So last year, I ran for mayor of my hometown, Tulsa, Oklahoma. And I was the underdog. I was running against a two-term incumbent, and my opponent ran the classic partisan playbook. He publicized his endorsement of Donald Trump. He publicized a letter that he sent to President Obama protesting Syrian refugees, even though none of them were coming to Tulsa.
去年我在家鄉俄克拉荷馬州 土爾沙市競選市長。 我處於劣勢。 我的對手是已經 做了兩任的現任市長, 他採用的是典型的 黨派偏見(盲目擁護)策略。 他宣傳他有唐諾川普的背書。 他宣傳他寄給歐巴馬總統的信, 內容是抗議敘利亞難民, 即使根本沒有 敘利亞難民到土爾沙市來。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
He ran ads on TV that my kids thought made me look like Voldemort, and sent out little gems in the mail, like this. [America's most liberal labor union has endorsed]
我的孩子認為他的電視廣告 讓我看起來像佛地魔, 他還用信件寄出像這樣的珍品。 〔美國最自由主義的勞工工會背書〕
Never mind that "America's most liberal labor union," as defined by this ad, was actually the Tulsa Firefighters Union, hardly a famed bastion of liberalism.
別在意這句「美國最 自由主義的勞工工會」, 根據這張廣告的定義, 其實是土爾沙消防隊工會, 實在算不上有名的自由主義捍衛者。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Never mind that while she was running for president and he was serving in his final year in that office, Hillary, Barack and I could just never find the time to get together and yuck it up about the Tulsa mayor's race.
別在意當她正在競選總統時, 他正在白宮任期的最後一年, 希拉蕊、巴拉克和我, 我們實在找不出時間聚聚 來笑談土爾沙市市長選戰。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Never mind that I, like my opponent, am a Republican.
別在意我和對手一樣 都是共和黨員。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
And so when something like this hits you in a campaign, you have to decide how you're going to respond, and we had a novel idea. What if, instead of responding with partisanship, we responded with a focus on results? What if we ran a campaign that was not about running against someone, but was about bringing people together behind a common vision? And so we decided to respond not with a negative ad but with something people find even sexier -- data points.
所以,當你在選戰時受到這種攻擊, 你得要決定如何回應, 而我們有個新穎的點子。 如果不採用黨派偏見來回應, 而是把焦點放在結果來回應呢? 如果我們的競選活動 重點不在於對抗某個人, 而是用一個共同的遠景 把人們結合在一起呢? 所以我們決定不要用 負面廣告來回應, 而是用人們會覺得 更迷人的回應方式── 資料點。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
And so we emphasized things like increasing per capita income in our city, increasing our city's population, and we stuck to those relentlessly, throughout the campaign, always bringing it back to those things by which our voters could measure, in a very transparent way, how we were doing, and hold me accountable if I got elected.
我們強調增加我們市民的平均收入, 增加我們城市的人口, 在整個競選活動期間, 我們都這樣堅持著, 總是都帶回到我們的選民 可以用非常透明的方式 來測量的東西上, 我們做得如何, 如果我當選了我就要為這些負責。
And a funny thing happened when we did that. Tulsa is home to one of the most vibrant young professional populations in the country, and they took notice of this approach. We have in our culture in our city, an ethos where our business leaders don't just run companies, they run philanthropic institutions and nonprofits, and those folks took notice. We have parents who are willing to sacrifice today so that their kids can have a better future, and those people took notice, too. And so on election day, I, G.T. Bynum, a guy whose name reminds people of a circus promoter ...
當我們那樣做之後, 發生了有趣的事。 土爾沙市是美國有最多 朝氣和年輕職業人口的家鄉之一, 而他們注意到了這個方法。 在我們的城市裡、我們的文化中, 有種風氣,就是我們的 企業領導人不只是經營公司, 他們也經營慈善機構和非營利機構, 那些人注意到了。 我們有些父母,願意犧牲今天, 來讓他們孩子有更好的未來。 那些人也注意到了。 所以,在投票日, 我,G.T. 拜能, 一個名字會讓人聯想到 馬戲團贊助者的傢伙,
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
a guy with the raw animal magnetism of a young Orville Redenbacher ...
一個有著年輕奧維爾雷登巴克魅力的 傢伙,(註:爆米花企業家)
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
I won the election by 17 points.
我贏選舉,且贏了 17%。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
And we did it with the support of Republicans and Democrats. Now, why is that story and that approach so novel? Why do we always allow ourselves to fall back on philosophical disagreements that ultimately lead to division? I believe it is because politicians find it easier to throw the red meat out to the base than to innovate.
我們有共和黨和民主黨的 支持才做到的。 為什麼那個故事和方法如此新穎? 為什麼我們總是允許我們自己 落回到哲學的歧見裡面, 最終導致分裂? 我認為是因為政治人物 覺得丟出一塊紅肉滿足支持者 比創新容易。
The conventional wisdom is that to win an election, you have to dumb it down and play to your constituencies' basest, divisive instincts. And when somebody wins an election like that, they win, that's true, but the rest of us lose.
一般的看法是,若要贏得選舉, 你得降到大眾的低智商水平, 迎合你的選民基礎和分歧的天性。 當有人用那樣的方式贏得選舉, 他們就是贏了,那是事實, 但我們剩下的人就輸了。
And so what we need to do is think about how can we change that dynamic. How can we move in a direction where partisanship is replaced with policy? And fortunately, there's a growing bipartisan movement across this country that is doing just that.
所以我們得想想 要如何改變那種動力。 我們要如何調整方向, 用政策來取代黨派偏見? 幸運的是,在全美, 超黨派運動正在成長, 這個運動做的就是那件事。
One of its heroes is a guy named Mitch Daniels. Mitch Daniels served as George W. Bush's budget director, and during that time, he created what was called the PART tool. The PART tool allowed people to evaluate a broad range of federal programs and apply numerical scoring for them on things like program management and project results. And using this, they evaluated over a thousand federal programs. Over 150 programs had their funding reduced because they could not demonstrate success. But unfortunately, there wasn't ever a well-publicized increase in funding for those programs that did demonstrate success, and because of this, the program was never really popular with Congress, and was eventually shuttered. But the spirit of that program lived on.
其中一位英雄,叫米奇丹尼爾。 米奇丹尼爾是小布希總統的預算主管, 在那段時間, 他創造了一個工具,叫「PART」。 「PART」讓人們能評估 各種聯邦計畫, 並對它們採用數值評分, 評估計畫管理、專案結果等等。 用這個工具,他們評估了 超過一千個聯邦計畫。 有超過 150 個計畫的資金被縮減, 因為它們無法展現出成功。 不幸的是,對於確實有展現出 成功的那些計畫, 從來也沒有廣為人知的資金增加, 因為這個原因,這計畫 一直沒在國會受歡迎, 最終被終止了。 但這個計畫的精神還繼續活著。
Mitch Daniels went home to Indiana, ran for governor, got elected, and applied the same premise to state programs, reducing funding for those programs that could not demonstrate success, but this time, he very publicly increased funding for those programs that could demonstrate success, things like increasing the number of state troopers that they needed to have, reducing wait times at the DMV -- and today, Mitch Daniels is the president of Purdue University, applying yet again the same principles, this time at the higher ed level, and he's done that in order to keep tuition levels for students there flat for half a decade.
米奇丹尼爾回到印第安納的家鄉, 競選州長,且當選了, 他把同樣的前提假設用到州計畫上, 無法展現出成功的計畫, 資金就會被縮減, 但這一次,他非常公開地 對於展現出成功的計畫 提供更多資金, 比如像是增加他們所需要擁有的 州警數目、 減少監理處的等候時間── 現今,米奇丹尼爾是 普渡大學的校長, 他又使用同樣的原則, 這次用在更高的教育層級, 他那麼做的目的是要 維持學生的學費五年不漲價。
Now, while Mitch Daniels applied this at the federal level, the state level, and in higher ed, the guy that really cracked the code for cities is a Democrat, Martin O'Malley, during his time as Mayor of Baltimore. Now, when Mayor O'Malley took office, he was a big fan of what they'd been able to do in New York City when it came to fighting crime. When Rudy Giuliani first became Mayor of New York, crime statistics were collected on a monthly, even an annual basis, and then police resources would be allocated based on those statistics. Giuliani shrunk that time frame, so that crime statistics would be collected on a daily, even hourly basis, and then police resources would be allocated to those areas quickly where crimes were occurring today rather than where they were occurring last quarter.
雖然米奇丹尼爾在聯邦層級、 州層級、高等教育層級 採用這些規則, 但真正為城市做到這些的, 是民主黨的馬丁歐麥利, 在當巴爾的摩市長的期間做到的。 當歐麥利市長就職, 他非常崇拜紐約市 對於打擊犯罪所做的事。 當魯迪朱利安尼最初 成為紐約市長時, 犯罪統計數字是每個月 甚至每年收集一次的, 警方資源則是根據 這些統計數字來分配。 朱利安尼把時間範圍縮短, 這麼一來,就必須要每天 甚至每小時收集犯罪統計數字, 接著,很快把警方的資源 分配到現今在發生犯罪的區域, 而不是分配到上季發生犯罪的區域。
Well, O'Malley loved that approach, and he applied it in Baltimore. And he applied it to the two areas that were most problematic for Baltimore from a crime-fighting standpoint. We call these the kidneys of death. [Baltimore homicides and shootings, 1999] So there they are, the kidneys. Now watch this. Watch what happens when you apply data in real time and deploy resources quickly.
歐麥利很喜歡那個方法, 所以它用在巴爾的摩。 他把那個方法用在 巴爾的摩打擊犯罪方面 問題最大的兩個區域。 我們稱它們是死亡的腎臟。 〔巴爾的摩自殺案和 槍擊案,1999 年〕 腎臟就在圖上這裡。 看看這個。 看看採用即使資料和快速部署資源 之後會發生什麼事。
In a decade, they reduced violent crime in Baltimore by almost 50 percent, using this approach, but the genius of what O'Malley did was not that he just did what some other city was doing. Lots of us mayors do that.
用這個方法,在十年間, 巴爾蒂摩的暴力犯罪減少了近一半, 但歐麥利的天才之舉 並不是他用了其他城市的做法。 很多市長都會這樣。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
He realized that the same approach could be used to all of the problems that his city faced. And so they applied it to issue after issue in Baltimore, and today, it's being used by mayors across the country to deal with some of our greatest challenges. And the overall approach is a very simple one -- identify the goal that you want to achieve; identify a measurement by which you can track progress toward that goal; identify a way of testing that measurement cheaply and quickly; and then deploy whatever strategies you think would work, test them, reduce funding for the strategies that don't work, and put your money into those strategies that do.
他了解到,同樣的方法 可以被用在他的城市 所面臨的所有問題上。 所以,在巴爾的摩,他們把它 用在一個又一個的議題上, 現今,全國各地的市長都在用它 來處理我們許多的大挑戰。 而整體的方法非常簡單── 找出你想要達成的目標; 找出可用來追蹤該目標進展的測量值; 找出一種便宜又快速的方式 來測試該測量值; 然後把所有你認為 可能有用的策略都部署出去, 測試它們, 針對沒有用的策略, 減少它們的資金, 然後把你的錢投入有用的策略上。
Today, Atlanta is using this to address housing issues for their homeless population. Philadelphia has used this to reduce their crime rates to levels not enjoyed since the 1960s. Louisville has used this not just for their city but in a community-wide effort bringing resources together to address vacant and abandoned properties. And I am using this approach in Tulsa. I want Tulsa to be a world-class city, and we cannot do that if we aren't clear in what our goals are and we don't use evidence and evaluation to accomplish them.
現今,亞特蘭大在用這個方法 來處理無家可歸者的住房議題。 費城用這個方法來降低 他們的犯罪率, 降到從 1960 年代之後 就沒享受過的低點。 路易斯維爾不只為該城市 採用這個方法, 也在社區層級努力 將資源集合在一起, 來處理空著的、廢棄的資產。 我也在土爾沙市用這個方法。 我想要讓土爾沙成為世界級的城市, 我們不可能辦到,除非我們 清楚知道我們的目標是什麼, 且要用證據及評估來達成那些目標。
Now, what's interesting, and we've found in implementing this, a lot of people, when you talk about data, people think of that as a contrast to creativity. What we've found is actually quite the opposite. We've found it to be an engine for creative problem-solving, because when you're focused on a goal, and you can test different strategies quickly, the sky's the limit on the different things that you can test out. You can come up with any strategy that you can come up with and utilize and try and test it until you find something that works, and then you double down on that. The other area that we've found that it lends itself to creativity is that it breaks down those old silos of ownership that we run into so often in government. It allows you to draw all the stakeholders in your community that care about homelessness or crime-fighting or education or vacant and abandoned properties, and bring those people to the table so you can work together to address your common goal.
當我們在導入這個方法時, 發現了有趣的事, 當你在談論資料時, 很多人會認為那是創意的對比。 但我們發現事實完全相反。 我們發現它其實是 創意式解決問題的引擎, 因為如果你把焦點放在一個目標上, 且你能快速測試不同的策略, 你就能測試各種 不同的東西,沒有限制。 你能想出任何你能想出的策略, 然後使用它、嘗試它、測試它, 直到你找到行得通的策略, 再針對它來加碼。 我們發現它適合創意的另一個地方, 是它能夠把我們在治理上常常 遇到的隔閡給打破, 它讓你能吸引你社區中所有關心 無家可歸者、打擊犯罪、教育、 空著或廢棄之資產的利害關係人, 讓大家坐下來談, 大家就能合作來針對共同目標努力。
Now, in Tulsa, we're applying this to things that are common city initiatives, things like, as you've heard now repeatedly, public safety -- that's an obvious one; improving our employee morale at the city -- we don't think you could do good things unless you've got happy employees; improving the overall street quality throughout our community. But we're also applying it to things that are not so traditional when you think about what cities are responsible for, things like increasing per capita income, increasing our population, improving our high school graduation rates, and perhaps the greatest challenge that we face as a city.
在土爾沙,我們把這個方法 用在共同的城市行動方案上, 比如,你現在已經聽過很多次的, 公共安全──那是很明顯的一項; 改善城市員工的士氣── 我們認為,如果沒有 快樂的員工,就不可做好事; 改善我們整個社區的整體街道品質。 但我們也把這個方法 用在不太傳統的地方, 當你想想城市應該要對什麼負責, 比如增加人均收入、 增加人口數、 改善我們的高中畢業率、 也許還有我們這個城市 所面臨的最的大挑戰。
At the dawn of the 1920s, Tulsa was home to the most vibrant African American community in the country. The Greenwood section of our city was known as Black Wall Street. In 1921, in one night, Tulsa experienced the worst race riot in American history. Black Wall Street was burned to the ground, and today, a child that is born in the most predominantly African American part of our city is expected to live 11 years less than a kid that's born elsewhere in Tulsa. Now, for us, this is a unifying issue. Four years from now, we will recognize the 100th commemoration of that awful event, and in Tulsa, we are bringing every tool that we can to address that life-expectancy disparity, and we're not checking party registration cards at the door to the meetings. We don't care who you voted for for president if you want to help restore the decade of life that's being stolen from these kids right now. And so we've got white folks and black folks, Hispanic folks and Native American folks, we've got members of Congress, members of the city council, business leaders, religious leaders, Trump people and Hillary people, all joined by one common belief, and that is that a kid should have an equal shot at a good life in our city, regardless of what part of town they happen to be born in.
在 1920 年代初期, 土爾沙是美國最活躍的 非裔美國人社區。 我們城市的葛林伍區 被稱為是黑色華爾街。 1921 年的一個晚上, 土爾沙發生了美國史上 最糟的種族暴亂。 黑色華爾街全被燒毀, 現今,出生在我們城市中 最主要非裔美國人區的孩子, 平均壽命比在土爾沙其他地方 出生的孩子少 11 年。 對我們來說,這是個統一的問題。 現在算起四年後, 將會是那個可怕事件的百週年紀念, 在土爾沙,我們會使用 所有能用的工具, 來處理那壽命長度懸殊差異的問題, 我們不會在會議的入口處檢查 你是哪個黨派的人。 我們不在乎你投票給 哪個總統候選人, 如果你現今願意協助那些 被偷走的十年多壽命孩子 恢復壽命的長度。 我們有白人也有黑人, 有西班牙人也有美國原住民, 有國會議員、市議會議員、 企業領導人、宗教領導人、 川普支持者和希拉蕊支持者, 因為一個共同信念而結合在一起, 即:在我們的城市裡, 孩子應該有平等的機會去過好生活, 不論他們剛好在城市的哪一區出生。
Now, how do we go forward with that? Is that easy to accomplish? Of course not! If it were easy to accomplish, somebody would have already done it before us. But what I love about city government is that the citizens can create whatever kind of city they're willing to build, and in Tulsa, we have decided to build a city where Republicans and Democrats use evidence, data and evaluation to solve our greatest challenges together.
我們要如何做到那一點? 很容易達成嗎? 當然不! 如果很容易達成, 在我們之前就會有人做了。 但市政府讓我很喜歡的一點, 就是市民可以把城市建造成 他們希望的任何樣子, 只要他們願意, 在土爾沙,我們決定要把城市建造成 共和黨和民主黨都能用 證據、資料、評估 來一起解決我們最大的挑戰。
And if we can do this, if we can set partisanship aside in the only state in the whole country where Barack Obama never carried a single county, then you can do it in your town, too.
如果我們能做到, 如果我們能把黨派放到一邊, 在這全國唯一一個歐巴馬未曾贏得 任何一郡的這州如果我們能做到, 那麼你們的鎮一定也可以做到。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Your cities can be saved or squandered in one generation. So let's agree to set aside our philosophical disagreements and focus on those aspirations that unite us. Let's grasp the opportunity that is presented by innovation to build better communities for our neighbors. Let's replace a focus on partisan division with a focus on results. That is the path to a better future for us all.
拯救或是揮霍你們的城市 可在一個世代之間。 所以讓我們把我們的 哲學歧見放到一邊, 把焦點放在讓我們團結的那些熱望。 讓我們把握住創新帶給我們的機會, 來為我們的鄰居建立更好的社區。 讓我們把焦點從黨派偏見的分裂上 移到結果上。 那才是讓我們所有人 通往更美好未來的路。
Thank you for your time.
非常謝謝你們花時間聽。
(Applause)
(掌聲)