Program | Speakers | Videos

Moderator:
Maria Bartiromo, Anchor, CNBC's "Closing Bell With Maria Bartiromo"

Health reform legislation is a positive step toward providing more Americans with insurance, but there's a big omission: The law doesn't do enough to promote prevention, innovation and cures. In a session moderated by CNBC's Maria Bartiromo, panelists discussed taking a broader and more holistic approach to what the concept of health care really means.

At least 70 percent of health spending goes toward preventable diseases, most of which are caused or made worse by lifestyle choices. Obesity is linked to several serious medical conditions — from heart disease to cancer — and its consequences are grave.

Every imperative to lose weight is there. But obesity presents an accumulation of complex socioeconomic factors that influence lifestyle choices. For example, in many communities, especially urban neighborhoods, options for healthy choices are limited, not easily affordable, or in some instances, completely unavailable making healthy choices difficult or impossible.

Prevention, said Wayne Gattinella of WebMD, is a "concept without a champion." Health insurers, pharmaceutical companies and even health-care providers are just not incentivized to promote it. Jay Gellert of Health Net said it's time to wage a war against obesity, the same way we fought the war against smoking. According to Gellert, "right now, we are fighting this war with squirt guns."

Ardis Hoven of the American Medical Association called for educating the public in a meaningful way and ensuring that available information is trustworthy and reliable.

Quickly woven into the conversation were the likely suspects of the ever-expanding waistline — Pepsi, Coca-Cola, McDonalds. Are they to take the brunt of the blame? Perhaps. But the larger question remains: Who's in charge of helping Americans improve their lifestyles, make healthier choices, and enhance productivity?

All panelists underscored that collaboration across sectors — health, policy, business — will be key.

The other side of coin is finding real cures for disease, said Michael Milken, chairman of the Milken Institute and FasterCures. Breakthrough cures will pay tremendous dividends, but we will have to channel capital correctly and streamline the process of translating discoveries into treatments. Milken cited the successful management of polio in the 1950s, and urged policymakers to learn from history.

David Brennan, CEO of AstraZeneca said that it's "about the art of what's possible." The pharmaceutical industry has been treatment-oriented, and for most diseases, there's limited understanding of prevention.

America's leadership in medical innovation is now being challenged on a global scale, and the U.S. should look to science parks in China, a biopolis in Singapore and better science and math education in Asian nations to find best practices. Innovation will thrive in an environment where it's appropriately incentivized and rewarded.

Milken noted that if the U.S. continues to misallocate resources significantly, our future in science will be in question. "What are we as a government going to stand for?"

Moderator:
Matthew Bishop, U.S. Business Editor and New York Bureau Chief, The Economist

The financial crisis has provoked a chorus of calls for increased regulation — and in the past, many laws and regulations were, in fact, created as responses to crises. Should new regulations and regulators be introduced in haste, or should we focus on enforcing existing rules? Should the shadow banking system be regulated, as commercial banks are? Is it to blame for what happened in the U.S. credit and mortgage markets, and does it represent a systemic risk in the future? Should the Fed try to identify and repress asset bubbles in the making? What sort of regulation are we likely to get, given the current political realities? How could governments all over the world better coordinate their rescue efforts when a crisis hits? This panel provides insights on how to reduce systemic risks and promote financial stability.

Moderator:
Michael Milken, Chairman, Milken Institute

Can education be improved by throwing money at it? It depends on whom you ask.

Gov. Linda Lingle of Hawaii told a panel of her peers that money isn′t a magic pill for fixing the nation′s schools. Lingle pointed to data that shows spending on education has doubled since 1970 yet reading scores have remained flat in that period of time.

"There is no correlation between the amount of money that′s spent in education in America and the results that are achieved. Absolutely none," she said.

At the same time, Lingle bemoaned the fact that Hawaii's schools were forced to furlough students and teachers 17 days this past school year, and she expects the same next school year.

Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, while conceding that accountability and efficient use of funding are important, gave an impassioned defense of spending on education.

"I would like to respectfully disagree with Gov. Lingle. It IS about money. When you′re talking about having 17 days of furloughs because you don′t have enough money, it′s about money," he said.

Doyle said Wisconsin has held education spending level, and the state hasn′t had furloughs or layoffs. The state spends 13 percent of its budget on higher education and has more students in the university system than at any time in Wisconsin′s history.

"I often say, you can′t tell a second-grader, 'Come back next year when we don′t have a recession, and we′ll give you a good education.' And you can′t tell a kid who's worked all his or her life to earn their way their way into the university system, to tell them, 'I′m sorry, you made all the grades, you did everything expected and you've been a good kid, but we don′t have a place for you in our university system.' "

Moderator:
Sage Kelly, Managing Director and the Global Head of Healthcare Investment Banking, Jefferies & Company Inc.

With the health reform law in place, leaders in the industry had more questions than answers about its implications.

"Cost comes from price [of health care] and utilization," said Ceci Connolly who covers health policy for The Washington Post. Measures are in place to curb the soaring cost of health-care services, like lowering readmission rates by addressing preventable underlying causes. But, "we have a lot to do" when it comes to utilization, she said. The law starts to modify behavior by changing incentives, but it requires broader public engagement.

Michael McCallister of Humana Inc. said the great power of consumers can be leveraged with the right incentives, accurate information and transparency throughout the health system. The law puts measures in place that will move the country toward "outcomes-driven care," said Billy Tauzin of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRma).

Tauzin said the law contains protections for biopharmaceutical research if implemented right. Connolly said the issue of 12-year exclusivity for biosimilars is one of the ongoing arguments among policymakers.

Tauzin said the law does not address the litigation system to stop "defensive medicine." The fear of liability encourages health-care providers to overutilize unnecessary health-care services, which leads to rising costs that do not necessarily bring better care.

Sandy Beaty of Pfizer Inc. said implementing this complex health reform law is a five- to 10-year process. But Tauzin said had Congress and the president not taken action, it would have taken 10 more years to revisit the issue.

Moderator:
Lowell Milken, Co-Founder, Knowledge Universe Education; Founder, TAP: The System for Teacher and Student Advancement

Even after decades of significant investments in education, the U.S. has made little progress in raising student achievement levels and attracting the right numbers of talented educators to do the job, Milken Family Foundation Chairman and TAP Founder Lowell Milken told a packed ballroom of leaders in education, business, policy and the community-at-large.

The new Race to the Top and Investing in Innovation Fund — coupled by an increased commitment to the Teacher Incentive Fund — are signals that the federal government is taking action to reverse this course. The competitive funds have sparked states and districts to think differently about educating their students. But given the resistance to changing the status quo, can the American K-12 system be reformed?

The general consensus of the panelists was yes, but there is still work to be done. Philanthropist Eli Broad and former U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings say that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was a good start. Its reauthorization will be critical in moving forward. "Rather than tinkering around the edges," said Spellings, "we need to use time, people and money in smarter ways." And there is no doubt that the end result must be increased student achievement.

"Effective reform boils down to student achievement," Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson said. "Anything short of that is unacceptable." Johnson offered four key factors in achieving reform: changing the culture of a school, increasing accountability, prohibiting excuses and having great people. This not only means teachers, but also principals and school board members.

Kevin Guitterrez made great people the core of education strategy while serving as chief academic officer of the Algiers Charter Schools Association (ACSA) in New Orleans. He is now continuing his work as deputy superintendent of the state's Recovery School District. At ACSA, Guitterrez's team adopted TAP: The System for Teacher and Student Advancement, embedding it into the charter. TAP is a powerful, comprehensive school reform that offers educators career advancement, ongoing data-driven professional development, rigorous teacher accountability based on clearly defined teaching standards, and performance-based pay. With TAP, ACSA is able to get the right people to become teachers, develop them into effective instructors and ensure that the system can deliver the best possible instruction.

Tony Miller, U.S deputy secretary of education, highlights this ultimate goal of an aligned approach. He notes that an instructional system that aligns teacher and principal preparation to high standards and accountability will be productive. When it comes to evaluation, the system must take student achievement into account. In his conversations with teachers, they say that they welcome evaluation if it is done fairly. "Evaluation systems must be based on clear standards, provide regular monitoring, ongoing feedback and intervention in the form of professional development, and be delivered by trained evaluators," Miller said.

Other critical factors in effective sustainable school reform are selecting talented principals, motivating students, engaging parents with user-friendly information and creating public/private partnerships.

-- Jana Rausch, Senior Manager of Media and Public Affairs, Milken Family Foundation

Moderator:
Michael Intriligator, Senior Fellow, Milken Institute; Professor Emeritus of Economics, Political Science and Public Policy, University of California, Los Angeles

As the foiled Christmas Day bombing, the attack at Fort Hood and other recent incidents show, terrorism is still a very real concern for the United States. Meanwhile, terrorist strikes continue to claim lives around the world, especially in the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan. This session considers how we are changing our tactics in fighting terrorists, what's working, what's not and what's next. Here at home, the TSA's screening of passengers has been criticized as ineffective, heavy-handed and invasive — and yet the effort to screen air cargo still lags behind. Is it time to shift our priorities? Has the U.S. overemphasized airport security while leaving other important potential targets vulnerable? Should Yemen be the new focus of anti-terrorism efforts? Should we change our whole approach to terrorism? Is there a smarter way to enhance our security while maintaining individual privacy and civil liberties?

Speaker:
Mikheil Saakashvili, President, Georgia

Interviewer:
Jeffrey Gedmin, President and CEO, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Situated at the strategically important crossroads where Europe meets Asia, Georgia has undergone almost a decade of reforms aimed at modernizing and privatizing its economy. The World Bank's "Doing Business" report named Georgia as the world's top reformer in 2006, and ranked it 11th globally for ease of doing business in 2010. How did this transformation come about in a nation once mired in poverty, corruption and crime? In a one-on-one interview, President Mikheil Saakashvili discusses his drive to streamline regulation and taxation with the goal of making Georgia more business-friendly and more attractive to foreign investors. In this candid conversation, he evaluates Georgia's progress as it seeks to build a democratic society and continue on a path to prosperity.

Moderator:
Albert Carnesale, Chancellor Emeritus and Professor, University of California, Los Angeles

Is nuclear disarmament a pie-in-the-sky goal? It's a task that's been made all the more complicated by the specter of terrorism — and all the more urgent by the prospect of a nuclear Iran.

The Global Conference gathered a panel of leading policy experts to debate the Obama administration's recent moves to reduce stockpiles in concert with the Russians and to evaluate the threats posed by Iran, North Korea, terrorist groups and even lone actors.

James Woolsey, former CIA director and currently of counsel at Goodwin Procter LLP, disagreed with Obama's willingness to take a nuclear strike off the table in case a U.S. ally undergoes a biological attack but the perpetrator nation is abiding by the terms of the nonproliferation treaty. Woolsey is not one for utopian dreams of a nuclear-free world; he urged a more hard-nosed approach of thinking like the bad guys and suspecting the worst. His major worry is a nuclear Iran, and he highlighted the radical nature and unpredictability of the current regime.

Far more supportive of the current administration's stance was former U.S. national security advisor Brent Scowcroft. He and Scott Sagan of UCLA maintained that good-faith reduction efforts are crucial, along with developing better verification methods. But all concurred that the Iran problem is looming, and the window for heading off a major confrontation is closing fast.

Don't miss the video of this intense policy discussion.

Moderator:
Margaret Anderson, Executive Director, FasterCures / The Center for Accelerating Medical Solutions

It's way past time to increase resources and build scientific capacity at the FDA. That was the consensus of a Tuesday panel, which noted that the FDA suffers from an almost scandalous lack of resources. The agency that regulates 25 cents of every dollar spent by U.S. consumers has a budget that is half what Americans spend every year on potato chips.

Scientific capacity at the agency is very weak and is inhibiting the agency's ability to evaluate new therapies moving through the pipeline. Panelists agreed that the FDA badly needs to be able to collaborate meaningfully with other sectors — what some refer to as the "triple helix" of government, academia and industry — without being constantly "demonized" for conflict of interest.

Garry Neil of Johnson & Johnson detailed the risky, unpredictable and costly pathway to new drug approval, a process that hasn′t changed substantially in 50 years. He reiterated that it costs well over $1 billion to develop an approved drug, and despite exponential increases in investment by government and industry, the number of new therapies approved every year has declined.

Many patients find the FDA impenetrable, said Ellen Sigal of Friends of Cancer Research. She said the patient voice is not being heard on Capitol Hill and concerns (many of them legitimate) about safety are all but drowning out patients' appetite for innovation and willingness to risk-share.

Jonathan Simons of the Prostate Cancer Foundation called for an "honest broker knowledge exchange" within FDA that would facilitate collaboration among stakeholders, evaluate data and create value through transmission of knowledge. He also proposed that the FDA develop a sort of "amicus curiae" process, as in the court system, to allow meaningful input by stakeholders other than regulated industry.

Gail Cassell of Eli Lilly held up a success story: the development of 29 new anti-retroviral therapies for HIV, approved in a relatively short time as stakeholders worked together across sectors with optimal speed. Simons noted that a significant reason for this success was leadership. Can this success be replicated? "It happened with HIV, it can happen again," Neil said.

Moderator:
Campbell Brown, Anchor, "Campbell Brown," CNN

The topics at this political panel were potentially incendiary, but it was one of the more civil political discussions of the past 12 months.

Go watch the video for this wide-ranging discussion of Arizona's immigration law, the just-concluded grilling of Goldman Sachs executives on Capitol Hill, the financial bailout and the Tea Party phenomenon, among others.

Here's a sample to whet your appetite:

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty on why Tea Partiers are so angry: "They are concerned about a government that they feel is too large. They note that we now have state-sponsored companies that are supposedly too big to fail. We have a federal government that is too big to succeed. We have a federal debt that's too big to pay off. And they see that we have leaders who are too small to do anything about it."

Radio host Matt Miller on why they will continue to be angry: "The Tea Party folks have no anchoring in any sort of policy reality, and as soon as anybody who tried to lead them proposed any actual measures it would take to do what they say they want, they would be just as upset with the proposals of their leaders as they are now. …We're going to be In a cycle of anti-establishment and anti-incumbency maybe for the foreseeable future because nothing that's on the horizon in terms of what our leaders are offering is going to change the fundamental trajectory of their economic status."

Moderator:
Louis Lévesque, Deputy Minister of International Trade, Canada

As the world economy continues to recover, building new trade and investment relationships is essential — especially for an export-dependent nation like Canada. There is a direct link between Canada's economic recovery and the efforts of its businesses, investors and innovators to create new partnerships around the world. In this session, Canada's deputy minister of trade joins some of the nation's most forward-thinking financial experts to analyze current trends within the broader context of Canada's economic, trade and productivity performance over the last decade. The panel also highlights how the Canadian banking system successfully navigated the economic downturn, and the many programs and initiatives in place to help Canada successfully compete in the world economy.

Moderator:
Peter Passell, Senior Fellow, Milken Institute; Editor, The Milken Institute Review

The stars seem to be aligned for a major reconsideration of public policy toward illicit drugs. Thirteen states have approved access to medical marijuana, several fiscally strapped states are looking to drugs as a source of revenue and the Obama administration has shifted the focus of federal drug initiatives from criminal deterrence to treatment. Meanwhile, the consequences of illicit trafficking in Afghanistan, Mexico and Burma are forcing a rethinking of priorities in coping with drugs. This panel assesses the benefits and costs of policy-as-usual, and analyzes the likely consequences of varying degrees of liberalization ranging from selective decriminalization to outright legalization.

Moderator:
Jon Hilsenrath, Chief Economics Correspondent, The Wall Street Journal

The Federal Reserve, facing growing deflationary pressures in the U.S. and abroad, is unlikely to tighten monetary policy until early 2011, a panel of Fed watchers said. "We're seeing outright deflation," said Jason Cummins, head of economic research at Brevan Howard Asset Management, noting that that the three-month trend in core consumer prices was negative.

Recent data from the IMF also show deflation growing in a host of countries, said Vincent Reinhart, an American Enterprise Institute Scholar and former director of the Fed's Division of Monetary Affairs. "Inflation is low and going lower," he said. The Greek debt crisis, which has led the dollar to appreciate against the Euro, is also damping inflationary jitters — the main concern that could prompt the Fed to raise rates quickly.

So when will the Fed move away from its unprecedented monetary accommodation? Reinhart predicted tightening could come as early as this November but more likely May of next year. Maria Fiorini Ramirez of MFR Inc. expected the Fed to wait until next February, while Cummins predicted the next rate hike in March 2011.

Check out the panel video for complete details.