Greetings, colleagues. We are now ready for the sixth session in our series of workshops on the implementation of the UNTSE Sector Satellite Account Handbook. This is Lester Solomon again. And that's my pleasure to be with you for another of these sessions. The last session, as you may remember, our fifth session in this series, we focused on the data items on institutional units. The institutional components of this third or social economy sector. And that was fairly easy because the core SNA data items are basically the ones that we fundamentally need to put together the satellite account so far as the institutional units are concerned. And you already have those core data items from the core of the SNA. We just had to make two adjustments, as you'll remember. One of them was the reconfiguration of the revenues so that we had a picture of the revenues by source, which is particularly important for this TSE sector because it has different sources of revenue and the characteristics of them differ a little bit from the concepts that lie behind the SNA data. And then the second adjustment that we have proposed in the handbook is to make an estimation of the non-market output of market TSEs, of market third sector entities. And this is required because unlike the market entities which only have market output, most of the market entities, many of these TSE sector institutional units are allocated to the market sector because they do get significant market income, but they also produce output that is not market-based that is financed from other ways or not financed at all. It's carried out by volunteers or it's a product of charitable contributions and the SNA would otherwise miss the product that is achieved as a consequence of this non-market output. And so we talked about how to estimate the non-market output of these market NPIs that are part of the TSE sector. Today we focus on another component of the TSE sector which is made up of the individual activities, fundamentally the workforce of the TSE sector. And here we have two components of that workforce. One are the paid workers. And for that there is data in the SNA at least on one component as you'll hear, but the volunteer data does not really exist in the SNA as we discussed when we talked about the treatment of the volunteers in SNA. And so we have to do a little more complicated story about how to get data on the volunteer workers. And that's what most of this workshop session is going to focus on. Just to give you a perspective on this component, here's a picture of how the core SNA reports on the workforce of the TSE sector and indeed of any sector of the economy. It does have data on the compensation of employees. These are paid employees and the one variable that is captured in the SNA is the compensation, the amount of money that is paid to employees because it is a factor of production. But the number of paid workers either in general or the full-time equivalent or the field that they work in, that's not covered nor are the volunteers, either organization volunteers or direct volunteers. There's nothing in the SNA about their numbers. There's nothing in them about the numbers of full-time equivalent workers they represent or the field. And there's nothing in the SNA really about the value of volunteer work, only partial data on one type of volunteering, direct volunteering, but even there, it's only in case that the work of the volunteers, the direct volunteers happens to produce physical items that the SNA can estimate the value of because it has other physical items that are being produced. So this for our purposes in the satellite account is inadequate. What we want in the satellite account is this next slide shows is of course, yes, the compensation of employees. So we're going to keep that one variable, but we also wanna know some things about the paid workers for which the SNA will have to look at the results of labor force surveys. We wanna know the number of those workers. We wanna know something about their full-time equivalents and we'll talk about what that means shortly. We wanna know about the field in which they work, all of which are items that are covered in labor force surveys. But we also want to get information on the volunteers and we want it both on the organization-based volunteers as well as the direct volunteers. We want the number of those workers, we want a expression of the full-time equivalent which means we need the hours that they work so we can convert the head counts of volunteers into the equivalent full-time workers and we want to compute the value of the volunteer work. And so these are all more elaborate efforts that need to be undertaken to find these additional data items. And we've had to work with the International Labor Organization to come up with an approach to capturing these data. And as you may remember from our discussion of the volunteer units, essentially we have proposed a special insert to the labor force survey to capture data on volunteer workers. And we're going to suggest that if it's not already done in your country that you may contact the people in your statistical agency that has responsibility for the labor force survey and see if they will be willing to add a small module to the total. But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's just take it one step at a time. Just so we have a clear understanding of it, what do we mean by full-time equivalent volunteers? Essentially, we'd like to express the volunteer effort in the same kind of terms that are used to convey and express regular workers. Volunteers tend to spend more limited time in their volunteer activity. It's not a full-time occupation for most people who do volunteers. And so if we just add up the head count of volunteers we'll come out with a number that is very misleading because it's counting people who may work three or four hours in a month and assuming that they are full-time workers when in fact they're not. And so full-time equivalence is computed by taking the total number of hours that volunteers perform their volunteer activities and divide it by the average hours in a full-time job in a particular country. So just to put this into concrete terms, if for example, in your country, a full-time job is estimated to be about 2,000 hours in a year and we calculate through various surveys that I'm going to describe that there are 200,000 hours of volunteering that are performed in your country. You would divide the 200,000 hours by 2,000 hours per full-time job to come up with the conclusion that you had 100 full-time employee volunteers, 100 full-time equivalent workers who are volunteers. Obviously the numbers are gonna be much higher than that but that just shows you the basic arithmetic of getting to an FTE figure from a number that represents the added total of all the hours that are generated by volunteers in a particular country. So how do we go about measuring and valuing a volunteer work? And how has this been done so far in the SNA? And I'm going over here some information that we've already discussed in the context of discussing the definition of the volunteer work. Here are the two ways in which volunteer work value is estimated first in the SNA currently and second in the satellite account that we're calling on you all to produce. Essentially, as you remember, SNA essentially treats organization and direct volunteering differently. In the case of organization-based volunteering, the SNA approach is a little bit misleading. It basically says, oh, you have these workers, we will do it the way we do any worker and we will do it on the basis of the cost to the employer. But if you'll remember back to our definition of what a volunteer is, volunteers are not paid at all by their employers. And so to say that you are measuring the value of volunteering by the cost of the employer essentially means you don't put any value on it at all. And while this may make a lot of logical sense, it doesn't make any practical sense because the work of volunteers is producing value to the economy, valuing it at zero essentially ignores that value. In the case of direct volunteering, the SNA approach is a little bit better but not by any means adequate. Only the value of volunteer work that goes into the production of physical structures is captured in the SNA. And essentially they compute what the cost is of producing these physical structures in other settings by regular workers and they assign that value to the value of the volunteer workers. So if they're building homes for poor people, for example, they will have a value that is put on the price of the home that is of that basic size and dimensions and character. And that would be the value assigned to volunteer work. But we know that a lot of volunteer work is really service work. It's lawyers giving pro bono work to organizations. It's accountants helping them with their tax filings. All of this or it's doctors providing volunteer work to help people with their medical issues. So all of this service work which is quite significant or can be quite significant is lost from view under this SNA approach. And so we were able to convince the keepers of the SNA that these are not adequate ways to measure the contributions of volunteering to the society at large and that we needed to build into the satellite account a different approach. And so what we have done essentially in the third sector satellite account handbook is to come up with a different alternative way of measuring the value of volunteer work. So far as organization based volunteering is concerned, we have suggested a replacement cost approach and we've particularly recommended a specialist replacement cost approach. I'll describe in a little more detail what these two different forms of replacement cost are but suffice it to say that the replacement cost for organizations can be more precise because the organization knows what kind of work the worker did. And if it's in the context of an organization it's usually structured a bit more. And therefore we can get down to a pretty precise measure of the occupation group that is represented by the work that's done for the organization. In the case of direct volunteering it's just a little more difficult to come up with a precise measure of the replacement cost and therefore we have sort of loosened the concept and come up with a generalist approach which is a general in the economy. And as you'll see, there are several options that countries can use or how to estimate the value of the direct volunteer work. So what do we mean by a replacement cost? A specialist replacement cost. This next slide gives you a picture of it. We basically find the wages that are paid in the same industry for the same occupation that the volunteer has indicated that they have performed for that organization. And then, and here's where it gets a little more tricky it's adjusted for the skill level that volunteers may bring to these tasks. What this means in practice is that it is assumed that volunteers don't quite always have the same skill level for the jobs that they're performing as with a regular employee in that same occupation. And so we have to discount a bit the wage that would be paid for that same occupation. In other words, we're being a bit conservative in the value that we're assigning. We don't assume that the wages paid to wages that would be paid to the volunteer would be the same as the wages paid to a full-time worker in that occupation because the volunteer may not be at the same skill level as the normal person who is performing that occupation. So there's an adjustment in a sense, a downward adjustment of the wages so that we don't overstate the value of volunteering. And it turns out that the value of volunteering is so large that it can experience a certain downgrading a little bit in order to avoid making it sound even more difficult for people to believe. So that's the specialist replacement cost. It's the same occupational level wage, but it's discounted for the difference in skill level of the volunteer versus the paid worker. The generalist replacement cost, we've identified several different options which countries can choose and which they can report on. So we know what they've done depending on what's available in the economy. Option one is probably the easiest. It's the average wage of all occupations in the economy. What's the average wage of workers in the entire economy? Option number two, it takes account of the fact that many volunteers operate in the personal services industry, which is where so much of the activity of the third sector institutions takes place. And therefore a reasonable proxy for direct volunteering in the service sector would be the personal services industry average wages. And usually the data that exists on the labor force in the country coming out of the labor force surveys will have occupational breakdowns that allow you to find what is the average or reasonable wage for the personal services industry. And then option three, if it turns out that the bulk of the volunteering is taking place in a different kind of industry, it's not as much personal services based. It may be a construction kind of responsibility that volunteers more commonly perform or some combination of these two. Then the average wage in the construction industry could be used at least for that part of the volunteer work that takes place in that industry. So there are a number of different ways in which the wage level assigned to the volunteer work and therefore the value of the volunteer work can take place. So these are the different measures of the value. How do we go about getting the data? And so we turned then to the next aspect of the volunteer measurement task. We focus in on the surveys that can be used to pick up and measure the amount of volunteer work and other features of the volunteer activity. And here are basically two different strategies for gathering the data on volunteer activity. One of them is through establishment surveys. This is where you go out and survey the establishments that volunteers work in and for. They can be parts of the nonprofit sector. They can be now with our broadened TSE sector cooperatives. They can be mutuals and they can be social enterprises. These are all the establishments that volunteers might work for that would be in scope of our TSE sector. Remember, we're only interested in the volunteers that are doing work for the TSE sector because this is the TSE sector satellite account. And so we don't wanna measure volunteering for government or volunteering if that ever happens for businesses. We really wanna zero in on establishments that are part of this sector for the measurement. There's some advantages of the establishment approach. You get accurate industry information because you know where the establishment is in the industry classification. And you know the sector allocation. We know whether it's not only a hospital whether it is a nonprofit hospital or a cooperative hospital. The cons, those are the pros for establishment surveys. The cons are that the records may not be available. It's not as if these organizations regularly collect and maintain the data on their volunteers. Even if they say how many volunteers they've had they frequently do not carry data on the number of hours they perform or the chores that they perform. And without those two things we can't compute the full-time equivalent and we can't compute the value. And then finally and very importantly, establishment surveys are not gonna pick up the direct volunteer work. And we know that the direct volunteer work can often be much, much bigger than the establishment base. So we're missing a very, very big part of volunteering. So the second approach for measuring volunteering are through household surveys. And there are several different kinds. As you'll hear, we prefer the labor force surveys that every country does. And we'll explain why that's the case but what are the advantages? What are the pros of household surveys? They give us great coverage, including small and exempt units and especially direct volunteer work. If you're going out to people in their household and surveying them, particularly with large surveys of the sort that labor force surveys represent, you can pick up volunteering that's even for very informal organizations as well as person to person volunteer work.  But there are cons as well. There are drawbacks to household surveys. There's something that statisticians refer to as selection and recall bias. Volunteering is a activity of around which there's a lot of social positive vibrations. And people may feel obliged to want to show off their volunteering or if they haven't done the volunteering they may be reluctant to confess that. And that means that they won't even answer the questions. And that means that you shrink the sample and the sample may contain only those people who are willing to claim that they volunteered. And this creates a very significant bias in the sample. It blows up the estimate of how big the volunteering is if only people who volunteer answer the survey and none of the ones who don't volunteer don't answer the survey. And then there's a very significant likelihood that the sector and industry allocation can be distorted. And why is this? Well, it's frequently the case that people don't know where, what kind of sector, what kind of entity they may be volunteering for whether it's a nonprofit or a government entity or even a for-profit entity. And so you may not get the clarity that we'd like to have about where the volunteering is taking place what kind of sector it is, what kind of industry it's associated with. So these are all issues in the design of the collection of data in volunteering. But suffice it to say in the manual that we've created the handbook, we very strongly recommend using household surveys. And there's several different kinds even of household surveys. And we have our preferences among those but there are multiple options available here as well. Clearly the preferred option are labor force surveys. Every country in the world has a very significant labor force survey program. It's frequently carried out by the same agency that does the satellite account that sometimes, I'm sorry, does the national income accounts but frequently it's in different locations, different agencies. But the labor force surveys have enormous advantages. They are the largest statistical system in most countries, largest in terms, for example, of the number of times they're executed, the number of times they're carried out even in the given year, they're typically done every year. And the samples are among the largest samples of any survey that is undertaken in most countries. So these are really rich surveys. And therefore we have focused our energies and recommendations on inserting a very small module focusing on volunteer work inside a labor force survey so that it minimizes the amount of time that is taken away from the other labor force issues that these surveys attempt to capture. They also have the advantage that you get a lot of demographic data already captured in these surveys. So you can know normally that there have been a certain number of volunteers but you know what occupation those volunteers have, you know their age, you know whether they're urban or rural, you know whether they're men or women. These are all pieces of data that are already being captured about these people in the regular labor force survey. And so we get access to that data by building our volunteer surveys into the labor force survey. So that's number one, but there are fallbacks. Obviously the labor force survey managers don't like to get too much other stuff into their labor force survey because they have problems convincing people to respond. And therefore they get very nervous of adding new items, new questions to the survey that lengthens it even if they are as short as our module, one and a half pages of questions. And so getting it inside the labor force survey is not always an option. We do have two other options. One of them are time use surveys. Many countries carry out these surveys. They're not as robust as the labor force surveys but they are household surveys. And basically the way they operate if you're not familiar with them is that surveys are administered to people and they agree to give a record of how they spend every hour of one week. And that or one day depending on how the survey is done. And in that day or in that week, if they've done volunteering, they would record what kind of volunteering it is, how many hours they spent, what activities they carried out, all the items of data that we would like to have. And this will become a similar household based account of the amount of volunteering that's taking place with a significant amount of detail about the type of volunteering, though it is a different classification system than is used in the labor force surveys. And then finally, many countries carry out a variety of general social surveys. Sometimes these are done every year with the same set of questions. Sometimes the focus of them changes from one year to the other. And that means that they don't have the continuity that the labor force surveys have. So just to focus in on the labor force surveys, here's what it gives us. The number of persons and the number of hours. So we get a very good picture of the volume of the volunteer effort. We have a classification structure in the labor force surveys that classify activity by industry, by occupation, by institutional sector, and by the type of work that's being done. And this is already structured into the labor force surveys and the classification structures that are used for the labor force surveys are also applied to the volunteer work. And therefore you can very easily compare the jobs and the industries of the volunteer work to the total amount of paid work in the same industry. So you can say that of all the activity that takes place, let's say in the health field, 40% of it is done by volunteers because you have the same classification of industry in the labor force survey for volunteers as you do for other workers. So this is another great advantage. You also get in the labor force survey, as I mentioned before, a significant amount of socio-demographic information. And since you have it for everybody who responds to the survey, you have it for those respondents who are themselves indicating that they have volunteered. You know, they're sex, you know, they're age group, you know whether they are working now with their labor force status, labor market statuses, and you know something about the geographic location of them within the country, whether it's urban or rural, whether it's in big cities or small cities. And then finally, with that data, we can derive the other information that we need. We can compute the full-time equivalent workers that volunteers represent because we know the number of volunteers and we know the number of their hours, and we should be able to find the typical full-time worker hours in that country. We also can compute the value of volunteer work because we'll know the activity and occupation that the volunteers perform. And then finally, we'll be able to compute the volunteering rates, which share of the population is actually engaged in volunteering. The time use survey has similar features to it, but just not as helpful. We'll know the number of persons, we'll know the number of hours per day, we'll know the classification of volunteer effort, we'll know the type of volunteering that they did, whether it's household-based or direct, I mean, organization-based or direct, we'll know something about the activity field that they're volunteering in. We'll know something about the socio-demographic information, the sex, the age group, the labor market status, geography, and we can do a decent job coming up with derived information about the full-time equivalence, the value of the work and the volunteering rates. We won't be able to make the kinds of comparisons that we would like to have in terms of the activities. The activity structure of the time use surveys is simply very different than the activity structures of the labor force survey. And therefore, we won't be able to make as clear a set of comparisons. So this is an example on this slide of how the time use surveys break up the activity of volunteers and others, but clearly you can see that it's a pretty fine grain, but it's not the same kind of structure. It breaks it out whether people are doing volunteer shopping or childcare or care for adults or help in enterprises. So it's not bad, but it is very different from the labor force survey breakdowns of classification of activity. So this is the picture of how we go about gathering data on volunteering. We have to do surveys in the countries where there are already surveys. Obviously they can be tapped so long as they capture these key variables. We wanna know how many people, but not only how many people we wanna know what number of hours they engage in volunteering. And we also wanna know what they did, what the actual tasks that they performed. And these are the features that are picked up by the module that we've created for insertion in the labor force surveys. So at the same time, we are convinced that this is the body of data that is extremely helpful for countries because it sheds light on an aspect of the third sector that has simply been overlooked in both the labor activity of the country and in the third sector in the country. Most of the countries that have measured volunteering have focused only on organization-based. We feel very strongly that we need to capture the direct volunteering as well. They're parts of the world in which the direct volunteering is much, much bigger than the organization-based for the good reason that they don't have as plentiful a nonprofit sector. And so without measuring the direct volunteering, we can frequently create an artificial disparity between more developed parts of the world and less developed ones that is misleading in terms of the volunteer activity that's carried out. So these are doable activities, but they do require that additional data needs to be assembled and that data is increasingly being found to be important in countries around the world. And so we hope that those of you who are carrying out and producing the TSE, the third or social economy satellite account are able to convince your colleagues in the labor force arena to add these additional questions to the labor force surveys. So thank you so much, appreciate your time. And as before, we stand ready to provide further assistance to your country, to your statistics agency. We have the capacity to provide more in-depth training and technical assistance. We've developed a whole variety of additional vehicles for carrying out these tasks, field guides, for example, that provide you with material that you can work through to apply the concepts of this third sector satellite account to your country. But it's very helpful to have a set of a contact point with the people who wrote the handbook to make sure that you're interpreting it the way it's being interpreted in other countries so that we come out of this process with data in your country that is consistent with the data that other countries are producing so that we can begin to make comparisons across countries with confidence that the approach being used is consistent from country to country. So our contact information is on this last slide. It's been on every one of these sessions. CCSS at jhu.edu, Center for Civil Society Studies at Johns Hopkins University.edu. And we stand ready to hear from you and to discuss how we can be of further help. Thank you so much.


Buddy and welcome to Think Tech, Tourism 101. Today we delve into the world of restaurant dining and hospitality. With the restaurant chain called PS Restaurant. They have 13 restaurants, eight here in the state of Hawaii, and five in California. I guess are the chief executive officer of PS Restaurant. Thank you, Reed. And the vice president of operations for their four restaurants, two on Oahu, two on Kauai, killing chain. How's it brother? How are you? Okay, okay. So listen, when I delved into your backgrounds, I found some interesting similarity. Both of Polynesian descent. You both also started, I believe, at Leilani's restaurant. They're on Maui. I was just there the other week with Jared Higashi, our vice president of the River Relations. And one of the four times there was Jason. Beautiful setting there at Kana Poly. And you both went to college or got some of your postgraduate training at San Diego. So the two of you have had many things in common through the year. So it's no wonder that you're working very closely today. I actually didn't put that together. Thank you for pointing that out. So let's, Jackie, let's talk about you. You are the chief executive officer of this very fine, privately owned family restaurant. Tell us about how you started in the business and where you grew up. And I always like to know that about our guests. I was born in Honolulu. My mom came here from Samoa in the sixties. And then I was born here, but her dream was always to get to the mainland. So we moved to San Diego when I was just about three years old. But because most of my family stayed in Hawaii, we would come back every summer. And so summers were spent here. My family was here. So Hawaii definitely always felt at home, even while growing up in California. So after a sort of a transition period of time after high school and college, I came to Maui with my mom at 18 and was at a transition point in my life trying to figure out what my next step was. And I got a job as a hostess at Leilani's just to try to make some money and regroup and figure out where I was going to go to school. And little did I know that 30 years later I'd be sitting here with you talking about my wonderful career and family at TS. Right. Yeah, I grew up in Lahaina, where our first restaurant came over 40 plus years ago. So my mom's worked there. She just made 38 years. So I grew up in Lahaina on the bar stools and just being a part of the restaurants. From a very young age, one of our founders was based there. And so I just enjoyed always being around the restaurants. And when I was, when I had a first opportunity to get a job, Leilani was what it was. And I worked there off and on in the summers when I come back from high school because I got into Kumaima schools. So I was boarding in Oahu. I'd come back and even in college I'd come back and work. And what happened was I got to play some professional football for a few years. And when that was done in Canada, I came back. Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan. So I got to come back and figure out what I was going to do. And we had an opportunity when Hula Grill opened up right around 2004-2005. I just got back in again as a busser because my experience was professional football, not restaurant executive. And I just worked my way out, got a chance to go to Dukes and eventually became GM there.  I just to clarify though, we all those were similarities except for she went to San Diego State. I went to the University of San Diego. That's true. San Diego. San Diego. I'm just joking. So we did it as a way. You pretty much have stayed with both of you, with TS restaurants throughout your career. Yeah, that's interesting because you're usually in someone's career path. You look at mine, I've been in the private sector, public sector, non-profit world. But you've pretty much stayed with us. So what's very special about this restaurant? And maybe we've been there, your career path.  And Dylan, everybody knows you and Waikiki. I think you're the vice mayor of Waikiki. Everybody knows Dylan. So talk about that. Talk about what has kept you with one family business and then your career path. Well, being 18 and getting a job as a hostess at a restaurant, you don't think that that's going to be your career. I mean, I was 18. But what TS provides is a real ohana. There is a spirit in TS that's so beautiful. And it is because of the spirit of aloha. It is because the company started in Hawaii and there's so much respect for Hawaii and the culture and what all of that means with the community. And so when you're in TS, you're in a family that helps you grow. And if you prove yourself and you work hard and you take advantage of the many opportunities, then you know that you have a chance to do something more than what you're doing at the time. And so that's really why I've stayed all of these years. I didn't plan on it, obviously. I mean, if you would have told me when I was 18, I would have laughed and thought you were crazy that I could be CEO all these years later.  It perfectly mirrored my life between California and Hawaii and then the nod to the culture of Polynesia that I grew up in. And then also the people are just so amazing.  So why would I, why would I ever go anywhere else? Well, talk about your specific career path. So you went from there and you also were a controller? I was controller for, so I went from there to a bookkeeper. I was actually, it's told I was too young to be a bookkeeper, but I kept asking until somebody let me do it. And then from there I went through the financial side of the company and I was controller for about a dozen years. But I, because it's a family company, we were always able to do other things. And so when new projects would come up, I would raise my hand, I would ask to be involved, and I had the opportunity to do that. So I was growing more skills as, as I was doing these new projects. And then when Vice President of Operations became available because someone retired, I put my hand up and I was called on, which was amazing. And it was, it was an unconventional choice at the time, but I knew that I had had this beautiful opportunity to grow and develop all of these skills through the company because we were so willing to give people a chance. And so I was Vice President of Operations for the California region for five years before becoming CEO. And when did you become CEO? November 1st, 2015. All right. So you've been almost five years at the helm then come to 2020. Yeah, almost. Great. Dylan, talk about your career path. Yeah, when I was young, I really did, I grew up around these restaurants and with, you know, either role models or peers, not peers, but role models that I looked up to. And something I realized at a young age was that I think I noticed was that they were always having fun. And I just thought, and that sounds like a pretty cool career. Like, and so when I was young, I had a goal that one day I'd be a general manager in one of my restaurants. And I was, I felt like it was an attainable goal. It was far off, but they just looked like they had so much fun, they got to run their restaurants and, and take care of people. And though I didn't know hospitality was, you know, maybe a strong point for me, it just felt like the right thing. So as my, as I went through school, and I was doing fairly well in football, it kind of took me in a direction. And I thought, you know, you only get to do that once, so let that play out. And I got to play it as long as, you know, I thought that was a good time for me to get out. And sometimes I think you would probably know too, when professional sports, they tell you when it's time to go out. So I listened and I made my way back home, but with always the thought that I would get into the restaurants. But I didn't have any managerial experience. I did get a bachelor's in business, but a lot of times you need work experience. Though I knew some people in the restaurants, they wanted me to work my way up, which I did. And when they came back, I just bussed and ran food at the restaurants until there was an opportunity at Duke's, when I was at Hula Grill, they asked me to come down and just learn how to be a manager. And what was happening simultaneously, which I didn't know was I was also, I got into coaching and I was coaching varsity football at Kaiser. And I really felt like that was a calling for me coaching. I actually tell people, as much as I had great, you know, best playing, I loved coaching more. And what happened as I started moving my way through the restaurants was I realized that I could kind of coach people. And so I got to have a career where, you know, hopefully financially it was going to be good and I was having fun, but I also got to being sort of a mentor or coach. And I was surprised. I became a general manager, like right at 30 or 29, 30, which was a surprise for me. I thought it would have took longer. And at that point, I don't want to say I was good and I didn't want to push for anything else. But I was really happy. And then where I ended up today was this momentum. And hopefully, you know, I think people thought I could do a bit more than what I was doing. And I just been riding that train a little bit. So when we recommend your places to eat in Waikiki, more often than not, people would say to us, what about Duke's Waikiki?  I mean, you're taking advantage of Duke Hanabuka's name, but at the end of the day, when they walk in and if they're not getting good service, good food, what have you, they're going to say, gee, they named it after Duke, but you don't get that impression. You have really become a very popular restaurant in Waikiki. I'll start and let Dylan fill in. But it's interesting because we're in Waikiki. So there are a lot of tourists that come in and there are a lot of people that don't even know who Duke Hanabuku was and they don't know about his legacy. So I would say, first of all, we're really honored that we get to introduce Duke to a whole new segment of people that may not have ever known what a great man he was. So we're really proud of that. But really, in all of our restaurants, we always try to make sure that we embody home. And so when you're coming in, even though it's busy and it's large, and there are a lot of people in there, you feel like someone special. You feel like you're coming home. You feel like you're somewhere where people care about you. And that's what's important to us is that when you walk in, you feel that way. And that for the people that live here a full time, that they feel like this is their restaurant too. I do think that I totally agree with what she said. It's interesting because we would never want to have Duke be in the background, but we try our best not to over-utilize that great resource or that amazing legacy. That just happens naturally. And as she said, we had to introduce some people. We're not experts, but outside of maybe doing some research or going to the Bishop Museum or something, we do have a lot of artifacts. We do know a lot of stories. This is actually where he lived and worked most of his life and played in it. So there's that sense of place, which I think is really important when people look at a Waikiki. I think they're unsure about sense of place unless you tell the story or you're able to. And I think that's what's special about where we're at is it's actually where Duke was. It's where he's buried out in front. It's where he's worked. His family is still working down at the beach. So we have that essence that we don't need to do anything. It's there and then we do our best to be who we are, which is just gracious hosts. We want you to feel like you're home. And I always tell everybody, I think one of the great things about especially Duke's and Waikiki is it's one of the few places where I think you can feel really comfortable as a guest and really comfortable as a local. There's a lot of places that are geared towards both of those sectors of people. You know, we happen to be in the middle of a lot of hotels. So there's going to be a lot of tourists, but I think if locals make their way to Waikiki or they're down there for work, it's a place where they feel, you know, we can go to Duke's. I'll probably know somebody that's working there. I'll feel welcomed and it'll make it feel like home. And I think we do a really good job of providing that experience for both people. Great. Well, you know, we're going to take a pause for the cause at this point in time and then we'll come back and we'll talk a little bit more specifically about the challenges that everyone faces when you want to open a restaurant or operate a restaurant. I know in talking with a lot of my financial friends in the banking business said that's one of the toughest decisions sometimes I have to make is kind of a leap of faith if you will. But you've managed to do that, you've expanded and I know you have future plans that I'd like for you to share with you. I guest on our show are two wonderful people representing the restaurant business here in Hawaii and we're going to have them delve a little deeper into why it's such a special business and a great place for employment. Thanks to our ThinkTech underwriters and grand tours. The Atherton Family Foundation. Carol Mon Lee and the Friends of ThinkTech. The Center for Microbial Oceanography Research and Education. Collateral Analytics. The Cook Foundation. Duane Kurisu. The Hawaii Council of Associations of Apartment Owners. Hawaii Energy. The Hawaii Energy Policy Forum. Hawaiian Electric Company. Integrated Security Technologies. Galen Ho of BAE Systems. Kamehameha Schools. MW Group Limited. The Schuyler Family Foundation. The Sydney Stern Memorial Trust. Polo Foundation. Yuriko J. Sugimura. Thanks so much to you all.  Our guests today are Jackie Reed and Dylan Ching of TS Restaurants. They operate 13 restaurants. 5 in California. 8 in the beautiful state of Hawaii. So before I leave that subject of Dukes and Hula Grails, what are some of the more popular food items that people come in? Hula Pie. You have to have a hula pie whenever you come in. I also think what people are dreaming about when they're coming down or what they haven't had in a long time is one of our Duke's Mai Thais and it just makes sense to the setting. And then I think we really pride ourselves on fresh fish and really quality meats. So I think however you prepare them, you know, would definitely want to have sort of an island flavor. But I think if you start with really good ingredients, I think people appreciate it because a lot of times it's about how they feel when they left. Not necessarily do they remember the exact item. Outside of the Mai Thai and the hula pie, which are just so iconic, I think we're really shooting for consistency and how people feel when they leave. Okay, and of course you use a lot of local products. We do, especially produce. We use local farmers wherever we can and make sure that we try to support those local businesses. Dylan, where are your two operations on Koi that you oversee? We have Dukes right there. It's our original Dukes and it's right in Kalpaki at the Marriott. Yeah, it's probably one of the most beautiful settings that we have and you just feel relaxed and it's right there in Lihui. And then we also have Kyokis Paradise in Pui Pu. And again, I wouldn't take anything away from the beauty of that restaurant. And it's sort of our secret restaurant where people, it's farther away from everything and it's not, it doesn't have the name Dukes. When you get there, we almost always over deliver the experience because it's unexpected. So that's a hidden gem if anybody's looking to go, it'll also be different. And Jackie, what about the four besides Leilani's on Maui's? Talk about the other three. So Kimo's was our original restaurant. 1977 opened and is still an amazing place to be right in Front Street. And then across from Leilani's is the original Hula Grill on Maui and Wailers Village. And then we have Dukes Maui, one of our newer restaurants in North Kanapalli Beach. Let's talk about the challenges in operating the restaurant business. And talk about how you've been able to overcome it, as well as keeping in mind that, you know, it's more than just jobs. You want to create a healthy environment, but also be able to be competitive. This is a very competitive business. There are other restaurants out there, but you're holding your own and you're doing very well to talk about challenges. So it's interesting in business, one of the biggest words is innovation. And so you're constantly trying to innovate. But one of the gifts that our founders gave us, Rob Tipo and Sandy Saxton, is they literally sketched out a plan. It was called the plan of the core principles of how they were going to found this company before Kimo's. And every single one of those principles applies today. And so that was their gift to us of these are the things that are most important. There were things that a lot of people weren't doing at that time that now people are doing today. And so just making sure that we're executing that plan that's relevant to the time that we're in. And part of that is creating a sense of place, having architecture that honors a location, making sure we hire the best employees, making our general managers, owners of their restaurants, giving back to the communities and making sure that we're responsible members of the communities. All of those was part of their plan. And so having that in today's world is, like I said, a gift. But there are some things that are difficult. The increasing regulation, keeping up with that, a lot of the regulation doesn't apply as easily to the restaurant industry because it is a more transient business. And we've got a mix of part-time and full-time employees and a lot of students that work for us. And so I'm trying to keep up with all of the regulation and make sure that we're doing the right things from a legal perspective, but also creating the right environment within our industry and serving our guests properly is a difficult balance. Since you have operations in both California, let me put you on the spot here. Where is, what state is better in terms of a restaurant to operate in a business environment? Given the fact there are rules and regulations, maybe let me phrase that. Are there things that are happening in California that you could see happening here that would make it easier to operate in this business environment? Are there things happening here that you'd like California to adopt? Well, Hawaii is definitely a friendlier business environment. You know, we're proud to be in these two states because there is a lot of focus on people and the citizens of the states and making sure that they're taken care of. But there are some extra rules in California that are difficult to implement within our industry. So, yeah, Hawaii is definitely a more friendly business environment. Also, the organizations in Hawaii around restaurants are a lot bigger and a lot more supportive. You know, they exist in California and California is doing an amazing job, but the population is much higher. And so it's harder to create that type of community from a business perspective over there. Dylan is a vice mayor of Waikiki.  So how are you able to be part of the solution as opposed to just sitting idly by and say, well, we'll let government fix it, or we'll let the Hawaii Lodging and Tourism Association fix it? How do you have that balance there? Because as I said, people know you as someone exactly in Waikiki. Well, I would start with there's a lot that people don't know, and I think it's our job to get awareness out on a lot of the things that are happening. One way we can just start is that we have over 300, we have about 450, 500 employees. And I think all given the right information, I think they're happy to help their community. Lots of them live in Waikiki. Lots of them are from Hawaii. So I think we try to make sure that we get our people out and get to them to our community, whether it being Waikiki or the outskirts of Waikiki or anywhere on the island. So we do that quite a bit. But I think also things like for myself, being on a few boards that really are focused on things like homelessness or safety or the beautification, things like I'm on the Waikiki Community Center Board, which to me is probably, it's closest to my heart because when I think about Waikiki or when a lot of people think about Waikiki, there's lots of businesses and hotels and traffic and things going on. And there's just one jewel sitting right around Paul Kalani Street that just services the people of Waikiki for people that work. My son goes there as a preschooler and lots of people that I work with, kids go there. And there's a health center that we're landlords for. And also the kupuna that live in Waikiki is a place for them to go and to feel safe and to learn and to be part of a community. So I really feel fortunate about that. Other things like the Waikiki bid, which is our business improvement district and WIA, all these organizations are really working hard behind the scenes to try and make sure that we don't just utilize the space that we give back to it, because it is really important for not just the people that live and work in Waikiki, but it's a really important place for the whole state. And I think it's our kuleana to make sure that if we're there, that we're doing whatever we can to make sure that it's a better place for everybody that comes through, not just even just our employees walking to work. We want to make sure it's safe for them, because there's not a lot of great parking in Waikiki. So there's so much that we can do that we are doing that, but we can continue to do. And I think not just relying on government or certain organizations, I think it's a full community effort. All the stakeholders have to take ownership in doing it. And it's not let's push them one street over over here. Let's make sure that we attack the problem. And I think there's people that are trying to do that. And we got to keep pushing. Jackie, you're also involved in a number of tourism organizations. Talk about some of those experiences and the fact that you would take time out of your very busy schedule also being in California to come to the board meetings, participate actively, contribute in more ways than one. Yes, I'm on the board for the Hawaii Visitor and Convention Bureau and also on the board of the Hawaii Lodging and Tourism Association. And those organizations, they're important. They're important for the industry. They're important for the state, because tourism is the main economy in Hawaii. And so if I can be a part of organizations who are promoting tourism in a responsible way that still preserves the islands for the people who are from here and who their ancestors are from here, then it makes me feel great. And it's a wonderful use of my time. And you're also a member of YPO. I am a member of YPO, yes. Yeah, great. And Dylan, you're an alum of Pacific Century Fellows. I am. Yeah. Great. Very proud. Thank you very much. So let's talk about some of the opportunities that you see. Any plans for a future expansion? Yes, whether it's here or somewhere else? Absolutely. So one of the things that we recognized when I became CEO, we also had the second generation of families come onto the board in more active roles. And you can't replicate the energy of a growing company. And we knew that we had something really special. But we wanted to make sure that we continued to give opportunities for people who were like me at 18 or like Dylan when he was younger just starting out. And the way to properly do that is through growth. So we do have a growth plan. We're planning on growing, you know, not crazy, a little more conservatively. And we want to make sure that we're hitting all the points of the founders plan going in places where we know we can be a part of the community, a place where we can have a sense of place. And also one of the biggest things was opening restaurants in places where we want to live, work, and play. And so we're searching right now looking for our next opportunity. And we're really excited about it. Great. Dylan, any parting words for someone out there that might be thinking about entering a career in culinary, cuisine, restaurant business like, what would you say to them? I think that something that I don't think people realize is that, you know, when you work in the restaurant industry, you're dealing with people. And lots of jobs are not nowadays trending towards people. There's technology and robotics and all these things which are great and we need them. But a lost art of I think that's going to be very sought after in the future is people's ability to take care of people and to talk to them and to make them feel comfortable. I don't think any machine can ever replicate that. And the restaurant industry is amazing for the ability for people to get that. And I think a lot of people that come into the restaurant industry use it as a transition and a jumping off point to something else. But there's a lot of them that feel like, hey, this is a career that I love. And I think we're living proof of that. Living examples of that. But we've had a wonderful discussion today. I hope you've enjoyed as much as I have. Once again, T.S. restaurants. And this gives you a reason why you want to visit one of their eight locations throughout the state of Hawaii and their five in California. So next time, this is a movie, say, piece of love with all my love upon all. Thank you.


I have the high privilege and the distinct honor of presenting to you the President of the United States. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, President, distinguished members of the House and Senate, when we first met here seven years ago, many of us for the first time, it was with the hope of beginning something new for America. Meet here tonight in this historic chamber to continue that work. If anyone expects just a proud recitation of the accomplishments of my administration, I say let's leave that to history. We're not finished yet. My message to you tonight is put on your work shoes. We're still on a job. History records the power of the ideas that brought us here those seven years ago. Ideas like the individual's right to reach as far and as high as his or her talents will permit the free market as an engine of economic progress and as an ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said, govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish. Do not overdo it. Well, these ideas were part of a larger notion, a vision, if you will, of America herself. An America not only rich in opportunity for the individual, but an America too of strong families and vibrant neighborhoods, an America whose divergent but harmonizing communities were a reflection of a deeper community of values, the value of work, of family, of religion, and of the love of freedom that God places in each of us and whose defense he is entrusted in a special way to this nation. All of this was made possible by an idea I spoke of when Mr. Gorbachev was here. The belief that the most exciting revolution ever known to humankind began with three simple words, we, the people, the revolutionary notion that the people grant government its rights and not the other way around. And there's one lesson that has come home powerfully to me, which I would offer you now. Just as those who created this republic pledged to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, so too, America's leaders today must pledge to each other that we will keep foremost in our hearts and minds not what is best for ourselves or for our party, but what is best for America. In the spirit of Jefferson, let us affirm that in this chamber tonight there are no republicans, no democrats, just Americans. Yes, we will have our differences, but let us always remember what unites us far outweighs whatever divides us. Those who sent us here to serve them, the millions of Americans watching and listening tonight, expect this of us. Let's prove to them and to ourselves that democracy works even in an election year. We've done this before. And as we've worked together to bring down spending, tax rates and inflation, employment has climbed to record heights, America has created more jobs and better higher paying jobs, family income has risen for four straight years, and America's poor climbed out of poverty at the fastest rate in more than 10 years. Our record is not just the longest peacetime expansion in history, but an economic and social revolution of hope based on work, incentives, growth and opportunity, a revolution of compassion that led to private sector initiatives and a 77% increase in charitable giving, a revolution that at a critical moment in world history reclaimed and restored the American dream. In international relations too, there's only one description for what together we have achieved.  America was weak and freedom everywhere was under siege. Today, America is strong and democracy is everywhere on the move. From Central America to East Asia, ideas like free markets and democratic reforms and human rights are taking hold. We've replaced blame America with look up to America. We've rebuilt our defenses and of all our accomplishments, none can give us more satisfaction than knowing that our young people are again proud to wear our country's uniform. And in a few moments I'm going to talk about three developments, arms reduction, the strategic defense initiative and the global democratic revolution. That's when taken together offered a chance none of us would have dared imagine seven years ago. A chance to rid the world of the two great nightmares of the post war era. I speak of the startling hope of giving our children a future free of both totalitarianism and nuclear terror. Tonight then we're strong, prosperous, at peace and we are free. This is the state of our union and if we will work together this year, I believe we can give a future president and a future congress the chance to make that prosperity, that peace, that freedom, not just the state of our union, but the state of our world. Toward this end we have four basic objectives tonight. First, steps we can take this year to keep our economy strong and growing, to give our children a future of low inflation and full employment. Second, let's check our progress in attacking social problems where important gains have been made but would still need critical attention. I mean schools that work, economic independence for the poor, restoring respect for family life and family values. Our third objective tonight is global, continuing the exciting economic and democratic revolutions we've seen around the world. Fourth and finally, our nation has remained at peace for nearly a decade and a half. As we move toward our goals of world prosperity and world freedom, we must protect that peace and deter war by making sure the next president inherits what you and I have a moral obligation to give that president, a national security that is unassailable and a national defense that takes full advantage of new technology and is fully funded. This is a full agenda. It's meant to be. You see my thinking on the next year is quite simple. Let's make this the best of eight. And that means it's all out right to the finish line. I don't buy the idea that this is the last year of anything because we're not talking here tonight about registering temporary gains but ways of making permanent our successes. And that's why our focus is the values, the principles, and ideas that made America great. Let's be clear on this point. We're for limited government because we understand, as the founding fathers did, that it is the best way of ensuring personal liberty and empowering the individual so that every American of every race and region shares fully in the flowering of American prosperity and freedom. One other thing we Americans, like the future, like the sound of it, the idea of it, the hope of it, where others fear trade and economic growth, we see opportunities for creating new wealth and undreamed of opportunities for millions in our own land and beyond. Where others seek to throw up barriers, we seek to bring them down. Where others take counsel of their fears, we follow our hopes. Yes, we Americans like the future and like making the most of it. Let's do that now. And let's begin by discussing how to maintain economic growth by controlling and eventually eliminating the problem of federal deficits. We have had a balanced budget only eight times in the last 57 years. For the first time in 14 years, the federal government spent less in real terms last year than the year before. We took $73 billion off last year's deficit compared to the year before. The deficit itself has moved from 6.3% of the gross national product to only 3.4% and perhaps the most important sign of progress has been the change in our view of deficits. You know, a few of us can remember when not too many years ago, those who created the deficits said they would make us prosperous and not to worry about the debt because we owe it to ourselves. But at last, there is agreement that we can't spend ourselves rich. Our recent budget agreement, designed to reduce federal deficits by $76 billion over the next two years, builds on this consensus. But this agreement must be adhered to without slipping into the errors of the past. More broken promises and more unchecked spending. As I indicated in my first State of the Union, what ails us can be simply put, the federal government is too big and it spends too much money. I can assure you the bipartisan leadership of Congress, of my help, in fighting off any attempt to bust our budget agreement. And this includes the swift and certain use of the veto power. Now, it's also time for some plain talk about the most immediate obstacle to controlling federal deficits, the simple but frustrating problem of making expenses match revenues, something American families do and the federal government can't, has caused crisis after crisis in this city. Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, I will say to you tonight what I've said before and will continue to say. The budget process has broken down. It needs a drastic overhaul. With each ensuing year, the spectacle before the American people is the same as it was this Christmas, budget deadlines delayed or missed completely, monstrous continuing resolutions that pack hundreds of billions of dollars worth of spending into one bill and a federal government on the brink of default. I know I'm echoing what you here in the Congress have said because you suffered so directly. But let's recall that in seven years of 91 appropriations, bills scheduled to arrive on my desk by a certain date, only 10 made it on time. Last year of the 13 appropriations bills, due by October 1, none of them made it. Instead, we had four continuing resolutions lasting 41 days, then 36 days, and two days, and three days, respectively. And then along came these behemoths. This is the conference report. 1,053 pages report weighing 14 pounds. And then this, a reconciliation bill six months late. That was 1,186 pages long, weighing 15 pounds. And the long-term continuing resolution, this one was two months late, and it's 1,057 pages long, weighing 14 pounds. That was a total of 43 pounds of paper and ink. You had three hours. Yes, three hours to consider each. And it took 300 people, my office of management and budget, just to read the bill so the government wouldn't shut down. Congress shouldn't send another one of these. And if you do, I will not sign it. Let's change all this. Instead of a presidential budget that gets discarded and a congressional budget resolution that is not enforced, why not a simple partnership, a joint agreement that sets out the spending priorities within the available revenues? And let's remember our deadline is October 1, not Christmas. Let's get the people's work done in time to avoid a foot race with Santa Claus. And yes, this year to coin a phrase, a new beginning. 13 individual bills on time and fully reviewed by Congress. I'm also certain you join me in saying, let's help ensure our future of prosperity by giving the president a tool that though I will not get used to use it, is one I know future presidents of either party must have. Give the president the same authority that 43 governors use in their states, the right to reach into massive appropriation bills, pair away the waste, and enforce budget discipline. Let's approve the line item detail. And let's take a partial step in this direction. Most of you in this chamber didn't know what was in this catch all bill and report. Over the past few weeks, we've all learned what was tucked away behind a little comma here and there. For example, there's millions for items such as cranberry research, blueberry research, the study of crawfish, and the commercialization of wildflowers. And that's not to mention the five or so million so that people from developing nations could come here to watch Congress at work. I won't even touch that. So tonight I offer you this challenge. In 30 days, I will send back to you those items as rescissions, which if I had the authority to line them out, I would do so. Now review this multi-billion dollar package that will not undercut our bipartisan budget agreement. As a matter of fact, if adopted, it will improve our deficit reduction goals and what an example we can set that we're serious about getting our financial accounts in order. By acting and approving this plan, you have the opportunity to override a congressional process that is out of control. There is another vital reform. Yes, Graham Rudman Hollings has been profoundly helpful. But let us take its goal of a balanced budget and make it permanent. Let us do now what so many states do to hold down spending and what 32 state legislatures have asked us to do. Let us heed the wishes of an overwhelming plurality of Americans and pass a constitutional amendment that mandates a balanced budget and forces the federal government to live within its name. Reform of the budget process, including the line item veto and balanced budget amendment, will, together with real restraint on government spending, prevent the federal budget from ever again ravaging the family budget. Let's ensure that the federal government never again legislates against the family and the home. Last September, I signed an executive order on the family requiring that every department and agency review its activities in light of seven standards designed to promote and not harm the family. But let us make certain that the family is always at the center of the public policy process, not just in this administration, but in future, all future administrations. It's time for Congress to consider at the beginning a statement of the impact that legislation will have on the basic unit of American society, the family. And speaking to the family, let's turn to a matter on the mind of every American parent tonight, education. We all know the sorry story of the 60s and 70s, soaring spending, plummeting test scores, and that hopeful trend of the 80s when we replaced an obsession with dollars with a commitment to quality. And test scores started back up. There's a lesson here that we all should write on the blackboard 100 times. In a child's education, money can never take the place of basics like discipline, hard work, and yes, homework. As a nation, we do, of course, spend heavily on education more than we spend on defense. Yet across our country, governors like New Jersey's Tom Cain are giving classroom demonstrations that how we spend is as important as how much we spend, opening up the teaching profession to all qualified candidates, merit pay so that good teachers get A's as well as apples, and stronger curriculum. As Secretary Bennett has proposed for high schools, these imaginative reforms are making common sense the most popular new kid in America schools. How can we help? Well, we can talk about and push for these reforms. But the most important thing we can do is to reaffirm that control of our schools belongs to the states, local communities, and most of all to the parents and teachers. My friends, some years ago, the federal government declared war on poverty and poverty won. Today, the federal government has 59 major welfare programs and spends more than $100 billion a year on them. What has all this money done? Well, too often, it has only made poverty harder to escape. Federal welfare programs have created a massive social problem. With the best of intentions, government created a poverty trap that wrecks havoc on the very support system the poor need most to lift themselves out of poverty, the family. Dependency has become the one enduring heirloom passed from one generation to the next of too many fragmented families. It's time, this may be the most radical thing I've said in seven years in this office, it's time for Washington to show a little humility. There are 1,000 sparks of genius in 50 states and 1,000 communities around the nation. It is time to nurture them and see which ones can catch fire and become guiding lights. States have begun to show us the way. They've demonstrated that successful welfare programs can be built around more effective child support enforcement practices and innovative programs requiring welfare recipients to work or prepare for work. Let us give the states even more flexibility and encourage more reforms. Let's start making our welfare system the first rung on America's ladder of opportunity, a boost up from dependency, not a graveyard, but a birthplace of hope. And now let me turn to three other matters vital to family values and the quality of family life. The first is an untold American success story. Recently, we released our annual survey of what graduating high school seniors have to say about drugs. Cocaine use is declining. And marijuana use was the lowest since surveying began. We can be proud that our students are just saying no to drugs. But let us remember what this menace requires, commitment from every part of America and every single American, a commitment to drug free America. The war against drugs is a war of individual battles, a crusade with many heroes, including America's young people, and also someone very special to me. She has helped so many of our young people to say no to drugs. Nancy, much credit belongs to you. And I want to express to you your husband's pride and your country's thanks. Surprised you, didn't I? Well, now we come to a family issue that we must have the courage to confront. Tonight, I call America a good nation, a moral people, to charitable realistic consideration of the terrible cost of abortion on demand. To say to those who say this violates a woman's right to control of her own body, can they deny that now medical evidence confirms the unborn child is a living human being entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Let us unite as a nation and protect the unborn with legislation that would stop all federal funding for abortion.  Our Judeo-Christian tradition recognizes the right of taking a life in self-defense. But with that one exception, let us look to those others in our land who cry out for children to adopt. I pledge to you tonight I will work to remove barriers to adoption and extend full sharing and family life to millions of Americans so that children who need homes can be welcomed to families who want them and love them. And let me add here, so many of our greatest statesmen have reminded us that spiritual values alone are essential to our nation's health and vigor. The Congress opens its proceedings each day as does the Supreme Court, with an acknowledgment of the Supreme Being. Yet we are denied the right to set aside in our schools a moment each day for those who wish to pray. I believe Congress should pass our school prayer amendment. Now to make sure there is a full nine-member Supreme Court to interpret the law, to protect the rights of all Americans, I urge the Senate to move quickly and decisively in confirming Judge Anthony Kennedy to the highest court in the land and to also confirm 27 nominees now waiting to fill vacancies in the federal judiciary. Here, then, are our domestic priorities. Yet if the Congress and administration work together, even greater opportunities lie ahead to expand a growing world economy, to continue to reduce the threat of nuclear arms, and to extend the frontiers of freedom and the growth of democratic institutions. Our policies consistently receive the strongest support of the late Congressman Dan Daniel of Virginia. I'm sure all of you join me in expressing heartfelt condolences on his passing. One of the greatest contributions the United States can make to the world is to promote freedom as the key to economic growth. A creative, competitive America is the answer to a changing world, not trade wars that would close doors, create greater barriers, and destroy millions of jobs. We should always remember protectionism is destructionism. America's jobs, America's growth, America's future depend on trade, trade that is free, open, and fair. This year, we have it within our power to take a major step toward a growing global economy and an expanding cycle of prosperity that reaches to all the free nations of this earth. I'm speaking of the historic free trade agreement negotiated between our country and Canada. And I can also tell you that we're determined to expand this concept south as well as north. Next month, I will be traveling to Mexico, where trade matters will be of foremost concern. And over the next several months, our Congress and the Canadian Parliament can make the start of such a North American accord to reality. Our goal must be a day when the free flow of trade from the tip of Tierra Telfuega to the Arctic Circle unites the people of the Western Hemisphere in a bond of mutually beneficial exchange, when all borders become what the US-Canadian border so long has been, a meeting place rather than a dividing line. This movement we see in so many places toward economic freedom is indivisible from the worldwide movement toward political freedom and against totalitarian rule. This global democratic revolution has removed the specter so frightening a decade ago of democracy doomed to permanent minority status in the world. In South and Central America, only a third of the people enjoyed democratic rule in 1976. Today, over 90% of Latin Americans live in nations committed to democratic principles. And the resurgent of democracy is owed to these courageous people on almost every continent who have struggled to take control of their own destiny. In Nicaragua, the struggle has extra meaning because that nation is so near our own borders. The recent revelations of a former high-level Sandinista major, Roger Miranda, show us that even as they talk peace, the communist Sandinista government of Nicaragua has established plans for a large 600,000 man army. Yet even as these plans are made, the Sandinista regime knows the tide is turning. And the cause of Nicaraguan freedom is riding at its crest. Because of the freedom fighters who are resisting communist rule, the Sandinistas have been forced to extend some democratic rights, negotiate with church authorities, and release a few political prisoners. The focus is on the Sandinistas, their promises, and their actions. There is a consensus among the four Central American Democratic presidents that the Sandinistas have not complied with the plan to bring peace and democracy to all of Central America. The Sandinistas, again, have promised reforms. Their challenge is to take irreversible steps toward democracy. On Wednesday, my request to sustain the freedom fighters will be submitted, which reflects our mutual desire for peace, freedom, and democracy in Nicaragua. I ask Congress to pass this request. Let us before the people of Nicaragua what Lafayette, Pulaski, and Von Stuben were for our forefathers and the cause of American independence. So too, so too in Afghanistan, the freedom fighters are the key to peace. We support the Mujahideen. There can be no settlement unless all Soviet troops are removed, and the Afghan people are allowed genuine self-determination. I have made my views on this matter known to Mr. Gorbachev, but not just Nicaragua or Afghanistan. Yes, everywhere. We see a swelling freedom tide across the world. Freedom fighters rising up in Cambodia and Angola, fighting and dying for the same democratic liberties we hold sacred. Their cause is our cause, freedom. Yet even as we work to expand world freedom, we must build a safer peace and reduce the danger of nuclear war. But let's have no illusions. Three years of steady decline and the value of our annual defense investment have increased the risk of our most basic security interests, jeopardizing earlier hard won goals. We must face squarely the implications of this negative trend and make adequate, stable defense spending a top goal both this year and in the future. This same concern applies to economic and security assistance programs as well. But the resolve of America and its NATO allies has opened the way for unprecedented achievement in arms reduction. Our recently signed INF Treaty is historic because it reduces nuclear arms and establishes the most stringent verification regime in arms control history, including several forms of short notice on-site inspection. I submitted the treaty today, and I urge the Senate to give its advice and consent to ratification of this landmark agreement. In addition to the INF Treaty, we're within reach of an even more significant start agreement that will reduce US and Soviet long-range missile or strategic arsenals by half. But let me be clear, our approach is not to seek agreement for agreement's sake, but to settle only for agreements that truly enhance our national security and that of our allies. We will never put our security at risk or that of our allies just to reach an agreement with the Soviets. No agreement is better than a bad agreement. As I mentioned earlier, our efforts are to give future generations what we never had, a future free of nuclear terror. Reduction of strategic offensive arms is one step, SDI another. Our funding request for our strategic defense initiative is less than 2% of the total defense budget. SDI funding is money wisely appropriated and money well spent. SDI has the same purpose and supports the same goals of arms reduction. It reduces the risk of war and the threat of nuclear weapons to all mankind. Strategic defenses that threaten no one could offer the world a safer, more stable basis for deterrence. We must also remember that SDI is our insurance policy against a nuclear accident, a Chernobyl of the sky, or an accidental launch, or some madman who might come along. We've seen such changes in the world in seven years as totalitarianism struggles to avoid being overwhelmed by the forces of economic advance and the aspiration for human freedom. It is the free nations that are resilient and resurgent. As the global democratic revolution has put totalitarianism on the defensive, we have left behind the days of retreat. America is, again, a vigorous leader of the free world, a nation that acts decisively and firmly in the furtherance of her principles and vital interests. No legacy would make me more proud than leaving in place a bipartisan consensus for the cause of world freedom, a consensus that prevents a paralysis of American power from ever occurring again. But my thoughts tonight go beyond this, and I hope you'll let me end this evening with a personal reflection. You know, the world could never be quite the same again after Jacob Shalas, a trustworthy and dependable clerk of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, took his pen and engrossed those words about representative government in the preamble of our Constitution. And in a quiet but final way, the course of human events was forever altered when, on a ridge overlooking the Emmitsburg Pike in an obscure Pennsylvania town called Gettysburg, Lincoln spoke of our duty to government of and by the people and never letting it perish from the earth. At the start of this decade, I suggested that we live in equally momentous times, that it was up to us now to decide whether our form of government would endure and whether history still had a place of greatness for a quiet, pleasant, greening land called America. Not everything has been made perfect in seven years, nor will it be made perfect in seven times 70 years. But before us, this year and beyond, are great prospects for the cause of peace and world freedom. It means too that the young Americans I spoke of seven years ago, as well as those who might be coming along the Virginia or Maryland shores this night and seeing for the first time the lights of this capital city, the lights that cashed their glow on our great halls of government and the monuments to the memory of our great men. It means those young Americans will find a city of hope in a land that is free. We can be proud that for them and for us, those lights along the Potomac are still seen this night, signaling as they have for nearly two centuries. And as we pray, God, they always will that another generation of Americans has protected and passed unlovely this place called America, this shining city on a hill, this government of by and for the people. Thank you and God bless you.


What's up everyone? It's your girl, Kenzie here from Layton Sports Guards and I'm ripping a personal for Seth W We've got a 2022 top's chrome sonic baseball light box. All right. Good luck Seth. Here we go This is a fun rip.  Um buy back As I say that there's a 20 card right there quarter of the box paid for already michael brantley refractor prison rookie of zack thompson Uh amber g rookie and a salvo peres on the way rave Yep, you are in queue chikai you are in queue. There's about three or four people in front of you I'll read over the um queue after this box. Everyone knows where they are Refractor you strum ski onio cruz on the youth quake rookie Eli morgan Bruhan rookie. We've got wayrape evan longoria ran one door pool hosts Got rookie refractor of drew ellis. Does he have a short print in this? Give me one second. Just one two double check I Want to say he does my variation No, he is not.   Oh, we've got mackenzie gore youth quake. Oh my gosh, that's scary I thought someone else was in here I said that You've got prism rookie seth beer Blake snell and wayrape brandon crawford He's strawsburg stewart fair trial on the rookie refractor let's see here Adolfo castor rookie Lina Shane boz rookie. We've got a robby grassman on the wayrape McCormick refractor coupler jake mire's rookie Oh, and last pack here for yourself side gray Tony base we've got aqua wayrape of sony gray 188 of 199 Sonny gray and castianos Already set that will do it for your box of sonic light. Thanks again for hopping in and we'll get these right out to you