Gene Sperling: Economic Dignity

GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.

I'M THRILLED TO BE ABLE TO BE

HERE THIS AFTERNOON.

I'M MICHAEL BARR.

I'M THE DEAN AT THE GERALD R.

FORD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY.

IT IS A PLEASURE TO WELCOME YOU

ALL HERE TO THE FORD SCHOOL.

TO WELCOME THOSE WHO ARE

WATCHING ONLINE AS WELL.

I AM GOING TO JUST SAY A LITTLE

BIT ON FORMAT BEFORE I GET TO

THE INTRODUCTIONS OF OUR

WONDERFUL GUEST SPEAKER.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ABOUT, I

DON'T KNOW, FORTY MINUTES OR SO

OF TIME FOR ME TO ASK GENE SOME

QUESTIONS.

AN INFORMAL AIR CHAIR

CONVERSATION.

THEN WE'RE GOING TO OPEN IT UP

TO ALL OF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE

FOR QUESTIONS.

IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, PLEASE

WRITE IT DOWN ON YOUR INDEX CARD

THAT'S GOING AROUND.

STAFF WILL COME PICK IT UP.

THE QUESTIONS WILL MAKE THEIR

WAY TO OUR WONDERFUL STUDENTS

HERE WHO WILL BE SELECTING FROM

AMONG THE QUESTIONS MAKING SURE

WE HAVE A GOOD DISTRIBUTION OF

ALL KINDS OF TOPICS.

THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING ONLINE,

YOU CAN TWEET YOUR QUESTIONS

TO HASHTAG #POLICYTALKS AND

WE'LL INTEGRATE THOSE INTO THE

QUESTIONS AS WELL.

SO I AM THRILLED TO BE ABLE TO

BE SITTING HERE WITH GENE

SPERLING.

GENE IS A LEADING VOICE IN

PROGRESSIVE POLITICS IN THE

UNITED STATES TODAY.

HE HAS SERVED AS THE TOP

ECONOMIC ADVISOR, THE DIRECTOR

OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMIC

COUNCIL, AND TOP ECONOMIC

ADVISOR TO BOTH PRESIDENT

CLINTON AND PRESIDENT OBAMA.

GENE AND I HAVE KNOWN EACH OTHER

A LONG TIME.

LONGER PROBABLY THAN ANY OF

US -- EITHER OF US WANT TO

ADMIT.

THAT IS A LONG TIME.

WE STARTED WORKING TOGETHER IN

THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN OF

MICHAEL DUKAKIS.

MICHAEL DUKAKIS WAS AND IS A

LOVELY HUMAN BEING.

AND NOT MUCH OF A PRESIDENTIAL

CAMPAIGNER.

[ LAUGHTER ]

GENE SPERLING: DON'T GO

NEGATIVE ON GOVERNOR DUKAKIS.

A LOVELY HUMAN BEING.

IT WAS A GREAT EXPERIENCE.

I GOT TO SEE FOR THE FIRST TIME

THEN 31 YEARS AGO GENE IN ACTION.

EVEN AS AN EXTREMELY YOUNG MAN,

GENE WAS ALREADY A REAL STAR.

AND HE'S BEEN A HERO TO ME IN

DEMOCRATIC POLITICS AND POLICY

MAKING FOR A LONG TIME.

GENE HAS THIS WONDERFUL ABILITY

TO PULL TOGETHER DEEP

SUBSTANTIVE KNOWLEDGE IN POLICY

WITH A GREAT POLITICAL SENSE OF

HOW TO GET THINGS DONE.

AND AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE

WITH THE PUBLIC AND THE MEDIA

THAT ENABLES POLICY TO BECOME

ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC.

I THINK IT'S REALLY AN

EXTRAORDINARY GIFT TO HAVE THOSE

THREE SETS OF SKILLS IN ONE

HUMAN BEING.

SO, I'M GRATEFUL THAT THEY

LANDED IN GENE AND NOT IN THE

OPPOSITE OF GENE.

SO, I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE A MORE

FORMAL INTRODUCTION.

YOU HAVE GENE'S BIO IN FRONT OF

YOU.

I THOUGHT I WOULD JUST START IN

WITH A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT

GENE'S HISTORY AND BACKGROUND.

AND MAYBE WE'LL START WITH THE

FACT YOU ARE AN ANN ARBOR BOY

BORN AND RAISED

GENE SPERLING: MY FATHER

AND MOTHER MET ON THE TRAIN TO

THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN.

MY MOTHER WAS FROM MIAMI FLORIDA

AND SHE -- HER MOM CONVINCED

HER, MY GRANDMOTHER CONVINCED

HER THAT SHE COULD NOT BUY

CLOTHES FOR MICHIGAN IN MIAMI,

FLORIDA IN 1949.

AND SO THEY WENT TO NEW YORK AND

THEY SHOPPED AND THEY GOT ON THE

TRAIN.

AND SHE MET MY DAD ON THE TRAIN

TO MICHIGAN.

THEY WENT TOGETHER ALL FOUR

YEARS, MARRIED ON GRADUATION DAY

WOW

GENE SPERLING: AND MY DAD

WENT TO MICHIGAN LAW SCHOOL.

AND MY MOM -- THEN HE WENT TO

THE HONORS DIVISION OF THE

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT FOR TWO

YEARS.

THEY CAME BACK AND HE -- THEN

THEY HAD A VERY GLORIOUS LIFE

HERE.

HE WAS -- MY DAD JUST PASSED

AWAY SO WE'RE BRAGGING ABOUT

HIM.

HERE HE WON THE FIRST CASE RIGHT

BEFORE TITLE 9 ALLOWED -- A

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT ALLOWING

GIRLS TO PLAY ON BOYS SPORTS

TEAMS UNDER THE EQUAL PROTECTION

CLAUSE FOR THE FIRST TIME.

AND HE WAS THE ORIGINATOR OF

DOMINO SPEEDS.

I MEAN HE SIGNED THE FIRST LEGAL

DOCUMENTS FOR THEM.

SO THEY

WERE HERE AND I WAS BORN IN

MICHIGAN HOSPITAL.

WE LIVED HERE.

WE STILL CONSIDER THIS HOME.

WE HAD TO DO SOMETHING IN THE

WHITE HOUSE ONCE WHERE WE ALL

HAD TO DO VIDEOS OF OUR FIRST

JOBS.

OF COURSE, MINE WAS I WAS

MICHIGAN'S BALL BOY FOR THEIR

BASKETBALL TEAM.

HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THOSE

YEARS.

BUT FOR THOSE WHO ARE MORE FROM

THE COMMUNITY, THE CJ KUBEK STEVE GRODY JOE
JOHNSON

CAN'T BE RUSSELL YEARS.

I USED TO DO THE FLOOR AT

HALF-TIME.

I THINK EVERY TIME I WOULD GIVE

A TALK TO A NEW NATIONAL

ECONOMIC TEAM OR OLD TEAM I

WOULD ALWAYS TELL THEM.

I THINK WHEN YOU ARE IN

GOVERNMENT YOU GO FOR THE

BIGGEST THING POSSIBLE.

YOU OFTEN DO GOOD BUT IT'S NOT

WHAT YOU WANT.

IF SOMEBODY SAID WE WERE TRYING

TO GET 400,000 KIDS MORE HEAD

START FUNDING BUT WE ONLY GOT

CHRYSLER ARENA, THINK OF 15,000

LITTLE KIDS IN THERE THAT ARE

GOING TO HAVE QUALITY PRESCHOOL

BECAUSE OF YOU.

AND THINK OF IT EMPTYING OUT AND

EMPTYING IT THREE MORE TIMES.

THAT WAS ALWAYS MY WAY OF TRYING

TO MAKE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW,

REMEMBER HOW PRECIOUS IT WAS,

YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE

ABLE TO DO EVEN WITH THE PAIN OF

WHAT YOU WEREN'T ABLE TO DO.

I THINK THAT'S A GREAT

MESSAGE. GENE,

YOU MENTIONED OBVIOUSLY MOPPING

THE FLOORS, CLEANING THE FLOORS

OF CHRYSLER.

I THINK IT'S SORT OF INDICATIVE

OF YOUR WORK ETHIC, WHICH IS

EXTRAORDINARY.

AND I KNOW INTEREST YOU -- FROM

YOU THAT YOUR DAD WAS, UNTIL

REALLY JUST A FEW DAYS BEFORE HE

PASSED AWAY, WAS DOING PRO BONO

LEGAL WORK, WHICH IS REALLY

PHENOMENAL

GENE SPERLING: WHAT WAS

AMAZING WAS MY FATHER DID A LOT

OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF LAW.

BUT HE REPRESENTED PEOPLE,

WORKERS COMP AND PEOPLE HURT ON

SOCIAL SECURITY AND DISABILITY.

MY FATHER WAS SUCH A FIERCE

DEFENDER AGAINST PEOPLE WHO

TRIED TO SAY THAT PEOPLE ON

SOCIAL SECURITY AND DISABILITY

BENEFITS WERE CHEATS AND FRAUDS.

HE WOULD SAY IN THE HUNDREDS HE

HAD COME IN HE NEVER SAW ONE WHO

HADN'T WORKED AS HARD AS THEY

COULD AND TRIED TO WORK THROUGH

THEIR DISABILITY.

WHEN HE GOT TO BE SEVENTY OR SO

HE JUST DID THAT.

ALL HE WAS TRYING TO DO WAS MAKE

ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY HIS

SECRETARIES AND OTHER PEOPLE.

BUT HE WORKED UNTIL 86.

AND TO JUST REALLY BRING IT HOME

IN ANN ARBOR, THE LAST THING HE

DID, HE WAS ON HIS DEATH BED AND

HIS SECRETARY CALLED FROM THE

OFFICE AND SAYS, YOU JUST WON

THIS CASE.

AND THE CASE HE WON WAS A CASE

THAT WAS THE CARETAKER -- CASE

FOR CARETAKER SON FOR JOHN

DINGELL.

SO THAT WAS KIND OF A

SPECIAL ANN ARBOR CONNECTION

MOMENT.

BUT, YES, SO THE WORK ETHIC GOES

STRONG.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE TWO OF US

DON'T COMPARE TO MY MOTHER.

[ LAUGHTER ]

YOUR MOTHER IS A FORCE TO BE

RECKONED WITH.

AND YOUR BROTHER'S NOT MUCH OF A

SLACK EITHER.

GENE SPERLING: NO MY

YOUNGER BROTHER IS THE REAL HERO

OF THE FAMILY.

HE FOUNDED THE MOSAIC YOUTH

THEATER GROUP OF DETROIT 27

YEARS AGO.

HE WAS ONE OF THE YOUNGEST

PEOPLE EVER TO WIN MICHIGANEDER

OF THE YEAR.

AND BESIDES ALL OF THE HONORS

THEY'VE WON TENS OF THOUSANDS OF

YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE VERY DIFFERENT

LIVES BECAUSE OF WHAT HE DEVOTED

HIMSELF TO.

I DEFINITELY GOT MY COME UPPINGS

WHEN I WAS WALKING DOWN FROM

AIR FORCE ONE WITH PRESIDENT

CLINTON AND WE WERE COMING DOWN

AND THE WHOLE DETROIT MAYOR,

EVERYBODY WAS THERE, AND WE GOT

RIGHT UP THERE AND PRESIDENT

CLINTON SAYS, THIS IS MY

ECONOMIC ADVISOR GENE SPERLING.

AND THE PERSON SAYS ARE YOU

RICK'S BROTHER?

[ LAUGHTER ]

THAT WAS A WARNING SHOT.

.

SO PEOPLE OFTEN THINK THERE'S

A CLEAR PATH, GO TO GRAD SCHOOL

THEN THERE'S JUST A STRAIGHT

LINE THAT LEADS TO BECOMING

DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL

ECONOMIC COUNCIL FOR THE

PRESIDENT.

OR THEY THINK, OH THERE'S NO

PATH THAT WOULD EVER LEAD THERE.

AND CAN YOU SAY A LITTLE BIT HOW

YOU MEANDERED YOUR WAY THROUGH

YOUR CAREER TO GET TO THE

POSITIONS YOU HAVE NOW HAD?

GENE SPERLING: I'D SAY A

COUPLE THINGS.

WHICH IS, ONE WHAT WAS REALLY

INTERESTING TO ME WAS AFTER I

WENT TO YALE LAW SCHOOL THEN I

WENT TO WHARTON BUSINESS SCHOOL

AND I WAS A COMPLETE MISFIT

BECAUSE I WAS THE GUY WHO WAS

GOING TO GO INTO POLICY.

NOBODY COULD UNDERSTAND ME.

THEN SO THEY CAME AND GAVE LIKE

THIS PERSONALITY TEST.

AND I CAME OUT AS TIED FOR THE

TOP WITH AN ENTREPRENEURIAL

PERSONALITY.

AND I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT LATER,

AND I REALIZED WHILE I HADN'T

GONE INTO BUSINESS THAT I, YOU

KNOW, I HAD GONE TO YALE LAW

SCHOOL, WHARTON BUSINESS SCHOOL,

I HAD BEEN PUBLISHED IN

ATLANTIC.

I HAD DONE WELL.

YOU KNOW, THAT FIRST JOB WAS --

I CAME ON AS A VOLUNTEER AT 28

YEARS OLD

TO THE DUKAKIS CAMPAIGN.

THAT'S HOW I STARTED THERE TOO.

AS A VOLUNTEER

GENE SPERLING: YOU HAD

ALREADY BEEN A RHODES SCHOLAR.

BUT THE POINT WAS I SLEPT ON A

FLOOR OF A BEACON HILL APARTMENT

WITH NO LIGHTS.

I WOULD GO WITH A FLASHLIGHT AT

THE END.

BUT THE TRUTH WAS I WAS EXCITED

BY IT.

AND I WAS WILLING TO KIND OF,

YOU KNOW, GO WHERE I HAD TO, DO

WHAT I HAD TO DO, AND I WASN'T

WORRIED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE JOB

I GET.

I HEAR PEOPLE ALL THE TIME AND

THEY'RE LIKE I NEED A PAID

INTERNSHIP.

I THINK A LOT OF US HAD THE VIEW

OF, YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS THERE I

USED TO DO TEN HOURS OF LAW WORK

AT NIGHT A WEEK FOR SOMEBODY.

THAT'S HOW I SUPPORTED MYSELF

THE FIRST FEW MONTHS.

BUT I THINK I DID, YOU KNOW, I

DON'T THINK THERE WAS A CLEAR

PATH.

WHEN I WALKED -- BUT A COUPLE OF

LESSONS.

I THINK THE DUKAKIS CAMPAIGN WAS

AN INCREDIBLE LIFE LESSON.

AND I TELL PEOPLE ABOUT IT THAT

WAY.

WHEN YOU ARE WALKING OUT OF

THERE, I HAD SPENT A FULL YEAR

THERE.

SO A FULL YEAR.

AND I GOT NOTHING.

NOTHING.

[ LAUGHTER ]

YOU KNOW THERE WAS A JOKE I USED

TO TELL DURING THE CAMPAIGN THAT

WAS POPULAR AS I WOULD SAY,

WELL, ONE OF TWO THINGS IS GOING

TO HAPPEN.

WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, DUKAKIS IS

GOING TO WIN.

THEN EVERYBODY BACK HOME IN

ANN ARBOR IS GOING TO SAY THAT

GENE SPERLING, HE REALLY, YOU

KNOW, WENT TO THIS LAW SCHOOL,

DID THIS AND NOW HE'S 29 AND

WORKING IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

WOW, WHAT A SUCCESS.

OR DUKAKIS WOULD LOSE, I WOULD

COME BACK HOME, AS I DID, AND

THEY WOULD SAY WOW LOOK AT THAT

SPERLING.

NEVER COULD FIGURE OUT WHAT HE

WANTED TO BE.

A PROFESSIONAL STUDENT.

HE'S 29 AND I HEAR HE'S LIVING

AT HOME.

[ LAUGHTER ]

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE -- IF

YOU CAN MEET WITH TRIUMPH AND

DISASTER AND TREAT THOSE

IMPOSTORS THE SAME.

BUT I THINK THE THING -- AND

THIS IS THE IMPORTANT LESSON I

WOULD SAY -- THERE ARE TWO

LESSONS.

OR MAYBE THREE.

ONE, I LEARNED A LOT THERE.

YOU KNOW, I THINK SO MANY PEOPLE

FOCUS ON GETTING TO THE WORLD

SERIES AND DON'T REALIZE THAT

IT'S BAD TO GET TO THE WORLD

SERIES AND GO 0 FOR 38.

I WON'T SAY 0 FOR 18 BECAUSE

THAT WILL SOUND LIKE THREE

POINTERS IN THE TEXAS TECH GAME.

[ LAUGHTER ]

PAINFUL.

I WAS THERE.

I WAS AT THE GAME.

BUT I THINK PEOPLE ARE, WHAT'S

IT GOING TO GET YOU.

BY BEING A WHOLE YEAR THERE.

JUST THE GUY IF THE BACK OF THE

ROOM IN THE STRATEGY MEETINGS, I

LEARNED, YOU KNOW, THREE

LIFETIMES.

TO BE IN A PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

FOR 10, 11 MONTHS, JUST BEING

THERE.

WHAT YOU LEARN ALMOST BY OSMOSIS

OF THE TIMING, OF THE NATIONAL

NEWS CYCLE.

MORE CONFUSING SOCIAL MEDIA

CYCLE.

SO, ONE, YOU GET THOSE SKILLS.

AND WHEN I WALKED OUT THAT DOOR

THINKING I HAD NOTHING, THAT IT

HAD BEEN A COMPLETE, YOU KNOW,

GAMBLE AND I HAD LOST

EVERYTHING, I REMEMBER I WAS

GOING AND I WAS ACTUALLY STARTED

WORKING WITH LARRY TRIBE.

HE WAS ON SABBATICAL AND WE WERE

HELPING HIM ON SOME OF HIS

PROJECTS.

AND INSTEAD, YOU KNOW, I START

REALIZING THAT EVERY TIME

SOMEBODY COMES TO INTERVIEW HIM,

I'M TAKING OVER.

NO, LARRY, THAT TAKES 18 -- THIS

IS A NATIONAL NEWS THING YOU GOT

TO SAY IT IN 14 SECONDS.

I'M

SUDDENLY A DIFFERENT PERSON.

BECAUSE I GAINED ALL THAT

KNOWLEDGE.

WHEN I GOT HIRED BY MARIO CUOMO

I CAME IN WITH THAT KNOWLEDGE.

HE DIDN'T RUN FOR PRESIDENT

EITHER.

IT'S NOT JUST LIKE YOU ARE JUST

HITTING THERE BUT YOU ARE GAPING

THE KNOWLEDGE SO WHEN THIS

MOMENT COMES YOU ARE READY.

I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK A

LOT MORE WILL THIS GET ME

SOMEWHERE AS OPPOSED TO WILL BE

I READY TO SOAR WHEN I GET

THERE?

THE SECOND THING I WOULD SAY

ABOUT THAT WAS THAT I BUILT A

REPUTATION THERE.

AND YOU CAN'T IMAGINE HOW

VALUABLE THAT IS.

SO, WHEN I WALKED OUT THE DOOR,

I THINK I HAVE NOTHING.

EXCEPT THE WAY I GOT THE JOB

WITH MARIO CUOMO WAS HIS OFFICE

CALLED PEOPLE AND SAID, WHO IS A

GOOD YOUNG PERSON FROM THE

DUKAKIS CAMPAIGN?

THE THIRD THING I REALLY LIKE TO

SAY TO PEOPLE WAS THERE WAS A

LOT OF SUCKING UP TO THE POWERS

THAT BE AMONG THE JUNIOR STAFF.

WE ALL HAD CERTAIN RESENTMENT

FOR SOMEBODY WHO DIDN'T SEEM AS

GOOD TO THEIR PEERS BUT THEY

WERE WORRIED ABOUT SOMEBODY

ELSE.

WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL OF US IS

MOST OF US WERE TIGHT KNIT AND

WE WORKED TOGETHER AND SHARED

CREDIT.

THE PEOPLE WHO WERE OUR PEERS

WERE THE ONES WHO MADE ALL THE

DIFFERENCE.

SO, THE PERSON WHO HIRES ME TO

BE BILL CLINTON'S NATIONAL

ECONOMIC ADVISOR IS GEORGE

STEPHANOPOULOS.

GEORGE IS FAMOUS, GOOD LOOKING

ALL THOSE THINGS NOW.

BUT WHEN WE MET--

HE WAS GOOD LOOKING THEN.

HE WASN'T AS GOOD LOOKING.

[ LAUGHTER ]

WHEN WE MET IN '88 GEORGE WAS A

JUNIOR COMMUNICATION STAFFER

LIKE WE DO.

SO I DO THINK THAT THAT NOTION

OF THAT WHEN YOU GO THROUGH LIFE

YOU, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU LOOKING

UP OR LOOKING AT YOUR PEERS, OR

ARE YOU LOOKING AT THE PEOPLE

BELOW?

ONE IT IS A GOOD WAY TO LIVE

YOUR LIFE.

A MORAL WAY TO LIVE YOUR LIFE.

THERE WILL BE MORE PEOPLE AT

YOUR FUNERAL.

BEYOND THAT I THINK IT'S A SMART

WAY TO LIVE YOUR LIFE.

AND IT'S NOT LINEAR YOU CAN'T

PROJECT.

YOU WANT TO THINK ABOUT WHO WAS

IN OUR JUNIOR CLASS THERE.

YOU AND ME.

SUSAN RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY

ADVISOR.

SYLVIA, HHS SECRETARY.

A LOT OF WHAT HAPPENED OVER A

GROUP OF PEOPLE SUPPORTIVE,

WORKING TOGETHER.

WHEN I BECAME HEAD OF BILL

CLINTON'S PRESIDENTIAL ECONOMIC

CAMPAIGN I HIRED SYLVIA THEN

MATTHEWS TO BE MY DEPUTY.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD TELL A LOT

OF TIMES WHEN THE INTERNS WOULD

COME IN.

BECAUSE THEY WOULD ALWAYS BE

LOOKING FOR THAT MOMENT THEY

WERE GOING TO CATCH SOMEBODY'S

EYE.

INSTEAD OF REALLY LOOKING AT

THIS PEER GROUP THEY HAVE AND

BEING SEEN AS A GOOD GUY AND

SOMEBODY WHO PEOPLE WANT TO WORK

WITH AND SOMEBODY WHO PEOPLE ARE

GOING TO SUPPORT GOING FORWARD.

THAT'S GREAT.

I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY

CONSISTENT IN MY EXPERIENCE TOO.

JUST I WANT TO DO ONE MORE

MEANDER IN YOUR CAREER PATH.

SO, YOU WERE VERY DISTINGUISHED

WORKING FOR BILL CLINTON AND

ALL.

BUT THEN YOU WENT AND WORKED FOR

THE WEST WING.

SO, TELL US WHAT IT WAS LIKE

FIRST TO BE WORKING IN THE WEST

WING, AND THEN TO BE HELPING

WORK ON WHAT THE WEST WING LOOKS

LIKE IN HOLLYWOOD

GENE SPERLING: FIRST OF

ALL THIS CROWD HAS BEEN GOOD

BECAUSE NOBODY IS LIKE -- YOU

KNOW THERE'S BEEN NO FLUTTER.

A LOT OF TIMES I GET INTRODUCED

AND THEY GO THROUGH MY RESUME

AND THE WHOLE CROWD IS SITTING

THERE STONE SILENT.

THEN THEY GO HE WAS A CONSULTANT

FOR THE "WEST WING" FOR FOUR

YEARS AND THE PLACE GOES WOE.

I'M LIKE REALLY?

IT'S MORE IMPRESSIVE THAT I

CONSULTED ON THE FAKE WEST WING

FOR FOUR YEARS THAN I WAS IN THE

REAL WEST WING FOR 11-AND-A-HALF

YEARS?

[ LAUGHTER ]

BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LEFT THE

CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, YOU

KNOW, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW LIFE IS

GOING TO GO.

YOU DON'T KNOW THE TURNS IT'S

GOING TAKE.

AND, YOU KNOW, I GOT THAT JOB AT

A VERY YOUNG AGE, AND THAT WAS A

GREAT THING.

BUT THERE'S ALWAYS SOMETHING

SCARY ABOUT THAT.

YOU START THINKING, I'M A PRO

ATHLETE.

LIKE IT'S ALL DOWNHILL AFTER 39

YEARS OLD.

OR I GUESS TIGER WOODS' CASE 43

YEARS OLD.

YOU SEE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU

ARE GOING DO.

SO I VEERED OFF AND STARTED A

CENTER THAT WORKED ON EDUCATION

FOR IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES FOR

CHILDREN.

BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT

DIDN'T EXIST WHEN I WAS THERE

AND SOMETHING I THOUGHT WAS

NEEDED.

A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY WHY DID YOU

DO THAT IT WAS OFF ECONOMICS.

BUT THE WAY I WAS THINKING IS

WHAT KIND OF SERVICE AM I GOING

TO DO MY WHOLE LIFE.

I DON'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, I'VE

ALWAYS THOUGHT HAVING THE KIND

OF JOBS WE'VE HAD WAS THE KIND

OF HIGHEST SERVICE, HIGHEST

IMPACT.

BUT IT'S NOT THE ONLY SERVICE

AND IMPACT.

SO I FELT LIKE THIS WAS AN AREA

WHERE IF I DIDN'T GET THAT CALL

TO COME BACK IN THAT I COULD

HAVE A UNIQUE IMPACT.

I'LL COME BACK TO WEST WING.

BUT I DID WANT TO SAY THE

FOLLOWING.

I DON'T THINK -- I THINK YOU

HAVE TO HAVE A LOT OF GOOD LUCK

TO GET THE JOBS I'VE HAD.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU CAN

PLAN YOUR LIFE AROUND THAT.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD TWO

GREAT RUNS.

BUT I WAS REALLY CLOSE TO TWO

OTHER GREAT RUNS.

I WAS PRETTY CLOSE TO JOHN KERRY

AND HILLARY CLINTON'S CAMPAIGN

TOO.

SO, WHETHER YOU GET THIS BIG JOB

OR NOT IS OFTEN ABOUT ISSUES

THAT GO BEYOND YOU, YOU KNOW,

LIKE ANYTHING ELSE IT IS A BIT

LUCK.

I DO THINK WHAT YOU CAN DO IS

THAT YOU CAN DECIDE THAT YOU ARE

GOING TO BE A MAJOR, AN

IMPORTANT PLAYER IN AN AREA YOU

CARE ABOUT.

AND THAT YOU CAN, AS I SAID, GET

AROUND THAT GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO

ARE GOING TO WORK ON THAT FOR

YEARS.

AND YOU CAN HAVE A GREAT IMPACT.

AND, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T START

OFF WITH I'M GOING TO BE

SECRETARY OF CONGRESS OR

NOTHING.

BUT YOU CAN SAY TODAY, I WANT TO

BE A LEADER IN THE GREEN DEAL OF

THE FUTURE.

NOW MAYBE YOU ARE GOING TO BE

SECRETARY OF ENERGY, SOMEBODY'S

ADVISOR, BUT YOU CAN BUILD THAT

TYPE OF REPUTATION SO THAT YOU

ARE ONE OF THE PEOPLE, ONE OF

THE 20 OR 30 PEOPLE MAYBE IN

D.C. OR AROUND THAT IS LOOKED AT

AS SOMEBODY WHO IS A GO-TO

PERSON, A THOUGHT LEADER.

SO, YOU KNOW, I DO THINK THAT'S

WHAT YOU, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW,

EVERYBODY WOULD LIKE TO GET

THE -- YOU KNOW THEY HAVE A

DREAM JOB.

BUT I DO THINK YOU HAVE TO FIND

YOUR SATISFACTION IN YOU HAVE AN

ISSUE, CAUSE YOU CARE ABOUT.

SOME SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUE YOU

CARE ABOUT AND THAT YOU CAN BE

AN IMPORTANT PLAYER THERE.

WHETHER IT ENDS UP BEING A

NONPROFIT JOB, A THINK TRAFFIC,

STATE, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,

WHETHER YOU GET THE LEVEL OF

YOUR JOB, YOU AND I BOTH KNOW.

IT'S GREAT TO BE NATIONAL

ECONOMIC ADVISOR.

BUT I DID A LOT OF GOOD THINGS

WHEN I WAS DEPUTY NATIONAL

ECONOMIC ADVISOR AND YOUR NAME

IS NOT IN THE PAPER AS MUCH.

I WENT TO HELP OUT AT TREASURY

DURING THE FINANCIAL CRISIS.

SO, YOU KNOW, THOSE THINGS

WERE -- YOU KNOW I DON'T LOOK

LIKE AT THOSE AS THOSE WERE THE

YEARS I DIDN'T HAVE A PRINCIPAL

LEVEL JOB.

THOSE WERE REALLY IMPORTANT

THINGS.

I WAS REALLY AFFECTED WHEN I

WENT TO RICHARD HOLBROOK'S

FUNERAL.

HERE WAS A GUY WHO ALWAYS

DREAMED OF BEING SECRETARY OF

STATE, NEVER MADE IT.

NEVER GOT HIS EXACT DREAM JOB.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOKED AT HIS LIFE

OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, ALL THE

THINGS HE DID, ALL THE PLACES HE

HAD BEEN.

SO I THINK YOU CAN'T BASE ON

THAT ONE THING OR BASE YOUR

HAPPINESS ON WHETHER YOU GET

THAT ONE THING.

BUT YOU CAN DECIDE YOU'RE GOING

TO MAKE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE

IN AN AREA.

AND I THINK WITHOUT

EXTRAORDINARY LUCK YOU CAN BE

SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS.

AND WHETHER YOU GET THE SUPER

GREAT JOB OR THE GREAT JOB OR

THE REALLY GOOD JOB, YOU KNOW,

YOU CAN FEEL THAT SATISFACTION.

NOW HAVING SAID ALL THOSE

MEANINGFUL THINGS, THE" WEST

WING" THAT WAS PRETTY FUN.

[ LAUGHTER ]

I WAS -- I DECIDED THAT WHEN

CLINTON WAS OVER -- SO ACTUALLY

WHAT HAPPENS IS "THE WEST WING"

STARTS IN OUR LAST YEAR.

WE DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO WATCH

IT

GENE SPERLING: YOU DIDN'T.

[ LAUGHTER ]

NO, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A

NARCISSISTIC MOMENT.

IT WAS UNDERSTOOD.

IT WAS KIND OF BASED OFF THE

KIND OF CLINTON FOLKS AND PEOPLE

USED TO SAY GENE YOU ARE THIS

GUY OR THAT GUY.

AND I'D SAY THEY'RE ALL BASED ON

GEORGE.

[ LAUGHTER ]

SO DON'T KID YOURSELF.

BUT SO BILL CLINTON INVITES THEM

TO COME TO THE STATE OF THE

UNION AFTER PARTY.

AFTER THE PARTY.

SO WE MEET ALL

OF THEM.

AND IT'S REALLY GREAT BECAUSE

WE'RE EXCITED TO BE MEETING

THESE HOLLYWOOD ACTORS.

THEY'RE EXCITED TO BE MEETING

THE PEOPLE THEY'RE PLAYING.

AFTER THAT BRAD WHITFORD WHO

PLAYED JOSH WOULD KEEP SENDING

ME POLICY IDEAS.

[ LAUGHTER ]

AND, OF COURSE, SO I LATER

THOUGHT TO MYSELF, WELL YOU KNOW

WHAT, IF HE IS SENDING ME POLICY

IDEAS, WHY CAN'T I SEND HIM AN

EPISODE IDEA?

I GOT OUT JANUARY 20, 2001 AND I

WORKED FOR FOUR TO SIX WEEKS AND

I WROTE OUT A WHOLE STORY IDEA

BASED OFF SOMETHING THAT HAD

HAPPENED WHEN WE WERE THERE.

I SENT IT IN AND HE SENT IT TO

TOM AND HE THEY SAID COME IN FOR

AN INTERVIEW.

SO I COME IN, KIND OF DRESSED

LIKE THIS.

I GET TO THE DOOR OF -- I GET

RIGHT TO THE WARNER BROTHERS LOT

AND LIKE OF COURSE I'M GOING TO

DATE MYSELF BUT IF YOU ARE MY

AGE, ALL YOU COULD THINK WAS

"BLAZING SADDLES."

THIS IS WHERE THEY BUSTED OUT IN

"BL

"BLAZING SADDLES".

I GET THERE AND THE PHONE RINGS

AND THE WOMAN SAYS I AM SO

SORRY, AARON IS WORKING AND HE

CAN'T MEET WITH YOU TODAY.

I'M JUST LIKE SUDDENLY ALL THE

THINGS CONSERVATIVE SAID ABOUT

HOLLYWOOD PEOPLE I WAS LIKE YES

I FLEW FROM D.C. AND I AM AT THE

GATE AND YOU CAN'T MEET.

THE WOMAN SAYS, WELL, I GUESS

YOU WILL KNOW IN THE PAPERS

ANYWAYS.

HE WAS ARRESTED YESTERDAY FOR

BRINGING ILLEGAL MUSHROOMS INTO

THE LAS VEGAS AIRPORT.

SHE SAYS BUT DON'T WORRY, TALK

ABOUT HOW LIFE TAKES ITS TURNS,

DON'T WORRY, INSTEAD OF

INTERVIEWING WITH HIM WE'RE

GOING TO HAVE YOU HAVE LUNCH

WITH ALL THE WRITERS.

SO I GO INTO THE

COMMISSARY AND I SIT DOWN AT

THE TABLE WHERE THEY HAVE THE

WRITING ROOM.

AND I COME IN THERE AND BRAD

WHITFORD HAS ACTUALLY COME.

SO, HE'S SITTING RIGHT THERE.

THERE'S A SPOT THERE.

I SIT IN THE OPEN SPOT.

I TURN TO MY LEFT AND INTRODUCE

MYSELF TO THE FIRST WRITER ON MY

LEFT.

AND THAT'S HOW I MET MY WIFE.

ALLISON.

SO THE MORAL OF THIS

STORY IS THAT THE REAL WEST WING

IS THE BEST THING IN MY

PROFESSIONAL LIFE AND THE FAKE

WEST WING WAS THE BEST THING IN

MY PERSONAL LIFE.

I LOVE IT.

I LOVE IT.

YOU OBVIOUSLY HAD SOME

TREMENDOUS EXPERIENCES WORKING

FOR BOTH PRESIDENT OBAMA AND

PRESIDENT CLINTON AND IT'S HARD

TO ENCAPSULATE THOSE

EXPERIENCES, WHICH WERE REALLY,

REALLY EXTRAORDINARY BOTH IN THE

LENGTH OF YOUR SERVICE AND ALSO

WHAT YOU WERE ABLE TO GET DONE.

BUT I WONDER IF YOU MIGHT PICK

ONE LESSON YOU LEARNED FROM

PRESIDENT CLINTON AND ONE LESSON

YOU LEARNED FROM PRESIDENT

OBAMA.

WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S AN

INTERESTING QUESTION.

LIKE WHAT IS THE KIND OF -- THE

LESSON THAT YOU LEARN.

I MEAN LOOK, YOU KNOW, THE --

PEOPLE ALWAYS ASK FOR

COMPARISONS BETWEEN THE TWO, AND

I ALWAYS SAY, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT

GOING TO TELL YOU WHETHER I LOVE

MOM OR DAD MORE.

I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO TELL YOU

WHICH ONE IS MOM AND WHICH ONE

IS DAD.

BUT I WILL SAY THAT WHAT I

REALLY HAD GREAT RESPECT FOR

BOTH OF THEM ON -- AND IT'S

RELATED TO HOW THEY SET UP THE

NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL -- WAS

THEY REALLY WANTED TO GET IT

RIGHT.

I'M NOT BEING NAIVE HERE.

YOU WERE IN THE FINANCIAL CRISIS

MEETINGS.

WE BOTH WERE.

IT IS A POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT.

BUT WHEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO

WANT TO START BY FIGURING IT

OUT.

ONE FIGURING IT OUT.

AND, TWO, BEING WILLING TO

LISTEN TO THE CHALLENGE BACK AND

FORTH.

AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW,

WHETHER YOU CALL IT MURDER

BOARDING, WHETHER YOU CALL IT

ALL OF THOSE THINGS, THERE IS A

HUMILITY IN DECISION MAKING THAT

I THINK YOU HAVE WHEN YOU ARE IN

THOSE JOBS WHICH PEOPLE I THINK

OFTEN HAVE TOO LITTLE OF.

A LOT OF TIMES I LOOK AT A

POLICY ISSUE OUT THERE AND WHAT

I AM REALLY THINKING TO MYSELF

IS WHY ARE THOSE PEOPLE SO SURE?

LIKE, YOU KNOW, I HEAR PEOPLE

DEBATE -- THERE'S A LOT OF

ISSUES PEOPLE DEBATE RIGHT NOW

AND I HAVE MY VIEW OR THIS VIEW.

BUT THE ONE THING I AM NOT IS

I'M NOT SURE.

I THINK THERE IS A CERTAIN

HUMILITY IN YOUR DECISION

MAKING, WHICH IS THAT -- AND I

THINK IT'S PARTLY BECAUSE WHEN

YOU ARE WRITING AN OP-ED OR

GOING ON CABLE TV OR YOU ARE

WRITING A POLICY PAPER, YOU

KNOW, IT'S NICE TO BE RIGHT, BUT

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE WAY YOU

GET REWARDED.

YOU GET REWARDED BY HAVING A

STRONG VIEW THAT YOU HAVE

ARTICULATED THAT BREAKS THROUGH.

THAT GETS LOTS OF MEDIA TWEETS.

WHEN YOU THERE ARE AND IT'S

PEOPLE'S LIVES ON THE LINE AND

YOU KNOW THAT THE THINGS YOU DO

CAN HAVE ENORMOUS CONSEQUENCE ON

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OR

MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, IT'S SCARY

AND IT SHOULD BE SCARY.

AND I THINK WHAT BOTH OF THEM

DID WAS THEY TREATED IT LIKE WE

DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THE

RIGHT THING IS GOING TO BE, BUT

WE ARE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING WE

CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE

MAKE THAT DECISION WE HAVE --

THAT WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING THAT

WE COULD.

WHEN I WAS IN A LITTLE PHASE

WHERE I WAS READING

REVOLUTIONARY HISTORY, THERE WAS

A GREAT LINE ONCE WHERE

WASHINGTON AND THEM ARE TALKING

AND HE SAYS YOU CANNOT GUARANTEE

SUCCESS; YOU CAN ONLY GUARANTEE

YOU HAVE PREPARED AS MUCH AS

POSSIBLE FOR SUCCESS.

I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE IN THE

DECISION MAKING.

AND I THINK THAT FEELING OF

HAVING EVERYBODY AROUND THE

TABLE, LETTING EVERYBODY SPEAK

UP, ENCOURAGING AN ACTIVE

DEBATE, NOT MANAGING ANYBODY

FEEL THEY WILL BE PUBLISHED OR

HURT FOR DISAGREEING WITH THE

PRESIDENT OR STRONGLY

DISAGREEING WITH THE PRESIDENT,

I THOUGHT THAT WAS OUTSTANDING.

AND I DON'T -- YOU KNOW I THINK

THAT THE WAY THOSE THINGS WERE

DONE IS OFTEN, YOU KNOW, WOULD

BE A LESSON FOR A LOT OF TYPES

OF DECISION MAKING.

BUT I THINK IT IS THAT SENSE OF

HUMILITY ABOUT THE FUTURE,

WHAT'S THE RIGHT THING.

TESTING.

I CAN THINK OF MANY TIMES I HAD

THE MOST BRILLIANT PEOPLE AROUND

MY TABLE IN THE NATIONAL

ECONOMIC OFFICE AND WE CAME TO

WHAT SEEMED LIKE A DECISION.

AND SOMEBODY WOULD CALL BACK

THAT NIGHT AND SAY, I THOUGHT OF

A FLAW.

AND WE'D BRING EVERYBODY BACK

AGAIN.

WHEN YOU THINK OF TERRIBLE

DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE,

THE WAR IN IRAQ, ETC, YOU

HAVE TO WONDER, WAS THAT KIND OF

RIGOR BROUGHT?

WAS THAT KIND OF CHALLENGING,

THAT KIND OF IT'S OKAY TO

DISAGREE WITH THE PRESIDENT?

IT'S OKAY TO ARGUE.

I THINK THOSE ARE TWO THINGS I

ADMIRED A LOT ABOUT THEM.

I'M NOT SAYING -- YOU ARE IN A

POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT.

BUT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE AND I

THINK THIS IS WHAT I THOUGHT THE

CORE OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMIC

COUNCIL WAS.

THAT YOU ARE GOING TRY TO FIGURE

OUT WHAT THE BEST POLICY IS

FIRST.

AND THEN YOU ARE GOING TO TRY TO

FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH OF THAT YOU

CAN DESIGN.

BUT YOU START WITH WHAT'S RIGHT,

AND THEN YOU SAY WELL THAT'S

IDEAL.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S IDEAL.

NOW WHAT CAN WE PRACTICALLY GET

DONE?

WHAT HAS A CHANCE OF SUCCEEDING?

WHAT ARE THE ODDS?

WHAT'S THE GOOD OF PROPOSING AN

UNREALISTIC THING BUT SETTING A

TONE FOR THE FUTURE VERSUS

HELPING PEOPLE'S LIVES MAYBE

FILLING UP 20 OR 30 STADIUMS BUT

NOT GETTING THE WHOLE WAY.

SO, I THINK I LEFT WITH REALLY

GREAT ADMIRATION FOR BOTH OF

THEM.

AND WHATEVER YOU THINK ABOUT

BOTH OF THEM, BOY, THEY WERE

WILLING AT TIMES TO DO THE HARD

THING JUST BECAUSE IT WAS RIGHT.

I MEAN, THERE WERE TIMES WHERE,

YOU KNOW, WE BOTH SAW THEM AND,

YOU KNOW, IT'S -- I'M NOT GOING

TO SAY IT'S LIKE THE AMERICAN

PRESIDENT WHERE MICHAEL DOUGLAS

COMES OUT.

IT'S NOT FUN DOING SOMETHING

UNPOPULAR.

THEY WEREN'T GOING, GREAT, I'M

GOING DO THIS TO SAVE THE

FINANCIAL CRISIS.

AND DAVID AXLEROD IS TELLING ME

OR GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS IS

TELLING ME ONLY 22 PERCENT OF

AMERICANS WILL SUPPORT WHEN I AM

DOING.

THEY HATE IT.

THEY'RE CURSING.

THEY'RE UPSET.

BUT THEY STILL DID IT.

THEY STILL DID WHAT WAS RIGHT

WHEN THEY HAD TO.

THAT'S GREAT.

LET ME BRING US TO SOME OF YOUR

CURRENT WORK.

THERE'S TONS WE COULD TALK ABOUT

ABOUT BEING IN THE GOVERNMENT

BUT MAYBE WE'LL TURN THE

CONVERSATION NOW TO YOU RECENTLY

WROTE A PIECE INTO DEMOCRACY

JOURNAL CALLED "ECONOMIC

DIGNITY" THAT IS I THINK GOING

TO BE YOUR NEXT BOOK PROJECT?

GENE SPERLING: YES.

SO IT'S A BIG TOPIC.

SO A

LOT OF TIMES, IF YOU'LL PARDON

ME, POLICY NERDS OR POLICY GEEKS

LIKE YOURSELF, WILL FOCUS ON,

YOU KNOW, THE 10 POINT PLAN FOR

CHILD CARE.

OR THE 15 STEPS TO IMPROVE THE

EITC FOR UNDER THREE BILLION

DOLLARS.

YOU'VE DECIDED TO TAKE ON A

PRETTY BIG TOPIC, ECONOMIC

DIGNITY.

WHY DID YOU THINK IT WAS

IMPORTANT TO DO THAT?

WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU ARE

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

THE BOOK I WROTE IN 2005 WAS,

YOU KNOW, POLICY NERD -- IT WAS

A POLICY NERD BIBLE.

THE PRO GROWTH PROGRESSIVE.

AND I WAS, YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO

PUT DOWN WHAT I THOUGHT WERE A

LOT OF THE GOOD THINKING OF THAT

MOMENT IN TIME.

THOUGH THE WORLD HAS CHANGED A

LOT SINCE THEN.

I'D WRITE IT DIFFERENTLY TODAY.

BUT I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW,

PARTLY I HAVE MORE GRAY HAIR.

I THOUGHT I HAD MORE PERMISSION

NOW TO STEP BACK AND WRITE

SOMETHING REFLECTIVE.

BUT I REALLY WANTED TO.

I THINK WHAT I STARTED TO FEEL

WAS THAT I BELIEVE MOST PEOPLE

WHO COME IN TO PUBLIC SERVICE

REALLY COME IN WITH GOOD

INTENTIONS.

I FEEL A LITTLE SAD THAT

PEOPLE -- I FEEL SAD THAT PEOPLE

USED TO SAY TO ME, IS "SCANDAL"

AND "HOUSE OF CARDS" REALISTIC

INSTEAD OF IS "THE WEST WING"

REALISTIC.

I USED TO SAY IT WAS VERY

REALISTIC EXCEPT THEY WALK

FASTER, THEY'RE FUNNIER AND

BETTER LOOKING.

I DID HAVE MY ONE MOMENT.

I HAD TWO MOMENTS BY THE WAY

WITH BARACK OBAMA ON "THE WEST

WING" THAT WERE MEMORABLE TO ME.

ONE WAS HE SAID, WE WERE IN THE

MIDDLE OF THE FINANCIAL CRISIS,

AND HE CALLS EVERYBODY IN TO A

MEETING.

THINGS ARE MOVING SO FAST YOU

HAVE A SITUATION WHERE THE

PRESIDENT'S IN THE OVAL AND

WE'RE WAITING, YOU KNOW, FOR A

FEW PEOPLE TO GET THERE.

AND IT'S LIKE EIGHT, NINE AT

NIGHT, HE IS EXHAUSTED AND HE

SAYS YOU'VE BEEN IN THE WEST

WING EIGHT YEARS IS IT ALWAYS

LIKE THIS?

I SAID WELL IT'S -- I SAID

IT'S -- PEOPLE USED TO ASK IS

THE WEST WING REALISTIC.

I SAID YEAH IT'S JUST THEY

CONDENSE NINE MONTHS INTO ONE

HOUR.

THAT'S WHAT YOUR PRESIDENCY IN

THE FINANCIAL CRISIS IS LIKE.

YOU KNOW, IT WAS CONDENSED.

BUT TO GO BACK.

I FELT LIKE FOR ALL THAT WE

WERE -- FOR ALL PEOPLE COME IN

WITH THE BEST OF INTENTIONS.

I THINK I FOUND IT WAS VERY EASY

FOR PEOPLE TO KIND OF TAKE THEIR

EYE OFF THE BALL.

SO, IT'S NO THE LIKE I THINK

THAT PEOPLE COME IN AND THEY

ARE, YOU KNOW, IT IS "SCANDAL"

OR "HOUSE OF CARDS."

I THINK PEOPLE COME IN TO

WASHINGTON -- MOST PEOPLE, WE'LL

PUT THIS CURRENT WHITE HOUSE TO

THE SIDE.

HOPEFULLY THIS HISTORIC

ABERRATION.

BUT I THINK MOST PEOPLE THERE

HAVE A CONVICTION OF POLICY

VIEW.

I THINK MOST PEOPLE I'VE WORKED

WITH DO.

BUT I NOTICE THAT WHAT HAPPENS

OVER TIME IS THAT PEOPLE START

TO, AS I SAID, TAKE THEIR EYE

OFF THE BALL A LITTLE.

BY THAT I DON'T MEAN THEY BECOME

GREEDY OR OUT THERE PERSONAL.

I THINK WHAT HAPPENS IS PEOPLE

START TO CONFUSE MEANS FOR ENDS.

SO, WHAT HAPPENS IS, YOU KNOW,

PEOPLE START SAYING, ARE YOU FOR

TRADE OR AGAINST IT?

ARE YOU FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION OR

AGAINST IT?

DO YOU BELIEVE WE CAN DO A 2.8

PERCENT GDP?

WHAT HAPPENS IS PEOPLE START

LOCKING IN ON THESE THINGS.

AND IT STARTS TO -- IT'S NOT

JUST ARGUMENTS ON CABLE NEWS.

PEOPLE COME INTO THEIR JOBS AND

THEY START SAYING, OH, WELL THIS

IS WHAT WE SHOULD DO.

AND WHY.

WELL BECAUSE THAT WAS A METRIC

OR MEANS THAT HAD BEEN SOMETHING

THAT HAD BEEN A PROGRESSIVE GOAL

TEN YEARS AGO SO IT IS RIGHT

NOW.

AND I WOULD START TO REALIZE,

THERE ISN'T AS MUCH REFLECTION

ON, HOLD IT, WHAT'S THE ULTIMATE

END GOAL OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO

DO?

SHOULDN'T WE STEP BACK A LITTLE

AND ASK?

AND I STARTED THINKING ABOUT

THAT MORE AND MORE MYSELF FOR MY

OWN DECISION MAKING.

IF I GO INTO THIS ADMINISTRATION

WHAT'S GOING TO BE MOST

IMPORTANT AND WHY?

THEN AGAIN IT'S NOT THAT I THINK

THAT OH MY GOD YOU HAD TO WORK

ON WHAT THE END GOAL OF ECONOMIC

POLICY IS BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE NO

MORALS OR GO INTO THIS WITH NO

ANCHOR.

I THINK THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT

THE ECONOMIC DEBATE THAT TAKES

YOUR EYE OFF THE BALL.

SO, YOU START TO, AGAIN, WHEN

YOU START TO LOCK IN ON DEBATING

ABOUT MEANS, IT GETS MORE

TRIBAL.

IT GETS MORE ONE CAMP VERSUS THE

OTHER.

SO, PEOPLE ARE DEBATING, ARE YOU

LIKE A NEW DEMOCRAT OR A

POPULOUS DEMOCRAT?

OR ARE YOU FOR A UNIVERSAL

PROGRAM OR ARE YOU FOR TARGETED

PROGRAMS?

AND ALL OF THESE DEBATES ARE

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

I'M NOT DENIGRATING ANY OF THEM.

BUT I THINK PEOPLE START TO LOSE

THE IDEA THAT THAT IS STILL A

MEANS TO AN END.

AND SO FOR ME, AND I THINK WHEN

YOU REALIZE THAT A PARTICULAR

POLICY, HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT

FISCAL POLICY OR HOW YOU FEEL

ABOUT TRADE POLICY IS A MEANS TO

A LARGER END.

YOU'RE MORE WILLING TO LOOK AT

NEW EVIDENCE.

YOU'RE LESS DEFENSIVE.

I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE

RIGHT NOW THAT MOSTLY WANT TO

DEBATE THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN

SO I STARTED FEELING MORE LIKE

THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG.

THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE

DEBATE.

ONE PLACE THAT IT REALLY HIT ME

WAS IN 2009.

NOW, IF YOU WERE IN THE

WHITE HOUSE AT THIS POINT YOU

REALIZED ONE THING, WHICH WAS,

YOU KNOW, THE TEA PARTY FEEL WAS

ALREADY STARTING TO COME.

THE DEMOCRATS WERE ALREADY

STARTING TO FEEL IT.

AND IT WAS VERY, VERY HARD.

IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE THAT YOU WERE

GOING TO GET SOME HUGE, SECOND

STIMULUS IN 2009.

YOUR OWN PARTY DIDN'T WANT TO DO

THAT.

THAT I UNDERSTAND.

BUT, AT THE SAME TIME, SOME

PEOPLE STARTED COMING TO ME,

MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO WILL

REMAIN NAMELESS, AND SAY, CAN

YOU CONVENIENCE PRESIDENT OBAMA

HE SHOULDN'T BE DOING

HEALTHCARE.

HE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON THE

ECONOMY.

I THINK THAT REALLY WAS A MOMENT

THAT WENT OFF FOR ME.

WHICH IS IT'S TO THE POINT WHERE

PEOPLE DIDN'T THINK PEOPLE'S

HEALTHCARE WAS THE ECONOMY.

IT WAS GDP OR IT WAS -- AND

REMEMBER TOO THERE WASN'T MUCH

CHANCE YOU WERE GOING TO BE ABLE

TO DO A LOT MORE AT THAT

PARTICULAR MOMENT.

IT WAS MORE THEY WANTED HIM JUST

TO TALK ABOUT IT.

FOR ME, I HAD BEEN THINKING IN

THE EIGHT YEARS OFF YOU KNOW

WHAT REALLY -- IF I COME BACK,

WHAT REALLY MATTERS MOST?

WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT TO GET

DONE?

AND I WOULD START THINKING TO

MYSELF, OKAY, ON SOMEBODY'S

DEATH BED, WHAT WOULD THEY THINK

WAS MOST IMPORTANT IN THEIR

ECONOMIC LIFE?

I WOULD ALSO THINK TO MYSELF,

WHAT IS IT THAT WE CAN DO FOR

EVERYBODY?

NOT EVERYBODY CAN BE DEAN OF THE

POLICY SCHOOL OR, YOU KNOW, JUST

HAVE GOOD FORTUNE, ET CETERA.

WHAT IS IT THAT POLICY SHOULD

AIM FOR EVERYONE?

I STARTED THINKING ABOUT

HEALTHCARE.

BUT NOT LIKE WOE NORMALLY THINK

ABOUT IT.

L

RISING COST, ET CETERA.

I STARTED THINKING ABOUT THE

PAIN OF A PARENT NOT BEING ABLE

TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR SICK CHILD.

I MEAN, IT'S EXTRAORDINARY,

RIGHT?

I MEAN, LIKE WE ALL WORRY ABOUT

OUR KIDS SO MUCH.

THE IDEA THAT THERE WERE SO MANY

PEOPLE WHO WENT BRUNT --

BANKRUPT OR COULDN'T PROVIDE FOR

THEIR CHILD.

I STARTED THINKING IF I'M

THINKING ABOUT SOMEONE, THEIR

CORE, THE INER SELF, THAT'S

GOING TO BE ONE OF THE WORST

THINGS.

THAT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.

IT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.

AND SO FOR ME I'M COMING BACK

AND I'M THINKING, I AM SO GLAD

BARACK OBAMA IS TAKING ANOTHER

SHOT AT HEALTHCARE.

I WAS SO PROUD OF BILL AND

HILLARY CLINTON FOR GOING BACK

AND GETTING THE CHILDREN'S

HEALTH INITIATIVE PROGRAM AFTER

WE HAD FAILED.

NOW HE WAS GOING TO GO BACK AND

YES IT WASN'T NECESSARILY GOING

TO BE IN MY LANE ON THE

ECONOMICS, BUT I WAS DEVOTED.

IN FACT AS YOU REMEMBER I ENDED

UP COORDINATEING ON THE TREASURY

TEAM ON THIS BECAUSE I WANTED TO

BE SO INVOLVED.

AND I THINK THAT WAS A MOMENT

WHERE I THOUGHT, THERE IS

SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS WAY WE

THINK OF ECONOMICS THAT THE FACT

WE DON'T ACTUALLY STOP AND

REFLECT ON WHAT THE END GOAL

ACTUALLY AFFECTS HOW SENATORS

AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND

PEOPLE IN THE ADMINISTRATION

THINK ABOUT WHAT THEIR GOAL IS.

SO, IN 2005 I HAD WRITTEN IN THE

PROGRESSIVE, MY SECOND CHAPTER.

I SAID WE'RE GOING DO A LOT OF

ECONOMIC BUT THIS REALLY IS

ABOUT VALUES.

AND I PUT THREE VALUES DOWN.

I SAID ONE, YOU KNOW, ECONOMIC

DIGNITY.

IF YOU WORK HARD, SHOULD YOU BE

ABLE TO RAISE YOUR CHILDREN,

RETIRE, TAKE CARE OF YOUR

PARENTS WITH DIGNITY?

NUMBER 2, DOES EVERYBODY HAVE A

CHANCE TO RISE?

AND ARE WE A COUNTRY WHERE THE

ACCIDENT OF YOUR BIRTH

DETERMINES THE OUTCOME OF YOUR

LIFE?

AND I THINK THAT THIS TIME

INSTEAD OF THAT JUST BEING THE

SECOND CHAPTER , I WANTED TO

REALLY STEP BACK AND SAY LET ME

THINK A LITTLE HARDER.

WHAT ACTUALLY SHOULD OUR END

GOAL BE?

AND I STARTED REALIZING THAT

REALLY I DIDN'T NEED THREE

VALUES.

THAT WHILE I WASN'T GOING TO TRY

TO WRITE A BOOK AS THERE ARE

PROBABLY SOME PHILOSOPHY

PROFESSORS AND STUDENTS HERE WHO

WORK ON, TO GO THROUGH WHAT DID

HE MEAN HERE.

DID HE STEAL THAT FROM RUSSO.

I MEAN, I'M READING ALL THAT SO

THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.

BUT THAT WASN'T GOING TO BE IT

BUT THAT I WAS GOING TO TRY TO

UNDERSTAND IF IT WAS POSSIBLE

FOR US TO DO WHAT HE WAS MOST

IMPORTANT FOR WHAT IS KIND OF

MOST PRECIOUS, MOST UNIVERSAL

FOR PEOPLE YOU KNOW WHAT DID

THAT MEAN.

SO I STARTED DOING THE FRAME OF

ECONOMIC DIGNITY.

AND IT SCARED ME TO WORK ON IT

BECAUSE FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.

I MEAN, I AM -- I FEEL ASHAMED A

LITTLE BIT HOW SCARED I WAS TO

WORK ON IT.

FOR BAD REASONS.

I WAS WORRIED ABOUT SNARK ABOUT

WRITING SOMETHING THAT MIGHT

SEEM FLUFFY.

I WAS SCARED OF ACADEMICS WHO

WOULD SAY YOU ARE NOT AN EXPERT

IN SOCIAL JUSTICE, PHILOSOPHY OR

ARE NOT TRYING TO BATES ALL THIS

WHERE STARTING WITH LOCK IS AND

GOING FORWARD.

BUT AS I STARTED TALKING TO

PEOPLE, I STARTED REALIZING

THERE WAS A BIT OF A HUNGER.

I ALSO STARTED REALIZING THERE

WASN'T MUCH OUT THERE.

SO IF I WROTE SOMETHING LIKE

THIS, EVEN IF SOMEBODY SAID YOU

GOT IT WRONG, YOU KNOW, IT'S

REALLY A DIFFERENT CONCEPTION OF

FRE

FREEDOM.

OR YOUR THREE PILLARS OF

ECONOMIC DIGNITY ARE WRONG I

REALIZED THAT WOULD BE DOING

GOOD.

BECAUSE I WOULD BE AT LEAST

STARTING A CONVERSATION.

WHEN I THINK ABOUT WRITING A

BOOK I THINK TO MYSELF A LITTLE,

WHEN I WAS THAT 28 OR

BENEFITTED FROM READING THAT?

AND I THINK TO MYSELF, YEAH, IF

THE FIRST TIME I WAS GOING INTO

THE WHITE HOUSE I HAD READ A

BOOK THAT WAS ASKING ME, WHAT'S

YOUR ULTIMATE GOAL AS A HUMAN

BEING FOR ECONOMIC POLICY IN A

WAY THAT FIT THE KIND OF FRAME

IN THE U.S. I THOUGHT THAT WOULD

BE WORTH DOING.

AND SO I WROTE THE PIECE 9,000

WORDS IN THE DEMOCRACY JOURNAL

TO GET IT OUT THERE.

AND I'VE BEEN REALLY, YOU KNOW,

REALLY TOUCHED BY THE REACTION.

AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE AGREED TO DO

A BOOK SINCE THEN.

SO LET'S TRY TO UNPACK THAT A

LITTLE BIT.

YOUR CONCEPT OF ECONOMIC

DIGNITY.

YOU TALKED ABOUT THREE PILLARS

IN THE PIECE AND JUST NOW.

AND MAYBE I'M GOING TO ASK YOU

TO PAUSE ON EACH ONE AND SAY A

LITTLE BIT MORE.

SO THE FIRST

PILLAR I'M GOING TO READ SO I

GET IT RIGHT.

THE FIRST PILLAR IS...

HAVING

THE CAPACITY TO CARE FOR A

FAMILY AND EXPERIENCE ITS

GREATEST JOYS.

THAT'S NOT USUAL ECONOMIST

SPEAK.

WHAT DID YOU MEAN AND WHY IS

THAT THE FIRST PILLAR?

GENE SPERLING: I THINK THE

BASIC GOODS THAT YOU NEED FOR A

KIND OF MIDDLE-CLASS LIFE OR

AMERICAN DREAM LIFE IS KIND OF

THE COMMON WAY THIS IS DONE.

HUEY LONG, YOU KNOW, HAD HIS

CHICKEN IN EVERY POT.

AND FDR USED ONE OF HIS LAST

INAUGURAL SPEECHES TO DO A

SECOND ECONOMIC BILL OF RIGHTS.

AND PRESIDENT OBAMA HAD KIND OF

A LIST SQUARE DEAL.

THOSE ARE

USUALLY HEALTHCARE RETIREMENT.

ALL THINGS THAT ARE INCREDIBLY

IMPORTANT.

BUT I THOUGHT IF I WAS GOING TO

ASK ABOUT THIS IT WAS WORTH

STEPPING BACK A LITTLE AND KIND

OF SAYING WHY.

AND NOT JUST KIND OF DOING A

LIST OF GOODS.

WHICH IS I FELT MOST TIMES WHAT

PEOPLE DID IN THIS SITUATION.

HERE'S THE FIVE THINGS YOU HAVE

TO HAVE.

YOU SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO THOSE

FIVE THINGS AND WE'RE DONE AND

WE'LL SEE YOU LITTER.

SO I -- LATER.

AGAIN, THIS IS THE PART WHERE

YOU ARE JUST WRITING FROM YOUR

HEART.

YOU ARE NOT BASING IT ANYWHERE.

YOU ARE JUST DECIDING YOU ARE

GOING TO PUT YOUR HEART OUT

THERE AND IF PEOPLE SHOOT AT IT

THAT'S FINE OR NOT FINE BUT

YOU'LL LIVE WITH IT.

WHICH WAS I HAVE ALWAYS -- YOU

KNOW IT TOUCHES AND MOVES ME WAS

A HUMAN BEING THAT FOR ALL THE

AMAZING THINGS I'VE SEEN AND

DONE OR YOU HAVE SEEN OTHER

PEOPLE DO, PEOPLE WHO, YOU KNOW,

HAVE BEEN HEADS OF STATE OR

BILLIONAIRES OR, YOU KNOW, GREAT

ATHLETES.

WHATEVER YOU DO.

WHAT IS IT IN LIFE THAT KIND OF

MATTERS TO YOU AS MUCH AS LIKE

THE BIRTH OF YOUR CHILD?

OR WORRYING ABOUT YOUR KIDS?

I'M NOT TRYING TO DO TRADITIONAL

FAMILY HERE.

ME OF ALL PEOPLE.

I'VE GOT TWO CHILDREN WHO AREN'T

MY MY ACTUAL GOD CHILDREN AND

THEN MY SON I INHERITED.

SO I MEAN KNIT THE BROADCAST

SENSE.

THE PEOPLE YOU LOVE.

IT GETS ME THAT WE KIND OF

EXCEPT YOU CAN'T HAVE PURE

ECONOMIC EQUALITY.

YET THERE IS KIND OF A NATURAL

EQUALITY THAT'S INCREDIBLY

BEAUTIFUL.

WHICH IS YOU CAN BE THE

BILLIONAIRE OR YOU CAN BE THE

LOWEST PERSON IN THAT

BILLIONAIRE'S OFFICE.

BUT THE BIRTH OF YOUR CHILD, HOW

YOU TAKE CARE OF YOUR PARENTS,

YOU KNOW, HAPPINESS OF YOUR

FAMILY, YOU KNOW, FEELING THAT

YOU CAN CAN PROVIDE AND TAKE

CARE, LIKE THAT'S THE DEEPEST

THING.

AND YOU THINK TO YOURSELF, WELL

THAT IS THIS BEAUTIFUL EQUALITY.

AND YET IT'S NOT ACTUALLY

ACTUALIZEED.

BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THAT'S SO

ACHIEVABLE, ECONOMIC DEPRIVATION

TAKES THAT AWAY.

SO, YOU CAN'T REALLY SAY WE ALL

GOT TO ENJOY IT THE SAME.

BECAUSE HALF THE PEOPLE IN THIS

COUNTRY ARE HAVING BABIES AND

GOING TO WORK TWO DAYS LATER.

SOME OF THEM ARE DYING IN

CHILDBIRTH.

SOME OF THEM ARE GOING THROUGH

ENORMOUS STRESS AND TRAUMA OR

THEY DIDN'T HAVE GOOD NUTRITION,

THEY DIDN'T HAVE THINGS.

SO I STARTED TO THINK ABOUT

THINGS A COUNTRY LIKE THE UNITED

STATES, IT WOULD BE SO EASY FOR

PEOPLE TO HAVE.

THINKING ABOUT IT FROM A BASIS

OF NOT JUST DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH

GOODS BUT ARE YOU ACTUALLY ABLE

TO ENJOY THE GREATEST JOYS OF

FAMILY AND LOVING?

RAND IT MADE ME THINK ABOUT

THINGS SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT.

AGAIN, IT'S NOT THAT YOU BECOME

FOR OR AGAINST SOMETHING, BUT

MAYBE YOU PRIORITIZE SOMETHING

DIFFERENT.

FOR ME, IT MADE ME THINK OF

HEALTHCARE LESS THROUGH JUST THE

RECIPIENT AND MORE THROUGH THE

PERSON WHO PROVIDES OR CAN

PROVIDE OR CAN'T PROVIDE WHO CAN

OR CAN'T TAKE CARE.

IT MADE ME THINK OF PAID FAMILY

LEAVE.

THAT SEEMED TO BE LIKE A NICE

ISSUE BUT THERE WERE OTHER

THINGS.

BUT WHEN YOU START THINKING

ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE IN LIFE OF

BEING THERE FOR YOUR PARENTS OR

FWLEEG FOR SOMEONE YOU LOVE WHO

HAS CANCER, OF BEING ABLE TO

SPEND TIME FOR YOUR CHILD, THOSE

ARE MAYBE SOME OF THE GREATEST

JOYS IN LIFE OR EVEN THE TIME

OFF WHEN YOU ARE GRIEVING.

MOST PONT THINGS IN LIFE.

AND THEY ARE UNBELIEVABLY

ECONOMIC.

YOU GO TO YOUR AVERAGE COMPANY

IN THIS COUNTRY AND THERE IS

BEREAVEMENT LEAVE IF YOU ARE AN

EXECUTIVE BUT NOT FOR OTHER

PEOPLE.

SO IF YOUR WIFE OR KID PASSED

AWAY, WORST THING THAT CAN

HAPPEN IN LIFE, YOU KNOW, WE

DON'T HAVE IT.

SO I STARTED TO THINK ABOUT THIS

MORE AS NOT A SET OF GOODS BUT

MAYBE AN EVOLVING DISCUSSION.

AND I THINK THE THING I STRUGGLE

WITH A LITTLE IS THAT, YOU KNOW,

WE ALL LOVE TO KIND OF SAY GOSH

LOOK AT THAT PERSON.

HIS MOM SWEPT THE FLOORS FOR 80

HOURS A WEEK, ET CETERA.

THAT TROUBLES ME A LITTLE.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IF SOME OF THE

PEOPLE HERE WANT TO WORK 80

HOURS A WEEK SO THEY CAN BE A

TENURED PROFESSOR OR NATIONAL

ECONOMIC ADVISOR, THAT'S A

CHOICE YOU MAKE.

BUT THE IDEA THAT SOME PEOPLE

HAVE TO WORK SO HARD, THEY MAKE

A CERTAIN INCOME BUT IS THE

PRICE OF THEIR INCOME THEY'RE

NOT ABLE TO HAVE THOSE JOYS.

SO

THAT TO ME WAS I THINK A RICHER

WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT.

AND ALSO GOES MORE I THINK TO

NOT LOOKING AT THINGS AS JUST A

SET OF GOODS BUT IN TERMS OF

YOUR INNER-WORTH, WHAT'S MOST

IMPORTANT TO YOU.

DID OUR ECONOMIC LIVES --

REMEMBER I'M NOT WRITING DIGNITY

JOURNAL.

I'M WRITING ABOUT ECONOMIC

DIGNITY.

IF WE HAVE AN ECONOMIC SYSTEM

THAT PREVENTED ECONOMIC

DEPRIVATION FROM KEEPING PEOPLE

FROM ENJOYING THAT WHICH IS MOST

IMPORTANT THAT WE CAN EASILY

AFFORD AND HAVE FOR EVERYONE

SO THE SECOND MAIN PILLAR OF

ECONOMIC DIGNITY THAT YOU TALK

ABOUT IS THE PURSUIT OF PURPOSE.

I WONDER IF YOU COULD SAY A

LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT YOU

MEAN BY THAT AND WHY THAT IS SO

ESSENTIAL

GENE SPERLING: IT'S THE

PURSUIT OF POTENTIAL AND

PURPOSE.

AND I SAID "PURSUIT."

AGAIN, I CAN'T PRETEND THAT WE

CAN HAVE ECONOMIC DIGNITY FOR

EVERYONE WHERE EVERYONE GETS TO

REACH YOUR POTENTIAL.

BUT I DO THINK LIKE THIS IS AN

AREA WHERE WHEN YOU LOOK AT KIND

OF THE CORE VALUES OF THE

COUNTRY THERE IS A STRONG

INSTINCT AND A HUGE GAP BETWEEN

WHAT WE IDEALIZE AND WHAT WE

HAVE.

AND I ALSO THINK IT'S AN AREA

THAT WE ARE REALLY IGNORING AT

OUR PERIL.

SO, ONE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GO TO

WASHINGTON AND YOU CAN GO TO A

SPEECH AND YOU CAN GO FROM PAUL

RYAN TO BERNIE SANDERS AND THEY

WILL BOTH SAY AT THE BEGINNING,

THE ABSENT OF YOUR BIRTH

SHOULDN'T DETERMINE THE OUTCOME

OF YOUR LIFE.

THAT'S A PRETTY STRONG VALUE.

YET, THAT VALUE IS NOT REALIZED

IN TERMS -- WE KNOW THAT.

AND WE KNOW IT'S KIND OF A CRUEL

JOKE TO SAY WHEN WE KNOW THAT IF

YOU ARE BORN INTO THE TOP BOTTOM

TEN OR TWENTY PERCENT, BOTTOM

TWENTY PERCENT YOU HAVE LIKE A

SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE PERCENT

CHANCE OF GRADATING FROM A

FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE.

WE KNOW GRADATING FROM A FOUR

YEAR COLLEGE IS PROBABLY THE

SINGLE THING THAT WILL MOVE YOU

UP THE ECONOMIC LADDER.

AND WE KNOW THAT'S DUE TO THE

ACCIDENT OF YOUR BIRTH.

AND SO WITHOUT GOVERNMENT

POLICY, WITHOUT ACTIONS, THAT'S

NOT THE CASE.

THAT'S SAD HOW MUCH WE AS A

COUNTRY HAVE WORKED AT THAT AND

NOT ACHIEVED IT.

WE HAVE TO STAY AT THAT.

THE OTHER PART IS THE KIND OF

SECOND CHANCES.

ONE OF THE THINGS I MENTIONED IN

THE ARTICLE AND I'LL MENTION

MORE IN THE BOOK IS THE UNITED

STATES IS ONE OF THE FIRST

COUNTRIES TO GET RID OF DEBT

PRISONS.

WHICH IS KIND OF A NICE THING

ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THIS IS

A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE WE HAD

SLAVERY AND WOMEN COULDN'T VOTE

OR HAVE RIGHTS.

SO, IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS

NOT MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN,

BUT IT'S -- YOU KNOW ONE THING

THAT MARTIN LUTHER KING DID

WHICH I ALWAYS THOUGHT WAS SO

POWERFUL IS INSTEAD OF WRITING

OFF A PERIOD HE WOULD SAY HERE

WERE THE VALUES.

HERE WERE THE VALUES OF THE

FRAMERS.

INSTEAD OF DISPARAGING THEM AND

SAYING HERE THEY ARE, THOSE ARE

GREAT VALUES, NOW LET'S LOOK AT

WHERE WE ARE AS A COUNTRY AND

MAKE PEOPLE FEEL THAT COGNITIVE

DISADENSE BETWEEN WHAT WE

ESPOUSE AND WHERE WE ARE.

SO WE

ARE A COUNTRY OF FIRST CHANCE.

WE TALK ABOUT FIRST CHANCES.

WE TALK ABOUT ACCIDENT OF BIRTH.

WE DON'T LIVE IT UP AND LIVE

THROUGH IT.

SECOND CHANCES IS VERY MUCH THE

SAME AS WELL.

NOT HAVING DEBT PRISONS, YOU

KNOW, IT REALLY WAS, WE

SHOULDN'T KILL A PERSON'S

POTENTIAL BECAUSE THEY WENT IN

DEBT ONCE.

IF YOU READ THE LANGUAGE, THE

SPEECHES ON BANKRUPT IN THE

EARLY -- BANKRUPTCY IN THE EARLY

"A FRESH START."

WE GLAMORIZE PEOPLE WHO MOVED

WEST.

WE GLAMORIZED THE PILGRIMS.

WE GLAMORIZED PEOPLE WHO HAD HAD

BAD STARTS, WHO HAD SECOND

CHANCES.

AND YET WE'RE TERRIBLE AS A

COUNTRY ON THIS.

WE'RE REALLY BAD.

WE SPENT LESS MONEY TO WONK

OUT -- YOU LOOK AT ANY OACD

STUDY WE SPEND LESS MONEY ON

HELPING PEOPLE WHEN THEY'RE

DISLOCATED.

THE FACT THAT WE HAVE SHRINKING

UNIONIZATION HURTS.

IN SWEDEN AND GERMANY A LOT OF

THE KIND OF TRAINING THAT

HAPPENS IS NEGOTIATED THROUGH --

IT'S EITHER GOVERNMENT OR

NEGOTIATED THROUGH UNION

CONTRACTS.

WE DON'T DO ANY OF

THOSE THINGS.

NOW I THINK WE'RE REALLY

STARTING TO SEE, THIS IS A

CENTRAL ASSAULT ON THE DIGNITY

OF SO MANY PEOPLE.

I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE

NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMING FROM

PRISON WHO DO NOT -- WHO I THINK

NEVER GOT A FIRST CHANCE OFTEN

THEN DON'T GET A SECOND CHANCE.

IF YOU LOOK AT PEOPLE -- YOU

TALK ABOUT THE ACCIDENTS OF

BIRTH.

HOW ABOUT ACCIDENTS OF THE

ECONOMY?

PEOPLE CHOOSE TO WORK FOR

PET.COM OR, YOU KNOW, FACEBOOK.

THEY WEREN'T GENIUSES.

SOME PEOPLE GOT LUCKY.

SOME PEOPLE CHOSE THE RIGHT

PLACE.

SOME PEOPLE DIDN'T.

SO, IT'S NOT LACK OF VALUE.

IT'S OFTEN JUST BAD LUCK.

YOU ARE IN THE WRONG PLACE AT

THE WRONG TIME.

YOU ARE IN THE WRONG COMMUNITY

AT THE WRONG TIME.

AND WE DO SO LITTLE.

RIGHT NOW WHEN YOU LOOK AT

MANUFACTURING COMMUNITIES,

PEOPLE SPIRAL DOWN.

WE HAVE NOTHING IN YOUR TOOLBOX

POLICY WISE TO DEAL WITH THIS.

AND IT'S OKAY.

IT GOES ON EVERY YEAR.

AND NOW, AND I AM NOT GOING TO

TRY TO DO A DIRECT CAUSAL LINK

BUT IT IS HARD TO BELIEVE THAT

THE RISE OF SO-CALLED DEATHS OF

DESPAIR OF -- DEPTH OF DESPAIR,

OF THE SUICIDE AT THAT AGE.

AT THE FACT THAT YOU ARE SEEING

A CERTAIN GROUP OF PEOPLE IN OUR

COUNTRY HAVING LOWER LIFE

EXPECTANCY.

IT IS HARD TO BELIEVE IT DOES

NOT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH

PEOPLE FEELING A LOSS OF PURPOSE

AND POTENTIAL.

AND I THINK THE REASON IT GETS

IGNORED TOO MUCH IN A SERIOUS

WAY -- AND WHEN I SAY "SERIOUS

WAY," IF YOU THINK OF A LOT OF

THE BIG POLICY IDEAS OUT THERE

RIGHT NOW THEY'RE NOT REALLY IN

THIS AREA.

THEY'RE NOT ABOUT MANAGING SURE

EVERYBODY GETS A SECOND BITE AT

THE APPLE.

THEY'RE GOOD, IMPORTANT THINGS

BUT NOT THIS AREA PARTICULARLY.

AND I THINK WE WILL -- I THINK

WE'RE MISSING SOMETHING VERY

FUNDAMENTAL IN PEOPLE'S SPIRIT.

THAT THEY WANT TO CONTINUALLY --

ALL OF US WANT TO HAVE A SENSE

OF PURPOSE AND POTENTIAL.

AND I THINK THE MORE WE IGNORE

THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HURT AS A

COUNTRY.

THE REASON WHY I THINK BOTH

SIDES ARE NOT TOO GOOD ON THIS

IS THAT REPUBLICANS TALK THE

TALK ON THIS.

BUT THEN THEY WANT LESS

GOVERNMENT FOR EVERYTHING.

BUT THESE ARE AREAS WHERE THE

PRIVATE SECTOR ISN'T GOING TO

HELP SOMEBODY WHO HAS BEEN

DISLOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY

THAT'S SPIRALING DOWN.

THERE'S NO INCENTIVE FOR THEM.

THEY PROBABLY GET SUED IF THEY

DID IT.

THEY DON'T HAVE -- GOVERNMENT

HAS TO STEP IN IN THOSE

SITUATIONS.

AND THEN ON I THINK THE

PROGRESSIVE SIDE I THINK THERE'S

BEEN A LITTLE BIT TOO, YOU KNOW,

I THINK THERE WAS A VIEW WHICH

HAS A LOT OF FAIRNESS WHICH IS

IN THE '90S PERHAPS THOSE OF US

IN THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION

WERE TOO FOCUSED ON HUMAN

CAPITAL.

INVESTING IN PEOPLE.

WE WEREN'T LOOKING ENOUGH AT THE

STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS IN IN E

ECONOMY.

I THINK THE PEOPLE WHO RAISED

THOSE ISSUES THEN HAVE TURNED

OUT TO BE RIGHT.

AND I THINK WE ALL ACKNOWLEDGE

THAT.

AT LEAST IT HAS DEVELOPED THAT

WAY IN TERMS OF MONOPOLY POWER,

RESTRICTIONS ON THE PEOPLE

COMPETING FOR JOBS, YOU KNOW,

THE NON-COMPETE ISSUE THAT OUR

GOOD FRIEND THE LATE ALAN

KRUEGER WAS WORKING ON.

I THINK THESE ARE ALL IMPORTANT

ISSUES.

BUT NOW I THINK PEOPLE HAVE GONE

TOO FAR.

THEY'VE STARTED TO I THINK

ALMOST DENIGRATE THE IMPORTANCE

OF INVESTING IN PEOPLE.

SO, I WANT TO SAY TO THOSE ON

THE PROGRESSIVE SIDE, IT'S NOT A

CHOICE.

WE SHOULD FOCUS ON STRUCTURAL

INEQUALITY.

WE SHOULD FOCUS ON WHERE THERE'S

TOO MUCH MARKET POWER,

CONCENTRATION OF POWER.

BUT THAT'S NOT A REASON TO NOT

HAVE A REALLY ROBUST POLICY

ABOUT HELPING PEOPLE FIND NEW

CAREERS, HELPING PEOPLE FIND NEW

JOBS.

NOT JUST ECONOMICALLY BUT FOR

THEIR SENSE OF PURPOSE AND

POTENTIAL

LET ME ASK YOU TO TALK A

LITTLE IT ABOUT THE THIRD PILLAR

THEN I'M GOING OPEN IT UP TO

QUESTIONS AND MAYBE WE'LL GO TO

BEING ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE

ECONOMY WITH REQUEST AND NOT

DOMINATION OR HUMILIATION.

I WANT TO SAY WHILE YOU CAN

PICK AND CHOOSE ASPECTS OF MY

DEFINITION OF ECONOMIC DIGNITY,

YOU CAN'T NOT TAKE THIS PART.

[ LAUGHTER ]

I WANT TO SAY WHY.

BECAUSE NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER

ONE ARE SO IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE,

PEOPLE CAN -- IT'S SO IMPORTANT

TO PROVIDE FOR YOUR FAMILY.

IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO HAVE A JOB

FOR SOME PEOPLE OR HAVE A SENSE

OF POTENTIAL THAT THEY WILL --

THEY CAN BE PUT IN A SITUATION

WHERE THEY HAVE ACHIEVE OR TRY

TO ACHIEVE THE FIRST TWO BY

ACCEPTING SITUATIONS THAT ARE

HUMILIATING, EXPLOIT ATEIVE.

SO, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LIMIT.

A PROTECTION OF DIGNITY IN THE

THIRD BUCKET OR YOU ARE -- OR I

DON'T THINK YOU CAN SAY THAT YOU

HAVE REALLY ACHIEVED HAVING A

DEFINITION OF ECONOMIC DIGNITY.

SO, WHEN YOU LOOK AT KIND OF THE

CLASSIC DEFINITION WITH ALL THE

DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS, THE

KIND OF NOTION THAT YOU SHOULD

NOT TREAT A PERSON AS A PURE

MEANS TO AN END BUT AS AN END TO

THEMSELVES.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS NORMALLY WE

OFTEN THINK ABOUT THIS OFTEN AS

LIMITS ON THE POWER OF

GOVERNMENT.

YOU THINK THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT'S

CRUEL OR UNUSUAL CLAUSE.

THE U.N. DECLARATION ON HUMAN

RIGHTS, ON TORTURE.

SO, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE ALL SOME

OF THE MANIFESTATIONS PEOPLE

WOULD THINK OF THE CONCEPT OF

DIGNITY.

IN A WAY WHAT THEY ARE IS

THEY'RE SAYING THERE IS

SOMETHING SO ESSENTIAL, SO

PRECIOUS, SO PRICELESS ABOUT

BEING A HUMAN BEING THAT EVEN IF

WE'RE AT WAR, EVEN IF YOU HAVE

COMMITTED A HEINOUS CRIME THERE

IS A SPHERE OF DIGNITY THAT

WE'RE NOT GOING TO LET THE STATE

IMPINGE ON.

AND I THINK THAT TO HAVE AN

ECONOMIC DIGNITY VIEW YOU ALSO

HAVE TO LOOK AT AND SAY THERE IS

A SPHERE OF DIGNITY THAT WE'RE

NOT GOING TO LET THE MARKET OR

THE FREEDOM TO CONTRACT IMPINGE

ON.

AND YOU ARE SAYING BASICALLY --

AND I THINK IN THE ECONOMIC

CONTEXT, THAT IS REALLY BASED

AROUND THE UNDERSTANDING OF

ECONOMIC -- OF THE POWER

IMBALANCES IN THE LABOR MARKET.

SO, YOU KNOW, IN LES MIS YOU SEE

A WOMAN SELL HER HAIR, SELL HER

TEETH, ULTIMATELY HERSELF,

ANYTHING FOR A CHILD, RIGHT.

ANYTHING FOR HER CHILD.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE

TO USE A THEATRICAL EXAMPLE.

IT PLAYS OUT ACROSS THE WORLD IN

THE UNITED STATES ALL THE TIME.

YOU LOOK AT THE PEOPLE WHO

WORKED IN THE MINES.

YOU LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT

MOTHER JONES, NOT THE MAGAZINE

BUT THE ACTUAL MOTHER JONES WAS

EXPOSING AT THE TIME.

I MEAN, THESE WERE SITUATIONS OF

PEOPLE GOING THROUGH QUASI

SLAVERY, UTTER HUMILIATION,

OTHER DOMINATION, BUT THEY WERE

DOING IT BECAUSE THEY ULTIMATELY

WANTED TO SUPPORT THEIR FAMILY.

AND SO THE DESPERATION FOR THE

FIRST ELEMENT WILL LEAD A PERSON

TO DO ALMOST ANYTHING.

AND IF THE PRICE OF NUMBER 1,

THE PRICE OF BEING ABLE TO CARE

FOR FAMILY AND HAVE ITS JOYS IS

UTTER EXPLOITATION, THEN YOU

HAVE FAILED.

AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK TO ME AT

LIKE THE PROGRESSIVE ERA, THE

PROGRESSIVE ERA WAS KIND OF THE

PLACE WHERE PEOPLE SAID, FINALLY

STARTED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THERE

NEED TO BE LIMITS ON THE MARKET.

THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW THE

SUPREME COURT SWITCHES ON

MINIMUM WAGE.

IT IS A RECOGNITION OF POWER

IMBALANCE.

AND I THINK IT'S INTERESTING

THAT YOU SEE THAT AS THE FIRST

ACCOMPLISHMENTS REALLY OF THE

PROGRESSIVE ERA.

YOU DON'T GET THE MORE

AFFIRMATIVE VIEWS OF ECONOMIC

DIGNITY MORE TO THE NEW DEAL.

BUT YOU ALSO SAYS IT PLAYING OUT

TODAY.

LOOK AT THE #MeToo MOVEMENT.

AND THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS

WHY I LIKE HAVING ECONOMIC

DIGNITY AS A GOAL INSTEAD OF A

METRIC WHICH I TALK ABOUT WHY

IT'S NOT GDP.

BUT I THINK WE HAVE A METRIC

LIKE GDP, ALL SORTS OF ECONOMIC

PAIN BECOME INVISIBLE.

YOU DON'T SEE THEM.

YOU DON'T COUNT THEM.

I'M KIND OF, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE

ASK ME ARE THERE THINGS YOU FEEL

BAD ABOUT.

I TELL YOU ONE THING I FEEL BAD

ABOUT.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEVER HAD A

MEETING ABOUT DOMESTIC WORKERS.

REALLY.

GOD BLESS PU.

GOD BLESS THE NATIONAL DOE MESIC

CAROL LYONS?

WHY THEY WEREN'T UNIONIZEABLE,

ORGANIZEABLE.

THEY HAD JOBS AND WEREN'T

AFFECTING THE JOB MARKET.

YET YOU LOOK NOW AND REALIZE

THERE ARE WHOLE CLASSES OF

WORKERS WHO SUFFER A LOSS OF

ECONOMIC DIGNITY WHERE IT

DOESN'T SHOW UP IN ANY METRIC.

BUT BY HAVING ECONOMIC DIGNITY

AS YOUR GOAL IT FORTS THOSE

ISSUE -- FORCES THOSE ISSUES UP

THE AGENDA AND INTO THE ECONOMIC

SPHERE.

REMEMBER, THE PEOPLE THERE WERE

SAYING PRE-EXISTING CONDITION

PROTECTION HEALTHCARE WAS NOT AN

ECONOMIC ISSUE.

WELL IT IS TO A HUMAN BEING.

IT IS TO A PARENT, A FAMILY

MEMBER.

SO, WHETHER THE PRICE FOR YOU

PURSUING YOUR POTENTIAL WAS

SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS A PRETTY

BIG DAMN ISSUE.

I THINK YOU TALK ABOUT PURSUIT

OF POTENTIAL.

IT WAS INTERESTING, YOU KNOW,

YOU SEE IT THROUGHOUT THE

ECONOMIC CLASSES, RIGHT.

SO, YOU SEE WOMEN WHO HAVE LOWER

ECONOMICS, LOWER EDUCATION,

SUFFER THE WORST SILENTLY.

AND NOW PERHAPS THERE'S A LITTLE

MORE ATTENTION TO ENSURING

PEOPLE HAVE ECONOMIC POWER,

DIGNITY, MORE PROTECTION.

BUT YOU ALSO IN RATHER, YOU

KNOW, HIGH FORM ALSO SAW PEOPLE

WHO HAD ALL THE EDUCATION AND

ALL THE ADVANTAGES.

AND THEY HAD SUCH A STRONG

DESIRE TO PURSUE THEIR

POTENTIAL, TO PURSUE THEIR

PURPOSE, THAT THEY WERE IN A

SITUATION WHERE THEY WERE ABLE

TO BE ABUSED AND HARASSED.

AND FEEL INCREDIBLE PAIN THAT

THEIR SENSE OF PURSUING THEIR

POTENTIAL WAS TAKEN AWAY BY THIS

EXPLOITATION AT THE JOB.

SO I THINK YOU CAN PICK PARTS

BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE NUMBER

THREE IN.

BECAUSE, IF NOT, THEN YOU CAN

HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE PEOPLE

ARE -- THE PRICE OF PURSUING

YOUR POTENTIAL AND CARING FOR

YOUR FAMILY CREATES SUCH AN

ECONOMIC DESPERATION THAT YOU

HAVE SUCH A WEAK POWER BALANCE

THAT YOU LOSE THAT SENSE OF

DIGNITY.

AND IF YOU ACTUALLY THINK ABOUT

WHAT IN YOUR ECONOMIC LIFE YOU

TALK ABOUT MOST AT YOUR KITCHEN

TABLE WITH YOUR SPOUSE,

BOYFRIEND, GIRLFRIEND, PARTNER,

WHATEVER.

IT IS PROBABLY WHETHER YOU FEEL

AT WORK YOU'RE BEING TREATED

WITH RESPECT.

I MEAN, JUST THINK ABOUT IT.

YOU PROBABLY SPEND MORE TIME ON

THAT.

I'M NOT SAYING THERE'S A

GOVERNMENT SOLUTION FOR EVERY

PERSON WHO IS MEAN TO YOU AT

WORK OR A BAD BOSS, ETC,

BUT IT IS WORTH NOTING WHEN YOU

ASK WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT, THAT

IS PROBABLY THE NUMBER ONE THING

PEOPLE SPEND IN THEIR WORK LIFE

IS WHETHER THEY FEEL THEY'RE

TREATED WITH RESPECT AND DIGNITY

AT WORK.

SO, WHY IF THAT'S WHAT'S MOST

IMPORTANT ON YOUR DEATH BED AND

KITCHEN TABLE WHY SHOULD THAT BE

OUTSIDE THE ARENA OF BEING A

FIRST TIER ECONOMIC ISSUE?

>> THAT'S GREAT.

A LOT TO WRESTLE WITH.

LET ME TURN IT OVER TO OUR

STUDENTS.

THEY'RE GOING TO INTRODUCE

THEMSELVES THEN THEY HAVE

COLLECTED YOUR QUESTIONS FOR

ASKING

HELLO.

MY NAME IS MALIKA.

I'M A FIRST YEAR MPP STUDENT.

I'M INTERESTED IN

INTERNATIONAL/ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT.

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR

JOINING US HERE TODAY

MALIKA YOU HAVE LIKE FINALS IN

SEVEN HOURS OR SOMETHING?

DON'T YOU ALL?

I'M REALLY TOUCHED ANY OF YOU

ARE HERE AT THIS LATE DAY.

BUT GO AHEAD

NO PROBLEM.

WE ARE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU HERE.

THE FIRST QUESTION HERE I HAVE

ASKS: GIVEN THE POWER OF

TELEVISION TO CHANGE MINDS, HOW

WOULD YOU PITCH AN EPISODE OF

"THE WEST WING" TO GET THE

PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND THE

IMPORTANCE OF ECONOMIC DIGNITY

AND WHAT WE NEED TO CHANGE TO

MAKE IT HAPPEN

GENE SPERLING: WELL I

THINK THAT THE ISSUE I WAS JUST

RAISING WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, A

PRETTY GOOD EXAMPLE.

BECAUSE I THINK THE ISSUE OF THE

PEOPLE WHO ARE INVISIBLE, THAT

OUR LIMITATION ON ECONOMIC

METRICS.

LET ME BE CLEAR.

GROWTH IS IMPORTANT.

PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH IS

IMPORTANT.

GDP IS IMPORTANT.

THEY'RE JUST NOT END GOALS IN

THEMSELVES.

THEY'RE MEANS.

YOU WANT STRONG GROWTH BECAUSE

YOU'RE HOPING IT'S GOING TO LEAD

TO HUMAN FULFILLMENT.

I MEAN LOVE JOHN F. KENNEDY BUT

RISING TIDES LIFTS ALL BOATS IS

THE WORST STAMP STATEMENT

BECAUSE YOUR GOAL IS A RISING

TIDE WILL LIFT ALL BOATS.

IT DOESN'T DISCUSS WHAT IT

ACTUALLY MEANS.

SO I THINK THAT WHAT I WOULD

HAVE DRAMATIZED A LITTLE -- IS

EVERYBODY GETTING TOGETHER TO

HAVE A MEETING ON GIG WORKERS.

AND THEY'RE ALL TALKING ABOUT,

YOU KNOW, THE UBER DRIVERS AND

INSTA CART.

WHY ARE THEY ALL TALKING ABOUT

IT?

I HATE TO SAY THIS.

BECAUSE IT AFFECTS YUPPIE LIFE

IN AMERICA.

SO, PEOPLE HAVE BECOME AWARE

MORE OF THAT.

AND I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT AT

THAT POINT TO HAVE SOMEBODY GO,

YOU THINK THIS ISSUE JUST CAME

UP?

WHY WAS THIS ISSUE, YOU KNOW,

HOW ABOUT CONTRACT WORKERS IN

CONSTRUCTION IN TEXAS WHO HAVE

HIGH DEATH LEVELS?

HOW ABOUT DOMESTIC CARE WORKERS

WHO HAVE ONE PERSON THEY REPORT

TO ALMOST NO LEGAL PROTECTIONS.

WE DON'T EVEN HAVE SYSTEMS SET

UP FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE NANNYS TO

PROVIDE THEM HEALTHCARE IN A

WAY.

ALL THESE THINGS.

AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE PRETTY

POWERFUL.

BECAUSE IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE

ECONOMIC DIGNITY OF ALL WORKERS

AND ALL PEOPLE, WHY DID IT TAKE

THE GIG ECONOMY TO REALLY MAKE

PEOPLE FOCUS ON WHAT WAS A

PRETTY LARGE PROBLEM FOR A LOT

OF PEOPLE WHO JUST WEREN'T

REALLY AT THE TABLE?

HI,  I'M FIRST YEAR MPP STUDENT

TOO.

THIS QUESTION COMES FROM

TWITTER.

DO YOU SEE ROOM FOR FURTHER

EXPANSION OF THE FEDERAL CHILD

TAX CREDIT?

IF SO, WHAT TYPE OF EXPANSION?

GENE SPERLING: WELL THIS

IS AN ISSUE I SPENT A LOT OF

TIME ON.

AND I ALSO WANT TO MAKE ONE

POINT TOO.

RIGHT NOW THERE IS A LOT OF

DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW,

HAVING BIGGER GOALS.

WHICH I THINK IS WONDERFUL.

AND WHEN MICHAEL AND I CAME IN

TO GOVERNMENT, DEMOCRATS HAD

BEEN OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE FOR

AND WE ONLY GOT IN ONCE FOR 4

YEARS BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT WAS

A CROOK WAS ON THE WAY TO BEING

IMPEACHED.

IT WASN'T A GREAT 24-YEAR

RECORD.

AND I THINK YOU NOW HAVE PEOPLE

COMING IN WHO ARE -- WHO WANT TO

TALK MORE ABOUT HEALTHCARE AS A

RIGHT.

WHO WANT TO, YOU KNOW, BE FOR

THE, YOU KNOW, HAVE MORE OF OUR

DIALOGUE PARTICULARLY ON THE

PROGRESSIVE SIDE BE ABOUT THE

ULTIMATE VISION AND GOAL.

AND I THINK THAT THAT IS -- I

THINK THAT IS A GREAT THING.

I THINK IT PROVIDES FRESH

ENERGY.

NOW, THAT SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF

BEING MORE AWOKE WOULD HAVE MADE

IT EASIER TO DO MUCH THE LAST

SIX YEARS OF BILL CLINTON'S

PRESIDENCY WHEN REPUBLICANS

CONTROLLED BOTH HOUSES OF

CONGRESS FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS.

SO IT WAS HARD.

BUT THE THING I WANT TO SAY IS

THESE AREN'T NECESSARILY EITHER

ORS.

YOU CAN HAVE A GREAT VISION AND

YOU AIM TO GET THERE.

AND IF YOU CAN'T GET THERE IN

ONE STEP, IF YOU CAN'T GET THERE

IN ONE 60-YARD PASS, THEN YOU

RUN, YOU KNOW, TEN PLAYS UP THE

MIDDLE FOR SIX YARDS UNTIL YOU

GET THERE.

THE REASON I AM SAYING THIS IN

TERMS OF THE CHILD TAX CREDIT IS

BILL CLINTON RAN ON -- AND I

THINK THIS WAS A VERY MUCH A

DIGNITY MESSAGE.

AT A TIME WHEN YOU WERE STILL

OVERCOMING THE REAGAN ERA AND

THE REAL DENIGRATION OF PEOPLE

WHO GOT PUBLIC -- ANY KIND OF

PUBLIC SUPPORT, CLINTON SAID, IF

YOU WORK FULL-TIME YOU SHOULDN'T

HAVE TO RAISE YOUR KIDS WITH

DIGNITY.

IT IS VERY MUCH A UNIFYING ISSUE

AND IT WORKED.

IT MADE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO

WOULD NOT NORMALLY SUPPORT A

PROGRAM THAT WENT MOSTLY TO

LOWER INCOME PEOPLE, MOSTLY TO

PEOPLE, OFTEN SINGLE WOMEN OF

COLOR, BECAUSE IT PUT IT IN A

VALUE FRAME OF, IF YOU WORK

FULL-TIME YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE

THE INDIGNITY OF RAISING YOUR

CHILDREN IN POVERTY.

AND WE GOT A MAJOR INCREASE IN

'93 FOR FAMILIES TWO OR MORE.

THEN IN '97, IN THE BUDGET

AGREEMENT, WE COULDN'T GET MORE,

SO WE SNUCK MORE IN.

WE GOT A -- I'LL TELL YOU WHAT

HAPPENED.

WE GOT A CHILD TAX CREDIT.

THEY WOULDN'T MAKE IT

REFUNDABLE.

AND I CAN EXPLAIN THIS MORE TO

PEOPLE AT ANOTHER TIME.

BUT BY HOW YOU STACKED IT WE

ENDED UP INCREASING THE EITC BY

ANOTHER BIG AMOUNT.

BUT THE IMPORTANT THING ABOUT

THAT WAS THAT CLINTON -- AND

THIS KIND OF ARGUES FOR THE

BENEFITS OF BOTH THE BIG VISION

AND HOW THE POWER OF TAKING

STEPS CAN MATTER.

HE HAD A BIGGER VISION.

THIS WASN'T A PUBLIC HANDOUT.

THIS WAS MAKING SURE WORK PAID.

HE DID NOT GET ALL THE WAY

THERE, BUT HE WON THE PUBLIC

MESSAGE.

IN A WAY THAT WHEN 2001 CAME IN

AND THE BUSH TAX CUT WENT

THROUGH THERE GOT TO BE A LITTLE

MORE REFUNDAMENTAL.

THEN NANCY PELOSI AND ROSA

DELORI PUSHED FOR MORE IN 07.

THEN OBAMA CAME IN.

HERE IS THE QUESTION.

A SINGLE PARENT WITH TWO KIDS

MAKING $17,000, HOW MUCH MORE DO

THEY GET TODAY THAN THEY DID

BEFORE BILL CLINTON WAS ELECTED

PRESIDENT?

IT IS A PRETTY AMAZING NUMBER.

$7,100.

NOW THAT'S HUGE.

LIKE IF YOU, I MEAN, YOU KNOW,

EVEN THE MOST I THINK KAMALA

HARRIS HAS THE MOST AMBITIOUS

PROSE OUT THERE AND IT'S --

PROPOSAL OUT THERE AND IT'S

THE FACT WAS YOU HAD A VISION

AND YOU HAD A GOAL AND YOU DID

NOT HAVE A CONGRESS OR

GOVERNMENT THAT COULD DO IT ALL

AT ONCE.

BUT OVER TIME YOU HAVE BY PEOPLE

DIGGING IN, TWO ADMINISTRATIONS

DIGGING IN THE TRENCHES, IN THE

NEGOTIATIONS, HAVE DONE

SOMETHING THAT'S RELATIVELY

EXTRAORDINARY, NOT ENOUGH, BUT

PROBABLY 10, 11, 12 MILLION

PEOPLE ARE OUT OF POVERTY

BECAUSE OF IT.

THE QUESTION IS WHAT MORE DO YOU

WANT TO DO THERE?

I THINK THERE'S A FEW DIFFERENT

ELEMENTS.

AND AGAIN WE COULD DO A WHOLE

SESSION ON THIS BUT I'LL JUST

MENTION THEM.

ONE IS BILL CLINTON PUT IN THE

FIRST -- IT WASN'T FOR CHILDREN

BUT IS THE EITC FOR AN

INDIVIDUAL WHO DIDN'T HAVE

DEPENDENT CHILDREN.

I WANT TO SAY THIS DOESN'T MEAN

YOU DON'T HAVE CHILDREN JUST

MEANS YOU DON'T HAVE DEPENDENT

CHILDREN ON THE TAX CODE.

IT'S ONLY LIKE $500.

NOW THAT'S GONE UP TO $7,000.

BUT IF YOU ARE A SINGING PERSON

OR -- SINGLE PERSON OR MAYBE

TAKING CARE OF NEPHEW OR NIECES

BUT IS THEY'RE NOT PEOPLE YOU

PUT ON, YOU GET NOTHING.

SO, ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK

THERE'S GREATER CONSENSUS IS ON

LET'S INCREASE THE EARNED INCOME

TAX CREDIT FOR INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE

WHO DON'T HAVE DEPENDENT

CHILDREN.

I ALWAYS SAY THAT DOESN'T MEAN

YOU ARE IGNORING THAT WOMAN OR

DAD WHO'S GOT TWO KIDS LIVING

AND THEY'RE PRETTY POOR BECAUSE

THEY'RE GOING TO BE 40 OR 45

SOME DAY AND THEIR KIDS AREN'T

GOING TO OB THEIR TAX RECORDS

AND THIS WILL HELP THEM.

SECONDLY IS WHAT PEOPLE CALL THE

CHILD ALLOWANCE.

THAT IS THE VIEW THAT AT THE

VERY BOTTOM, THE WAY REFUND

ABILITY WORKS IS THAT ONCE YOU

GET TO A CERTAIN LEVEL -- 12,

CREDIT EITC BECOME POWERFUL.

BUT IF FOR MR.

REASON YOU ONLY

MAKE MAKE $5,000 A YEAR YOU GET

VERY LITTLE.

I THINK THE BIG PUSH IS DO YOU

NEED MORE PURE REFUND ABILITY AT

FOR THE LOWEST ECONOMIC FAMILY.

THAT CREATES THE ISSUE WHY ARE

THEY.

I THINK MANY OF US FEEL THERE'S

A LOT OF PEOPLE IN DIFFICULT

CIRCUMSTANCES.

I BELIEVE IN A COMPACT.

I BELIEVE PEOPLE SHOULD DO WHAT

THEY CAN.

BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE FOR VARIOUS

REASONS WHO STRUGGLE AND IF THEY

HAVE CHILDREN WE SHOULD DO MORE.

THE THIRD ISSUE IS WHETHER WE

NEED TO RAISE THIS WHOLE CONCEPT

UP INTO THE MIDDLE-CLASS MORE

SO THE EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT

AND CHILD TAX CREDIT RECOGNIZE

WHILE WE WANT TO HELP THE

WORKING POOR OUT MOST THAT

MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES ARE

STRUGGLING.

I THINK THERE'S ABOUT TO BE A

PROPOSAL COMING OUT OF THE

SENATE WITH SHAREIT BROWN AND

MICHAEL BENNETT HAVE WORKED ON

AND I THINK WHAT THEY'RE TRYING

TO DO IS CREATE AN EXPANDED

CHILD EITC CREDIT THAT WILL FILL

ALL THOSE HOLES SO IF DEMOCRATS

GAIN POWER AGAIN AND THEY REPEAL

THE BUSH -- PARTS OF THE BUSH

TAX CUT, THERE WILL BE ACTUALLY

A PRETTY DETAILED PLAN THAT

PEOPLE COULD PUT IN THAT WOULD

BE A REAL LIFT UP FOR PEOPLE WHO

ARE YOU MIGHT SAY WORKING POOR,

STRUGGLING LOWER MIDDLE-CLASS.

BUT EVEN TO BE HONEST A LOT OF

THE STRUGGLING MIDDLE-CLASS WHO

AS WE SEE OFTEN DON'T HAVE

ENOUGH MONEY TO GET THROUGH A

SINGLE EMERGENCY

SO THE NEXT QUESTION ASKS:

WITH THE IMMINENT THREAT OF

AUTOMATION DO YOU BELIEVE A

UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME AS

PROPOSED BY ANDREW YANG COULD BE

PART OF THE SOLUTION TO EASE THE

DISPLACEMENT OF MANY AMERICANS?

GENE SPERLING: SO IF YOU

STRUGGLE THROUGH MY PIECE YOU

WILL FIND THAT I'M--

BARR: IT'S NOT A STRUGGLE.

[ LAUGHTER ]

GENE SPERLING: IF YOU

RELISH GOING THROUGH THE PIECE.

[ LAUGHTER ]

I, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT A LOT

OF THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT

UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME DO SO OUT

OF A SENSE OF THE KIND OF

ECONOMIC DIGNITY I'M TALKING

ABOUT.

BUT I THINK THERE'S NO QUESTION

THAT WHAT I AM PROPOSING ENDS UP

BEING AN ALTERNATIVE PATH.

I TALK IN FACT ABOUT YOU BENT,

UNIVERSAL BASIC DIGNITY.

I THINK IT'S FOR A COUPLE

REASONS.

WHEN I LOOK AT THE THINGS YOU

HAVE TO DO FOR ECONOMIC DIGNITY,

I DON'T BELIEVE ALL OF IT CAN

JUST BE THROUGH AN INCOME GRANT.

YOU LOOK AT THE DEPRIVATION OF

ECONOMIC DIGNITY FOR PEOPLE, I

MEAN, MUCH OF IT IS HEALTHCARE.

IT IS VIOLENT NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT IS LACK OF AFFORDABLE

HOUSING.

THESE ARE THINGS THAT REQUIRE

GOVERNMENT POLICY.

THE UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME IS SO

LARGE AND IT GOES TO ABSOLUTELY

EVERYBODY, WHETHER THEY NEED IT

OR NOT, THAT I WORRY THAT IT

WILL CROWD OUT THE OTHER THINGS

THAT ARE MOST NEEDED FOR

ECONOMIC DIGNITY.

AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF

BIG PROPOSALS OUT THERE.

BUT THIS ONE ACTUALLY COSTS

ALMOST AS MUCH AS ALL THE

SPENDING OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT

COMBINED.

AND THERE'S A REASON WHY A LOT

OF LIBERTARIANS LIKE THIS

PROPOSAL.

THEY ARE HOPING THAT IT DOES

CROWD OUT THE REST OF

GOVERNMENT.

SO, CHARLES MURRAY AT AI

SUPPORTS THIS BECAUSE HE HOPES

THIS WILL LEAD TO THE END OF

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE,

ETC.

SO, THAT'S ONE CONCERN I HAVE AS

WELL INTENTIONED AS IT IS.

A SECOND I HAVE IS, IF WE HAD

THIS WORLD OF THE ROBOTS TAKING

OVER AND THERE WERE LESS JOBS,

AND WE HAD THIS SURPLUS OF MONEY

THAT WE COULD GIVE, I WOULD

RATHER GIVE TO WHAT I CALL

DOUBLE DIGNITY JOBS.

SO, WHEN PEOPLE SAY THERE MIGHT

NOT BE ENOUGH JOBS IT BOTHERS ME

WHEN PEOPLE SAY THAT BECAUSE

IT'S LIKE WELL THERE'S LESS NEED

FOR PEOPLE TO PUT

ALL THE

DOES THAT MEAN IF WE HAVE LESS

PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS BUT HAD A

SURPLUS OF WEALTH THE WAY WE

WOULD DO IT IS HAND EVERYBODY A

CERTAIN AMOUNT?

I WOULD SAY WHAT ARE ALL THE

JOBS WE REALLY NEED IN YOUR

COUNTRY THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO

GIVING OTHER PEOPLE DIGNITY?

SO RIGHT NOW YOU CAN GO PLACE

AFTER PLACE WHERE OUR COUNTRY IS

DISGRACEFULLY, WOEFULLY SHORT IN

JOBS THAT ARE NEEDED.

HOW ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HAVE

CHILDREN WITH AUTISM IN THEIR

FAMILY, DOING EVERYTHING THEY

CAN.

WE GIVE VERY LITTLE SUPPORT TO

THOSE FAMILIES.

TERRIBLE.

HORRIBLE.

JUST CRAZY.

LIKE WHAT KIND OF -- I MEAN, IT

MAKES ME FEEL BAD ABOUT OUR

COUNTRY.

SO, WELL IF YOUR CHILD IS BORN

WITH A DISABILITY, TOUGH LUCK.

OR THEY HAVE A CHALLENGE AND

THEY NEED MORE HELP.

YOU COULD HAVE AN ARMY OF PEOPLE

WHO WERE TRAINED WHO COULD HELP

THOSE FAMILIES.

AND THE POINT AND LOOK AT, YOU

KNOW, I'M HERE RIGHT NOW TO HELP

MY MOTHER, 88 YEARS OLD,

ALZHEIMER'S, DEMENTIA, BUT, YOU

KNOW, WE CAN DO IT RIGHT.

HOW MANY FAMILIES CAN DO IT

RIGHT?

HOW MANY?

NOT MANY.

NOT MANY.

MAYBE IN THIS ROOM.

MAYBE HERE.

NOT MANY.

SO IF I HAVE RESOURCES I WANT TO

HELP GIVE PEOPLE MEANINGFUL,

DIGNIFIED JOBS BRINGING DIGNITY

TO OTHER PEOPLE.

IF YOU'RE PRETTY WELL OFF AND

YOUR KID'S NOT GOING WELL, YOU

GET A TUTOR FOR THEM.

YOU GET INDIVIDUALIZED ATTENTION

FOR THEM.

THERE ARE SO MANY JOBS THAT ARE

NEEDED THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO

GIVING PEOPLE FIRST CHANCES,

SECOND CHANCES, DIGNITY.

SO MY

VIEW IS THAT IF WE HAD THIS I

WOULD NOT WRITE EVERYBODY A

CHECK AND PRETEND THAT THERE

WEREN'T OTHER JOBS NEEDED.

I WOULD USE THAT RESOURCES TO

CREATE AN ARMY OF DOUBLE DIGNITY

JOBS HELPING CHILDREN WHO NEED

EXTRA HELP.

HELPING FAMILIES WHO NEED EXTRA

HELP.

AND WHAT'S GREAT ABOUT THOSE

JOBS IS ALMOST ALL OF THOSE JOBS

ARE SKILLED JOBS.

THEY'RE INTERESTING JOBS.

THEY ARE JOBS THAT MEET MARTIN

LUTHER KING'S VIEW OF A

DIGNIFIED JOB.

SOMETHING THAT IS SERVING OTHER

PEOPLE.

SO I HAVE GREAT, YOU KNOW,

ADMIRATION FOR THE HEART OF THE

PEOPLE WHO ARE FOR UNIVERSAL

BASIC INCOME.

BUT IF THAT SITUATION COMES

WHERE THERE'S LESS JOBS I WOULD

RATHER PUT PEOPLE TO WORK ON THE

JOBS THAT MAY BE THE MARKET'S

NOT DEMANDING BUT ECONOMIC

DIGNITY FOR OTHER PEOPLE IS

DEMANDING

WHAT IS THE BEST WAY FOR

DEMOCRATS TO DEFLECT THE

SOCIALIST LABEL IN THE 2020

CAMPAIGN?

GENE SPERLING: SO THIS IS

SOMETHING I THINK MY ARTICLE

SPEAKS RIGHT TO.

WHICH IS, WE SHOULD FOCUS LESS

ON -- WE SHOULD FOCUS ON WHAT

THE END GOAL FOR PEOPLE IS.

LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED ON

PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS.

IT IS A GREAT EXAMPLE.

PREEXISTING CONDITIONS FOR A

WHILE WAS LIKE OBAMA'S SOCIALIST

AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.

THAT'S WHAT IT WAS.

AND THE FOCUS WAS ON THE

DELIVERY SYSTEM.

FOR ME, WHEN I LOOK AT POLICY I

LOOK MUCH MORE, WHAT'S YOUR GOAL

FOR IMPACTING PEOPLE'S LIVES?

SO I HATED HOWARD SCHULTZ'S LINE

THAT MEDICARE FOR ALL WAS

UN-AMERICAN.

LIKE AS IF, LIKE DID YOU COULD

HAVE A SOLUTION THAT WOULD GIVE

EVERYBODY HEALTHCARE THAT'S

UN-AMERICAN.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I ALSO DON'T

LIKE PEOPLE WHO SUGGEST THAT IS

THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN HAVE

HEALTHCARE AS A RIGHT.

AGAIN, THE POLICY IS THE MEANS

TOWARDS THE END.

THE END GOAL IS WE SHOULD

HAVE -- HEALTHCARE SHOULD BE A

RIGHT.

IT SHOULD BE FOR EVERYBODY.

AND I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF

HUMILITY ABOUT WHAT THE BEST WAY

TO DO THAT IS.

I THINK OTHER PEOPLE SHOULD TOO.

I THINK IT'S GREAT TO HAVE THE

ARGUMENT.

BUT I THINK BOTH POLICY WISE AND

THE WAY WE TALK ABOUT THINGS, IF

WE FOCUS ON WHAT THAT END GOAL

IS FOR PEOPLE, WHAT THE IMPACT,

I THINK THAT IS THE BEST -- I

THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY

POLICY AND YOU ARE OPEN TO

DIFFERENT WAYS TO GET THERE.

BUT I ALSO THINK IT IS THE RIGHT

WAY FOR PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT IT.

TO GO BACK TO PREEXISTING

CONDITIONS.

ONCE IT STOPPED BEING ABOUT, YOU

KNOW, IS OBAMA DOING A SOCIALIST

TAKEOVER AND PEOPLE JUST FOCUSED

ON, DO YOU THINK THAT BECAUSE

SOMEBODY IN YOUR FAMILY HAS A

PREEXISTING CONDITION THAT YOU

SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE BANKRUPT

WITH SUPER HIGH COSTS?

DO YOU BELIEVE THAT WOMEN SHOULD

HAVE TO PAY MUCH MORE THAN MEN

FOR HEALTHCARE BECAUSE THEY HAVE

BABIES AND MEN DON'T?

WHEN YOU STARTED FOCUS ON WHAT

THE END GOAL IS, DEMOCRATS AND

PROGRESSIVES AND PEOPLE WHO

BELIEVED IN THIS STARTED WINNING

OVERWHELMINGLY.

SO, THAT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE WHERE

WHEN IT WAS THE ACA VERSUS THIS

WE WERE -- IT WAS SUBJECT TO WHO

DID BETTER ON FOX NEWS OR A

PROGRESSIVE OUTLET IN DEFINING

IT.

WHEN IT ACTUALLY CAME TO WHETHER

YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT REPUBLICAN,

RIGHT, LEFT, LIBERTARIAN,

WHATEVER, DO YOU THINK THAT IF

YOUR CHILD HAS A DISABILITY OR

YOUR SPOUSE HAS A HEART

CONDITION, THAT THAT MEANS YOU

SHOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO CHANGE

JOBS AND START YOUR OWN BUSINESS

BECAUSE YOUR HEALTHCARE WOULD

SKYROCKET?

DOES IT MEAN THAT IF YOU GOT

LAID OFF THE NEXT DAY THAT YOUR

ONE JOB, ONE PINK SLIP AND ONE,

YOU KNOW, AWAY FROM FINANCIAL

DEVASTATION?

WHEN YOU PUT IT IN THOSE TERMS,

OVERWHELMING NUMBER OF AMERICANS

SAID, THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE.

DO SOMETHING TO FIX IT.

NOW, RIGHT NOW AFFORDABLE CARE

ACT IS DOING BETTER BECAUSE AT

LEAST THAT'S THIS SOLUTION TO

FIX IT AND NOBODY ELSE HAS COME

UP WITH A DIFFERENT ONE.

I, AGAIN, THINK IF PEOPLE

TALK -- AND I DIDN'T DO MY PIECE

TO BE AN ECONOMIC FRAME FOR THIS

CAMPAIGN.

BUT I DO THINK IF YOU TALK ABOUT

THE THINGS THAT ARE MORE

UNIVERSAL, THE DIGNITY TO PEOPLE

CAN THEY RETIRE WITH DIGNITY,

HOW DO PEOPLE LIVE THEIR OWN

LIVES, SHOULD THEY BE ABLE TO

TAKE CARE OF THEIR KIDS.

EVERYBODY KNOWS SOMEBODY WHO,

YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW MANY

PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A FAMILY

MEMBER, A CLOSE FRIEND, A

RELATIVE WHO IS GOING THROUGH

SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WHEN IT BECOMES ABOUT THEM, AND

ABOUT THEIR DIGNITY AND ABOUT

THEIR RESPECT AND FAIRNESS TO

THEM, THEN I THINK PEOPLE WILL

WANT SOLUTIONS.

AND AT LEAST PEOPLE ON OUR SIDE,

GOD BLESS THEM, ARE TRYING HARD

TO DO SOLUTIONS.

AND I'LL BE HAPPY WHEN THE

CONSERVATIVE SIDE IS JOINING IN

NOT JUST MAKING IDEOLOGICAL

COMMENTS ABOUT SOCIALISM OR

MARKETS BUT ACTUALLY JOINING IN

SAYING HEY PEOPLE ARE DEMANDING

A FIX.

THEY'RE DEMANDING PROTECTION

FROM PREEXISTING CONDITIONS.

IF WE DON'T LIKE THEIR PROPOSAL,

WHAT'S OURS.

THAT WILL BE PROGRESS.

I CAN SEE WHY GENE SPERLING

IS SO GOOD AT WHAT HE DOES.

PLEASE JOIN ME IN THANKING GENE

FOR A GREAT CONVERSATION.

[ APPLAUSE ]

THOSE OF WHO YOU CAN, PLEASE

JOIN US FOR A RECEPTION IN THE

GREAT HALL AFTERWARDS.

AND GENE WILL BE OUT IN A MINUTE

TO SAY HELLO.