALSO THANK DEAN BARNE AND HIS COLLEAGUES FOR TAKING ACTION TO RESPOND TO ONE OF OUR UNIVERSITY'S GREATEST CHALLENGES, HOW TO PROMOTE DISCOURSE ACROSS DIFFERENCE IN AN ERA OF EXTREME POLITICAL POLARIZATION. THE CONVERSATIONS ACROSS DIFFERENCE INITIATIVES IS GROUNDED IN THE HIGHEST IDEALS OF THE MISSION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. IT ENHANCES OUR ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE BY BRINGING SPEAKERS TO CAMPUS AND IMPLEMENTING KAW RICK LAR ELEMENTS THAT TEACH THE VALUE AND MEANING AND IMPORTANCE OF CITIZENSHIP IN OUR SOCIETY. AND ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOOD CITIZENSHIP IS THAT WE CONSIDER ISSUES OF THE DAY FROM DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES. I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT HEARING IDEAS WE DISAGREE WITH CHALLENGES OUR OWN WAYS OF THINKING. IT HELPS US SHARPEN OUR OWN BELIEFS AND IT HELPS US GROW. ENGAGING ACROSS THE DIFFERENCE TEACHES US TO WORK THROUGH PROBLEMS IN GROUPS AND HOW TO EXPRESS OURSELVES IN WAYS THAT CAN BRING ABOUT POSITIVE CHANGE, BUT FIRST WE MUST LISTEN. THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF OPPORTUNITY TO ADJUST MAJOR CHALLENGES IN OUR MODERN WORLD. TO DEMONSTRATE WE CAN DISAGREE WITHOUT DEMONIZING AND DEBATE WITHOUT DEMIGOGARY. USING OUR COLLECTIVE HUMAN TALENTS AND DRAWING FROM THE EXPERIENCE AND INTELLECTUAL POWER OF PEOPLE OF ALL BACK GROINDZ AND IDEOLOGIES. I AM HOPEFUL YOUR WORK CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE BY ENCOURAGING GREATER TURNOUT IN THIS NOVEMBER'S ELECTION. MICHIGAN STUDENTS WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACT ON THE KNOWLEDGE AND PERSPECTIVES YOU AND OUR SPEAKERS HAVE SHARED TODAY AND OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS. IN THE LAST MID-TERM ELECTION ONLY 19 PERCENT OF ELIGIBLE COLLEGE STUDENTS VOTED. THAT NUMBER WAS EVEN LOWER ON OUR OWN CAMPUS. I KNOW THAT THE FORD SCHOOL, OUR COLLEGE OF LITERATURE SCIENCE AND ARTS AND MANY OF THE STUDENTS HERE TODAY HAVE WORKED WITH OUR GUINSBERG CENTER TO HELP WIN THE BIG 10 VOTER CHALLENGE. THE CHALLENGE IS A NONPARTISAN INITIATIVE TO ENCOURAGE STUDENTS TO EXERCISE THE RIGHT TO VOTE, AND TO CHANGE THE TREND THAT HAS LEAD TO VOTER TURNOUT FOR PEOPLE UNDERAGE 30 BEING HISTORICALLY LOW COMPARED WITH OLDER SEGMENTS OF THE POPULATION. ALREADY HUNDREDS OF MICHIGAN STUDENTS HAVE GOTTEN REGISTERED THIS CYCLE. OCTOBER 9th IS THE LAST DAY TO REGISTER FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS HERE IN MICHIGAN. I WAS REMINDED AGAIN OF THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR WORK ON MY WAY INTO THE AUDITORIUM. RIGHT OUTSIDE HERE IS A PORTRAIT OF THE NAME SAKE OF OUR SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY, GERALD FORD. DURING HIS FINAL STATE OF THE UNION IN 1977, FORD SPOKE OF A COUNTRY THAT TWO AND A HALF YEARS EARLIER WAS DEEPLY DIVIDED AND TORMENTED. THAT WAS THE STATE OF OUR UNION WHEN I WAS A COLLEGE STUDENT. HE EXPRESSED HOPE AND CONFIDENCE IN THE FUTURE OF THE THEN 200-YEAR-OLD NATION AND REMINDED US THAT THE FUTURE OF OUR UNION IN FACT RELIED ON US EMBRACING UNITY. THE STATE OF THE UNION IS A MEASUREMENT OF THE MANY ELEMENTS OF WHICH IT IS COMPOSED, HE SAID. IT IS A POLITICAL UNION OF DIVERSE STATES AND ECONOMIC UNION OF VARYING INTERESTS AND INTELLECTUAL OF COMMON CONVICTIONS AND A MORAL UNION OF UH MEANABLE IDEALS. I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR ACCEPTING THE CHALLENGE ENGAGED ACROSS DIFFERENCE. BY JOINING TOGETHER TO LISTEN AND TO LEARN YOU ALSO INSPIRE AND YOU DEMONSTRATE THAT NO DIVIDE IS INSUR MOUNTABLE WHEN WE SHARE THE IMPORTANT ASPIRATION OF A MORE PERFECT UNION. THANK YOU ALL VERY, VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE]. I INVITE YOU ALL TO JOIN US FOR A RECEPTION OUTSIDE. THANK YOU.