Time when speakers had a lot fewer responsibilities than today. If anything, it is even more so it is the most difficult job in washington. Susan this position is named in the constitution without a lot of detail. I am wondering, when the framers created the position, what are they have in mind . Professor green they were thing thinking about the model of the speakership where it was a position that had parliamentary responsibilities. The job was to preside over the chamber and make sure the rules were being followed fairly. They also understood the position could take on other responsibilities. I think it is telling it is only mentioned once in the constitution and says the house shall choose it speaker and leaves the rest up to the house itself. Susan over time, has it evolved as the institution has changed or have the people that have been in it changed the job . Professor green i think it is a combination. The larger context in which speakers have to operate, the house itself and our government has changed. There have been new duties imposed on speakers. There have been individuals who have made a profound impact on the speakership and changed the way it governs and operates. Susan our viewers see nancy pelosi on the news every day. We thought we would learn from you about some of the powerful people of the past who have shaped the role and shaped the country through legislation. Along the way, lets start with the modern speaker. If you could give us a modern an overview, what are the tools, how large is the staff, give us some sense of what nancy pelosi oversees. Professor green to think about it in the broader context, the speaker of the house has a number of responsibilities. Part of it is presiding over the house chamber, although they rarely do that. They have someone doing that for them. Theyre technically responsible for presiding over the house. They are also the leader of their party. With that comes some expectations they will help the party pass the legislative agenda, they might help set the agenda. Raising money, these kinds of things to help their fellow partisans get elected. They also have a public role to play. Theyre expected to do interviews, to be in the public sphere and represent their party as well as the house as a whole. That is why it is such a difficult job. Susan do you have a sense of how large their staff is today or the budget of the speakers up as . Professor green i do not know offhand what the number is, but it has grown significantly over the last several decades. It has become a position with a lot of staff and a large budget. Susan what are the tools they have in order to keep their caucus or the entire congress in line . Professor green speakers have formal and informal tools at their disposal. They do have the power of recognition. They can decide who gets to speak on the house floor. They also have within their party a number of powers. The republicans and democrats differ here. They have the power to influence Committee Assignments. They can decide who is on what committee and who chairs committees. They can reward who are loyal and punish those who are disloyal and shape the legislative agenda. Susan how about their ability to raise money . Professor green that is one of the things speakers are expected to do. You will not find it in the rules of the house of representatives, but they are expected to do it. It is one of the things speakers have to do. They need to raise money. They need to do fundraisers. They go to districts when they are running for reelection or election. There are doing a lot of the Campaign Work to help members of their party. Susan there have been some organizational changes so the congress under various speakers. When is the end of earmarks. Explain what earmarks are and did that change the power of the Speakers Office . Professor green earmarks are basically putting special targeted funding into a larger spending bill. You might have a bill for transportation. In that bill, it might say or in some other related language, x amount of money might go for this road or that bridge. This was something that was traditional in congress. They grew in size and expense in the early 2000 and so, when republicans took control of the house, they banned earmarks. One of the criticisms that have been made of the ban of earmarks is it takes away a tool available to speakers who wish to build a majority for legislation. They cannot say, if you vote for this bill, you will put money into the district. It is no longer allowed under the rules to put those explicit earmarks into bills. Susan another thing that has changed is the seniority of the Committee Chairs. Tenure is the word i am looking for. In the past, Committee Chairs were every bit as powerful. Now, they have a tenure under which they can serve. Does that give more power to the speaker Professor Green . That is one of the reasons speakers are more powerful. That started under Newt Gingrich. That was something the party had done before he was speaker. With the term limits, do not have folks who are chair for 10, 20, 30 years treating their committee has some sort of personal fiefdom. They have to constantly be moved out. That weakens their constitutional authority. That has come largely their has declined their power has declined. Susan on the senate side of congress, the majority of minority leaders are the powerful ones. We see them all the time in their public roles shepherding legislation on the floor. In the house, there is the speaker and the majority leader. How does that relationship work . Professor green the easiest way to think about this is both the house and senate have a top constitutional officer. In the house, it is the speaker of the house. In a the senate, it is the Vice President. The Vice President is elected by the Electoral College and the public at large. Speakers are not. The senate did not always have a Vice President at the same party. The Majority Party point of view, giving power to the Vice President to the same degree the Majority Party in the house my give to the speaker could cause a lot of problems if the Vice President was of the other party. They established their Top Party Leader as effectively the most powerful person in the senate. In the house, the speaker because the speaker is chosen by the whole house effectively by the Majority Party, the majority felt more comfortable giving the speaker more authority. There is a majority leader. The top leader of the Majority Party in the house is the speaker of the house. Susan before we delve into history, i want our audience to know who they are listening to. You are teaching at catholic university. What courses do you teach . Professor green i teach introduction to american politics. I also teach courses on political institutions. I teach a class on american congress. I teach a class called power in american politics. We talk about the executive branch and the legislative branch. We talk about trumps election, why that happened and the politics that surround the trump presidency. Susan how did you get into teaching and join the academy . Professor green my father was a history professor. I ended up after College Going to capitol hill and working as a legislative aid for a number of years. I ended up combining my interest in academia with my fascination and love for legislative politics into the job i have now. Susan what period of time were you on the hill . Professor green 1993 to 1988. 1998. I do not know how close i got. I was not working for a leader. I was there for the 1994 election, which was a phenomenal experience because the democrats had lost control of the house for the first time in four years. You got a sense of how consequential elections can be when you see a switch of power. I tell the story of walking down the Office Building hallway and next day. You could tell who was a democrat who was a republican by the looks on their faces. The democrats look like death had passed over them. The republicans were jubilant. It was a really phenomenal experience. And then, being there for Newt Gingrichs early months as speaker made a big impression on me. Susan we are going to talk more about him later on. As people search for you, they will find you are a participant in a blog called mischief of faction, which is all college professors. What do you do in that blog . Professor green it is about Political Parties. That is what unifies the group of contributors. What we write about are everything from the Majority Party in congress and leadership in congress to the democratic primaries, we write about the power of the president. There is also about contributions of parties in other countries like south america. How do other parties work in other countries . Well come to the subject from a different perspective. We are writing about Political Parties went large in contemporary politics. Professor green what is the name come from . Where does the name come from . Professor green i believe it comes from the federalist papers. It was alexander hamilton. Im pretty sure that is it. Susan we will send people in that direction. There have been 54 people who have served as speaker of the house. How many of them are history making percentage wise . Professor green i would say depending on how you count it, maybe 10 to 15 . Susan what makes for a successful or powerful speaker . Professor green i think several things make for a powerful or important speaker. It could be any combination of these things. One is exercising significant influence on major legislation. Helping get major bills passed in your chamber. Another is bringing about significant institutional change in the house of representatives. Changing the way the house works or the structure. Another is finding new ways to use the powers you already have to get things through. Maybe in terms of how you appoint folks to committees. Those are some of the ways speakers have distinguished themselves from others. Susan are important speakers always parliamentary tacticians . Professor green not necessarily. Others defer to their staff or the parliamentarian and instead are more effective at influencing politics through their relationships with other members. Susan to get started, this is peaking my interest. I thought it would be interesting to start with speakers house itself considered were so important that they named major Office Buildings after them. We are going to start with joe cannon. He served from 1903 to 1911. Republican from illinois. He had a nickname, uncle joe. Tell me about him. Professor green uncle joe cannon was a character. He had a white beard, a stovepipe hat. He always had a cigar in his mouth. He was quite a distinguished character on the hill. What made him stand out was his use of power. He was he represented the apex of power in the house of representatives. He was the chair of the rules committee, which is the committee that decides what can come to the house floor. There were only three members on the committee. He effectively could decide what bills came to the floor and what did not. It was entirely up to him. He was also not afraid to use his power to block legislation even if a lot of members wanted it. He was also not afraid to punish members of his party who were insufficiently loyal. For example, he famously punished some insurgents in his party who were causing trouble, kicking them off committees. He moved one member to the committee of ventilation and acoustics, which is one of the worst committees you could have been on. It does not exist today. It is a there is a story about a member of congress who got a letter from a constituent saying, could you please send me the rules of the house of representatives . The congressman sent back a picture of joe cannon. He was the rules of the house. Susan today, the rules committee is not presided over by the speaker of the house. Professor green correct. Susan this description of how he wanted power sounds counterintuitive to someone called uncle joe. You know how we got the nickname . Professor green i do not actually. He was not disliked. He was not a dislikable person. What was the problem from members was his use of power. Particularly, the insurgents. The democrats were not happy either, but most members of his party were perfectly happy with him and his use of power. Susan the time in which he served was also the time of theodore roosevelt. You know about their relationship . Professor green roosevelt was advocating for more progressive legislation then joe cannon wanted. There were times when roosevelt would be writing letters to joe cannon saying, could you please let this bill will come to the floor . There was no sense that the speaker should just do what the president said. It was understanding that the speaker had the power and the president just had to ask. Cannon often said no. He said i do not agree with the progressive legislation. It is not coming to the floor. They often did not see eye to eye. It was very frustrating for roosevelt and the progressive insurgents in the republican conference. Susan what legislative achievements did he accomplish . Professor green i would put him in the category of what things that he prevent from passing . There was a lot of progressive legislation that did not get to the floor. Some things did. It was often because of his great reluctance or some other means. What he is most famous for his inadvertently being the last speaker to have that much power because of a rebellion that took place against his authority in 1910. Susan there was also the age of muckraking newspapers. How did they treat him and vice versa . Professor green cannon got a lot of criticism from the press. Democrats had a field day with that and would say he is a dictator. Put us in charge and we will not govern the way joe cannon does. Some of that journalism was useful for the progressives because they would bring up things like unsanitary food conditions or canning facilities. This would create pressure on congress to enact progressive regulation. He saw his role as being leader of his party in the house. Susan it came to a head with a revolt inside the house on march 17, 1910. That is st. Patricks day. Is that significant to the story . Professor green i do not really think about in terms of st. Patricks day. I think a bit more about how procedure was used that day. This was a group of insurgents who were plotting with democrats to try to weaken the speakers power. Susan where they generally progressive . Professor green the progressives in the Republican Party working with democrats. They wanted to change the rules so that cannon could not control the house for through the commit the house for through the committee. They managed to bring forward a motion that would take the speaker off the rules committee and expand it to 15 members. Cannon fought it vehemently from the chair. He spent hours trying to get absent republicans to show up to defeat this motion. He ultimately failed. A coalition of democrats and republicans were able to pass this and effectively strip the speaker of one of his most important tools in power. Susan did he stay in the congress . Professor green he did. He did in fight stay in the house. You had former uncle joe cannon, the most powerful speaker ever, now just a regular member of congress. Susan next on our list is the longworth building, named after nicholas longworth. Served from 1925 to 1931. Wheres his home state . Professor green ohio. Susan what should we know about him . Professor green longworth was an interesting character. I think of him as a quintessential 1920s leader. He is dapper. He and his wife, daughter of former president roosevelt, would have these social events. It was drinking going on display prohibition. If you see a picture of him, he looks like a quintessential 1920s character. He was a speaker who like joe cannon believed in strong party government. He came later than cannon. The speakership did not have the former tools that cannon did. Longworth hated what he called block government, which is when a group of the Majority Party works with the Minority Party to do what it wants against what the majority wants. He had to find ways to be powerful without the tools that joe cannon had. Susan did the daughter of roosevelt and hence his enhance his relationship . How did it play in the larger washington scene . Professor green roosevelt was not president when he was speaker. Susan but he tried to come back. Professor green that is true. I did not really know if it helped him or heard him. Alice herself is quite a character. We could spend a lot of time talking about her. Susan she would represent the progressives, right . Theodore roosevelt was more of a progressive. I assume she was aligned with her father. Professor green i do not really know about her politics. I think of her as someone who had strong views of personal behavior and was not afraid to express herself. She was a strong, independent minded woman. That certainly came from Teddy Roosevelt who was an independentminded president and raised his children to be similarly inclined. Susan the aforementioned John Nance Garner was around. I read that the two of them created the board of education where they brought members together. How did that function . Professor green this was an interesting example of how you can be both a partisan leader you say bipartisan or more emphasis on cooperation. He was not afraid to open his door to democrats and work with the democratic leadership, including John Nance Garner. They would get together in this board of education and it was kind of a social scene. It was a way for them to communicate so there were not misunderstandings about what each party was going to do. The kind of idea that in order for politics to work, you have to communicate, even with those you disagree with. I believe alcohol was also served at the board of education meetings, which might have helped with the discussions. This was a tradition that continued with sam rayburn. This idea you sit down with members and eight can be members of the other party as well, to just talk and communicate about what is going on. Susan does anything like that exist informally in Todays Congress . Professor green not to my knowledge. Susan is that a loss for the institution . Professor green i think it is a loss for the institution. There could B Communications happening behind the scenes and with modern technology. As far as i know nancy pelosi , and Kevin Mccarthy are texting each other. I have no idea. But this idea of a social place where you could go without the scrutiny of the media or others i do not think we see that in congress today. Susan given his tenure, that would have put him in the speakers chair during the crash of the stock market. So what happened in the congress and how did the house respond to the devastation that was happening in the economy . Professor green there was an unusual period, a period of transition. At one point, during the 1930 election, it was unclear which party was going to be in the majority. There were some members who had passed away. Longworth died unexpectedly. That created a leadership vacuum. In terms of dealing with the recession, because you did not have he did not have fdr until 1933. Both parties were trying to deal with this economic downturn using older techniques and an older agenda. This idea the government should spend a lot of money and go into debt to improve the economy was not something many members agreed with. Had democrats saying that we should cut spending because that is how you get out of a deficit. You reduce spending and have a Budget Surplus and then things improve. Neither party had the tools to figure out how to deal with the great recession. Susan the third building the house of representatives honored is the rayburn building, named after sam rayburn. Tell me about him. Professor green sam rayburn was the longestserving speaker in house history. He served until 1961 with a couple of breaks when the republicans took over the house. A former speaker of the statehouse in texas. In many ways he personified and , helped implement a way of governing that was that characterized the house of representatives from the 1930s to the 1970s. It was a system in which you deferred to committees. A system in which Committee Chairs were powerful. A system in which seniority was the most important thing. It was a system in which you had a careful balance between the two wings of your party. In this case it was the northern liberals in these small and the southern conservatives. It was a small c conservative house. You did not see the house doing a lot of major legislation. They would take the lead of the president particularly on foreign affairs. Because rayburn was there for so long and helped and forced the system, helped and force the system, it put his print on the house. Susan what was the key to his longevity . Professor green one of them was he was a master at bargaining. There was the middleman theory where speakers have to be the media member of their party. He was very good at balancing those two wings. He had the automatic support of southerners because he was from texas. He also had his door open to liberals. They were a Smaller Group in the party, but he did not shut them out or try to defeat them. The other thing is that he recognized it was an ideological balance and a regional one chain he set up regional one. He set up the boston connection. You always have two people from leadership. One from the south area and one from the northern area. His majority leader was from boston. When mccormick became speaker, the majority leader was carl albert from oklahoma. By keeping the regional balance in leadership, you have both sides more or less satisfied. That allows you to maintain power. Susan he had a famous protege, Lyndon Johnson. Do you know how that relationship started . Professor green Lyndon Johnson was elected to the house when rayburn was pico. Two texans. Lyndon johnson was a master of figuring out who had power and how to get into their good graces. Through his charm and whatever else, he managed to win over rayburn. If memory serves, i think he was the only person who would rub rayburns head. I think that was johnsons form of affection. I do not know what other people thought of that. I think that helped. The other thing johnson did, he served the party. He helped members get reelected by raising money from wealthy Oil Interests in his district and doing that service to the party is something that can win over other members including leadership. Susan i ask because we have a clip we want to show about sam rayburn. It comes from Lyndon Johnsons biographer. This was taped in april of 2012. Lets listen to him talk about sam rayburn. Power does not always corrupt. Power can cleanse. It cleanses it in the sense of sam rayburn who had to keep quiet as a representative until he became first a powerful Committee Chairman and then you see him moving the senate, the house of representatives to populist legislation. Susan as he gained power, he became more visible and vocal. He also said nobody could buy sam rayburn. Could you use those observations to tell us more about sam rayburn . Professor green one of his most noteworthy characteristics was he was seen as a very upstanding and moral individual. There was no sense he had that he was trying to benefit any special interest other than the interest of his own district. There was no sense that he there was no believe he lacked any principal. It was that he can be persuaded to take one position or another. As robert caro points out, even though rayburn may have been more upfront when he became speaker, he was still fairly quiet. That is an important tool to have when you are a leader. There were instances where he helped liberals. He did it very quietly behind the scenes so it would not alienate a wing up his party. It also makes it hard to study rayburn. I have visited the rayburn papers in austin. He did not write very much down. He did not put a lot to paper. It is hard to know what he was thinking. I think that extended to the way he governed as a speaker. Susan he said earlier one tool a speaker has is seeing the public face of the institution. With the public ive seen very much of sam rayburn . Professor green they would not. He was famously resistant to any kind of electronic in the chamber in terms of voting machines, cameras, radios. I think a lot of people might have known what he looked like from a picture in the newspaper, that it would not be the same as seeing a speaker at a press conference. Susan i found two major legislative things i wanted to ask you about. The first major crisis was world war ii after he came into office. He suffered through a victory in the draft. Professor green it shows how even though he did not have the formal tools joe cannon had, he had informal ways of influencing the legislative process. To make a long story short, there is a temporary draft. It is going to explain and president roosevelt wants it to extend another six months. A lot of people do not want this. They either are being drafted or have sons who have been conscripted. It is an unpopular bill. Rayburn agrees with roosevelt this needs to have empty he talks to the president and they craft a bill they think and get a majority. He starts lobbing members of congress, a lot of them. At one point, he does not have enough votes, so he delays for proceedings for a day. He still does not have the votes. He is lobbying on the four while on the floor while it is being debated. The vote count starts. At one point, it is narrowly passing by three votes. A member gets up and changes his vote. Now it is only passing by one vote. There are other members of Congress Getting ready to be recognized. He slams the gavel down. He says the vote is done, it passed. It is a great example of how critical he was in getting major legislation passed. Without rayburn, we may not have extended the draft. Susan by this time, Lyndon Johnson has moved to the senate and we have a republican president , eisenhower. How did that work . Professor green you had a combination of inherent deference that rayburn would give president of either party because he believed it was important to give the president a chance to succeed, coupled with political skills of rayburn and Lyndon Johnson. Johnson believed in winning. He believed in understanding what you can achieve. Going up against an opponent for the sake of it would not be smart politics. If they can give you something, that would be smart politics. Eisenhower, johnson and rayburn did not disagree all that much on major legislation. Eisenhower was not that conservative of a president. Rayburn was not that liberal of a speaker. The idea you cannot get things done because a divided because of a divided government would not have made lot of sense during that time. Susan only Seven Members of congress at the time he was speaker including the majority leader were aware of the manhattan project, which developed the atomic bomb, and yet he has to find funding for it. How did he do that . Susan that is not Professor Green that is not a story im familiar with. Rayburn fully believed in working with the white house and doing things behind the scenes. If memory serves, he basically worked with the Appropriations Committee and said, this is what we need and lets get it. With the understanding that National Security was at stake, it was not that hard to do. He also had less scrutiny about what congress was doing back then. Susan im going to dip into history because this piece of videotape is interesting. I want to talk about henry clay. We found on the internet a Transylvania College seminar in kentucky in 2011. They invited three people who had been speaker of the house to talk about henry clay. I want to get your reaction to it. Lets watch. Took you 12 years to become speaker of the house. Took you 20 years, took you 20 years. When you hear about henry clay becoming speaker on the very first day, does it make you feel like kind of a loser . [laughter] a slow learner. If you look at the period to 1860, there was no one person in the United States more responsible for holding our union together than henry clay. Right outside of what used to be the Speakers Office, exactly right outside the door in statuary hall, henry clay. He is looking into the distance. You try to imagine as statesman leader, where is he looking . At the time henry clay served in the u. S. Congress, both in the senate and speaker, was an amazing time. Kentucky, this was the frontier. Going back to the missouri compromise, the treaty of ghent that he signed, which takes us back to the word of 1812, you had have some amazing influences. Susan lots to talk about with that one clip. He served in a number of Important Roles including secretary of state in the socalled corrupt bargain. Why did he belong on our impact of speakers list . Professor green there is a political scientist named ron peters who said that clay was our first strong speaker. In other scientist said he drew on all of the possible sources of power. He was the first to use that effectively. He was very strategic in Committee Assignments to get legislation through, particularly tariff legislation. He oversaw dramatic expansion of the Committee System in the house of representatives. He was a forceful individual. He had been speaker in the statehouse before. The fact he was the first freshman to be chosen and the only freshman to be chosen speaker other than frederick muilenburg in the first congress, really speaks to the assets he had coming into the office. He used them very effectively. Susan would you say a quick word on the two former speakers . Both john boehner and dennis has Dennis Hastert . Professor green both of hastert and i have written about hastert the conventional wisdom is he was not that important a speaker because his majority leader, tom delay, had much more influence. Tom delay was a very powerful majority leader. That understates the Important Role hastert plays in winning over votes. He thought of himself as the coach. His job was to bring the party together. You have to do the and not use whipping or threats or promises. You have to have a sense of unity. He was good at bringing members in and persuading them to do things. Susan the first line of his biography will also be the things that sent him to prison afterwards. Professor green that came out after he was speaker. That is one of the things that when you are trying to analyze the contribution of a speaker, you have to think, what is it they did before, when they were speaker, and after and determine how you are going to evaluate them. His leadership in the house is one thing. Thinking about the personal issues and the ethics and criminal problems he had is another set of issues to consider when evaluating him. Susan john boehner, one sentence or two because im going to run out of time. Professor green i have written that john boehner was a rayburn speaker and a gingrich house. He wanted to negotiate. He wanted to make deals. His party and the larger political context made that too difficult for him. He had to deal with factions like the House Freedom caucus and ultimately, he resigned from the house. Susan we are going to talk about another speaker who had a which was had a nickname, reed. Was czar he was the most influential speaker in terms of how the house operates. When he was rising up in leadership in the 1870s and 1880s, the house was becoming paralyzed by filibustering and dilatory tactics. The reason why was because the rules of the house made it easy for individual members to slow things down. You had what was called the disappearing quorum. The house requires a quorum to do business. It is usually a majority. You can choose not to participate in the vote. If less of acquirement dissipated in the vote, there was no quorum. Everything had to stop before you could get the quorum. The idea was it is very easy to , slow things down that way. One of the early things he did was this contested elections bill was coming to the house floor. Democrats were in the minority and they chose not to participate in the vote. He started counting the members who were in the chamber. The democrats said this is an outrage. Reed had these funny lines. Someone said i do not want to be counted. He said Something Like the gentleman protests the speaker counting him. Does he deny he is here . Everyone laughed because you cannot deny you are there. Once that died down, he brought about a change in the rules that are known as reed rules. They effectively made the house a majoritarian chamber. A Majority Party gets to run the show. Which is what we have today. Susan he resigned from congress over a point of principle. Professor green he was a big believer in party loyalty, but he was also a believer in the party agenda. What was happening with president mckinley was the country was moving towards war. What will become the spanishamerican war. He felt strongly that was not appropriate. This was a war of imperialism or of expanding territory, which was not the proper role of government as he saw it paid he tried to use his powers of speaker to prevent issues related to going to work with related to war to come to the floor. He eventually felt it was not tenable for him to remain speaker. Susan our next speaker brought television to the house of representatives. 1977 to 1987. Longest uninterrupted tenure. Elected five times. What was his leadership style like . Professor green oneill was the first partisan speaker since longworth and definitely since cannon. What had happened in the 1970s as the Democratic Party was becoming more liberal in the southern wing was shrinking. The speaker at the time was not interested in governing in a partisan way. The speaker at the time was not interested in governing in a partisan way. His successor, carl albert, still not comfortable being highly partisan. Oneill was the first to embrace these tools and encourage more rules changes to give the Majority Party in the speaker and the speaker more power. During this time, he saw an increased number of restrictive rules. The bill would come to the floor. The rule that went with it would limit the number of amendments that were allowed or limit the debate time that was permitted. That was usually more harmful to the Minority Party. Gradually, you seem more power being centralized at the leadership. At the expense of the Minority Party. Having said that, tip oneill was also very likable. He was a social person. He was known for sitting on the house floor while things were going on to get a sense of what was happening. Any member who had any problems could come to him. That was one of the reasons that he had some degree of popularity with members of both parties. Susan both he and his republican counterpart led to caucuses in the house that where the postwatergate post vietnam era of politicians and younger more technology oriented. Where their leadership styles i akin to the people they were trying to oversee . Professor green yes and no. Yes in that they were more so than their predecessors had been. And on the democratic side, folks like carl albert. Albert did start using radio and television for the first time. But they were generally more comfortable than their predecessors had been. They also found themselves challenged by some of those members. On the democratic side, folks , and the republican side, Newt Gingrich, these members who focused on television and media to cultivate not only their districts but also their national representations, that was a new phenomenon michael and oneill had to learn to adjust to. Susan we have a piece of video that is classic for cspans history. It is from 1984. Were tired ofo being in their minority began to use it as a tool. Lets watch the interaction with the speaker on the house floor. My personal opinion is this. You deliberately stood before an empty house and challenged these people and challenged their americanism. It is the lowest thing ive ever seen in my 32 years in congress. Mr. Speaker, if i may reclaim my time. Let me say first of all i move we take the speakers words down. [applause] susan people will not understand what it means to take the speakers words down. How significant was that . Professor green at the time, it was highly significant. The rules of the house require all members follow decorum. You cannot insult people. You cannot accuse people of things. You cannot question their motives. For the speaker of the house who is supposed to be in charge of the decorum of the house to break that rule was significant. His words were taken down. The punishment, which would be to not be on the floor for the rest of the day the republicans , graciously said we will not impose the punishment. It was unprecedented for a speaker to have their words taken down. It said that oneill was a likable person. He also had a temper. Newt gingrich found a way to get oneill upset. Not knowing what might happen. But as it turned out by getting , him upset, he ended up losing his cool and saying things the ended up getting him in trouble. Susan the group Newt Gingrich was aligned with ultimately did take power in the house in 1995. You were there during that time. Newt gingrich becomes speaker of the house, displacing bob michael, who had been the longterm leader. What kind of speaker was Newt Gingrich . Professor green his first year and first few months, he was undoubtedly the most powerful speaker the house had seen in decades. He was he decided he was willing to overcome to ignore seniority in choosing some Committee Chairs. This person was next in line, but they do not have my vision, so we will go down the rank, the seniority list and find someone who will. He and the republicans had drafted this contract with america, this Campaign Document about the things they would do if elected. That became the agenda of the house Republican Party. That agenda and those items were being moved through leadership. Certainly, dick army, majority leader and Newt Gingrich, they would determine what was in the legislation. They would determine the procedures under which it would come to the floor. They figured out how to sell it. A lot of these things went through task forces appointed by gingrich. It was a remarkable period in which the house was the center of policymaking. Gingrich was at the center. Susan what brought him down . Professor green a series of things ended up bringing down Newt Gingrich. The precipitating factor was the end of 1995 when there was a pair of government shutdowns that had to do with a showdown of republicans and president clinton. The idea is, we need clinton to sign our legislation. If you will not, the government will shut down. Clinton basically called their bluff, and people were upset about the shutdown. They were suffering. The ended up blaming gingrich and the republicans for it. From that point on, there was considerable doubt in the republican conference that gingrich was able to outsmart president clinton and help their party avoid electoral and political problems. It was ultimately not until there was a coup attempt in 1997 with disgruntled republicans. It was ultimately after the 1998 elections, the republicans in the house lost seats. The first time a party that does not control the white house but does control the house lost seats since 1934. Many republicans said they had it. They have to blame somebody for this. Gingrich should go. He left. Susan how many of the major changes he brought to the institution how many of those became permanent . Professor green a number of them are still permanent. Some of the changes he made, getting rid of some committees. The office of Technology Assessment i believe he abolished. He also instituted this idea of term limits for Committee Chairs and also for the speaker. That one did not last. They got rid of it. But this idea of term limits remained a potent one in the house. Susan he started experimenting with televising the speakers press conference. That did not last long. Professor green it did not. That was a difficult environment to control your message. Sometimes gingrich would say the wrong thing. Suddenly it is on camera. , you cannot undo it. Besides the idea of the speaker should be at the center of policymaking, which in many ways, we see today, i think the most important changes was changing how the house operated. One of the things they did is, they didnt audit of the house of representatives and found there were a lot of financial irregularities, things that were not done professionally. They streamlined the process and made it more professional. In my opinion that was one of , the most important and longlasting changes gingrich and fellow republicans brought to congress. Susan i want to spend five minutes on nancy pelosi. She is guaranteed a place in history as the first woman to lead the house of representatives. She returned to power after losing it wants. The third speaker to preside over a president ial impeachment. When historians begin to assess her term even as it is unfolding, what are the kind of things will be looking for . Professor green one of them is her legislative leadership. She has been involved in some major legislation that has been passed through the house of representatives. Exhibit a would be obamacare. Her involvement in crafting legislation, negotiating with different factions in her party, figuring out how to get a bill through the house, negotiating that with them in the white house, she was a major player. I think they will also note her incredible and dogged determination to raise money and visit districts. It is phenomenal. I do not know where she gets the energy to do that. She has been doing that consistently as speaker. Related to that is her ability to keep the party together. There have been differences, there have been divisions. She manages to find a way to keep the different factions in the caucus together when it matters. When it is her ability to count votes and do favors for members, those kinds of things set her apart from a lot of speakers of the house. Susan our last video is february 6. This is the state of the union night. Lets watch. I tore up a manifesto of mistruth. It is very hard for us to get you to talk about the issues we are working on. He misrepresented all of that. Necessary to get the attention of the American People to say, this is not true. This is how it affects you. They are vicious and mean. These people are vicious. Nancy pelosi is a horrible person. She wanted to impeach a long time ago. She said, i pray for the president. She may pray, but she prays for the opposite. I doubt she prays at all. Susan the morning after the state of the union, the image of the speaker at the end of the speech tearing the president s speech apart. I am wondering, in history, the animosity between these two leaders. Has there been anything like this . Professor green we have come a long way from sam rayburn and dwight eisenhower. This idea you Work Together even if you are in separate elected institutions. The idea the speaker should be deferential to the president. That is not what we are seeing now. There is a way in which that is a sign of healthy, vigorous partisan differences. If you disagree, you should not be afraid to say so. But i think, and this is what troubles me, and i have written about this, there are certain ways in which are elected officials, we expect to share some common agreement on issues or a sense they have these Important Roles to play that should rise above their policy differences. I think what happened at the state of the Union Address how each of the players reacted shows that things like the state of the Union Address are not serving the purpose they used to. It is not a way for the republic to see the officials are coming together. Saying there are problems we need to solve. But more of an avenue for each of these players to say, i am right. The other side is wrong. What that is through i through what i say are the gestures i use. That kind of thing i do not think is healthy for the republic. Susan matthew green, the author of a number of books. I read you are working on a biography of Newt Gingrichs tenure. When will that be out . Soon, i hope. We are wrapping it up now. Thank you for taking us on a walkthrough history. I think we can spend an hour on each one of these people. Thank you for giving us the top line on these powerful speakers and how they affected our country and the institution. Professor green it was my pleasure. Thank you. All q a programs are available on our website or as a podcast at cspan. Org. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] monday night on the communicators, from the state of the net conference, Justice Department associate attorney generaland former fbi counsel on Encryption Technology and privacy. Itsf facebook encrypts platforms and to end, the company itself will lose visibility into what is happening on its platforms of the estimation is about 70 70 5 cut will go dark. Children being abused to we wont be able to track down. My view is Law Enforcement needs to rethink its approach to encryption in light of the fact that Congress Wont act, and are significant cyber threats, and embrace encryption instead of trying to find ways rake it. Led that is not what Law Enforcement is trying to do but in other words, it needs to embrace encryption as a way to enhance cybersecurity and the security of all americans. Whats the communicators, monday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern come on cspan2. When the Senate Devils in monday at 3 00 p. M. Eastern, wisconsin senator Tammy Baldwin delivers the traditional reading of washingtons farewell address. Later in the week, the senate takes procedural votes on two antiabortion members. Measures. The house is back from legislative work on tuesday, with their first votes expected on monday. On wednesday. Later in the week, a bill that would ban all flavored tobacco products, including ecigarettes. Watch live coverage of the house on cspan and the senate on cspan2. Attorney alanse dershowitz debates democratic consultant robert shrum on the politics of impeachment, the me too movement, and antisemitism. The Beverly Hills temple of the arts hosts the event