Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Delivers Remarks at Santa Clara University

May 14, 2015

Mayor Bill de Blasio: Thank you. Thank you everyone. It is such a joy to be with you, and I want to tell you I have such fondness for Santa Clara University, not just because it is a beautiful place, not just because of the wonderful students and wonderful faculty, but because this place means so much to our family. And I reached out to Father Engh and I told him I wanted to come here and offer some thoughts and join with this wonderful university community in a conversation, and he said to me that he was very receptive but that there was a condition that I had to find a way to create a rainstorm at the same time.

[Laughter]

I said, you know, “Father Engh that’s going to take some divine intervention.” We worked on it together, and we’re proud of the result today.

[Applause]

That plan worked out very nicely. I wanted to tell you, you’re blessed to have a leader in Father Engh who cares so deeply about the opportunity this school gives to each student to really have a transcendent experience in their lives. The education provided here – and I’ve seen it with my own eyes; there’s something particular about the Jesuit philosophy of education; there’s something that is so appropriate to the times we’re living in.

In a moment, I’ll talk about what I think is the core challenge we face, but part of understanding that challenge and acting on it is really going deep into how this come to pass, and what it means, and what is the way out. And that spirit of inquiry, that critical thinking that is part of your everyday education here is not typical everywhere in the academic world, it’s not typical everywhere in our society, but it is strong here at SCU, and it’s something I think people should be very, very proud of. And just one – Chiara just wanted to say “Go Broncos.” Is that my moment?

[Applause]

And I must say I’m so appreciative of Father Engh for his leadership. I also want to thank his Chief of Staff, Molly McDonald, who has been great at helping us prepare for today, and all she does for this university. And it’s also a moment where we have to take stock that there is such extraordinary leadership in this world on the topic I care about, and I’m going to talk about, the inequality that we’re faced with today.

And I’ve said it many times, I am one humble voice on this matter but there is a voice that’s the strongest on this earth and has broken through more than anyone else, and that’s Pope Francis. And the Jesuit tradition has come out so powerfully in his ideas, his words, his analysis that is literally changing the global dialogue on income inequality and so many other issues. So, it’s a propitious time to be having this conversation.

But I also want to speak from a very personal perspective before I go into my remarks. This school means a lot to me and it means a lot to my family. And you know, for us – we first came at SCU, we experienced this beautiful place, but we didn’t know what it would mean in terms of our family’s life, what it would mean for us, and the future of our family, and the experience has been so powerful. So, I want to just say a profound thank you to everyone at SCU, and I want to be joined in that thank you by the First Lady of New York City, Chirlane McCray, who will now take her bow.

[Applause]

Well, the reason that I got to know this place is a young woman who means everything to Chirlane and I, our daughter, has been for us a revelation from the day she was born. And you know, you learn a lot from your children. And there’s always that hope that parent has, that dream that their children will surpass them. And you know, you don’t know when and how that might happen but it’s something parents cling to. And Chirlane and I are blessed because I can say this, and Chiara this is from the bottom of my heart, our daughter has surpassed us already.
And it is because she has shown her bravery, a strength – even in the face of her own adversity, a desire to help others to turn any source of pain into a source of action in the cause of helping others. That is the most beautiful thing. And so I just have to – I won’t brag about her anymore –but from the bottom of my heart, I have to express, not just my love but my admiration for Chiara de Blasio.

[Applause]

Take your bow. Take your bow.

Well, we’re here in the center of one of the most dynamic parts of the country. We’re here in Silicon Valley and we associate this with progress, and we associate it with innovation, we associate it with the creation of wealth. And we in New York City, as many of you know, we have a very impressive and booming tech sector of our own, and we associate it with the same things. And it would be easy to look at that good and think that the pieces of our society are coming together, things are working, an opportunity of balance.

And yet, what’s true here, what’s true in New York City, what’s true all over the country that even in the midst of our strengths, we’re experiencing a deepening – a deepening division, a deepening crisis, a deepening gap that’s really in the end profoundly contradictory with our American values. It’s a country that was founded – remember, not founded simply because people found themselves in a certain geography and it made sense to have a country within the certain boundaries. This was a country founded more than I could argue almost any other on a set of ideas, and those ideas fundamentally revolved around equality, and yet we find ourselves in a time of deepening inequality.

And my goal today is to talk to you about this crisis not because I think it is without solution but because I think we are not, as Americans, yet grappling with the totality of what it means and what it’s doing to us; and how it does not fit our character and our beliefs; and how it has to be called out for what it is. There’s a crisis of inequality.

When I ran for mayor, I talked about New York City, unfortunately, in its full reality as a tale of two cities. I talked about the inequality crisis that took many forms, not just economic. But the one that I think that is underlying so many of the challenges we face and is so under examined and undernoted is the crisis of income inequality. And the one where the solutions have not been acted on the most is in the area of income inequality.

And it’s sobering because you think about the history of this country, and you think about the greatest economic crisis we ever had which was the Great Depression, the years leading right up to it – literally through the stock market crash in 1929 – those were the times of our historically greatest inequality. The wealthiest became even wealthier and those who had the least had no way of breaking through, and we had a template in our American thinking, look back at the year 1929 was the bright line in American history, that was everything we weren’t supposed to be. 1929 was when the lust for wealth was out of control; when there was no set of boundaries and ground rules to stop us from veering into a dangerous path and literally going right over the cliff. And therefore, in that year, stock market crashed and our country went into the greatest economic crisis in its history. And for a lot of us, we grew up with those who went through the crisis. It was dinner table conversation in family gatherings in my family. People talked about what it meant, the bread lines, the people lost their jobs, the businesses – the family businesses that they had built over years and years were swept away in an instant.

And for those who went through the Great Depression, they had an attitude a strongly held belief that they would never let it happen again, not to their children or grandchildren, not to their country. And for decades, we actually lived out that belief. We actually had a country that progressed, and was more economically inclusive. It was more fair. There was actually a way forward, not for everyone. Lord knows, we faced challenges, and discrimination, and exclusion throughout our history, and those are very real still today.

But it actually was substantial progress for so many people, and the thought of ever going back in those dangerous times seemed inconceivable. And then, slowly but surely, almost without seeing that we were starting down the path, we started back towards that cliff we had once gone over. And now, this year, we have once again, the level of income inequality we had in 1929. The difference now is it’s getting worse.

Now, in this year, we have the for first time a long [inaudible] of time that we’ve lived through in which an average American literally has been going backwards economically. I just want you to fully take in that idea. For the last 25 years, you take the median family income in this country and adjust for inflation, it is lower today than it was 25 years ago. We are still the wealthiest country in the world. We have the strongest economy in the world in terms of the totality of our economic might, but the average American has gone backwards.

I will have the honor of speaking at the University of California Berkeley earlier today, working together with former Labor Secretary Bob Reich, and he’s done such extraordinary work on this topic. And I urge you to see a film he put together a few years ago called the ‘Age of Inequality’. And this film points out that this crisis has deepened to such a point that is typical now in our country – even with people who used to think of themselves as middle class – it’s typical for people to be living very, very close to the economic edge.

The phrase ‘living one paycheck away from economic disaster,’ is very, very real for a huge percentage of Americans. In the film, there were very touching moments where it would randomly go to people and ask them about their economic circumstances. The question was asked very simply, ‘How much do you have in your bank account?’ And it was painful to see so many families say $25, $50, $100. It was all they had as a cushion against economic demise.
That is what has happened more and more to American families, and it’s because we went through the second greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression with the Great Recession. Starting in 2008, something profound changed. And I know we’re going to have a dialogue in a few minutes, but part of what I think is so important about having the dialogue and examining what happened is to recognize that this is the uncharted territory. I told you what it was like when is nation went into the depression.

Well, at that time, of course, there had been nothing like it and a whole new approach had to be innovated to deal with a time that there’s no precedent for, there was no roadmap, there was no game plan. Suddenly, the nation was fundamentally economically undermined, and the government had to innovate a way forward. We were blessed in that moment that we had leaders like Franklin Roosevelt or in my city, like Fiorello La Guardia who found a path and understood what it would take to make people whole again.

And again, we know from that history, those actions worked. World War II came, changed the dynamic for everyone – so much pain and suffering, but also a whole new economic reality that came out of it. The difference this time is the Great Recession hit, it changed our lives profoundly and set so many people back, and yet, we still haven’t taken full stock of what it meant. This time, there are no new policies on the table. There is no profound change in our behavior, our approach, or our government that addresses the totality of what we face, and so we continue deeper into the crisis.

Now, I am not telling you all this out of hopelessness. I wouldn’t do the work I do if I were not fundamentally an optimist. I am not saying it as a wakeup call. I am saying it because we can and must deal with it, and actually, we should be inspired by the history we’ve been through because if the Great Depression was the worst challenge we ever faced and we saw it addressed, we should be asking ourselves today, why is this challenge going unaddressed? Why are people content to watch an ever growing division and not demand more of their leaders? And where will it take us if the crisis isn’t addressed?

It’s interesting – this dialogue has grown slowly but surely. The Great Recession hit, the first few years obviously a shock to the system, where will we go, and we know so much of our financial sectors tittering on the edge. We know our auto industry was almost lost, and we were all caught up in the work of trying to salvage and save that which was immediately in front of our eyes and that which we are facing. Then, slowly but surely, in the years since, stock is being taken of what’s happened, but it’s been very slow.

Part of what I aspire to do working with so many leaders around the country is to get this issue to the front of the agenda where it needs to be. When you think about it, this kind of phenomenon is worth discussing. It’s touching so many Americans so profoundly. It’s going to have lasting effects on us. It has to come to the front of the agenda.

You know, the voices have started talking about this, which is so interesting because it wasn’t just progressives like me; it wasn’t just people from organized labor. One of the first people to say that our system was out of whack when it came to taxation was Warren Buffett, arguably the most successful capitalist of all time. He started sounding alarmed that something was wrong with the tax system in which he, as a billionaire, paid a lower percentage of taxes than his own secretary and the others who worked in his office.

Then, you start to see other voices come forward. One of the most affecting to me in last year was Lloyd Blankfein, the CEO of Goldman Sachs – and arguably, the strongest financial firm on Wall Street. He gave an interview a few months back. He talked about income inequality. He talked about how dangerous it was to this country. He used a word that we should all take as a particular warning sign coming from one of the people who probably understands our economy the best. He said income inequality was destabilizing the United States of America. That’s his word, destabilizing.

So something’s happening that is profoundly important, profoundly under recognized, and almost unaddressed particularly in Washington. And that is a time when people have to stand and be counted, demand of their leaders something very, very different. And we should feel some outrage at this moment. In fact, outrage, honest outrage is one of the things that moves social change, and it often starts on campuses like this because there has not been a recognition that a growing concentration of wealth in the hands of a few could seriously set us back as a nation.
Again, I don’t believe it’s consistent with our values, but as more and more economists and even business leaders are pointing out that growing concentration of wealth backfires because that wealth is in the hands of people who, by definition, do not plow it back into the economy the way consumers do. This is what Professor Reich talks about and so many others that there is a reality of what is strong economy looks like, there’s a middle class that’s growing, there are people who take the money they make and they spend it right away. And it builds up the economy for everyone.

Joe Stiglitz said – Nobel Prize Winning Economist, put out a report a few days ago, I had the honor of being with him – he said, ‘Look, if the economy is no longer about a large majority of Americans having enough money to spend on a regular basis, well then, the fundamental dynamics are undermined.’ He said, ‘it’s even worse than that because we’ve all been told, we’ve been told that we need an economy that grows. The only way to have it grow is to put more and more money in the hands of the wealthy, and yet, what we’re actually finding is those “pro-growth policies,” are backfiring.’ The kind of growth we need is the kind of growth that uplifts working people in the middle class.

And any time the critics say that that in fact means that we will somehow not be able to sustain our growth, we’ll look at the decades upon decades upon decades when America got better for everyone, the middle class grew and the wealthy, they did find but they didn’t have anywhere near the concentration of wealth they have today. They also used to pay a lot more in taxes and that allowed the government to invest.

The America that worked from World War II through the end of the 1970s was the America where the distance between the average workers’ pay and the CEO’s pay was actually not that far. The CEO paid a very substantial amount of taxes that went into the government that invested in roads and bridges, ports, education, research, and it all kept growing for the good of all.
But just a few years ago, that phenomenon went like this – the pay of CEOs shot upwards, the concentration of wealth increased, the actual earnings of working people started to go down, the government no longer taxed at the same level, the resources of the government declined, the roads and the bridges got older, the research was cut off, education was no longer invested in.
The greatest nation on earth literally took its formula for success and threw it away. And that is the moment you inherited – that is the moment. Isn’t that good news?

[Laughter]

That is the moment that we have to change. When I say you’re inheriting, I am not saying it to be coy or to be depressing. I am saying it as a call to arms because you didn’t create that but you can help solve it.

I’ll give you an example of the kind of thing we should recognize as something wrong. In my city, And I said – I called it a tale of two cities, I didn’t want [inaudible] words, I still don’t [inaudible]words, I am responsible for 8.5 million people and their well-being but I am not going to pretend that we have solved the problem. So, I have a city with obviously some of the richest people on earth. I have a city where that income skew is amongst the greatest in the country. I have a city where 46% of my fellow New Yorkers are living at or near the poverty level – at or near the poverty level. We have 8.5 million people, 46% means almost four million people at that level.

Now, in that same city, just a year ago, we saw a single apartment sell for $100 million. Again, a city with four million people clinging – clinging to any possibility of getting by economically, we saw an apartment sell for $100 million. We saw another apartment rent for $500,000 a month, which made me think in my mind, I thought, what if the guy who purchased the apartment ran into the guy who rented the other apartment, what would he say to him? He’ll probably say, don’t worry, you’ll be able to own one day.

That is a city that could turn into a gilded city. That is a city that could turn into a gated community. And we’ve said very clearly, we won’t let that happen because by the way, what’s true of New York City is true of our country. We don’t work as a gated community. We don’t work as a society of exclusion or a society with haves and have-nots are more deeply divided. What made New York City so great, not just for decades, for centuries, was it was open to everyone. It was open to immigrants; it was open to working people; it was open to folks that who had a great idea, and literally almost nothing in their pocket but turned it into something wonderful.

The entrepreneurs, the artists, all of the famous names you hear that come out of the history of New York City, so many of them started with nothing or were new to our shores. It was a society that actually allowed for that possibility of something greater because it was open. It was affordable, it was inclusive. Not always warm and welcoming. That’s not always our strong suit but economically, a place of possibility.

[Laughter]

I know what I am fighting for and people today in my city are fighting for is to keep consistency with that great tradition that worked for us; to not let it slip through our hands; to not become as we see in so many cities in Europe, a place where the city is for the wealthy and the periphery is for the poor and the working class, no. That’s, again, not consistent with our values as Americans. We’re supposed to be a place for everyone.

So, we’re fighting in New York City every tool we know how. We have the biggest affordable housing program in the history of this country where building and preserving 200,000 units of housing in the next ten years – enough for half a million people. So, literally, enough affordable housing that we will create to equal the size of the population within the city limits of Atlanta, or Miami, or Kansas City. That’s what we’re doing to go at the number one expense in people’s lives, which is housing.

We’re raising in every way we can wages and benefits. We passed a paid sick leave law for half a million more New Yorkers, so that they’re not going to lose a paycheck just because they got sick or because their child got sick. We’re providing full day pre-k for every child in the city this coming school year, which is going to change the lives of those young people and give them so much more opportunity. But also for the families taking away a huge expense they have to somehow pay out of their own pocket.

So, we are using every tool we know, and we’re trying to hold ourselves accountable. By the way, I’d like to see a very different reality from my state government or my federal government but physician-heal thyself – first, show what we can do with our own resources.  So, we just put out a plan for the future of New York City, and in that plan we said, we pledge especially if we can get the tools we need from our state and federal government, we will lift 800,000 New Yorkers out of poverty in the next decade.

800,000 people right now are just scraping to get by. We will lift them up economically. We will do that to address the inequality that plagues us and to create a more fair and just society, but we need a state government that would do things like give us the higher minimum wage that’s desperately needed – especially a place like New York. I’m a firm believer in the $15 dollar minimum wage. In a place like New York City, if you don’t make that much per hour, you can’t get by. A minimum wage is supposed to be a minimum wage. It’s supposed to stand for something. It’s supposed to be a measure of viability, but it hasn’t been for a long time.

We’re fighting for that in our state capital, in Washington. We’re fighting for those investments I talked about before to actually see our federal government do what national governments all over the world do all the time – invest in mass transit; invest in roads, and highways, and bridges, in research, in education.

By the way, our economic competitors – they are very clear that their national governments have to build their economy. Why is China booming? Because China puts over four times more of its resources into infrastructure than we do proportionally. Europe puts over twice as much more. We can see it but we allow our current political dynamics to stifle all the things that would start to turn us around, and create opportunity, and create an economy that actually included people again.

I’m working with people all around the country who feel the same way and it’s a growing number. We organized just a few days ago in Washington a group of leaders, members of the Congress, and mayors, and labor leaders, and issue advocates – we gathered together and we inaugurated something called the Progressive Agenda to combat income inequality. I urge you all to take a look at progressiveagenda.us. It’s a simple set of ideas that we think can turn this crisis, and take us to a place of opportunity again – things like the $15 dollar minimum wage, things like paid sick leave and paid family leave for all Americans, pre-k for our children, progressive and fair taxation, the Buffet Rule I had mentioned before.

Let’s create a tax system where those who have done very well actually have to pay the same percentage of tax as the rest of us. Let’s create a tax system where hedge fund managers can do the [inaudible]. The hedge fund manager paid less in tax than the woman who [inaudible]. I say that as a Democrat but I believe what I’m saying is [inaudible] in all parts of the country and people of all different values and ideas. By the way – 2014 – where did you see states pass higher minimum wage via referendum? You saw it in red states like Nebraska. You saw people saying, wait a minute, something is out of whack here. We’re going to do something about it. This set of ideas, I think, transcends our concepts of ideology because people are living it and feeling it on the ground and demanding solutions, but not small solutions – bold and forceful solutions. That’s what would be needed to turn this around.

Look, I’ll finish here by saying, a lot of us understand and it’s very hard for people who are struggling not to feel this in this country. Hard working people, there’s a lot of people in this country, they’re not working one job, they’re working two jobs, they’re working three jobs, and still they end up with only $50 dollars in their checking accounts. Still they wonder if they would be able to pay the bills next week. For so many Americans, there’s a deep, deep feeling that the game is rigged, that the rules actually are not fair for them and that those who are wealthy and powerful keep doing better and better, and the rules are only for those already at the top. By the way, the great recovery that we hear about all the time since the recession – 91 percent of the gains from that recovery have gone to those at the very top of the income scale already. So, why would any American citizen who thought there’s something wrong with this picture – why would you call them wrong? You can’t. You have to say they’re seeing and feeling exactly what we experience in this country, and they’re demanding all of us to find a way out of it and a way forward.

Again, I’ll finish with a notion that I – even with this tough analysis I’m trying to provide, I see a lot of cause for hope. I see hope certainly in the fact that we went through an even a deeper crisis in the 1930s and found a way forward. I see hope in the fact that we actually have models from our own American experience of what can work to create a fair economy and an inclusive economy. I see hope in the fact that we see governments around the world investing in their people and achieving booming economies as a result. I see hope in the fact that there are business leaders of conscience saying this is not an acceptable state of affairs. I see hope in the fact that my brothers and sisters in red states are voting for a higher minimum wage. I see a lot of hope in the fact that this fight for a $15 dollar minimum wage has changed our national discussion so much that even some of our biggest corporations are rushing to proactively increase their own wages because they can feel the demand rising up, that fight for $15 dollar movement.

A couple of weeks ago, there are 200 cities in this country that simultaneously had demonstrations for a higher minimum wage. That’s not business as usual. That says that something is happening at the grass roots and I’m a firm believer – real change does not happen from the top down, it happens from grass roots up, and it’s starting to happen in this country.
I’ll finish with a quote from the man who I think showed us the most about how to respond to economic crisis, and how to actually heed the call of our people – Franklin Roosevelt. He said, “Let us not be afraid to help each other. Let us never forget the government is ourselves and not an alien power over us. The ultimate rulers of our democracy are not a president, and senators, and congressmen, and government officials, but the people of this country.” It’s such a simple idea, and so powerful, so basic. Never allow that notion to stray from your field of vision. Never let the sense that there’s paralysis in Washington, or angry partisan debate, or sensationalized news coverage – never let any of those things take away from you the feeling, and the understanding, and the belief that what Roosevelt said is still true. It’s still the people who set the pace. We’re hearing their call. They are demanding change right now and they are right. They want a just nation again. They want an economy that works for everyone again. With your help, that is what we will achieve. Thank you.

[Applause]

Dr. Elsa Chen: Mayor de Blasio, I’d I like to start by thanking you for your very powerful and compelling remarks, and thank you for bringing your lovely first lady, Ms. McCray. Thank you for coming in. Thank you for bringing the rainstorm also.

Mayor: Lovely and talented.

Dr. Elsa Chen: Lovely and talented, absolutely. Are we going to get in trouble if I didn’t add that?

Mayor: I would never let you not add that.

[Laughter]

Dr. Elsa Chen: Okay. I thought I’d start with a question. Hang on a second. I have to remind people to pass the comment and question cards – the question cards to the aisles and people will be free to pick them up. Thank you. I like to start with a question that’s pretty close to home here. In your recent op-ed with Elizabeth Warren, one of your recommendations for reducing income inequality was reigning in the cost of college.

Mayor: Yes.

Dr. Elsa Chen: So as someone who is –

Mayor: Can I get an amen?

[Cheers]

Dr. Elsa Chen: I know you’re paying tuition bills at Santa Clara University.

[Laughter]

So, you know that college is –

Mayor: We’re about to be paying a lot more at Yale University for our son, Dante.

[Laughter]

Dr. Elsa Chen: Congratulations to Dante. So, you know that college is really expensive these days, and I’d like to ask you why you think that’s the case and what are some specific ways that schools like SCU can reduce tuition costs while still attracting high quality students and faculty?

Mayor: Well, I want to separate the public policy piece from what an individual school can do. Look, I think the fact is education determines economic destiny at this point in history more than literally any other point before. If we’re going to have an inclusive society, you need the maximum number of people educated at the highest conceivable level. When that becomes economically impossible, we’re broken, right? There is only a very small number of people in this country who know that their kids can go to college and they don’t even have to think about it. Top 1 percent or maybe top 10 percent – whatever it is in that range, but for most Americans especially if it’s multiple kids, it becomes an immediate challenge. And then, there’s the challenge of debt burden which I have seen in the discussions of my own children – that something that Chirlane and I didn’t have to obsess about. I think so many of you have to think about deeply – what will it mean for your own possibilities if you’re carrying so much debt? I would say, this is first a public policy question. I think, we have to get this nation on a track to debt-free college, which means federal investment, and it certainly means one of the other things we can do is to create a methodology to allow students with debt to refinance their debt the way we do everything else in our financial system, and reduce the burdens. I think, structurally, it’s not surprising if you have a federal disinvestment in education and certainly in financial aid, that it has created a bigger crisis where the skyrocketing cost cannot be met. Then, there’s either a debt burden or for many – you are, thank God, the ones who manage to sustain your education but I have met too many young people who couldn’t continue their educations. I also have met those who are perfectly able and should have been in that community college or four-year college, and literally did not think they could even start because they could not conceive of a financial way forward. So, you are the blessed that are at least in the game. There are many, many more – I would argue millions who can’t sustain it or don’t even try because the math is so daunting. I think what the individual institutions have to do – with all their might, besides the hard work of fundraising to build up their financial aid, is to do their darndest to limit the cost, and not do all the things that an institution would love to do to be as good as it could be, but at this point, I think as a question of equality and inclusion, we need financial aid more than we need a lot of the other things that might make a university great, because if it’s not inclusive of every kind of people, it’s not as great a university as it could be.

[Applause]

Dr. Elsa Chen: I think that’s really a food for thought –

Mayor: Thank you.

Dr. Elsa Chen: You spoke also very compellingly about the desire for the $15 dollar minimum wage in New York City and elsewhere. One of my students – Stephanie, right there – would like you to talk about whether you foresee a rise in unemployment, or maybe a departure of small businesses, or any other unattended consequences with your proposed increase in the minimum wage?

Mayor: I’ve heard those concerns, obviously. Certainly, we heard similar concerns when we passed our paid sick leave law. We heard those concerns around the country but the paid sick leave is a great example of where – here in San Francisco, in the state of Connecticut, and other places – Seattle – all those concerns are put forward and the opposite happened. Healthier workers became more loyal, more longevity on job, more productive. That’s one example. The same we hear in terms of minimum wage that it will have a negative impact on businesses – I would argue the opposite. I would argue the same phenomenon as paid sick leave, a better paid workforce will be a stronger workforce and in a lot of levels. You’ll also be able to maintain talented workers for a longer period of time. But, guess what? The Henry Ford point – Henry Ford, creator of the Ford Motor Company, the man who was never described as a left-wing socialist, literally paid his workers at a level that would be unrecognizable today. By one estimate I saw, if his assembly line workers pay was adjusted for inflation, it would be pushing $100 dollars an hour by our terms today. He paid in an extraordinary wage. He had a very simple idea. It was not about charity or creating a better society, he had a simple sentence – “I want the workers in my company to be able to afford the product that they make.” It was an understanding about how our actual functioning economy works. So, I would argue to anyone who says that it’s going to have a negative effect – I’d say, look at this economy right now, where so many families can’t purchase anything but the basics. If you want a thriving economy, give people the kind of wage that they not only could just make ends meet, they can go out and buy some of the extras in life, and build up the economy for everyone, and a lot more employment for those who are not yet employed because the economy is growing.

Dr. Elsa Chen: But do you think that will influence American businesses’ competitiveness with countries where people manufacture products that they also are not able to afford?

Mayor: I understand that challenge for sure, but here’s what I have to say about our economy today. If it’s not functioning for such a huge percentage of Americans and if, again, a simple measure – are people stably in the middle class? I argue that there’s a huge percentage of people including some who even 10 years ago thought they were stable in the middle class who know they are not – the folks who are poor; the folks who are low income; working people; to folks who are clinging to the middle class but again, a few paychecks away; older workers who know if they lose a job, it would be very hard to find a new one. That is a pervasive reality in our economy, and this “recovery” we’ve experienced has come with very little wage growth. As I mentioned, the difference of 25 years ago to today – the average American family has gone backwards economically. I would argue, you have to go to the heart of that matter, and if you do, you’re going to create economic growth that is actually sustainable and again where is the evidence? The late 40s, the 1950s, and 1960s, 1970s. Yes, different context in than a globalized world, but in the end, if our economy is not functioning for our people, I would argue our first task is to right that wrong. That is job one in this country and it’s not being achieved.

Dr. Elsa Chen: Thank you. Do you think that there’s any possibility that your efforts to push fellow Democrats to embrace more progressive policies might backfire when it comes to the presidential election in 2016, especially if the Republicans can find a somewhat moderate candidate?

Mayor: No.

[Applause]

Dr. Elsa Chen: Why not?

Mayor: I don’t mean this is as a comment on you. There is a conventional wisdom that says, you know, the electorate craves a moderate. I would argue, the electorate craves leaders who are clearly defined and are offering bold solutions to the challenges we face because that larger reality – so, how many Americans are unaffected by the problem of stagnant wages, or college debt, or foreclosure, or so many of the other challenges that people face? All of them are looking for a clear path forward. I use the example of 2014. I think what happened with Democrats in 2014 is in many, many cases in competitive races, they did not talk about a progressive economic vision. They did not acknowledge the existence of the president of the United States, who is a member of their own party. They ran away from healthcare reform, which actually has been an extraordinary success in terms of reaching so many people who didn’t have healthcare and now do. By the way, you want to talk to some people who actually think government did something for them, talk to some of them who didn’t have health insurance and now does. Talk to perhaps some of your own parents, who had the situation where they couldn’t get their kids under their insurance, now can up to the age of 26. Talk to people with preexisting conditions who couldn’t be covered, now can. Nothing would be more important to a family’s economy than not having to pay a huge amount of out-of-pocket healthcare costs. I use that example 2014 to say, I actually think the problem for my party is when people are not willing to be authentic progressive Democrats. Howard Dean – who I think the world of – who joined us a couple of days ago as we announced the Progressive Agenda – again, progressiveagenda.us. Look it up. That’s my product placement. Howard Dean had that phrase from 2004 that changed so much of our political dynamic. He used to get up and say, “I’m Howard Dean and I’m from the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party,” and that to me is actually what the voters respond to.

Dr. Elsa Chen: Yeah. I have quite a few questions coming in.

Mayor: I’ll do quicker answers now. Okay, what are they?

Dr. Elsa Chen: No, no. I have quite a few questions coming in related to criminal justice and police. This morning, a Quinnipiac University poll indicated that William Bratton, whom you hired for his second stint as police commissioner in New York City, has the approval of 55 percent of New Yorkers, with 28 percent disapproving and 57 percent approved of the Broken Windows-style of policing quality of life offenses. In fact, that poll found that support for Broken Windows outweighs opposition even among black voters. At the same time, Bratton’s policies have been controversial, especially among Latino and black New Yorkers, and especially these days after the death of Eric Garner and many other African American men. How do you work with the police department to balance Broken Windows with issues of racial profiling to preserve public safety which is, of course, one of the greatest concerns for all people of all races in New York?

Mayor: From the beginning, my vision and – I have to say, I think Commissioner Bratton has done an outstanding job. I knew before I was elected, based on the number of conversations with them, I knew how kindred we were on these issues. The concept was, we had to find a way to keep crime low while repairing the bridge between police and community. The previous governing discussion in New York City – certainly the message of the previous administration then, there was a choice and it was epitomized by the stop and frisk policy. You can have a policy that alienated police from community, and in the process, the theory went – keep crime low, or you can bring police and community together but crime will go up. Bratton and I believe that that was a false choice and that we could, in fact, keep crime low, and maybe even drive it lower, while repairing that bridge. What happened? In the year 2014, we had the lowest crime we’ve had in a generation. We managed to take a broken stop and frisk policy and change it foundationally so that very few stops were taken and they were higher quality stops. We, in the course of the year, addressed what had been a very misguided policy of arresting New Yorkers, especially young men of color for a very low-level amounts of marijuana possession. We stopped those arrests – and we saw crime continue to decline. Now, we have crime challenges and there are some areas where I’m certainly not satisfied nor is the commissioner, but the balance point here was to say, you could have a quality of life policing addressing real concerns of community residents, keeping a strong and positive police presence in communities, but also create a more fair dynamic between police and community. What I think is going to happen as this deepens is that you will see police and community become partners. We had obviously a tragedy recently when Officer Moore was shot, and what isn’t noted enough is that community residents immediately pointed out to the police the perpetrator. That is one small sign of the fact that – the day that I’m looking forward to is when we create that kind of bond, street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood, where community members are always reaching out to help the police and vice versa. It will make everyone safer – the community and the officers as well. We are actually on that track. We’re on that track now. There’s a lot of evidence of that, and we’re very committed to it.

Dr. Elsa Chen: I find this hard to believe but I’ve just been reminded that it’s time to ask the last question.

Mayor: Oh my God –

Dr. Elsa Chen: And I have these many questions.

Mayor: I’m just warming up.

Dr. Elsa Chen: I think I have to ask you this, and I think I know what you’re going to say but I have to ask you anyway. Your national tour has raised lots of speculation regarding your presidential or other aspirations. You’ve consistently responded that you’re only planning on running for re-election as mayor of New York. Here’s where the born in New York, raised in New Jersey side of me comes out.

Mayor: Yes.

Dr. Elsa Chen: Are you serious, really?

[Laughter]

Mayor: You know, I didn’t ask to see your biography but I believe you now – that you are authentic.

[Laughter]

You know, what’s interesting – I think I’ll just frame it this way. We have a conception in our political system, I think grounded in a lot of fact that the only reason that someone could do something is about political ambition or through this prism of being a candidate. There’s another concept which is, what is leadership? Folks have asked me, what is a role of a mayor in a national debate?  I always take a clean example and put it forward. Fiorello LaGuardia I think is the greatest mayor our city ever had and I think he will always be the greatest mayor we ever had. Fiorello LaGuardia, seeing the onset of depression and understanding that it would only be addressed with a federal role, helped to create the U.S. Conference of Mayors. There was no unity between mayors. There was no common vision and platform, but his vision with the other mayors was that they could bind together urban America to be a force to be reckoned with in Washington – they could actually change policies. And they were one of the reasons why the New Deal came to pass, which profoundly helped New York City out of the crisis. I believe right now and I think I’ve made clear of my remarks before that we are in a deep crisis and I can guarantee you, it’s affecting my city in particular. It’s affecting everyone but that 46 percent at or near the poverty level is plenty of an example of what it means for my city. I do not have a federal government I can rely on to invest in infrastructure, in education, in affordable housing. I don’t have the minimum wage level I need for my people and only the federal government or my state government can make that change because by law, I am not allowed to. I believe we should tax those who have done well at a higher level so we can change our society for all. I don’t have the right to do that. That power resides again in Albany and in Washington. So, I could sit back and say, let’s just leave the status quo the way it is. Let’s just assume it can’t be changed or wait for someone to be elected someday to something and maybe we hope they’ll change it or I can say as a leader with a bully pulpit, that I am going to try to change the conversation, and try and change the political context. I think we forget sometimes that the way things change is by yes, leaders annunciating a vision of change but I said, it ultimately comes from the people. Look at some of the things that happened just in the last decades. I assume many people have seen the Inconvenient Truth – An Inconvenient Truth – I’m sorry – that movie by Al Gore. Al Gore used to go all over the world talking about climate change to doubting audiences. It was a very lonely task as the movie makes clear. 20 to 30 years ago, there was a fundamental misunderstanding or denial of climate change. Today, it is a front and center issue that people take very seriously and real action is occurring on the issue – not enough, but real action. Marriage equality – a decade ago – a decade ago, if I tell you we would be where we are today on marriage equality in so many states and possibly with the Supreme Court about to tip the bounce in favor or fairness for all Americans, you would have said I was crazy a decade ago. The people demanded it and a lot of leaders rose to the occasion. We have to address income inequality to be the country we are meant to be, and I’ve got to do something about it, but you know what? The only thing I am running for is reelection as mayor of New York City.

[Applause]

Dr. Elsa Chen: That’s a no?

Mayor: That’s a no. Thank you.

Dr. Elsa Chen: Thank you.