>>.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.
I'M THRILLED TO BE ABOUT YOU 
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.
>> 31 YEARS.
>> 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 DUKE CAULK 
IS.
>> A LOVELY HUMAN BEING.
IT WAS A GREAT EXPERIENCE.
I GOT TO SEE FOR THE FIRST TIME 
IN 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 U 
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 PRESIDENT.
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 BRARGING 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 CJQP JOHNSON 
CAN'T BE GRUDY 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 
60,000, I WOULD SAY THINK OF 
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.
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 
AIRFORCE 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.
100 HOUR WEEKS.
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.
TH
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 S14 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 SHER 
A
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 
DIFFE
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 LEGAVEL 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 KIWIN 
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 
NARCICISSTIC 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
"BLA
"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 GLUE 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 COME 
ASATISFACTORY 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 TOE 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, ET CETERA, 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 
1990-BLANK.
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.
LI
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
FREE
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 
29-YEAR-OLD, WOULD I HAVE 
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
19TH CENTURY, WE USE THE PHRASE 
"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 
5:
5:30.
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, ET CETERA, 
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 
>> COULD YOU HAVE LIKE FINALS IN
SEVEN HOURS OR SOMETHING?
DON'T YOU CALL?
I'M REALLY TOUCHED ANY OF YOU 
ARE HERE AT THIS LATE DAY.
BUT GO AHEAD 
>> NO PROBLEM.
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?
>>  I'M FIRST YEAR MPV 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 
20 OF 24 YEARS.
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 
6,000.
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, 
13, $14,000 -- THE CHILD TAX 
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-CLASSS 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--
>> 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, 
ET CETERA.
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 
DEMAN
DEMANDING 
>> WHAT IS THE BEST WAY FOR 
DEMOCRATS TO DEFLECT THE 
SOCIALIST LABOR 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 POLICYWISE 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
